The frontrunner in the race to succeed Jeremy Corbyn has appointed a self-proclaimed Stalinist to organise her campaign for the leadership.
Rebecca Long Bailey, the shadow business secretary, has turned to Alex Halligan, who was instrumental in Mr Corbyn’s successful leadership campaign in 2015.
Her move is understood to have infuriated the shadow chancellor John McDonnell. Mr McDonnell expressed concern, Mr Halligan attempted to confront him. Now the shadow chancellor, who had been expected to back Ms Long Bailey, 40, is understood to have made a “conscious decision to have no involvement in the leadership election” even though she is widely seen as his protégée.
Mr. kinabalu, if you're picking someone based on gender rather than competence the only legitimate complaint that can be levelled at my description of 'box-ticking' is that it's too kind to overt sexism.
If that were the case, yes. But the position under consideration is not Head of Claims at the Pru, it is Leader of the Labour Party. For this is required some core attributes - most certainly including competence but plenty of others too. Charisma anyone? You bet! They will up against the political rock star known by all and sundry as "Boris". And now here's the thing. If there are a number of candidates who are perceived to have these key attributes - these sine qua nons - to a sufficient level (although of course one can never be sure until they are tested in the job) one then needs a way to discriminate and select. Here is where gender comes in. That the Party has never had a woman at the top is a genuine political problem for them. It's embarrassing - especially for a so called "progressive" party. It allows a valid line of attack from opponents. Thus when it comes to the final choice it is perfectly right and proper - more than that it's common sense - for them to be more attracted to a woman than a man. This is not mere "box ticking". Surely this is obvious.
I don't think the EU, and crucially its member states, see the Level Playing Field requirements as a mistake. They are there because member states have those obligations as a necessary price for high access to each others' markets. They are certainly not going to allow national basis access to a UK that explicitly sets out to price down those obligations. This is the reddest of all red lines for member states.
Once again the EU is playing hard-ball to a degree that suggests they either don’t understand what’s going on in British politics, or they do but that they don’t care because they’re so wedded to Ever Closer Union that it must bind even a state that leaves the club – which truly would be a Hotel California Brexit.
Actually member state really don't care about British politics and whether the UK has close access beyond the level playing field.
I think that that is confusing 2 different things. If goods are being exported from the UK to the EU they need to comply with EU regulations and visa versa. This is simpler to ensure if goods manufactured in the UK are subject to the same regulations but it is not essential, its just that there is a price attached to the greater possibility of differentiation. Other than ensuring that all goods circulating in the SM meet their standards I don't see the EU having any interest in what UK regulation is.
The second aspect is the fear that the UK might become overly competitive if, for example, we did not burden our manufacturers with such onerous responsibilities in respect of maternity pay, working hours requirements, a very bureaucratic health and safety regime and things like GDPR. Keeping a "level playing field" in this context requires us to apply regulations so that we do not gain a competitive advantage. I think that is much more difficult for us to tolerate. Its also completely silly because a much bigger advantage can be gained by a competitive devaluation of Sterling, for example.
I think we will find a comfortable modus operendi in respect of the first issue based on regulatory equivalence. The second will give Boris (sorry to those upset by this) more of an issue.
all very well having a female leader, but the Corbyn Mafia have to be expelled from the Party, just like Militant were in the 80's
Not going to happen - centrists are annoyed that the leadership has gone too far left for their taste, but there is virtually zero interest in mass purges. The interest comes from people like your good self who wouldn't join the party if we were led by a jobshare of Mother Teresa and the Archangel Gabriel.
Surely Labour will elect a female leader this time?
Can’t see how they avoid it. Talking to LibDems during their contest, members clearly felt it had to be a woman, despite Davey being the better qualified candidate. Labour being absolutely the last, even after all the minor parties, and with their self-image of having been the first to embrace positive discrimination, I don’t see how they can realistically choose another man. McDonnell knew that, hence his willingness to duck out now.
...and despite all this, the favourite in the bettng is a man...
Indeed but a few Lib Dem females close up in the betting.
Jo Swinson might be leader for a while yet.
Oh sorry, I was talking about Labour, where Keir Starmer is favourite
Rebecca is slight favourite with most bookies but only by a quarter of a point or so.
Betfair is the real market, but not a lot in it between RLB and Starmer
According to Yougov voters might actually slightly prefer RLB to Starmer but Lisa Nandy or Jess Phillips do better than either of them
all very well having a female leader, but the Corbyn Mafia have to be expelled from the Party, just like Militant were in the 80's
Not going to happen - centrists are annoyed that the leadership has gone too far left for their taste, but there is virtually zero interest in mass purges. The interest comes from people like your good self who wouldn't join the party if we were led by a jobshare of Mother Teresa and the Archangel Gabriel.
all very well having a female leader, but the Corbyn Mafia have to be expelled from the Party, just like Militant were in the 80's
Not going to happen - centrists are annoyed that the leadership has gone too far left for their taste, but there is virtually zero interest in mass purges. The interest comes from people like your good self who wouldn't join the party if we were led by a jobshare of Mother Teresa and the Archangel Gabriel.
How should Corbynites change? It would be really nice if they could embrace Blairites rather than trying to fight them.
I'm afraid this is true. I dont even like him one bit and I call him Boris, people moaning about it is just pathetic. I'm sorry but theres no other word for people who get mad or annoyed because Boris gets called Boris, based on the insulting notion it means people are fooled into liking him or some nonsense.
It doesnt mean everyone is acting like hes a mate. Boris is a dick. See? Seriously this is what upsets people? Theres real things to get mad at boris or boris supporters for.
I'm not moaning about it. It needs to stop and I plan to act. I don't agree that it's pathetic to try and do my small bit in this regard. First name branding is a real asset. "Boris" is a politician I oppose. Thus I wish to see him stripped him of his asset. It's Johnson. Boris Johnson. The PM. And, OK, I'm only one person and so you may say (with justification) that it's futile. But what can any of us do as individuals? My vote only counts one. Is that futile too?
Not convinced by another header. This is getting to be a trend.
Leaving on 31st January will be cathartic. I genuinely believe that the fizz will come out of this at that point. There will be some noise around the edges, people trying to make the case that our GDP is down 0.1% or something fanciful, people saying that the EU still have too much influence on our affairs, people who just can't let go. But for most we will find that the sun still comes up in the morning (not that we actually see it much at this time of year) and life seems incredibly similar to what it was before.
Those who claim that getting a trade deal with the EU is going to be impossible in the year are the same who were convinced that Boris could not get the EU to change a single sentence of May's deal. Whilst such conviction and self confidence is admirable in many ways it has drawbacks. I expect a deal to be done which will no doubt have some loons (Farage for example) screaming betrayal but which a comfortable majority accept.
And then we can get on to the real issues affecting our economic future.
It was reported this morning that the government is determined to have no regulatory alignment at all post 2020. That is simply not compatible with getting anything more than the most minimal deal in such a short timeframe. Thus far the header is looking more convincing than your riposte.
Cobham is a strange mixture of Austin Powers electronic gadgets and various aviation activities. It will now be dismembered. Airbus Defence and Space should have snapped up the missions systems division.
Having said that, if a company can't make money by owning 15% of the AirTanker PFI fiasco then something is seriously fucked somewhere.
Quiet day in the office so I've been looking at the betting for top Christmas Day TV programme. bet365 and Ladbrokes have a market up.
