Heavy rains forecasted for tomorrow, across the country. Some places in the North to even have snow! Bet 365 has reduced it's over/ under turnout, from 67.5 to 66. Bad weather may affect the elderly and those with mobility/ health issues. Given that there are neary 85 seats on less than 5% margin, may make a crucial difference. Postal voting has only been 20-25% of the overall.
It seems most places will have a relatively dry morning with heavy rain in the afternoon and evening. Are elderly people more likely to vote in the morning perhaps? People coming home from work may not worry as they'll already be outside, but those thinking of popping out especially after dinner might decide not to bother.
Most elderly I know do not like going out after dark. Many people do not like driving in the dark. I suspect that most pensioners who are intent on voting will do it earlier in the day.
They also have time during the day. For working people, they'll often do it after work, which if it's dark (which it will be), and wet, then thats more likely to affect them.
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, has been recorded telling a private meeting that the EU would not be able to conclude a full trade negotiation with the EU by the end of next year, as Boris Johnson claims. As the Independent reports in its scoop, Barnier said:
"It is unrealistic that a global negotiation can be done in 11 months, so we can’t do it all. We will do all we can to get what I call the ‘vital minimum’ to establish a relationship with the UK if that is the time scale."
Although this will be seized upon as evidence that Boris is out with the fairies in saying a deal can be done by the end of the year (which he is), it does suggest that the EU might be amenable to a face-saving fudge, whereby there's a minimal trade deal combined with an extension of the transitional arrangements for everything else - i.e. effectively an extension of the transition but not actually called that.
We can but hope!
Of course we can get a deal done in 12 months, it will just not be a good deal for the UK. The EU know we are desperate to get it done quickly and will obviously leverage that. Im sure the EU could put together a deal they would be happy to sign in less than a week if we were stupid enough to take it.
Trade deals have taken a long time historically because both parties have a status quo baseline and have to protect and manage the interests of their economies and industries from the changes the trade deal brings.
This negotiation will be very different, with the UK rejecting the status quo in advance, and we are back to impact of no deal is bigger on the UK than the EU so the EU will again have all the leverage.
Stupid question
Why would both sides not just say "no tariffs, on anything"
end of
?
Because the UK will not agree to a level playing field and the EU will demand that for no tariffs on anything.
THE EU won't accept a tariff free deal without free movement amongst other things.
And Boris can't offer free movement because he wants control of immigration.
If you really think Brexit is finished when we leave you are in for a big surprise - it hasn't really started yet and only starts when we are on the back foot..
Eventually that penny will drop even for the very dimmest of the 52%, well maybe for some of them anyway!
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, has been recorded telling a private meeting that the EU would not be able to conclude a full trade negotiation with the EU by the end of next year, as Boris Johnson claims. As the Independent reports in its scoop, Barnier said:
"It is unrealistic that a global negotiation can be done in 11 months, so we can’t do it all. We will do all we can to get what I call the ‘vital minimum’ to establish a relationship with the UK if that is the time scale."
Although this will be seized upon as evidence that Boris is out with the fairies in saying a deal can be done by the end of the year (which he is), it does suggest that the EU might be amenable to a face-saving fudge, whereby there's a minimal trade deal combined with an extension of the transitional arrangements for everything else - i.e. effectively an extension of the transition but not actually called that.
We can but hope!
Of course we can get a deal done in 12 months, it will just not be a good deal for the UK. The EU know we are desperate to get it done quickly and will obviously leverage that. Im sure the EU could put together a deal they would be happy to sign in less than a week if we were stupid enough to take it.
Trade deals have taken a long time historically because both parties have a status quo baseline and have to protect and manage the interests of their economies and industries from the changes the trade deal brings.
This negotiation will be very different, with the UK rejecting the status quo in advance, and we are back to impact of no deal is bigger on the UK than the EU so the EU will again have all the leverage.
Stupid question
Why would both sides not just say "no tariffs, on anything"
end of
?
Because non-tariff barriers are 50% of things, and the EU will also require tye UK to have minimum standards.
Has @bbclaurak broken the law by telling 2 million viewers the postal votes are grim for Labour in huge swathes of the country?
Yes because the votes should not have been seen.
Mind you does it get Labour votes out tomorrow and / or keep Tory "voters" from voting
Pretty sure party officials watch the opening and counting of postal votes.
If they do they should be stopped. I think postal voting should be stopped except in extreme or exceptional cases.
Couldn'y it be argued that postal voting a kind of infringement of the principle of a secret ballot?
It is vital that party agents counting agents are present when they are opened. They can confirm that the various bits necessary are there and the signatures match. They can pull those where there is some doubt for further discussion. For instance the instructions are vague about signature, you could sign J. Bloggs, John Bloggs; John H. Bloggs; J Horatio Bloggs while the specimen might be Jack Bloggs. In this instance there would need to be agreement between the agents that it was the same person.
thanks for that explanation. Further proof that postal ballot without a very good reason for it (i.e. genuinely unable to attend) is a very bad thing.
Is it? It's cheaper than the other option which would be running a few manned polling stations for a week leading up to the election itself.
THE EU won't accept a tariff free deal without free movement amongst other things.
And Boris can't offer free movement because he wants control of immigration.
If you really think Brexit is finished when we leave you are in for a big surprise - it hasn't really started yet and only starts when we are on the back foot..
This is clearly a false statement. Brexit WILL be finished when we leave because we will have left.
What will not be finished is all the subsequent negotiating and the new arrangements which I agree will not be simple or necessarily always to our advantage. But the mere act of leaving on 31st January means that Brexit itself will be finished.
Scottish Labour holding five seats in the MRP was certainly a surprise, but thinking about it there's not really any reason why anyone who voted for Scottish Labour in 2017 would be tempted to switch their vote. They can focus all their resources on just these seats as well.
The 2017 SLab vote contains a fair chunk of Yes voters.
I had assumed they would have switched to SNP and the mid campaign polling certainly suggested they had.
1. Friend who lives in Bolsover, very left wing and was right in 2017 when she said Skinner would hold on comfortably. Now leaning to the Tories winning it, says the only people in the town centre have been the Brexit party, Labour not much. For the first time, she will not vote Labour as she thinks Corbyn is an anti-semite.
2. In the swimming changing rooms, overheard a conversation between three typically North London well-spoken older chaps who live in Hampstead and Kilburn. All declared themselves suitably left wing. I guess Channel 4 did a programme last night that was damning on Tulip Siddiqi and her links with Bangladesh. What surprised me was the vehemence against her by all three. One called her "evil", another one pointed out how she had failed to help in a deportation case of a Japanese national. Now, not much of a point I know but I am guessing a fair few people in H&K saw that programme and I do wonder whether she is safe. Anyway, had a nibble at the LDs winning the seat.
3. I wonder whether the Ed Balls moment of this night might be Ed Miliband losing his seat. Look at the stats. More than 70% leave and very heavily white. Tories at 10.5 on Betfair.
Some folk are clutching at straws regarding the oldies not voting in bad weather. They're made of sterner stuff than the 18-24 yr old bracket I can absolutely guarantee you.
Regardless of the liquid it’s still an assault and designed to shock and demoralise.
If you are looking for someone who has broken the law today look no further than the Minister for Tory Propaganda @bbclaurak
She just told 2 million viewers postal votes are grim for Labour
Section 66 of the 1983 Representation of the People Act forbids "any statement relating to the way in which voters have voted at the election" before polls close.
The maximum punishment for breaking the law is six months' imprisonment or a fine of £5,000.
I have made a complaint to the BBC and encourage others to do so, its just spectacularly out of order, particularly when she is already considered biased by many.
Heavy rains forecasted for tomorrow, across the country. Some places in the North to even have snow! Bet 365 has reduced it's over/ under turnout, from 67.5 to 66. Bad weather may affect the elderly and those with mobility/ health issues. Given that there are neary 85 seats on less than 5% margin, may make a crucial difference. Postal voting has only been 20-25% of the overall.
It seems most places will have a relatively dry morning with heavy rain in the afternoon and evening. .
Not actually the case.
Western half of Britain will have heavy rain most of the morning, pushing into the north by lunchtime where it will turn to snow. Only the east will remain dry in the morning, to be replaced by rain pm.
If this is true, it is a criminal act that is unacceptable and the culprits should be punished with the full force of the law. However, until it is verified I would remain skeptical because of the source. If it turns out to be another of Guido's scheming tactics that is also outrageous.
If Guido is anyway associated with the reporting, treat it as complete bunkum.
If the Russia report has not included a look at Guido's finances it is incomplete. There are many ways of funnelling money, including overpromoting a wife and paying her 10 times what she is worth.
We on PB, we do not need the Russia Report. Guido was discredited here as far back as the Cash For Honours inquiry, as given the bum's rush shortley thereafter.