Gavin & Stacey is fave with both, 4/11 with 365 and 1/4 with Ladbrokes. First show since New Years Day 2010 and before that Xmas Day 2009 when it was 4th most watched programme. That was during a series, not a comeback special.
It was on at 22:00 then and three of the programs in the BBC1 schedule before it had higher ratings (Eastenders, The Royle Family, Doctor Who).
Last year Michael McIntyre was the top rated show, ahead of Strictly and Call the Midwife. All three are back on the schedule again this time. Call The Midwife is 2nd Fav with both bookies (365 7/2, Ladbrokes 6/1). It has been beaten by Strictly last 2 years so I'm not touching this. And I feel the G & S odds are too short with no track record to base it on and it's taking a big chunk out of the book.
So I'm drawn to Strictly at 14/1 and Michael McIntyre at 8/1, which follow each other like last year, only 45 mins earlier.
I'm probably just trying too hard to find a bet on a market I should leave alone, but I'm having a small bet on Michael McIntyre to repeat last years win.
Quiet day in the office so I've been looking at the betting for top Christmas Day TV programme. bet365 and Ladbrokes have a market up.
Gavin & Stacey is fave with both, 4/11 with 365 and 1/4 with Ladbrokes. First show since New Years Day 2010 and before that Xmas Day 2009 when it was 4th most watched programme. That was during a series, not a comeback special.
It was on at 22:00 then and three of the programs in the BBC1 schedule before it had higher ratings (Eastenders, The Royle Family, Doctor Who).
Last year Michael McIntyre was the top rated show, ahead of Strictly and Call the Midwife. All three are back on the schedule again this time. Call The Midwife is 2nd Fav with both bookies (365 7/2, Ladbrokes 6/1). It has been beaten by Strictly last 2 years so I'm not touching this. And I feel the G & S odds are too short with no track record to base it on and it's taking a big chunk out of the book.
So I'm drawn to Strictly at 14/1 and Michael McIntyre at 8/1, which follow each other like last year, only 45 mins earlier.
I'm probably just trying too hard to find a bet on a market I should leave alone, but I'm having a small bet on Michael McIntyre to repeat last years win.
But DYOR and have a merry christmas.
Is that the height of "Christmas Specials" ?....no wonder I don't watch any live tv anymore.
I don't think the EU, and crucially its member states, see the Level Playing Field requirements as a mistake. They are there because member states have those obligations as a necessary price for high access to each others' markets. They are certainly not going to allow national basis access to a UK that explicitly sets out to price down those obligations. This is the reddest of all red lines for member states.
Once again the EU is playing hard-ball to a degree that suggests they either don’t understand what’s going on in British politics, or they do but that they don’t care because they’re so wedded to Ever Closer Union that it must bind even a state that leaves the club – which truly would be a Hotel California Brexit.
Actually member state really don't care about British politics and whether the UK has close access beyond the level playing field.
What does high access mean? You make a car in the EU to the regs, get it approved and then you can sell it to every EU member. Make a car outside the EU, get it approved at an EU approval centre and you can sell it in all EU countries.
The EU want LPF to protect their trade surpluses, so if we sign up to food standards, the EU approves the foods and decides what countries comply arround the world, meaning that if we sign up to this we can not go and replace food with other world food at our choice.
Quiet day in the office so I've been looking at the betting for top Christmas Day TV programme. bet365 and Ladbrokes have a market up.
Gavin & Stacey is fave with both, 4/11 with 365 and 1/4 with Ladbrokes. First show since New Years Day 2010 and before that Xmas Day 2009 when it was 4th most watched programme. That was during a series, not a comeback special.
It was on at 22:00 then and three of the programs in the BBC1 schedule before it had higher ratings (Eastenders, The Royle Family, Doctor Who).
Last year Michael McIntyre was the top rated show, ahead of Strictly and Call the Midwife. All three are back on the schedule again this time. Call The Midwife is 2nd Fav with both bookies (365 7/2, Ladbrokes 6/1). It has been beaten by Strictly last 2 years so I'm not touching this. And I feel the G & S odds are too short with no track record to base it on and it's taking a big chunk out of the book.
So I'm drawn to Strictly at 14/1 and Michael McIntyre at 8/1, which follow each other like last year, only 45 mins earlier.
I'm probably just trying too hard to find a bet on a market I should leave alone, but I'm having a small bet on Michael McIntyre to repeat last years win.
But DYOR and have a merry christmas.
I'm with you on this, Gavin & Stacey should be around 6-4, although I don't find him funny at all, McIntyre in the value bet.
I'm afraid this is true. I dont even like him one bit and I call him Boris, people moaning about it is just pathetic. I'm sorry but theres no other word for people who get mad or annoyed because Boris gets called Boris, based on the insulting notion it means people are fooled into liking him or some nonsense.
It doesnt mean everyone is acting like hes a mate. Boris is a dick. See? Seriously this is what upsets people? Theres real things to get mad at boris or boris supporters for.
I'm not moaning about it. It needs to stop and I plan to act. I don't agree that it's pathetic to try and do my small bit in this regard. First name branding is a real asset. "Boris" is a politician I oppose. Thus I wish to see him stripped him of his asset. It's Johnson. Boris Johnson. The PM. And, OK, I'm only one person and so you may say (with justification) that it's futile. But what can any of us do as individuals? My vote only counts one. Is that futile too?
You are moaning about it, you said it was "twattish" to call him Boris as if he is a mate. But people who call him that aren't acting like he is their mate, it is just what he is commonly known as by people who aren't trying to make it clear that they dislike him.
Surely Labour will elect a female leader this time?
Can’t see how they avoid it. Talking to LibDems during their contest, members clearly felt it had to be a woman, despite Davey being the better qualified candidate. Labour being absolutely the last, even after all the minor parties, and with their self-image of having been the first to embrace positive discrimination, I don’t see how they can realistically choose another man. McDonnell knew that, hence his willingness to duck out now.
...and despite all this, the favourite in the bettng is a man...
Indeed but a few Lib Dem females close up in the betting.
Jo Swinson might be leader for a while yet.
Oh sorry, I was talking about Labour, where Keir Starmer is favourite
Rebecca is slight favourite with most bookies but only by a quarter of a point or so.
Betfair is the real market, but not a lot in it between RLB and Starmer
According to Yougov voters might actually slightly prefer RLB to Starmer but Lisa Nandy or Jess Phillips do better than either of them
all very well having a female leader, but the Corbyn Mafia have to be expelled from the Party, just like Militant were in the 80's
Not going to happen - centrists are annoyed that the leadership has gone too far left for their taste, but there is virtually zero interest in mass purges. The interest comes from people like your good self who wouldn't join the party if we were led by a jobshare of Mother Teresa and the Archangel Gabriel.
How should Corbynites change? It would be really nice if they could embrace Blairites rather than trying to fight them.
Conservatives are the opposition. Blairites (that John Rentoul and you I think, so not a crowded room) are the enemy. Funny really, you’re responding to a person whose political career is wholly aligned to the rise and fall of Blairism yet you are the enemy.