But wouldn't it be nice to see him exposed as a Russian lackey in the national media?
He is probably just a useful idiot like most Leavers lol.
Has @bbclaurak broken the law by telling 2 million viewers the postal votes are grim for Labour in huge swathes of the country?
Yes because the votes should not have been seen. Mind you does it get Labour votes out tomorrow and / or keep Tory "voters" from voting
Pretty sure party officials watch the opening and counting of postal votes.
If that is true, it would be illegal. Can you tell us all where it happens, please?
Laura K should be able to:
“The postal votes have already arrived. The parties are not meant to look at it but they do get a hint and on both sides people are telling me that the postal votes that are in are looking pretty grim for Labour in a lot of parts of the country.”
Wasn’t everyone saying something very similar back in 2017 ? How did that turn out ?
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, has been recorded telling a private meeting that the EU would not be able to conclude a full trade negotiation with the EU by the end of next year, as Boris Johnson claims. As the Independent reports in its scoop, Barnier said:
"It is unrealistic that a global negotiation can be done in 11 months, so we can’t do it all. We will do all we can to get what I call the ‘vital minimum’ to establish a relationship with the UK if that is the time scale."
Although this will be seized upon as evidence that Boris is out with the fairies in saying a deal can be done by the end of the year (which he is), it does suggest that the EU might be amenable to a face-saving fudge, whereby there's a minimal trade deal combined with an extension of the transitional arrangements for everything else - i.e. effectively an extension of the transition but not actually called that.
We can but hope!
Of course we can get a deal done in 12 months, it will just not be a good deal for the UK. The EU know we are desperate to get it done quickly and will obviously leverage that. Im sure the EU could put together a deal they would be happy to sign in less than a week if we were stupid enough to take it.
Trade deals have taken a long time historically because both parties have a status quo baseline and have to protect and manage the interests of their economies and industries from the changes the trade deal brings.
This negotiation will be very different, with the UK rejecting the status quo in advance, and we are back to impact of no deal is bigger on the UK than the EU so the EU will again have all the leverage.
Stupid question
Why would both sides not just say "no tariffs, on anything"
end of
?
Because the UK will not agree to a level playing field and the EU will demand that for no tariffs on anything.
is a tariff free agreement not the definition of a level playing field?
A level playing field is more about standards and regulations so that one party to the deal doesn’t have an unfair advantage.
For example if say the UK adopted US food standards which are lower the EU would not allow tariff free in that area .
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, has been recorded telling a private meeting that the EU would not be able to conclude a full trade negotiation with the EU by the end of next year, as Boris Johnson claims. As the Independent reports in its scoop, Barnier said:
"It is unrealistic that a global negotiation can be done in 11 months, so we can’t do it all. We will do all we can to get what I call the ‘vital minimum’ to establish a relationship with the UK if that is the time scale."
Although this will be seized upon as evidence that Boris is out with the fairies in saying a deal can be done by the end of the year (which he is), it does suggest that the EU might be amenable to a face-saving fudge, whereby there's a minimal trade deal combined with an extension of the transitional arrangements for everything else - i.e. effectively an extension of the transition but not actually called that.
We can but hope!
Of course we can get a deal done in 12 months, it will just not be a good deal for the UK. The EU know we are desperate to get it done quickly and will obviously leverage that. Im sure the EU could put together a deal they would be happy to sign in less than a week if we were stupid enough to take it.
Trade deals have taken a long time historically because both parties have a status quo baseline and have to protect and manage the interests of their economies and industries from the changes the trade deal brings.
This negotiation will be very different, with the UK rejecting the status quo in advance, and we are back to impact of no deal is bigger on the UK than the EU so the EU will again have all the leverage.
Stupid question
Why would both sides not just say "no tariffs, on anything"
end of
?
Because the UK will not agree to a level playing field and the EU will demand that for no tariffs on anything.
The CET is 50% of goods no tariff. 30% of goods less than 3% (i.e negligible) and the Final 20% high tariffs. The high tariffs are basically on cars, food and textiles. Guess where the majority of the trade surplus the EU runs with the UK is?
Regardless of the liquid it’s still an assault and designed to shock and demoralise.
If you are looking for someone who has broken the law today look no further than the Minister for Tory Propaganda @bbclaurak
She just told 2 million viewers postal votes are grim for Labour
Section 66 of the 1983 Representation of the People Act forbids "any statement relating to the way in which voters have voted at the election" before polls close.
The maximum punishment for breaking the law is six months' imprisonment or a fine of £5,000.
I have made a complaint to the BBC and encourage others to do so, its just spectacularly out of order, particularly when she is already considered biased by many.
you would not have been saying that if they had been great for Labour!
Laura reported information she was told by labour activists, something that political reporters do all the time. She is merely acting as a conduit.
They have have given incorrect or even misleading information to Laura, who knows? caveat emptor.
She should know better. She is intelligent so I suppose this is yet another example of even the better journalists being pretty ignorant of their subject matter.
Regardless of the liquid it’s still an assault and designed to shock and demoralise.
If you are looking for someone who has broken the law today look no further than the Minister for Tory Propaganda @bbclaurak
She just told 2 million viewers postal votes are grim for Labour
Section 66 of the 1983 Representation of the People Act forbids "any statement relating to the way in which voters have voted at the election" before polls close.
The maximum punishment for breaking the law is six months' imprisonment or a fine of £5,000.
I have made a complaint to the BBC and encourage others to do so, its just spectacularly out of order, particularly when she is already considered biased by many.
you would not have been saying that if they had been great for Labour!
I am not a fan of Labour! I dont know whether her comments will drive the Labour vote up or down, I just expect a senior journalist at the BBC to follow key laws that parliament has decided.
Heavy rains forecasted for tomorrow, across the country. Some places in the North to even have snow! Bet 365 has reduced it's over/ under turnout, from 67.5 to 66. Bad weather may affect the elderly and those with mobility/ health issues. Given that there are neary 85 seats on less than 5% margin, may make a crucial difference. Postal voting has only been 20-25% of the overall.
It seems most places will have a relatively dry morning with heavy rain in the afternoon and evening. .
Not actually the case.
Western half of Britain will have heavy rain most of the morning, pushing into the north by lunchtime where it will turn to snow. Only the east will remain dry in the morning, to be replaced by rain pm.
Has @bbclaurak broken the law by telling 2 million viewers the postal votes are grim for Labour in huge swathes of the country?
Yes because the votes should not have been seen. Mind you does it get Labour votes out tomorrow and / or keep Tory "voters" from voting
Pretty sure party officials watch the opening and counting of postal votes.
If that is true, it would be illegal. Can you tell us all where it happens, please?
Laura K should be able to:
“The postal votes have already arrived. The parties are not meant to look at it but they do get a hint and on both sides people are telling me that the postal votes that are in are looking pretty grim for Labour in a lot of parts of the country.”
Wasn’t everyone saying something very similar back in 2017 ? How did that turn out ?
Its always crap. Some dork catches a glimpse of three or four Tory votes as they are being pulled from envelopes, exaggerates what he’s seen when he reports back, and three or four people down the line you’d think someone had seen all the PVs sorted into party piles.
Laura reported information she was told by labour activists, something that political reporters do all the time. She is merely acting as a conduit.
They have have given incorrect or even misleading information to Laura, who knows? caveat emptor.
She should know better. She is intelligent so I suppose this is yet another example of even the better journalists being pretty ignorant of their subject matter.
One thing this campaign has confirmed is that Laura isn’t actually a very good journalist.
Laura reported information she was told by labour activists, something that political reporters do all the time. She is merely acting as a conduit.
They have have given incorrect or even misleading information to Laura, who knows? caveat emptor.
She should know better. She is intelligent so I suppose this is yet another example of even the better journalists being pretty ignorant of their subject matter.
Or that as a celeb they are immune to things like laws, the truth or editorial oversight. Where the PM leads the rest of society will follow.
Has @bbclaurak broken the law by telling 2 million viewers the postal votes are grim for Labour in huge swathes of the country?
Yes because the votes should not have been seen. Mind you does it get Labour votes out tomorrow and / or keep Tory "voters" from voting
Pretty sure party officials watch the opening and counting of postal votes.
If that is true, it would be illegal. Can you tell us all where it happens, please?
They are verified in batches by the ERO, usually at town halls. The parties are entitled to send observers - but normally don’t bother since the papers are supposed to be kept face down so normally you don’t see very much. And it is illegal to reveal any information so derived while the election is still in progress. Whether a generalised national statement would fall foul is another question. The bigger issue is that it is almost certainly bollocks put about by someone who just wants to seem in the know.
I agree about the theory. The reality is that most crosses can be seem through a ballot paper and someone with good eyes and a bit of nouse can count a percentage for a candidate who happens to be either bottom or top of the ballot paper, more difficult for the inbetweens. I think there could be problems for Laura if she were perceived to be referring to a particular contest. Is she right ? It would be a brave person who suggested she wasn't but how the PVs relate to the whole, who knows.
The genuinely interesting thing to know would be the percentage return of postal votes. There is an assumption it is always very high but I'm not sure. A lot of those who apply will be very infirm and not all will desire or be able to fill them in.
Has @bbclaurak broken the law by telling 2 million viewers the postal votes are grim for Labour in huge swathes of the country?
Yes because the votes should not have been seen.
Mind you does it get Labour votes out tomorrow and / or keep Tory "voters" from voting
Pretty sure party officials watch the opening and counting of postal votes.
If they do they should be stopped. I think postal voting should be stopped except in extreme or exceptional cases.
Couldn'y it be argued that postal voting a kind of infringement of the principle of a secret ballot?
It is vital that party agents counting agents are present when they are opened. They can confirm that the various bits necessary are there and the signatures match. They can pull those where there is some doubt for further discussion. For instance the instructions are vague about signature, you could sign J. Bloggs, John Bloggs; John H. Bloggs; J Horatio Bloggs while the specimen might be Jack Bloggs. In this instance there would need to be agreement between the agents that it was the same person.
thanks for that explanation. Further proof that postal ballot without a very good reason for it (i.e. genuinely unable to attend) is a very bad thing.
Is it? It's cheaper than the other option which would be running a few manned polling stations for a week leading up to the election itself.
I liked the idea yesterday about having voting over 2 days - preferably a Friday and Saturday or a Sunday and Monday to straddle weekend and weekday. As I said earlier a lot of older people really don't like going out after dark and this would give them more time for voting. It also helps those who commute long hours.
We still don;t know if the postals are good for labour or not. Laura hasn't reported any facts on the postals per se.
Laura merely reported a view she was told by labour activists. They may be mistaken, misinformed or calculating. Make your own mind up. All Laura is doing is supplying you and I with a perspective on an event and telling us where she got that perspective.
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, has been recorded telling a private meeting that the EU would not be able to conclude a full trade negotiation with the EU by the end of next year, as Boris Johnson claims. As the Independent reports in its scoop, Barnier said:
"It is unrealistic that a global negotiation can be done in 11 months, so we can’t do it all. We will do all we can to get what I call the ‘vital minimum’ to establish a relationship with the UK if that is the time scale."
Although this will be seized upon as evidence that Boris is out with the fairies in saying a deal can be done by the end of the year (which he is), it does suggest that the EU might be amenable to a face-saving fudge, whereby there's a minimal trade deal combined with an extension of the transitional arrangements for everything else - i.e. effectively an extension of the transition but not actually called that.
We can but hope!
Of course we can get a deal done in 12 months, it will just not be a good deal for the UK. The EU know we are desperate to get it done quickly and will obviously leverage that. Im sure the EU could put together a deal they would be happy to sign in less than a week if we were stupid enough to take it.
Trade deals have taken a long time historically because both parties have a status quo baseline and have to protect and manage the interests of their economies and industries from the changes the trade deal brings.
This negotiation will be very different, with the UK rejecting the status quo in advance, and we are back to impact of no deal is bigger on the UK than the EU so the EU will again have all the leverage.
Stupid question
Why would both sides not just say "no tariffs, on anything"
end of
?
Because the UK will not agree to a level playing field and the EU will demand that for no tariffs on anything.
THE EU won't accept a tariff free deal without free movement amongst other things.
And Boris can't offer free movement because he wants control of immigration.
If you really think Brexit is finished when we leave you are in for a big surprise - it hasn't really started yet and only starts when we are on the back foot..
Eventually that penny will drop even for the very dimmest of the 52%, well maybe for some of them anyway!
Who are still brighter than the brightest of the 48%
Has @bbclaurak broken the law by telling 2 million viewers the postal votes are grim for Labour in huge swathes of the country?
Yes because the votes should not have been seen. Mind you does it get Labour votes out tomorrow and / or keep Tory "voters" from voting
Pretty sure party officials watch the opening and counting of postal votes.
If that is true, it would be illegal. Can you tell us all where it happens, please?
Laura K should be able to:
“The postal votes have already arrived. The parties are not meant to look at it but they do get a hint and on both sides people are telling me that the postal votes that are in are looking pretty grim for Labour in a lot of parts of the country.”
Wasn’t everyone saying something very similar back in 2017 ? How did that turn out ?
Its always crap. Some dork catches a glimpse of three or four Tory votes as they are being pulled from envelopes, exaggerates what he’s seen when he reports back, and three or four people down the line you’d think someone had seen all the PVs sorted into party piles.
That was my point. Backed by the evidence of the last time.
Has @bbclaurak broken the law by telling 2 million viewers the postal votes are grim for Labour in huge swathes of the country?
Yes because the votes should not have been seen.
Mind you does it get Labour votes out tomorrow and / or keep Tory "voters" from voting
Pretty sure party officials watch the opening and counting of postal votes.
If they do they should be stopped. I think postal voting should be stopped except in extreme or exceptional cases.
Couldn'y it be argued that postal voting a kind of infringement of the principle of a secret ballot?
It is vital that party agents counting agents are present when they are opened. They can confirm that the various bits necessary are there and the signatures match. They can pull those where there is some doubt for further discussion. For instance the instructions are vague about signature, you could sign J. Bloggs, John Bloggs; John H. Bloggs; J Horatio Bloggs while the specimen might be Jack Bloggs. In this instance there would need to be agreement between the agents that it was the same person.
thanks for that explanation. Further proof that postal ballot without a very good reason for it (i.e. genuinely unable to attend) is a very bad thing.
Is it? It's cheaper than the other option which would be running a few manned polling stations for a week leading up to the election itself.
Fine if that is the way everyone is voting. Maybe that is the way it should be done.
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, has been recorded telling a private meeting that the EU would not be able to conclude a full trade negotiation with the EU by the end of next year, as Boris Johnson claims. As the Independent reports in its scoop, Barnier said:
"It is unrealistic that a global negotiation can be done in 11 months, so we can’t do it all. We will do all we can to get what I call the ‘vital minimum’ to establish a relationship with the UK if that is the time scale."
Although this will be seized upon as evidence that Boris is out with the fairies in saying a deal can be done by the end of the year (which he is), it does suggest that the EU might be amenable to a face-saving fudge, whereby there's a minimal trade deal combined with an extension of the transitional arrangements for everything else - i.e. effectively an extension of the transition but not actually called that.
We can but hope!
Of course we can get a deal done in 12 months, it will just not be a good deal for the UK. The EU know we are desperate to get it done quickly and will obviously leverage that. Im sure the EU could put together a deal they would be happy to sign in less than a week if we were stupid enough to take it.
Trade deals have taken a long time historically because both parties have a status quo baseline and have to protect and manage the interests of their economies and industries from the changes the trade deal brings.
This negotiation will be very different, with the UK rejecting the status quo in advance, and we are back to impact of no deal is bigger on the UK than the EU so the EU will again have all the leverage.
Stupid question
Why would both sides not just say "no tariffs, on anything"
end of
?
Because the UK will not agree to a level playing field and the EU will demand that for no tariffs on anything.
is a tariff free agreement not the definition of a level playing field?
A level playing field is more about standards and regulations so that one party to the deal doesn’t have an unfair advantage.
For example if say the UK adopted US food standards which are lower the EU would not allow tariff free in that area .
Also state aid rules etc .
We should have a long hard look at European animal welfare standards which are well below those in the UK.
We still don;t know if the postals are good for labour or not. Laura hasn't reported any facts on the postals per se.
Laura merely reported a view she was told by labour activists. They may be mistaken, misinformed or calculating. Make your own mind up. All Laura is doing is supplying you and I with a perspective on an event and telling us where she got that perspective.
Its called reporting.
Dont you know the law either?
Section 66 of the 1983 Representation of the People Act forbids "any statement relating to the way in which voters have voted at the election" before polls close.
The maximum punishment for breaking the law is six months' imprisonment or a fine of £5,000.
Some folk are clutching at straws regarding the oldies not voting in bad weather. They're made of sterner stuff than the 18-24 yr old bracket I can absolutely guarantee you.
That's not in dispute; turnout is always higher among 65+. The only thing that matters is the elasticity of that turnout with regard to weather. If 65+ are _disproportionately_ likely to vote in fine weather, then bad weather is better for parties relying on younger voters (and vice versa). Because the baseline is real elections held during summers and not the average opinion across the age groups, all that matters is the elasticity. For example, maybe the pre-family age cohort has a low turnout, but the ones who do vote are the opinionated ones who will definitely go out, and furthermore they happen to have their original hips and fall victim to the 'flu less often. It's not clear how you empirically test the hypothesis.
Regardless of the liquid it’s still an assault and designed to shock and demoralise.