Well if it is so normal why do they not call other politician's by their first name , sad insecure gits
Just thinking more about this - now we're on it - I think it's not just the persona it is also to do with the name itself. "Boris" lends itself very readily to the neglect of whatever surname follows it. Boris Becker was "Boris", for example, in a way that "John McEnroe" was never "John". I bet Yeltsin was "Boris" to his people whereas Putin, I wonder what the Russian people call him? Not "Vlad" surely. I bet it's "Putin". So if Johnson's 1st name was, say, "Derek", I suspect he would be known as "Johnson" or at a pinch "Derek Johnson".
all very well having a female leader, but the Corbyn Mafia have to be expelled from the Party, just like Militant were in the 80's
Not going to happen - centrists are annoyed that the leadership has gone too far left for their taste, but there is virtually zero interest in mass purges. The interest comes from people like your good self who wouldn't join the party if we were led by a jobshare of Mother Teresa and the Archangel Gabriel.
How should Corbynites change? It would be really nice if they could embrace Blairites rather than trying to fight them.
Conservatives are the opposition. Blairites (that John Rentoul and you I think, so not a crowded room) are the enemy. Funny really, you’re responding to a person whose political career is wholly aligned to the rise and fall of Blairism yet you are the enemy.
Of course it wasn't Swinson , a useless carpetbagger who would not know the way to Scotland. It was a handful of pensioner bowlers
Come on, though, this is Milngavie we're talking about. It has the element of petty plausibility.
Imagine the level of enragement that made Milngavie pensioners vote for 'Wee Nippy and her Indyref II nonsense'? The EssEnnPee should set up a dedicated recreational bowling social fund just for the lolz.
Surely Labour will elect a female leader this time?
Can’t see how they avoid it. Talking to LibDems during their contest, members clearly felt it had to be a woman, despite Davey being the better qualified candidate. Labour being absolutely the last, even after all the minor parties, and with their self-image of having been the first to embrace positive discrimination, I don’t see how they can realistically choose another man. McDonnell knew that, hence his willingness to duck out now.
...and despite all this, the favourite in the bettng is a man...
Indeed but a few Lib Dem females close up in the betting.
Jo Swinson might be leader for a while yet.
Oh sorry, I was talking about Labour, where Keir Starmer is favourite
Rebecca is slight favourite with most bookies but only by a quarter of a point or so.
Betfair is the real market, but not a lot in it between RLB and Starmer
According to Yougov voters might actually slightly prefer RLB to Starmer but Lisa Nandy or Jess Phillips do better than either of them
To bet on the leadership, we need a YouGov of Labour members. To bet on having a chance at the next GE, Labour members need a YouGov of marginal seat swing voters. So we are all in the dark. But not Thornberry. She grates every time she talks.
Surely Labour will elect a female leader this time?
Can’t see how they avoid it. Talking to LibDems during their contest, members clearly felt it had to be a woman, despite Davey being the better qualified candidate. Labour being absolutely the last, even after all the minor parties, and with their self-image of having been the first to embrace positive discrimination, I don’t see how they can realistically choose another man. McDonnell knew that, hence his willingness to duck out now.
...and despite all this, the favourite in the bettng is a man...
Indeed but a few Lib Dem females close up in the betting.
Jo Swinson might be leader for a while yet.
Oh sorry, I was talking about Labour, where Keir Starmer is favourite
Rebecca is slight favourite with most bookies but only by a quarter of a point or so.
Betfair is the real market, but not a lot in it between RLB and Starmer
According to Yougov voters might actually slightly prefer RLB to Starmer but Lisa Nandy or Jess Phillips do better than either of them
Mr. 64, hmm, McIntyre isn't on the Ladbrokes list, that I can see.
no they don't have him listed. and it isnt clear if their market is the winner of just the shows they list (bet365 have the "others on request" caveat at the bottom). I tried to get confirmation from ladbrokes via livechat and email but both were like talking to a crap robot "you will need to pick the best TV show who will won at Christmas day".
Well if it is so normal why do they not call other politician's by their first name , sad insecure gits
Just thinking more about this - now we're on it - I think it's not just the persona it is also to do with the name itself. "Boris" lends itself very readily to the neglect of whatever surname follows it. Boris Becker was "Boris", for example, in a way that "John McEnroe" was never "John". I bet Yeltsin was "Boris" to his people whereas Putin, I wonder what the Russian people call him? Not "Vlad" surely. I bet it's "Putin". So if Johnson's 1st name was, say, "Derek", I suspect he would be known as "Johnson" or at a pinch "Derek Johnson".
The headmaster at my school was called Boris, and everyone referred to him as such, so I think you have a point
The frontrunner in the race to succeed Jeremy Corbyn has appointed a self-proclaimed Stalinist to organise her campaign for the leadership.
Rebecca Long Bailey, the shadow business secretary, has turned to Alex Halligan, who was instrumental in Mr Corbyn’s successful leadership campaign in 2015.
Her move is understood to have infuriated the shadow chancellor John McDonnell. Mr McDonnell expressed concern, Mr Halligan attempted to confront him. Now the shadow chancellor, who had been expected to back Ms Long Bailey, 40, is understood to have made a “conscious decision to have no involvement in the leadership election” even though she is widely seen as his protégée.
The far-left's natural state is to be at war with itself. Corbyn was a glue who kept multiple factions together that are usually much happier at each other's throats. Now he is going, it would not be a surprise to see war recommence. Rayner would probably win a contest if she stood. Long Bailey I am increasingly less sure about. I think that she has been totally blindsided by Starmer's early move. I also sense that unity is going to be a very powerful call among the membership - and Starmer has made an effective pitch to own that already. I hope Lisa Nandy runs and wins, but for the country and the Labour party it is important that Rebecca Long Bailey doesn't. I suspect a growing number of Labour members are coming to a similar conclusion.
While clearly @Alanbrooke and a few others yearn for a return of the casual racism, homophobia and misogyny of the Seventies as one of their Brexit goals, I cannot see it myself. Those days are gone.
We just had an election that resulted in the gayest parliament in the world. Look at the great offices of state and tell me this is not representative, maybe even over-representative, of multicultural Britain. Even more than is seen in the stands of LCFC. The Government now has MPs from parts of the country that haven't seen a Tory for decades. Many decades. And unlike Labour, we elect our leader on ability, not because it has to show it has overcome its innate misogyny.
We have a very twenty-first century Govt., listening to and implementing what its people want.
So as it is the season of goodwill, less of the causal stupidity, hey?
While clearly @Alanbrooke and a few others yearn for a return of the casual racism, homophobia and misogyny of the Seventies as one of their Brexit goals, I cannot see it myself. Those days are gone.
We just had an election that resulted in the gayest parliament in the world. Look at the great offices of state and tell me this is not representative, maybe even over-representative, of multicultural Britain. Even more than is seen in the stands of LCFC. The Government now has MPs from parts of the country that haven't seen a Tory for decades. Many decades. And unlike Labour, we elect our leader on ability, not because it has to show it has overcome its innate misogyny.
We have a very twenty-first century Govt., listening to and implementing what its people want.
So as it is the season of goodwill, less of the causal stupidity, hey?
While clearly @Alanbrooke and a few others yearn for a return of the casual racism, homophobia and misogyny of the Seventies as one of their Brexit goals, I cannot see it myself. Those days are gone.
We just had an election that resulted in the gayest parliament in the world. Look at the great offices of state and tell me this is not representative, maybe even over-representative, of multicultural Britain. Even more than is seen in the stands of LCFC. The Government now has MPs from parts of the country that haven't seen a Tory for decades. Many decades. And unlike Labour, we elect our leader on ability, not because it has to show it has overcome its innate misogyny.
We have a very twenty-first century Govt., listening to and implementing what its people want.
So as it is the season of goodwill, less of the causal stupidity, hey?