If you are looking for someone who has broken the law today look no further than the Minister for Tory Propaganda @bbclaurak
She just told 2 million viewers postal votes are grim for Labour
Section 66 of the 1983 Representation of the People Act forbids "any statement relating to the way in which voters have voted at the election" before polls close.
The maximum punishment for breaking the law is six months' imprisonment or a fine of £5,000.
Got it.
Assaults are fine as long as they’re committed by my side.
We still don;t know if the postals are good for labour or not. Laura hasn't reported any facts on the postals per se.
Laura merely reported a view she was told by labour activists. They may be mistaken, misinformed or calculating. Make your own mind up. All Laura is doing is supplying you and I with a perspective on an event and telling us where she got that perspective.
Its called reporting.
So if there is an injuction blocking a story being told she can report that as well? Or which laws are fine for the BBC to break and which are they going to uphold?
1. Friend who lives in Bolsover, very left wing and was right in 2017 when she said Skinner would hold on comfortably. Now leaning to the Tories winning it, says the only people in the town centre have been the Brexit party, Labour not much. For the first time, she will not vote Labour as she thinks Corbyn is an anti-semite.
2. In the swimming changing rooms, overheard a conversation between three typically North London well-spoken older chaps who live in Hampstead and Kilburn. All declared themselves suitably left wing. I guess Channel 4 did a programme last night that was damning on Tulip Siddiqi and her links with Bangladesh. What surprised me was the vehemence against her by all three. One called her "evil", another one pointed out how she had failed to help in a deportation case of a Japanese national. Now, not much of a point I know but I am guessing a fair few people in H&K saw that programme and I do wonder whether she is safe. Anyway, had a nibble at the LDs winning the seat.
3. I wonder whether the Ed Balls moment of this night might be Ed Miliband losing his seat. Look at the stats. More than 70% leave and very heavily white. Tories at 10.5 on Betfair.
I have (Tory-voting) friends in H&K - they reckon Tulip is reasonably well-regarded and will win without much trouble. But that's just two anecdotes, of course.
Laura reported information she was told by labour activists, something that political reporters do all the time. She is merely acting as a conduit.
They have have given incorrect or even misleading information to Laura, who knows? caveat emptor.
Memory serves me right Labour Uncut said the activists said the same in 2017.
Postal voters likely to have sent in earlier in the campaign, when Tories were ahead 10-15% or so. Also older I guess? If so, postals might go Con+25/30, who knows.
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, has been recorded telling a private meeting that the EU would not be able to conclude a full trade negotiation with the EU by the end of next year, as Boris Johnson claims. As the Independent reports in its scoop, Barnier said:
"It is unrealistic that a global negotiation can be done in 11 months, so we can’t do it all. We will do all we can to get what I call the ‘vital minimum’ to establish a relationship with the UK if that is the time scale."
Although this will be seized upon as evidence that Boris is out with the fairies in saying a deal can be done by the end of the year (which he is), it does suggest that the EU might be amenable to a face-saving fudge, whereby there's a minimal trade deal combined with an extension of the transitional arrangements for everything else - i.e. effectively an extension of the transition but not actually called that.
We can but hope!
Of course we can get a deal done in 12 months, it will just not be a good deal for the UK. The EU know we are desperate to get it done quickly and will obviously leverage that. Im sure the EU could put together a deal they would be happy to sign in less than a week if we were stupid enough to take it.
Trade deals have taken a long time historically because both parties have a status quo baseline and have to protect and manage the interests of their economies and industries from the changes the trade deal brings.
This negotiation will be very different, with the UK rejecting the status quo in advance, and we are back to impact of no deal is bigger on the UK than the EU so the EU will again have all the leverage.
Stupid question
Why would both sides not just say "no tariffs, on anything"
end of
?
Because the UK will not agree to a level playing field and the EU will demand that for no tariffs on anything.
The CET is 50% of goods no tariff. 30% of goods less than 3% (i.e negligible) and the Final 20% high tariffs. The high tariffs are basically on cars, food and textiles. Guess where the majority of the trade surplus the EU runs with the UK is?
Tariffs of course are a two way street, with the current state of EU economies, I would have thought the last thing the EU wanted were tariffs on their second largest export market with which they have a huge surplus.
We still don;t know if the postals are good for labour or not. Laura hasn't reported any facts on the postals per se.
Laura merely reported a view she was told by labour activists. They may be mistaken, misinformed or calculating. Make your own mind up. All Laura is doing is supplying you and I with a perspective on an event and telling us where she got that perspective.
Its called reporting.
Nevertheless, the info from the activists is either accurate or made up. If the latter, it isn’t good journalism to pass it on. If the former, it was illegal for the activists to have shared that information. It’s a moot point whether it is illegal to report it in general terms, but once again passing illegally obtained information on to millions of viewers isn’t good journalism.
Section 66 of the 1983 Representation of the People Act forbids "any statement relating to the way in which voters have voted at the election" before polls close.
The maximum punishment for breaking the law is six months' imprisonment or a fine of £5,000.
We look forward to seeing Laura K being carted off in chains as soon as People's Commissar Abbott is in charge of the Interior Ministry.
Some folk are clutching at straws regarding the oldies not voting in bad weather. They're made of sterner stuff than the 18-24 yr old bracket I can absolutely guarantee you.
That's not in dispute; turnout is always higher among 65+. The only thing that matters is the elasticity of that turnout with regard to weather. If 65+ are _disproportionately_ likely to vote in fine weather, then bad weather is better for parties relying on younger voters (and vice versa). Because the baseline is real elections held during summers and not the average opinion across the age groups, all that matters is the elasticity. For example, maybe the pre-family age cohort has a low turnout, but the ones who do vote are the opinionated ones who will definitely go out, and furthermore they happen to have their original hips and fall victim to the 'flu less often. It's not clear how you empirically test the hypothesis.
Actually what matters for our purposes is the variance between the actual pattern of turnout and the pattern being assumed by the various polling companies in their weightings.
Take a look at Ross, Skye and Lochaber on Betfair. Last time I looked Tories were 26 on Betfair to win. In 2017, Ian Blackford only got 40% of the vote, the Tories got c. 25% and the Lib Dems 20%. Blackford is very high profile and if the Unionists go for tactical voting, he could be in trouble.
Do I think the Tories will win? Probably not but their chances are certainly better than 26.
Has @bbclaurak broken the law by telling 2 million viewers the postal votes are grim for Labour in huge swathes of the country?
Yes because the votes should not have been seen.
Mind you does it get Labour votes out tomorrow and / or keep Tory "voters" from voting
Pretty sure party officials watch the opening and counting of postal votes.
If they do they should be stopped. I think postal voting should be stopped except in extreme or exceptional cases.
Couldn'y it be argued that postal voting a kind of infringement of the principle of a secret ballot?
Yes, but it could also be argued that disenfranchising voters who are unable to reach their polling station on the day would be a worse infringement of voting rights.
Section 66 of the 1983 Representation of the People Act forbids "any statement relating to the way in which voters have voted at the election" before polls close.
The maximum punishment for breaking the law is six months' imprisonment or a fine of £5,000.
We look forward to seeing Laura K being carted off in chains as soon as People's Commissar Abbott is in charge of the Interior Ministry.
By definition it would be a People's Commissariat if it has a Narkom in charge of it.
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, has been recorded telling a private meeting that the EU would not be able to conclude a full trade negotiation with the EU by the end of next year, as Boris Johnson claims. As the Independent reports in its scoop, Barnier said:
"It is unrealistic that a global negotiation can be done in 11 months, so we can’t do it all. We will do all we can to get what I call the ‘vital minimum’ to establish a relationship with the UK if that is the time scale."
We can but hope!
Of course we can get a deal done in 12 months, it will just not be a good deal for the UK. The EU know we are desperate to get it done quickly and will obviously leverage that. Im sure the EU could put together a deal they would be happy to sign in less than a week if we were stupid enough to take it.
Trade deals have taken a long time historically because both parties have a status quo baseline and have to protect and manage the interests of their economies and industries from the changes the trade deal brings.
This negotiation will be very different, with the UK rejecting the status quo in advance, and we are back to impact of no deal is bigger on the UK than the EU so the EU will again have all the leverage.
Stupid question
Why would both sides not just say "no tariffs, on anything"
end of
?
Because the UK will not agree to a level playing field and the EU will demand that for no tariffs on anything.
The CET is 50% of goods no tariff. 30% of goods less than 3% (i.e negligible) and the Final 20% high tariffs. The high tariffs are basically on cars, food and textiles. Guess where the majority of the trade surplus the EU runs with the UK is?
Tariffs of course are a two way street, with the current state of EU economies, I would have thought the last thing the EU wanted were tariffs on their second largest export market with which they have a huge surplus.
Turkeys & Christmas?..
I completely agree, but some people have convinced themselves that because it is spread over a large GDP it is immaterial. I am sure Macron will agree as he looks on as car workers protest, farmers are dumping manure on the streets and the fisher people are barricading the ports with burning tyres.
Regardless of the liquid it’s still an assault and designed to shock and demoralise.
If you are looking for someone who has broken the law today look no further than the Minister for Tory Propaganda @bbclaurak
She just told 2 million viewers postal votes are grim for Labour
Section 66 of the 1983 Representation of the People Act forbids "any statement relating to the way in which voters have voted at the election" before polls close.
The maximum punishment for breaking the law is six months' imprisonment or a fine of £5,000.
Got it.
Assaults are fine as long as they’re committed by my side.
No spraying perfume is not an assault as far as I know otherwise Mrs BJ breaks the law every morning. Actually it is if you know the person you are spraying has an allergy to it. Not the case here
If the polling average going into tomorrow is around ten points or a bit less lead for the Tories that’s still one of those leads that could still be risky for them .
The magic number for Labour is to get within 5 points and any major squeeze is likely to be from Lib Dems and Greens towards them . Also at the last election the polls generally underestimated Labour turnout .
Of course it could go the other way . So either a landslide for the Tories or a hung parliament can’t be ruled out.
1. Friend who lives in Bolsover, very left wing and was right in 2017 when she said Skinner would hold on comfortably. Now leaning to the Tories winning it, says the only people in the town centre have been the Brexit party, Labour not much. For the first time, she will not vote Labour as she thinks Corbyn is an anti-semite.
2. In the swimming changing rooms, overheard a conversation between three typically North London well-spoken older chaps who live in Hampstead and Kilburn. All declared themselves suitably left wing. I guess Channel 4 did a programme last night that was damning on Tulip Siddiqi and her links with Bangladesh. What surprised me was the vehemence against her by all three. One called her "evil", another one pointed out how she had failed to help in a deportation case of a Japanese national. Now, not much of a point I know but I am guessing a fair few people in H&K saw that programme and I do wonder whether she is safe. Anyway, had a nibble at the LDs winning the seat.
3. I wonder whether the Ed Balls moment of this night might be Ed Miliband losing his seat. Look at the stats. More than 70% leave and very heavily white. Tories at 10.5 on Betfair.
I have (Tory-voting) friends in H&K - they reckon Tulip is reasonably well-regarded and will win without much trouble. But that's just two anecdotes, of course.
A lot of my left friends in the constituency have said they are voting LDs or Green (the Green candidate is someone I know and also has a lot of friends in the area). What surprised me, as mentioned, was just how much dislike she generated from these left-wing voters.
I think it’s really hard being BBC political editor. I used to slag off both Andrew Marr (up Blair’s arse) and Nick Robinson (toenails Robinson).
The fact is that as ‘establishment’ political journalists they get privileged information first from No.10 and other Government sources first as they always want to make BBC headline news. And the political editor has to make very quick decisions on that.
So they often end up breaking big news first (that sometimes isn’t the full picture) and by necessity end up having close relationships with Government.
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, has been recorded telling a private meeting that the EU would not be able to conclude a full trade negotiation with the EU by the end of next year, as Boris Johnson claims. As the Independent reports in its scoop, Barnier said:
"It is unrealistic that a global negotiation can be done in 11 months, so we can’t do it all. We will do all we can to get what I call the ‘vital minimum’ to establish a relationship with the UK if that is the time scale."
We can but hope!
Of course we can get a deal done in 12 months, it will just not be a good deal for the UK. The EU know we are desperate to get it done quickly and will obviously leverage that. Im sure the EU could put together a deal they would be happy to sign in less than a week if we were stupid enough to take it.
Trade deals have taken a long time historically because both parties have a status quo baseline and have to protect and manage the interests of their economies and industries from the changes the trade deal brings.
This negotiation will be very different, with the UK rejecting the status quo in advance, and we are back to impact of no deal is bigger on the UK than the EU so the EU will again have all the leverage.
Stupid question
Why would both sides not just say "no tariffs, on anything"
end of
?
Because the UK will not agree to a level playing field and the EU will demand that for no tariffs on anything.
The CET is 50% of goods no tariff. 30% of goods less than 3% (i.e negligible) and the Final 20% high tariffs. The high tariffs are basically on cars, food and textiles. Guess where the majority of the trade surplus the EU runs with the UK is?
Tariffs of course are a two way street, with the current state of EU economies, I would have thought the last thing the EU wanted were tariffs on their second largest export market with which they have a huge surplus.
Turkeys & Christmas?..
I completely agree, but some people have convinced themselves that because it is spread over a large GDP it is immaterial. I am sure Macron will agree as he looks on as car workers protest, farmers are dumping manure on the streets and the fisher people are barricading the ports with burning tyres.
That happens anyway. If risk-averse economics rather than nationalism and strategy decided everyone's Brexit policy, there'd be no Brexit.
Laura reported information she was told by labour activists, something that political reporters do all the time. She is merely acting as a conduit.
They have have given incorrect or even misleading information to Laura, who knows? caveat emptor.
She should know better. She is intelligent so I suppose this is yet another example of even the better journalists being pretty ignorant of their subject matter.
One thing this campaign has confirmed is that Laura isn’t actually a very good journalist.
Laura reported information she was told by labour activists, something that political reporters do all the time. She is merely acting as a conduit.
They have have given incorrect or even misleading information to Laura, who knows? caveat emptor.
She should know better. She is intelligent so I suppose this is yet another example of even the better journalists being pretty ignorant of their subject matter.
One thing this campaign has confirmed is that Laura isn’t actually a very good journalist.
Yeah I've tried defending her a lot but she's really not great. I mean way down the list of serious journalists, whether from right or left.
Be interesting to know who people think have been the standouts across different media?
Andrew Neil is clearly in a class of his own. I think we all knew that but it has been confirmed.
Who else? I think Lewis Goodall has done a good job on the left for Sky. Much of the big traction seems to have come on twitter?
Regardless of the liquid it’s still an assault and designed to shock and demoralise.
If you are looking for someone who has broken the law today look no further than the Minister for Tory Propaganda @bbclaurak
She just told 2 million viewers postal votes are grim for Labour
Section 66 of the 1983 Representation of the People Act forbids "any statement relating to the way in which voters have voted at the election" before polls close.
The maximum punishment for breaking the law is six months' imprisonment or a fine of £5,000.
Got it.
Assaults are fine as long as they’re committed by my side.
No spraying perfume is not an assault as far as I know otherwise Mrs BJ breaks the law every morning. Actually it is if you know the person you are spraying has an allergy to it. Not the case here
Reporting postal votes is.
There must be some point where spraying something in someones face maliciously isn't legal?
Regardless of the liquid it’s still an assault and designed to shock and demoralise.
If you are looking for someone who has broken the law today look no further than the Minister for Tory Propaganda @bbclaurak
She just told 2 million viewers postal votes are grim for Labour
Section 66 of the 1983 Representation of the People Act forbids "any statement relating to the way in which voters have voted at the election" before polls close.
The maximum punishment for breaking the law is six months' imprisonment or a fine of £5,000.
Got it.
Assaults are fine as long as they’re committed by my side.
No spraying perfume is not an assault as far as I know otherwise Mrs BJ breaks the law every morning. Actually it is if you know the person you are spraying has an allergy to it. Not the case here
Reporting postal votes is.
You've conflated spraying perfume on your own person to spraying perfume in a stranger's face there. Just to let you know.
Laura reported information she was told by labour activists, something that political reporters do all the time. She is merely acting as a conduit.
They have have given incorrect or even misleading information to Laura, who knows? caveat emptor.
She should know better. She is intelligent so I suppose this is yet another example of even the better journalists being pretty ignorant of their subject matter.
One thing this campaign has confirmed is that Laura isn’t actually a very good journalist.
I suspect she'll be moved on after the election. She's become the story, which is never a good look for a news organisation.
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, has been recorded telling a private meeting that the EU would not be able to conclude a full trade negotiation with the EU by the end of next year, as Boris Johnson claims. As the Independent reports in its scoop, Barnier said:
"It is unrealistic that a global negotiation can be done in 11 months, so we can’t do it all. We will do all we can to get what I call the ‘vital minimum’ to establish a relationship with the UK if that is the time scale."
Although this will be seized upon as evidence that Boris is out with the fairies in saying a deal can be done by the end of the year (which he is), it does suggest that the EU might be amenable to a face-saving fudge, whereby there's a minimal trade deal combined with an extension of the transitional arrangements for everything else - i.e. effectively an extension of the transition but not actually called that.
We can but hope!
Yep, that’s more or less what I expect.
So stability starts to return to both the UK and EU from the end of 2020, and the referendum mandate is honoured too.
If you Vote Conservative.