Well if it is so normal why do they not call other politician's by their first name , sad insecure gits
Just thinking more about this - now we're on it - I think it's not just the persona it is also to do with the name itself. "Boris" lends itself very readily to the neglect of whatever surname follows it. Boris Becker was "Boris", for example, in a way that "John McEnroe" was never "John". I bet Yeltsin was "Boris" to his people whereas Putin, I wonder what the Russian people call him? Not "Vlad" surely. I bet it's "Putin". So if Johnson's 1st name was, say, "Derek", I suspect he would be known as "Johnson" or at a pinch "Derek Johnson".
I believe that Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson is known to his family and friends as Alex. Boris is his stage name.
Betfair is still trading the "Meaningful Vote To Pass In 2019?" market and has No as the strong fav.
Was yesterday's not it then?
I don't think so. I don't think it satisfies the definition in the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018.
I had a bet on that market too, but got cold feet and cashed out at a modest profit at the weekend, when Gove and Sunak were talking about the Bill being presented before Christmas but saying nothing about the meaningful vote.
There was talk before of the Bill amending the previous Act, so that a separate meaningful vote wouldn't be required. But I don't know whether that is going to happen. The only practical point about the meaningful vote seemed to be that the European Parliament had been waiting for it before ratifying the withdrawal agreement.
Apologies for interrupting the flow of "Boris" adulation with a comment about betting.
You are moaning about it, you said it was "twattish" to call him Boris as if he is a mate. But people who call him that aren't acting like he is their mate, it is just what he is commonly known as by people who aren't trying to make it clear that they dislike him.
Not "moaning" - that is to trivialize a matter that is not trivial. For example, if one described valid concerns about, say, immigration as people "moaning", would that be deemed as appropriate lingo? Quite. Now I'm not saying that what "Boris" is called is as important an issue as the implementation of an Australian style points system to address the very real concerns that people have about immigration - of course it isn't - but I do not agree that the matter is trivial. If people think that branding is unimportant - well there's a whole industry who would disagree vehemently. And there's a particular very eminent politician who would too. We all know his name. Unfortunately.
While clearly @Alanbrooke and a few others yearn for a return of the casual racism, homophobia and misogyny of the Seventies as one of their Brexit goals, I cannot see it myself. Those days are gone.
We just had an election that resulted in the gayest parliament in the world. Look at the great offices of state and tell me this is not representative, maybe even over-representative, of multicultural Britain. Even more than is seen in the stands of LCFC. The Government now has MPs from parts of the country that haven't seen a Tory for decades. Many decades. And unlike Labour, we elect our leader on ability, not because it has to show it has overcome its innate misogyny.
We have a very twenty-first century Govt., listening to and implementing what its people want.
So as it is the season of goodwill, less of the causal stupidity, hey?
While clearly @Alanbrooke and a few others yearn for a return of the casual racism, homophobia and misogyny of the Seventies as one of their Brexit goals, I cannot see it myself. Those days are gone.
We just had an election that resulted in the gayest parliament in the world. Look at the great offices of state and tell me this is not representative, maybe even over-representative, of multicultural Britain. Even more than is seen in the stands of LCFC. The Government now has MPs from parts of the country that haven't seen a Tory for decades. Many decades. And unlike Labour, we elect our leader on ability, not because it has to show it has overcome its innate misogyny.
We have a very twenty-first century Govt., listening to and implementing what its people want.
So as it is the season of goodwill, less of the causal stupidity, hey?
I'm afraid this is true. I dont even like him one bit and I call him Boris, people moaning about it is just pathetic. I'm sorry but theres no other word for people who get mad or annoyed because Boris gets called Boris, based on the insulting notion it means people are fooled into liking him or some nonsense.
It doesnt mean everyone is acting like hes a mate. Boris is a dick. See? Seriously this is what upsets people? Theres real things to get mad at boris or boris supporters for.
I'm not moaning about it. It needs to stop and I plan to act. I don't agree that it's pathetic to try and do my small bit in this regard. First name branding is a real asset. "Boris" is a politician I oppose. Thus I wish to see him stripped him of his asset. It's Johnson. Boris Johnson. The PM. And, OK, I'm only one person and so you may say (with justification) that it's futile. But what can any of us do as individuals? My vote only counts one. Is that futile too?
I tend to agree. It’s annoyingly longer to type, but Johnson will remain a Johnson.
You are moaning about it, you said it was "twattish" to call him Boris as if he is a mate. But people who call him that aren't acting like he is their mate, it is just what he is commonly known as by people who aren't trying to make it clear that they dislike him.
Not "moaning" - that is to trivialize a matter that is not trivial. For example, if one described valid concerns about, say, immigration as people "moaning", would that be deemed as appropriate lingo? Quite. Now I'm not saying that what "Boris" is called is as important an issue as the implementation of an Australian style points system to address the very real concerns that people have about immigration - of course it isn't - but I do not agree that the matter is trivial. If people think that branding is unimportant - well there's a whole industry who would disagree vehemently. And there's a particular very eminent politician who would too. We all know his name. Unfortunately.
Yeah I'd think it appropriate to say they were moaning about immigration, same as you are about what people call Boris
It was reported this morning that the government is determined to have no regulatory alignment at all post 2020. That is simply not compatible with getting anything more than the most minimal deal in such a short timeframe. Thus far the header is looking more convincing than your riposte.
Of course you could be right. And I would usually agree with low expectations of a Conservative big majority government. But if it is true (as logic dictates) that it would be extremely bad for the economy for us to move a long way from frictionless trade with the EU, and if PM Johnson is driven above all else by popularity (as he seems to be), then surely he will have to find a way to do a sensible, pragmatic deal. That's what I think anyway.
Surely Labour will elect a female leader this time?
Can’t see how they avoid it. Talking to LibDems during their contest, members clearly felt it had to be a woman, despite Davey being the better qualified candidate. Labour being absolutely the last, even after all the minor parties, and with their self-image of having been the first to embrace positive discrimination, I don’t see how they can realistically choose another man. McDonnell knew that, hence his willingness to duck out now.
...and despite all this, the favourite in the bettng is a man...
Indeed but a few Lib Dem females close up in the betting.
Jo Swinson might be leader for a while yet.
Oh sorry, I was talking about Labour, where Keir Starmer is favourite
Rebecca is slight favourite with most bookies but only by a quarter of a point or so.
Betfair is the real market, but not a lot in it between RLB and Starmer
According to Yougov voters might actually slightly prefer RLB to Starmer but Lisa Nandy or Jess Phillips do better than either of them
It was reported this morning that the government is determined to have no regulatory alignment at all post 2020. That is simply not compatible with getting anything more than the most minimal deal in such a short timeframe. Thus far the header is looking more convincing than your riposte.
Of course you could be right. And I would usually agree with low expectations of a Conservative big majority government. But if it is true (as logic dictates) that it would be extremely bad for the economy for us to move a long way from frictionless trade with the EU, and if PM Johnson is driven above all else by popularity (as he seems to be), then surely he will have to find a way to do a sensible, pragmatic deal. That's what I think anyway.
Of course, once the FTPA has gone, "Boris" will also have the option of gaming the system again, and seeking re-election on any momentary crest of popularity that may materialise.
The past: I think the Tories won a large majority because they had the best policies, the best leader and the best campaign.
The policies are centre-left Labour policies (which is why they gave Labour such a problem with their manifesto). Johnson, who is despised by all who know him, have worked for him or have managed him, is loved by those who don't know him (the majority). He has a twinkle. Corbyn, on the other hand has been successfully demonised for the last two or three years by the Tories, the Blairites in Labour and the Friends of Israel, each with their own agenda. The Tory message was "Get Brexit Done". The Labour message was "We will negotiate another better deal with the EU and then put it to the people in a referendum with Remain as an option and I, as leader, will remain neutral". Johnson avoided the bear traps of an interview with Neil and kept Rees-Mogg under wraps somewhere. In total, that's why the Tories won a large majority. Labour didn't lose it. The Tories won it.
The LibDems made two errors - Jo Swinson as PM and Revoke. It probably cost them 6 to 10 seats but would have hardly dented the Tory majority if they had won these seats.
The future: Labour should choose Starmer or Raynor. They should hold the Tories to account on delivering their Labour policies using the line "If you want Labour policies delivered, vote Labour - not the Tories for Christ's sake!" LibDems should choose Davy as leader and build their base and win the next locals. They are in prime position for the next GE and will for instance easily take Wimbledon.
Brexit. What's Brexit? Though I've sold all my UK shares expecting a day of reckoning on the FTSE as we approach a cliff edge in June (no extension).
Yeah I'd think it appropriate to say they were moaning about immigration, same as you are about what people call Boris
I would prefer to keep discourse free of the M word. So if I were to say that (about people moaning about immigration) somebody ought to nip in and tell me off for doing so. And when they did, I would NOT be right to accuse them of "moaning" that people were accusing those with valid concerns about immigration of "moaning". Bottom line? Let's stop accusing people of moaning. And that includes accusing people of moaning that others are moaning.
Surely Labour will elect a female leader this time?
Can’t see how they avoid it. Talking to LibDems during their contest, members clearly felt it had to be a woman, despite Davey being the better qualified candidate. Labour being absolutely the last, even after all the minor parties, and with their self-image of having been the first to embrace positive discrimination, I don’t see how they can realistically choose another man. McDonnell knew that, hence his willingness to duck out now.
...and despite all this, the favourite in the bettng is a man...
Indeed but a few Lib Dem females close up in the betting.
Jo Swinson might be leader for a while yet.
Oh sorry, I was talking about Labour, where Keir Starmer is favourite
Rebecca is slight favourite with most bookies but only by a quarter of a point or so.
Betfair is the real market, but not a lot in it between RLB and Starmer
According to Yougov voters might actually slightly prefer RLB to Starmer but Lisa Nandy or Jess Phillips do better than either of them
you deserve an award for finding a list that IDS is 6th most popular on.
2 letters Johnson the only Leaver in the top 5 most popular. Bit of work to be done by team BJ, I'm sure their obvious talents and likeability will start to cut through any time now.
Yeah I'd think it appropriate to say they were moaning about immigration, same as you are about what people call Boris
I would prefer to keep discourse free of the M word. So if I were to say that (about people moaning about immigration) somebody ought to nip in and tell me off for doing so. And when they did, I would NOT be right to accuse them of "moaning" that people were accusing those with valid concerns about immigration of "moaning". Bottom line? Let's stop accusing people of moaning. And that includes accusing people of moaning that others are moaning.
Of course, once the FTPA has gone, "Boris" will also have the option of gaming the system again, and seeking re-election on any momentary crest of popularity that may materialise.
Oh bloody hell, you're right. Back to the drawing board for me.
BTW, you remember our mega astute bet at long odds on the MV passing in 2019?
OK, so I closed out anyway - smug city - but do you happen to know why that market is still trading? I thought the MV passed yesterday, no?
Good piece, but I think it overstates the extent to which the EU's position is a hardball negotiating stance and understates the extent to which they actually mean it: What the British want to do is to get full market access, but undercut their EU neighbours on environmental and labour standards.
The EU don't want this, not only because they can probably get a better deal by standing firm, but because they *don't have cornflakes for brains*.
Many EU states and MEPs, and certainly a blocking majority of each, simply don't want to get undercut in their own markets by a developed country playing regulatory arbitrage games. They aren't obliged to sign a deal that allows this, so they won't. No deal is better than a bad deal, as the philosopher once said.
This is a really widespread misconception in the UK and goes to the heart of the whole case for Brexit, so it's not hard to see how everything goes pear-shaped when it comes up against a deadline.
Businesses have set up their current operations on the basis of the status quo so it suits them not to change
But if it does change they will adapt.
The UK is a significant market and it will still make sense for lots of firms to have a local presence
One possible teeny tiny flaw in his logic.....it appears his model is based on current levels of support, and as we all know, there's a lot of water to flow under the Holyrood Bridge before the actual elections....
Boris will need to throw both more money at Scotland and get people to constantly point out how much worse things delegated there are compared to South of the border
Nah
call the SNP out on their dismal record of running Scotland
Rubbish Alan, they are doing a better job than any of the other parties would do. Given we are controlled by Westminster and only get pocket money , it is a bit rich to blame Westminster failure on the SNP. They are doing a reasonable job of mitigating some of the Tory excesses, far from perfect but streets ahead of the alternatives.
There is no Scottish magic money Tree Malcy.
We will be happy just spending our own money and not paying the interest on London loans.
Just to say that Eric Scrimshaw's model is the LeanTossup one and it was way better than most U.K models who were mainly predicting a close result on double digit Tory leads for some reason.
The headmaster at my school was called Boris, and everyone referred to him as such, so I think you have a point
Not to his face, though, I bet! Mine was a 60 a day cigarette smoker called Mr Carter who as far as we knew did not even have a first name. His fingers were all yellow from the nonstop fags and he was free with the old 'corporal'. Man of few words.
Of course, once the FTPA has gone, "Boris" will also have the option of gaming the system again, and seeking re-election on any momentary crest of popularity that may materialise.
Oh bloody hell, you're right. Back to the drawing board for me.
BTW, you remember our mega astute bet at long odds on the MV passing in 2019?
OK, so I closed out anyway - smug city - but do you happen to know why that market is still trading? I thought the MV passed yesterday, no?
On the astuteness or otherwise of the bet, I think the reasoning that "Boris" would want to send a political signal this year was sound, but he did it by having a vote on the bill itself (which involved more work than the MV because the bill had to be amended first).
And at least we were both astute enough to get out before it was too late ...
There's a small amount (tenner or so) on Betfair Exchange for Strictly at 27 for that bet.
I believe strictly is really popular.
It's been ranked 2nd last 2 years so not without a chance.
Is the bet the show which gets the most viewers?
yes. overnight BARB figures for Ladbrokes. bet365 not specific if it is the same or includes catch-up.
I'll not be betting on that market, in terms of novelty bets, favourites are very inconsistent.
I'll not preach to anyone not to bet it though. Gavin & Stacey is just an average at best British sitcom, it's not like it's Box office like the two Ronnie's or Morecambe & Wise etc.
If you only watch the first five minutes or the last 10 minutes, would that count I wonder..
On the astuteness or otherwise of the bet, I think the reasoning that "Boris" would want to send a political signal this year was sound, but he did it by having a vote on the bill itself (which involved more work than the MV because the bill had to be amended first).
And at least we were both astute enough to get out before it was too late ...
Yeah, he's like an open book. We should be able to clean up on the betting over the next 5 to 10 years. May as well make the best of things.
Still waiting for all those Labour pivots by the way.
OK, good to hear. But let's not pretend that "Jez" is in any way comparable. That is niche. Mainstream, it's "Corbyn" or it's "Jeremy Corbyn".