… but we were told we'd be out by the end of January. Do you not think people may be a tiny bit bemused when we are still talking about Brexit and cliff edges a year later?
Section 66 of the 1983 Representation of the People Act forbids "any statement relating to the way in which voters have voted at the election" before polls close.
That only relates to exit polls being published before polls have closed.
Regardless of the liquid it’s still an assault and designed to shock and demoralise.
If you are looking for someone who has broken the law today look no further than the Minister for Tory Propaganda @bbclaurak
She just told 2 million viewers postal votes are grim for Labour
Section 66 of the 1983 Representation of the People Act forbids "any statement relating to the way in which voters have voted at the election" before polls close.
The maximum punishment for breaking the law is six months' imprisonment or a fine of £5,000.
Got it.
Assaults are fine as long as they’re committed by my side.
No spraying perfume is not an assault as far as I know otherwise Mrs BJ breaks the law every morning. Actually it is if you know the person you are spraying has an allergy to it. Not the case here
Reporting postal votes is.
Perfume sprayed into in the eyes may well be assault
Some folk are clutching at straws regarding the oldies not voting in bad weather. They're made of sterner stuff than the 18-24 yr old bracket I can absolutely guarantee you.
That's not in dispute; turnout is always higher among 65+. The only thing that matters is the elasticity of that turnout with regard to weather. If 65+ are _disproportionately_ likely to vote in fine weather, then bad weather is better for parties relying on younger voters (and vice versa). Because the baseline is real elections held during summers and not the average opinion across the age groups, all that matters is the elasticity. For example, maybe the pre-family age cohort has a low turnout, but the ones who do vote are the opinionated ones who will definitely go out, and furthermore they happen to have their original hips and fall victim to the 'flu less often. It's not clear how you empirically test the hypothesis.
Actually what matters for our purposes is the variance between the actual pattern of turnout and the pattern being assumed by the various polling companies in their weightings.
Good point. For certain specific betting purposes, the difference in the assumed elasticity is what matters - though one assumes some companies will be no different compared to 2017. E.g., I doubt a self-reported opinion about likelihood to vote will embody the disproportionate likelihood of brief, seasonal ill health events, winter holidays, after-party hangovers, etc.
Regardless of the liquid it’s still an assault and designed to shock and demoralise.
If you are looking for someone who has broken the law today look no further than the Minister for Tory Propaganda @bbclaurak
She just told 2 million viewers postal votes are grim for Labour
Section 66 of the 1983 Representation of the People Act forbids "any statement relating to the way in which voters have voted at the election" before polls close.
The maximum punishment for breaking the law is six months' imprisonment or a fine of £5,000.
Got it.
Assaults are fine as long as they’re committed by my side.
No spraying perfume is not an assault as far as I know otherwise Mrs BJ breaks the law every morning. Actually it is if you know the person you are spraying has an allergy to it. Not the case here
Reporting postal votes is.
There must be some point where spraying something in someones face maliciously isn't legal?
Is the defence that it's fair enough because his missus sprays perfume on her own face all that persuasive?
I spray after shave on my face, but if I chucked a bottle of it in someone elses, I wouldn't be doing so for the same reason
Regardless of the liquid it’s still an assault and designed to shock and demoralise.
If you are looking for someone who has broken the law today look no further than the Minister for Tory Propaganda @bbclaurak
She just told 2 million viewers postal votes are grim for Labour
Section 66 of the 1983 Representation of the People Act forbids "any statement relating to the way in which voters have voted at the election" before polls close.
The maximum punishment for breaking the law is six months' imprisonment or a fine of £5,000.
Got it.
Assaults are fine as long as they’re committed by my side.
No spraying perfume is not an assault as far as I know otherwise Mrs BJ breaks the law every morning. Actually it is if you know the person you are spraying has an allergy to it. Not the case here
Reporting postal votes is.
There must be some point where spraying something in someones face maliciously isn't legal?
Is the defence that it's fair enough because his missus sprays perfume on her own face all that persuasive?
Some folk are clutching at straws regarding the oldies not voting in bad weather. They're made of sterner stuff than the 18-24 yr old bracket I can absolutely guarantee you.
That's not in dispute; turnout is always higher among 65+. The only thing that matters is the elasticity of that turnout with regard to weather. If 65+ are _disproportionately_ likely to vote in fine weather, then bad weather is better for parties relying on younger voters (and vice versa). Because the baseline is real elections held during summers and not the average opinion across the age groups, all that matters is the elasticity. For example, maybe the pre-family age cohort has a low turnout, but the ones who do vote are the opinionated ones who will definitely go out, and furthermore they happen to have their original hips and fall victim to the 'flu less often. It's not clear how you empirically test the hypothesis.
Heavy rains forecasted for tomorrow, across the country. Some places in the North to even have snow! Bet 365 has reduced it's over/ under turnout, from 67.5 to 66. Bad weather may affect the elderly and those with mobility/ health issues. Given that there are neary 85 seats on less than 5% margin, may make a crucial difference. Postal voting has only been 20-25% of the overall.
Heavy rains forecasted for tomorrow, across the country. Some places in the North to even have snow! Bet 365 has reduced it's over/ under turnout, from 67.5 to 66. Bad weather may affect the elderly and those with mobility/ health issues. Given that there are neary 85 seats on less than 5% margin, may make a crucial difference. Postal voting has only been 20-25% of the overall.
Heavy rains forecasted for tomorrow, across the country. Some places in the North to even have snow! Bet 365 has reduced it's over/ under turnout, from 67.5 to 66. Bad weather may affect the elderly and those with mobility/ health issues. Given that there are neary 85 seats on less than 5% margin, may make a crucial difference. Postal voting has only been 20-25% of the overall.
Heavy rains forecasted for tomorrow, across the country. Some places in the North to even have snow! Bet 365 has reduced it's over/ under turnout, from 67.5 to 66. Bad weather may affect the elderly and those with mobility/ health issues. Given that there are neary 85 seats on less than 5% margin, may make a crucial difference. Postal voting has only been 20-25% of the overall.
1. Friend who lives in Bolsover, very left wing and was right in 2017 when she said Skinner would hold on comfortably. Now leaning to the Tories winning it, says the only people in the town centre have been the Brexit party, Labour not much. For the first time, she will not vote Labour as she thinks Corbyn is an anti-semite.
2. In the swimming changing rooms, overheard a conversation between three typically North London well-spoken older chaps who live in Hampstead and Kilburn. All declared themselves suitably left wing. I guess Channel 4 did a programme last night that was damning on Tulip Siddiqi and her links with Bangladesh. What surprised me was the vehemence against her by all three. One called her "evil", another one pointed out how she had failed to help in a deportation case of a Japanese national. Now, not much of a point I know but I am guessing a fair few people in H&K saw that programme and I do wonder whether she is safe. Anyway, had a nibble at the LDs winning the seat.
3. I wonder whether the Ed Balls moment of this night might be Ed Miliband losing his seat. Look at the stats. More than 70% leave and very heavily white. Tories at 10.5 on Betfair.
I have (Tory-voting) friends in H&K - they reckon Tulip is reasonably well-regarded and will win without much trouble. But that's just two anecdotes, of course.
A lot of my left friends in the constituency have said they are voting LDs or Green (the Green candidate is someone I know and also has a lot of friends in the area). What surprised me, as mentioned, was just how much dislike she generated from these left-wing voters.
She's no Corbynista, that's for sure. She is however well-regarded and I expect her to hold on against a fairly stiff LD challenge.
I think it’s really hard being BBC political editor. I used to slag off both Andrew Marr (up Blair’s arse) and Nick Robinson (toenails Robinson).
The fact is that as ‘establishment’ political journalists they get privileged information first from No.10 and other Government sources first as they always want to make BBC headline news. And the political editor has to make very quick decisions on that.
So they often end up breaking big news first (that sometimes isn’t the full picture) and by necessity end up having close relationships with Government.
The answer is to cut the BBC free of its licence fee mooring.
They might then eventually learn to find perspective.
Laura reported information she was told by labour activists, something that political reporters do all the time. She is merely acting as a conduit.
They have have given incorrect or even misleading information to Laura, who knows? caveat emptor.
She should know better. She is intelligent so I suppose this is yet another example of even the better journalists being pretty ignorant of their subject matter.
One thing this campaign has confirmed is that Laura isn’t actually a very good journalist.
Laura reported information she was told by labour activists, something that political reporters do all the time. She is merely acting as a conduit.
They have have given incorrect or even misleading information to Laura, who knows? caveat emptor.
She should know better. She is intelligent so I suppose this is yet another example of even the better journalists being pretty ignorant of their subject matter.
One thing this campaign has confirmed is that Laura isn’t actually a very good journalist.
Yeah I've tried defending her a lot but she's really not great. I mean way down the list of serious journalists, whether from right or left.
Be interesting to know who people think have been the standouts across different media?