Ditto with other politicians. Both names or just the surname. Exception? Just the one. This "Boris" bloke. Almost everybody apart from me and you says it. It has to stop. Please help me stop it.
Which Labour pivots do you mean btw?
I never refer to the prime minster by his fake first name. Not here, not in writing anywhere else, not in conversation.
Just a simple way of not buying into his fake character.
That's the thing about these toxic narcissists. Their egos are so fragile they go to the lengths of creating a character who can bear the burden of any failure that inevitably comes their way. "The Donald" is the same. In his case his mental decline now means that the character is all that's left.
There's a small amount (tenner or so) on Betfair Exchange for Strictly at 27 for that bet.
I believe strictly is really popular.
It's been ranked 2nd last 2 years so not without a chance.
Is the bet the show which gets the most viewers?
yes. overnight BARB figures for Ladbrokes. bet365 not specific if it is the same or includes catch-up.
just found in their rules that they use 7-day data for their settlement. could make a significant difference.
Would that make a difference for the outsider's or the favourites?
I think it helps shows like Call the Midwife and Gavin and Stacey. They might get watched the next day or two. Variety/Entertainment shows like McIntyre and Strictly not so much. Call The Midwife comes top last year on 7-day ratings.
If you're Barnier, you're looking forward to 2020.
He's faced rubbish British negotiators for nearly 3 years,and now he faces a worthy opponent who will play to win.
Many slag off Boris, but what he's won since taking office is a huge achievement and does indicate super smart strategy behind the cloak of bluster and messy hair.
Barnier is excellent, significantly more able than anyone else in the EU.
If you're Barnier, you're looking forward to 2020.
He's faced rubbish British negotiators for nearly 3 years,and now he faces a worthy opponent who will play to win.
Many slag off Boris, but what he's won since taking office is a huge achievement and does indicate super smart strategy behind the cloak of bluster and messy hair.
Barnier is excellent, significantly more able than anyone else in the EU.
Let the battle begin.
What has Boris won? An election that Corbyn did almost everything to lose and a deal with the EU that was identical to what they first offered May before she rejected it.
Good piece, but I think it overstates the extent to which the EU's position is a hardball negotiating stance and understates the extent to which they actually mean it: What the British want to do is to get full market access, but undercut their EU neighbours on environmental and labour standards.
The EU don't want this, not only because they can probably get a better deal by standing firm, but because they *don't have cornflakes for brains*.
Many EU states and MEPs, and certainly a blocking majority of each, simply don't want to get undercut in their own markets by a developed country playing regulatory arbitrage games. They aren't obliged to sign a deal that allows this, so they won't. No deal is better than a bad deal, as the philosopher once said.
This is a really widespread misconception in the UK and goes to the heart of the whole case for Brexit, so it's not hard to see how everything goes pear-shaped when it comes up against a deadline.
Businesses have set up their current operations on the basis of the status quo so it suits them not to change
But if it does change they will adapt.
The UK is a significant market and it will still make sense for lots of firms to have a local presence
I'm in Ireland for a family event. Speaking to an in-law who is a dairy farmer I heard how his cooperative was changing their operations to cut the UK out of their supply chains/packing operation, and developing new cheese products to sell to non-UK markets. It's much easier for EU companies to reconfigure their operations to cut out the UK than the other way round.
They'll still sell to us, but we'll have to pay a higher price because we'll be competing with their new markets and we'll have to bear the costs of friction at the border. Meanwhile we've lost the income from being part of a larger integrated market.
If you're Barnier, you're looking forward to 2020.
He's faced rubbish British negotiators for nearly 3 years,and now he faces a worthy opponent who will play to win.
Many slag off Boris, but what he's won since taking office is a huge achievement and does indicate super smart strategy behind the cloak of bluster and messy hair.
Barnier is excellent, significantly more able than anyone else in the EU.
Let the battle begin.
He has shown great political skill and nerve in the domestic arena. I'm the first to say so. Churlish to deny it. I think he more won the GE than others lost it. Re the latter point, losing it, I would finger above all else the Benn Act.
But will this translate into being a great negotiator with foreign 3rd parties? I doubt it. We shall see.
Good piece, but I think it overstates the extent to which the EU's position is a hardball negotiating stance and understates the extent to which they actually mean it: What the British want to do is to get full market access, but undercut their EU neighbours on environmental and labour standards.
The EU don't want this, not only because they can probably get a better deal by standing firm, but because they *don't have cornflakes for brains*.
Many EU states and MEPs, and certainly a blocking majority of each, simply don't want to get undercut in their own markets by a developed country playing regulatory arbitrage games. They aren't obliged to sign a deal that allows this, so they won't. No deal is better than a bad deal, as the philosopher once said.
This is a really widespread misconception in the UK and goes to the heart of the whole case for Brexit, so it's not hard to see how everything goes pear-shaped when it comes up against a deadline.
Businesses have set up their current operations on the basis of the status quo so it suits them not to change
But if it does change they will adapt.
The UK is a significant market and it will still make sense for lots of firms to have a local presence
I'm in Ireland for a family event. Speaking to an in-law who is a dairy farmer I heard how his cooperative was changing their operations to cut the UK out of their supply chains/packing operation, and developing new cheese products to sell to non-UK markets. It's much easier for EU companies to reconfigure their operations to cut out the UK than the other way round.
They'll still sell to us, but we'll have to pay a higher price because we'll be competing with their new markets and we'll have to bear the costs of friction at the border. Meanwhile we've lost the income from being part of a larger integrated market.
At some point in this sorry saga, someone will be able to explain how it was that the Tory Party ended up wanting to walk away from one of Thatcher's main achievements, the Single Market.
They claim to revere the late PM, but they don't behave like it.
I believe that Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson is known to his family and friends as Alex. Boris is his stage name.
Really? Well well. And now all the country is his stage, others mere bit part players. Hubris will be the one to watch. Let's see when Mr H first appears to size him up.
Did I see RLB has appointed a Stalinist as her campaign manager?
Dear god, lessons not learnt then.
Reaching for the comfort blanket....
That these people are still central to Labour operations after 12th December shows how trashed their brand has become. Utterly hollowed out. There is no longer anything there for sane and sensible people to bother fighting over.
If you're Barnier, you're looking forward to 2020.
He's faced rubbish British negotiators for nearly 3 years,and now he faces a worthy opponent who will play to win.
Many slag off Boris, but what he's won since taking office is a huge achievement and does indicate super smart strategy behind the cloak of bluster and messy hair.
Barnier is excellent, significantly more able than anyone else in the EU.
Let the battle begin.
What has Boris won? An election that Corbyn did almost everything to lose and a deal with the EU that was identical to what they first offered May before she rejected it.
Boris's strategic map as he took office would have said "early election on my terms" as the end state, whichever way his EU & parliament interactions went.
He won. All the other UK political parties lost. They all fell for the Boris characture rather than seeing the plan, in front of their open eyes.
Did I see RLB has appointed a Stalinist as her campaign manager?
Dear god, lessons not learnt then.
Reaching for the comfort blanket....
That these people are still central to Labour operations after 12th December shows how trashed their brand has become. Utterly hollowed out. There is no longer anything there for sane and sensible people to bother fighting over.
I've never seen a 16 minute gap specially at the weekend, must be some sort of record for daytime. I'm only recent though.
Did I see RLB has appointed a Stalinist as her campaign manager?
Dear god, lessons not learnt then.
Reaching for the comfort blanket....