Andrew Neil is clearly in a class of his own. I think we all knew that but it has been confirmed.
Who else? I think Lewis Goodall has done a good job on the left for Sky. Much of the big traction seems to have come on twitter?
Emma Barnett has done well, I think. John Harris' stuff is always interesting, and going off his reports from Northern and Midlands marginals, the Tories will get over the line.
Regardless of the liquid it’s still an assault and designed to shock and demoralise.
If you are looking for someone who has broken the law today look no further than the Minister for Tory Propaganda @bbclaurak
She just told 2 million viewers postal votes are grim for Labour
Section 66 of the 1983 Representation of the People Act forbids "any statement relating to the way in which voters have voted at the election" before polls close.
The maximum punishment for breaking the law is six months' imprisonment or a fine of £5,000.
Got it.
Assaults are fine as long as they’re committed by my side.
No spraying perfume is not an assault as far as I know otherwise Mrs BJ breaks the law every morning. Actually it is if you know the person you are spraying has an allergy to it. Not the case here
Reporting postal votes is.
Perfume sprayed into in the eyes may well be assault
It sounds like assault to me as trying to inflict fear which is sufficient. The Sun are reporting that it is not politically motivated.
I think it’s really hard being BBC political editor. I used to slag off both Andrew Marr (up Blair’s arse) and Nick Robinson (toenails Robinson).
The fact is that as ‘establishment’ political journalists they get privileged information first from No.10 and other Government sources first as they always want to make BBC headline news. And the political editor has to make very quick decisions on that.
So they often end up breaking big news first (that sometimes isn’t the full picture) and by necessity end up having close relationships with Government.
The answer is to cut the BBC free of its licence fee mooring.
They might then eventually learn to find perspective.
I think it’s really hard being BBC political editor. I used to slag off both Andrew Marr (up Blair’s arse) and Nick Robinson (toenails Robinson).
The fact is that as ‘establishment’ political journalists they get privileged information first from No.10 and other Government sources first as they always want to make BBC headline news. And the political editor has to make very quick decisions on that.
So they often end up breaking big news first (that sometimes isn’t the full picture) and by necessity end up having close relationships with Government.
The answer is to cut the BBC free of its licence fee mooring.
They might then eventually learn to find perspective.
Some folk are clutching at straws regarding the oldies not voting in bad weather. They're made of sterner stuff than the 18-24 yr old bracket I can absolutely guarantee you.
That's not in dispute; turnout is always higher among 65+. The only thing that matters is the elasticity of that turnout with regard to weather. If 65+ are _disproportionately_ likely to vote in fine weather, then bad weather is better for parties relying on younger voters (and vice versa). Because the baseline is real elections held during summers and not the average opinion across the age groups, all that matters is the elasticity. For example, maybe the pre-family age cohort has a low turnout, but the ones who do vote are the opinionated ones who will definitely go out, and furthermore they happen to have their original hips and fall victim to the 'flu less often. It's not clear how you empirically test the hypothesis.
That sounds like a lot of bs to be honest.
Weak analysis; don't bet real money on that basis.
Incidentally, one's opinions on disproportionate youth turnout may matter for university or similar Remainia seats. If you think 65+ will disproportionately vote less compared to other people's beliefs, perhaps you should be long LDs over Labour in places like Cambridge or Hampstead where the Labour vote is a big mix of people.
Regardless of the liquid it’s still an assault and designed to shock and demoralise.
If you are looking for someone who has broken the law today look no further than the Minister for Tory Propaganda @bbclaurak
She just told 2 million viewers postal votes are grim for Labour
Section 66 of the 1983 Representation of the People Act forbids "any statement relating to the way in which voters have voted at the election" before polls close.
The maximum punishment for breaking the law is six months' imprisonment or a fine of £5,000.
Got it.
Assaults are fine as long as they’re committed by my side.
No spraying perfume is not an assault as far as I know otherwise Mrs BJ breaks the law every morning. Actually it is if you know the person you are spraying has an allergy to it. Not the case here
Reporting postal votes is.
You've conflated spraying perfume on your own person to spraying perfume in a stranger's face there. Just to let you know.
BJO is in full partisan election mode now.
Doesn’t give a shit about assault - just wants his side to win and to damage the other.
1. Friend who lives in Bolsover, very left wing and was right in 2017 when she said Skinner would hold on comfortably. Now leaning to the Tories winning it, says the only people in the town centre have been the Brexit party, Labour not much. For the first time, she will not vote Labour as she thinks Corbyn is an anti-semite.
2. In the swimming changing rooms, overheard a conversation between three typically North London well-spoken older chaps who live in Hampstead and Kilburn. All declared themselves suitably left wing. I guess Channel 4 did a programme last night that was damning on Tulip Siddiqi and her links with Bangladesh. What surprised me was the vehemence against her by all three. One called her "evil", another one pointed out how she had failed to help in a deportation case of a Japanese national. Now, not much of a point I know but I am guessing a fair few people in H&K saw that programme and I do wonder whether she is safe. Anyway, had a nibble at the LDs winning the seat.
3. I wonder whether the Ed Balls moment of this night might be Ed Miliband losing his seat. Look at the stats. More than 70% leave and very heavily white. Tories at 10.5 on Betfair.
Interesting. I've only made two constituency bets on this election, and one of them is Ed losing his seat.
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, has been recorded telling a private meeting that the EU would not be able to conclude a full trade negotiation with the EU by the end of next year, as Boris Johnson claims. As the Independent reports in its scoop, Barnier said:
"It is unrealistic that a global negotiation can be done in 11 months, so we can’t do it all. We will do all we can to get what I call the ‘vital minimum’ to establish a relationship with the UK if that is the time scale."
Although this will be seized upon as evidence that Boris is out with the fairies in saying a deal can be done by the end of the year (which he is), it does suggest that the EU might be amenable to a face-saving fudge, whereby there's a minimal trade deal combined with an extension of the transitional arrangements for everything else - i.e. effectively an extension of the transition but not actually called that.
We can but hope!
Of course we can get a deal done in 12 months, it will just not be a good deal for the UK. The EU know we are desperate to get it done quickly and will obviously leverage that. Im sure the EU could put together a deal they would be happy to sign in less than a week if we were stupid enough to take it.
Trade deals have taken a long time historically because both parties have a status quo baseline and have to protect and manage the interests of their economies and industries from the changes the trade deal brings.
This negotiation will be very different, with the UK rejecting the status quo in advance, and we are back to impact of no deal is bigger on the UK than the EU so the EU will again have all the leverage.
Stupid question
Why would both sides not just say "no tariffs, on anything"
end of
?
Because the UK will not agree to a level playing field and the EU will demand that for no tariffs on anything.
THE EU won't accept a tariff free deal without free movement amongst other things.
And Boris can't offer free movement because he wants control of immigration.
If you really think Brexit is finished when we leave you are in for a big surprise - it hasn't really started yet and only starts when we are on the back foot..
So you know that as a fact,how long have you been working in Barnier's team?
1. Friend who lives in Bolsover, very left wing and was right in 2017 when she said Skinner would hold on comfortably. Now leaning to the Tories winning it, says the only people in the town centre have been the Brexit party, Labour not much. For the first time, she will not vote Labour as she thinks Corbyn is an anti-semite.
2. In the swimming changing rooms, overheard a conversation between three typically North London well-spoken older chaps who live in Hampstead and Kilburn. All declared themselves suitably left wing. I guess Channel 4 did a programme last night that was damning on Tulip Siddiqi and her links with Bangladesh. What surprised me was the vehemence against her by all three. One called her "evil", another one pointed out how she had failed to help in a deportation case of a Japanese national. Now, not much of a point I know but I am guessing a fair few people in H&K saw that programme and I do wonder whether she is safe. Anyway, had a nibble at the LDs winning the seat.
3. I wonder whether the Ed Balls moment of this night might be Ed Miliband losing his seat. Look at the stats. More than 70% leave and very heavily white. Tories at 10.5 on Betfair.
Mr Ed was the name of a very good racehorse. I knew the owner. Are you by any chance related? (To the owner, that is, not the horse.)
Has @bbclaurak broken the law by telling 2 million viewers the postal votes are grim for Labour in huge swathes of the country?
Yes because the votes should not have been seen.
Mind you does it get Labour votes out tomorrow and / or keep Tory "voters" from voting
Pretty sure party officials watch the opening and counting of postal votes.
If they do they should be stopped. I think postal voting should be stopped except in extreme or exceptional cases.
Couldn'y it be argued that postal voting a kind of infringement of the principle of a secret ballot?
We don't have a secret ballot. Each ballot is numbered, and the number of your ballot paper recorded next to your name. They can come for you when they need to.
But I don't think they ever have. It is a theoretic safeguard. Presumably if the Electoral Commission was doing its job it would test some dubious election by opening the counterfoils. Won't happen until it is reformed, as it will be.
I think it’s really hard being BBC political editor. I used to slag off both Andrew Marr (up Blair’s arse) and Nick Robinson (toenails Robinson).
The fact is that as ‘establishment’ political journalists they get privileged information first from No.10 and other Government sources first as they always want to make BBC headline news. And the political editor has to make very quick decisions on that.
So they often end up breaking big news first (that sometimes isn’t the full picture) and by necessity end up having close relationships with Government.
The answer is to cut the BBC free of its licence fee mooring.
They might then eventually learn to find perspective.
Yes they may have to tell the truth rather than just be state propaganda unit
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, has been recorded telling a private meeting that the EU would not be able to conclude a full trade negotiation with the EU by the end of next year, as Boris Johnson claims. As the Independent reports in its scoop, Barnier said:
"It is unrealistic that a global negotiation can be done in 11 months, so we can’t do it all. We will do all we can to get what I call the ‘vital minimum’ to establish a relationship with the UK if that is the time scale."
Although this will be seized upon as evidence that Boris is out with the fairies in saying a deal can be done by the end of the year (which he is), it does suggest that the EU might be amenable to a face-saving fudge, whereby there's a minimal trade deal combined with an extension of the transitional arrangements for everything else - i.e. effectively an extension of the transition but not actually called that.
We can but hope!
Of course we can get a deal done in 12 months, it will just not be a good deal for the UK. The EU know we are desperate to get it done quickly and will obviously leverage that. Im sure the EU could put together a deal they would be happy to sign in less than a week if we were stupid enough to take it.
Trade deals have taken a long time historically because both parties have a status quo baseline and have to protect and manage the interests of their economies and industries from the changes the trade deal brings.
This negotiation will be very different, with the UK rejecting the status quo in advance, and we are back to impact of no deal is bigger on the UK than the EU so the EU will again have all the leverage.
Stupid question
Why would both sides not just say "no tariffs, on anything"
end of
?
Because the UK will not agree to a level playing field and the EU will demand that for no tariffs on anything.
THE EU won't accept a tariff free deal without free movement amongst other things.
And Boris can't offer free movement because he wants control of immigration.
If you really think Brexit is finished when we leave you are in for a big surprise - it hasn't really started yet and only starts when we are on the back foot..
So you know that as a fact,how long have you been working in Barnier's team?
MRP seems to show BXP romping in Barnsley. If you added BXP and the Tories together Labour would be in trouble in both seats.
I can’t work out though if the Tories would be doing much better if they weren’t standing.
I do think that in the Northern seats BXP standing is more of a help to the Tories than a hindrance. Many of those voters will simply never vote for a Tory but they will take their votes away from Labour if there is an alternative
We still don;t know if the postals are good for labour or not. Laura hasn't reported any facts on the postals per se.
Laura merely reported a view she was told by labour activists. They may be mistaken, misinformed or calculating. Make your own mind up. All Laura is doing is supplying you and I with a perspective on an event and telling us where she got that perspective.
Its called reporting.
They may also be spot on. But I shall be giving it no credence for at least thirty two hours.....
Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, has been recorded telling a private meeting that the EU would not be able to conclude a full trade negotiation with the EU by the end of next year, as Boris Johnson claims. As the Independent reports in its scoop, Barnier said:
"It is unrealistic that a global negotiation can be done in 11 months, so we can’t do it all. We will do all we can to get what I call the ‘vital minimum’ to establish a relationship with the UK if that is the time scale."
Although this will be seized upon as evidence that Boris is out with the fairies in saying a deal can be done by the end of the year (which he is), it does suggest that the EU might be amenable to a face-saving fudge, whereby there's a minimal trade deal combined with an extension of the transitional arrangements for everything else - i.e. effectively an extension of the transition but not actually called that.
We can but hope!
That's exactly what I suggested a while back as the solution. No extension of the extension period, but all the bolts and braces we need for trade.
Comments
What will not be finished is all the subsequent negotiating and the new arrangements which I agree will not be simple or necessarily always to our advantage. But the mere act of leaving on 31st January means that Brexit itself will be finished.
They have have given incorrect or even misleading information to Laura, who knows? caveat emptor.
I had assumed they would have switched to SNP and the mid campaign polling certainly suggested they had.
1. Friend who lives in Bolsover, very left wing and was right in 2017 when she said Skinner would hold on comfortably. Now leaning to the Tories winning it, says the only people in the town centre have been the Brexit party, Labour not much. For the first time, she will not vote Labour as she thinks Corbyn is an anti-semite.
2. In the swimming changing rooms, overheard a conversation between three typically North London well-spoken older chaps who live in Hampstead and Kilburn. All declared themselves suitably left wing. I guess Channel 4 did a programme last night that was damning on Tulip Siddiqi and her links with Bangladesh. What surprised me was the vehemence against her by all three. One called her "evil", another one pointed out how she had failed to help in a deportation case of a Japanese national. Now, not much of a point I know but I am guessing a fair few people in H&K saw that programme and I do wonder whether she is safe. Anyway, had a nibble at the LDs winning the seat.
3. I wonder whether the Ed Balls moment of this night might be Ed Miliband losing his seat. Look at the stats. More than 70% leave and very heavily white. Tories at 10.5 on Betfair.
Western half of Britain will have heavy rain most of the morning, pushing into the north by lunchtime where it will turn to snow. Only the east will remain dry in the morning, to be replaced by rain pm.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather
How did that turn out ?
For example if say the UK adopted US food standards which are lower the EU would not allow tariff free in that area .
Also state aid rules etc .
The genuinely interesting thing to know would be the percentage return of postal votes. There is an assumption it is always very high but I'm not sure. A lot of those who apply will be very infirm and not all will desire or be able to fill them in.
Laura merely reported a view she was told by labour activists. They may be mistaken, misinformed or calculating. Make your own mind up. All Laura is doing is supplying you and I with a perspective on an event and telling us where she got that perspective.
Its called reporting.
Section 66 of the 1983 Representation of the People Act forbids "any statement relating to the way in which voters have voted at the election" before polls close.
The maximum punishment for breaking the law is six months' imprisonment or a fine of £5,000.
London 41%
Rest of South 24%
Midlands/Wales 36%
North 48%
Scotland 12%
YouGov 5-6 Dec
#GE2019
Assaults are fine as long as they’re committed by my side.
Not overly meaningful I guess.
Tariffs of course are a two way street, with the current state of EU economies, I would have thought the last thing the EU wanted were tariffs on their second largest export market with which they have a huge surplus.
Turkeys & Christmas?..
Take a look at Ross, Skye and Lochaber on Betfair. Last time I looked Tories were 26 on Betfair to win. In 2017, Ian Blackford only got 40% of the vote, the Tories got c. 25% and the Lib Dems 20%. Blackford is very high profile and if the Unionists go for tactical voting, he could be in trouble.
Do I think the Tories will win? Probably not but their chances are certainly better than 26.
Reporting postal votes is.
The magic number for Labour is to get within 5 points and any major squeeze is likely to be from Lib Dems and Greens towards them . Also at the last election the polls generally underestimated Labour turnout .
Of course it could go the other way . So either a landslide for the Tories or a hung parliament can’t be ruled out.
The fact is that as ‘establishment’ political journalists they get privileged information first from No.10 and other Government sources first as they always want to make BBC headline news. And the political editor has to make very quick decisions on that.
So they often end up breaking big news first (that sometimes isn’t the full picture) and by necessity end up having close relationships with Government.
That isn’t the same as rampant bias.
Be interesting to know who people think have been the standouts across different media?
Andrew Neil is clearly in a class of his own. I think we all knew that but it has been confirmed.
Who else? I think Lewis Goodall has done a good job on the left for Sky. Much of the big traction seems to have come on twitter?
I spray after shave on my face, but if I chucked a bottle of it in someone elses, I wouldn't be doing so for the same reason
Come the revolution they’ll all be locked up aswell as the odious lot at Spiked !
They might then eventually learn to find perspective.
Put you down as a maybe??
Haha
Love banter
Why excuse the assault. If it is assault I am sure the police will deal with it
Incidentally, one's opinions on disproportionate youth turnout may matter for university or similar Remainia seats. If you think 65+ will disproportionately vote less compared to other people's beliefs, perhaps you should be long LDs over Labour in places like Cambridge or Hampstead where the Labour vote is a big mix of people.
I can’t work out though if the Tories would be doing much better if they weren’t standing.
Doesn’t give a shit about assault - just wants his side to win and to damage the other.
It's a shame. He used to penetrate right and left, as it were. But he's just become a rather rabid right-wing troll.
Mind you, with his background in 1980's alternative rave culture and a penchant for 'hot totty' he was never going to be conventional.
So you know that as a fact,how long have you been working in Barnier's team?