That these people are still central to Labour operations after 12th December shows how trashed their brand has become. Utterly hollowed out. There is no longer anything there for sane and sensible people to bother fighting over.
A brand that still gets 10,000+ votes in every constituency up north - that's worth fighting for as it gives you a head start.
Good piece, but I think it overstates the extent to which the EU's position is a hardball negotiating stance and understates the extent to which they actually mean it: What the British want to do is to get full market access, but undercut their EU neighbours on environmental and labour standards.
The EU don't want this, not only because they can probably get a better deal by standing firm, but because they *don't have cornflakes for brains*.
Many EU states and MEPs, and certainly a blocking majority of each, simply don't want to get undercut in their own markets by a developed country playing regulatory arbitrage games. They aren't obliged to sign a deal that allows this, so they won't. No deal is better than a bad deal, as the philosopher once said.
This is a really widespread misconception in the UK and goes to the heart of the whole case for Brexit, so it's not hard to see how everything goes pear-shaped when it comes up against a deadline.
Businesses have set up their current operations on the basis of the status quo so it suits them not to change
But if it does change they will adapt.
The UK is a significant market and it will still make sense for lots of firms to have a local presence
I'm in Ireland for a family event. Speaking to an in-law who is a dairy farmer I heard how his cooperative was changing their operations to cut the UK out of their supply chains/packing operation, and developing new cheese products to sell to non-UK markets. It's much easier for EU companies to reconfigure their operations to cut out the UK than the other way round.
They'll still sell to us, but we'll have to pay a higher price because we'll be competing with their new markets and we'll have to bear the costs of friction at the border. Meanwhile we've lost the income from being part of a larger integrated market.
Ask him how he is going to compete with Aus,NZ, etc Cheddar when the UK removes the CET tariff of 57%, that protects Cheddar makes at the moment.
I see that Andrea Leadsom's decision to allow sale of Cobbam is trending this morning. Classic bad news strategy to avoid serious scrutiny in Parliament, in press etc. Gives the stone the hedge funds, US financiers, military industrial complex tin foil hat wearers something to shout about on Twitter.
Why shouldn’t the owners of the company be allowed to sell it if they wish?
The frontrunner in the race to succeed Jeremy Corbyn has appointed a self-proclaimed Stalinist to organise her campaign for the leadership.
Rebecca Long Bailey, the shadow business secretary, has turned to Alex Halligan, who was instrumental in Mr Corbyn’s successful leadership campaign in 2015.
Her move is understood to have infuriated the shadow chancellor John McDonnell. Mr McDonnell expressed concern, Mr Halligan attempted to confront him. Now the shadow chancellor, who had been expected to back Ms Long Bailey, 40, is understood to have made a “conscious decision to have no involvement in the leadership election” even though she is widely seen as his protégée.
While the government can pursue an even more redistributive policy on London and the South East, that may well not play well to our export strengths.
It is quite telling that Brexiteers are fond of the phrase "Singapore on Thames", but I note that it is never "Singapore on Trent" or "Singapore on Mersey".
across the world globalisation is on ice. Its gone as far as it piece of the Pacific.
I am back to my original position of 2016-17, not too bot own Brexit dividend.
Others are going to have to look after themselves, but that is what they voted for, and I am quite content with them having that agency.
well that's two of us then
I voted for Brexit to change the direction of British politics Ive nothing much against the EU and could have been persuaded to vote Remain, But nobody could advance a decent reason to do so,
what nonsense. Food has always has contamination issues. Did being in the EU stop contamination in dutch eggs, horse meat being sold as beef chemical contamination in lettuce ? Or in our own case BSE, salmonella eggs or foot and mouth ?
Two tblocks spinning their regulations doesn't stop food scares.
As Ive pointed out to my wife my kids could eat US chicken every day for the rest of their lives and theyd still swallow less cklorine than the 10 years she took them to swimming club.
A sense of proportion needs to return to these debates.
And as you well know, it is not the chlorine which is the issue but the underlying poor animal husbandry of the chicken, one reason why the US has a much greater incidence of diseases like salmonella than occur in Europe, diseases which can cause serious harm to the vulnerable.
But you don’t care about that just so long as you can stick your tongue out at those pointing out these inconvenient facts.
Actually it’s to do with mandatory salmonella vaccination in Europe. Facts, hey.
The frontrunner in the race to succeed Jeremy Corbyn has appointed a self-proclaimed Stalinist to organise her campaign for the leadership.
Rebecca Long Bailey, the shadow business secretary, has turned to Alex Halligan, who was instrumental in Mr Corbyn’s successful leadership campaign in 2015.
Her move is understood to have infuriated the shadow chancellor John McDonnell. Mr McDonnell expressed concern, Mr Halligan attempted to confront him. Now the shadow chancellor, who had been expected to back Ms Long Bailey, 40, is understood to have made a “conscious decision to have no involvement in the leadership election” even though she is widely seen as his protégée.
I see that Andrea Leadsom's decision to allow sale of Cobbam is trending this morning. Classic bad news strategy to avoid serious scrutiny in Parliament, in press etc. Gives the stone the hedge funds, US financiers, military industrial complex tin foil hat wearers something to shout about on Twitter.
Why shouldn’t the owners of the company be allowed to sell it if they wish?
Ask Johnson.
p.104 of the Queen’s Speech: National Security and Investment Bill The purpose of the Bill is to: ● Strengthen the Government’s powers to scrutinise and intervene in business transactions (takeovers and mergers) to protect national security....
The frontrunner in the race to succeed Jeremy Corbyn has appointed a self-proclaimed Stalinist to organise her campaign for the leadership.
Rebecca Long Bailey, the shadow business secretary, has turned to Alex Halligan, who was instrumental in Mr Corbyn’s successful leadership campaign in 2015.
Her move is understood to have infuriated the shadow chancellor John McDonnell. Mr McDonnell expressed concern, Mr Halligan attempted to confront him. Now the shadow chancellor, who had been expected to back Ms Long Bailey, 40, is understood to have made a “conscious decision to have no involvement in the leadership election” even though she is widely seen as his protégée.
The frontrunner in the race to succeed Jeremy Corbyn has appointed a self-proclaimed Stalinist to organise her campaign for the leadership.
Rebecca Long Bailey, the shadow business secretary, has turned to Alex Halligan, who was instrumental in Mr Corbyn’s successful leadership campaign in 2015.
Her move is understood to have infuriated the shadow chancellor John McDonnell. Mr McDonnell expressed concern, Mr Halligan attempted to confront him. Now the shadow chancellor, who had been expected to back Ms Long Bailey, 40, is understood to have made a “conscious decision to have no involvement in the leadership election” even though she is widely seen as his protégée.
Good piece, but I think it overstates the extent to which the EU's position is a hardball negotiating stance and understates the extent to which they actually mean it: What the British want to do is to get full market access, but undercut their EU neighbours on environmental and labour standards.
The EU don't want this, not only because they can probably get a better deal by standing firm, but because they *don't have cornflakes for brains*.
Many EU states and MEPs, and certainly a blocking majority of each, simply don't want to get undercut in their own markets by a developed country playing regulatory arbitrage games. They aren't obliged to sign a deal that allows this, so they won't. No deal is better than a bad deal, as the philosopher once said.
This is a really widespread misconception in the UK and goes to the heart of the whole case for Brexit, so it's not hard to see how everything goes pear-shaped when it comes up against a deadline.
Businesses have set up their current operations on the basis of the status quo so it suits them not to change
But if it does change they will adapt.
The UK is a significant market and it will still make sense for lots of firms to have a local presence
No one is arguing that people will stop doing business in the UK. As you’re well aware, the argument is about what difference it makes at the margin.
Has any major manufacturer decided to locate their new EV battery plants in the UK since the referendum, for example ? (Tesla were quite specific that they had decided to stop looking at the UK as a location for their new plant for just this reason.)
Comments
The second aspect is the fear that the UK might become overly competitive if, for example, we did not burden our manufacturers with such onerous responsibilities in respect of maternity pay, working hours requirements, a very bureaucratic health and safety regime and things like GDPR. Keeping a "level playing field" in this context requires us to apply regulations so that we do not gain a competitive advantage. I think that is much more difficult for us to tolerate. Its also completely silly because a much bigger advantage can be gained by a competitive devaluation of Sterling, for example.
I think we will find a comfortable modus operendi in respect of the first issue based on regulatory equivalence. The second will give Boris (sorry to those upset by this) more of an issue.
So, all the candidates are pretty much the same, except Thornberry who is clearly the most disliked.
I believe that conclusion.
Thus far the header is looking more convincing than your riposte.
Having said that, if a company can't make money by owning 15% of the AirTanker PFI fiasco then something is seriously fucked somewhere.
Gavin & Stacey is fave with both, 4/11 with 365 and 1/4 with Ladbrokes. First show since New Years Day 2010 and before that Xmas Day 2009 when it was 4th most watched programme. That was during a series, not a comeback special.
It was on at 22:00 then and three of the programs in the BBC1 schedule before it had higher ratings (Eastenders, The Royle Family, Doctor Who).
Last year Michael McIntyre was the top rated show, ahead of Strictly and Call the Midwife. All three are back on the schedule again this time. Call The Midwife is 2nd Fav with both bookies (365 7/2, Ladbrokes 6/1). It has been beaten by Strictly last 2 years so I'm not touching this. And I feel the G & S odds are too short with no track record to base it on and it's taking a big chunk out of the book.
So I'm drawn to Strictly at 14/1 and Michael McIntyre at 8/1, which follow each other like last year, only 45 mins earlier.
I'm probably just trying too hard to find a bet on a market I should leave alone, but I'm having a small bet on Michael McIntyre to repeat last years win.
But DYOR and have a merry christmas.
The EU want LPF to protect their trade surpluses, so if we sign up to food standards, the EU approves the foods and decides what countries comply arround the world, meaning that if we sign up to this we can not go and replace food with other world food at our choice.
Way more that +/- 2%. Which sort of makes this irrelevant other than to vaguely conclude noone in the mix is obviously popular or unpopular.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyApOT98F0E
https://yougov.co.uk/ratings/politics/fame/conservative-politicians/all
Max
Simon
Reg
Malcolm
Gordon
Non Borissy names -
Alan
Stuart
David
Michael
Mark
When I tried to do it with women, I found I couldn't. It's a male thing, I think.
I had a bet on that market too, but got cold feet and cashed out at a modest profit at the weekend, when Gove and Sunak were talking about the Bill being presented before Christmas but saying nothing about the meaningful vote.
There was talk before of the Bill amending the previous Act, so that a separate meaningful vote wouldn't be required. But I don't know whether that is going to happen. The only practical point about the meaningful vote seemed to be that the European Parliament had been waiting for it before ratifying the withdrawal agreement.
Apologies for interrupting the flow of "Boris" adulation with a comment about betting.
It did almost do a joke once but they failed to stick the punchline.
The policies are centre-left Labour policies (which is why they gave Labour such a problem with their manifesto). Johnson, who is despised by all who know him, have worked for him or have managed him, is loved by those who don't know him (the majority). He has a twinkle. Corbyn, on the other hand has been successfully demonised for the last two or three years by the Tories, the Blairites in Labour and the Friends of Israel, each with their own agenda. The Tory message was "Get Brexit Done". The Labour message was "We will negotiate another better deal with the EU and then put it to the people in a referendum with Remain as an option and I, as leader, will remain neutral". Johnson avoided the bear traps of an interview with Neil and kept Rees-Mogg under wraps somewhere. In total, that's why the Tories won a large majority. Labour didn't lose it. The Tories won it.
The LibDems made two errors - Jo Swinson as PM and Revoke. It probably cost them 6 to 10 seats but would have hardly dented the Tory majority if they had won these seats.
The future: Labour should choose Starmer or Raynor. They should hold the Tories to account on delivering their Labour policies using the line "If you want Labour policies delivered, vote Labour - not the Tories for Christ's sake!" LibDems should choose Davy as leader and build their base and win the next locals. They are in prime position for the next GE and will for instance easily take Wimbledon.
Brexit. What's Brexit? Though I've sold all my UK shares expecting a day of reckoning on the FTSE as we approach a cliff edge in June (no extension).
But I haven't converted you, have I?
AFAICR, you have never been a big "Boris" user.
Bit of work to be done by team BJ, I'm sure their obvious talents and likeability will start to cut through any time now.
Onwards and upwards.
BTW, you remember our mega astute bet at long odds on the MV passing in 2019?
OK, so I closed out anyway - smug city - but do you happen to know why that market is still trading? I thought the MV passed yesterday, no?
But if it does change they will adapt.
The UK is a significant market and it will still make sense for lots of firms to have a local presence
Sorry, just saw your post on the MV market now. Cheers.
Webber’s whole thread is worth reading.
And at least we were both astute enough to get out before it was too late ...
That's a great female one.
I'll not preach to anyone not to bet it though. Gavin & Stacey is just an average at best British sitcom, it's not like it's Box office like the two Ronnie's or Morecambe & Wise etc.
If you only watch the first five minutes or the last 10 minutes, would that count I wonder..
Dear god, lessons not learnt then.
Just a simple way of not buying into his fake character.
That's the thing about these toxic narcissists. Their egos are so fragile they go to the lengths of creating a character who can bear the burden of any failure that inevitably comes their way. "The Donald" is the same. In his case his mental decline now means that the character is all that's left.
He's faced rubbish British negotiators for nearly 3 years,and now he faces a worthy opponent who will play to win.
Many slag off Boris, but what he's won since taking office is a huge achievement and does indicate super smart strategy behind the cloak of bluster and messy hair.
Barnier is excellent, significantly more able than anyone else in the EU.
Let the battle begin.
They'll still sell to us, but we'll have to pay a higher price because we'll be competing with their new markets and we'll have to bear the costs of friction at the border. Meanwhile we've lost the income from being part of a larger integrated market.
But will this translate into being a great negotiator with foreign 3rd parties? I doubt it. We shall see.
They claim to revere the late PM, but they don't behave like it.
That these people are still central to Labour operations after 12th December shows how trashed their brand has become. Utterly hollowed out. There is no longer anything there for sane and sensible people to bother fighting over.
He won. All the other UK political parties lost. They all fell for the Boris characture rather than seeing the plan, in front of their open eyes.
I am genuinely interested in his answer.
p.104 of the Queen’s Speech:
National Security and Investment Bill The purpose of the Bill is to:
● Strengthen the Government’s powers to scrutinise and intervene in business transactions (takeovers and mergers) to protect national security....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khrushchyovka
Has any major manufacturer decided to locate their new EV battery plants in the UK since the referendum, for example ? (Tesla were quite specific that they had decided to stop looking at the UK as a location for their new plant for just this reason.)