Mr R-M doing his best to win hearts and minds. Pretty obvious what he means.
'Rees-Mogg said that he appreciated his fellow Tory’s point, adding: “The last Labour government decided to take a wrecking ball to our constitution and made a bit of a muddle with it.
“Some of their most foolish interventions were their constitutional blunders which were out of step with many centuries of our parliamentary democracy. Blairite constitutional tinkering has weakened our parliament and has helped to divide the United Kingdom.
“I hope that this government finds an effective way of restoring our constitution to its proper form.”'
Memo: Devolution is even more popular in Scotland than independence.
I see the Guardian are making a big deal out of Rishi not declaring that his father in law is a billionaire. Apparently it's a huge secret that they (actually the private eye) have exposed. Honestly, these smears are becoming extremely tiresome.
It's this kind of reporting that makes the Guardian an unserious newspaper.
In what way was it a secret? We all knew it, didn't we?
Just as we all know Johnson's a serial liar and adulterer, Macdonnell was privately educated and Emily Thornberry's a snob?
It’s not that it’s a secret - it’s whether he recognises it as an interest to declare. Which is somewhat unlikely, but not quite as ridiculous.
I see Foxy has rather better made the point.
It's his father in law and his wife's business, not his.
Nah, such predictions have been made regularly for the last century, but the LDs survive and evolve.
Starmer is nowhere near as centrist as the Corbynites claim.
Indeed, there are plenty on here willing to write the obituary for the LDs.
I'm confident the LDs will return - the Party went through a cycle from 1970 to 2015 based on community politics and eventually prospered as first Labour and then the Conservatives went through their own periods of trauma and weakness. The Party was in Government with both Labour and the Conservatives and on both occasions paid the price for that.
Whether or not you think these things are cyclical, there will come a point when the Conservatives are unpopular again - the 2019 local elections showed the LDs (and others) can be beneficiaries of such unpopularity. There will come a point when the Conservatives are polling 25% and it'll be then that local by-elections will be won and Conservative morale will suffer as we saw in the 1990s when the Tory local base was almost completely hollowed out in a cycle of local contests.
Nothing lasts forever - the last few years should confirm that. I've little doubt the LDs will be at the margins for some period to come - even in the mid-2000s, the Party was really only competitive in 100 seats but sometimes that's enough to be the balance and the Party must learn from the 2010-15 experience should the opportunity arise again to be in a position of influence within a divided Commons.
The question is whether the next re-alignment will be on the centre-right. To what extent would or will Reform be able to say those things the Conservatives can't and start drawing support from the blues? I suspect the tension between liberal and social conservatism hasn't gone away.
I am not saying they will disappear, I am saying it will be better for their underlying political cause (as opposed to the party) if they disband. They won't of course.
You don’t abandon your family, social life and reason to be here over something as facile as politics, where else are like minded people to meet and hold sausage and cider socials and have raffles?
I see the Guardian are making a big deal out of Rishi not declaring that his father in law is a billionaire. Apparently it's a huge secret that they (actually the private eye) have exposed. Honestly, these smears are becoming extremely tiresome.
It's this kind of reporting that makes the Guardian an unserious newspaper.
In what way was it a secret? We all knew it, didn't we?
Just as we all know Johnson's a serial liar and adulterer, Macdonnell was privately educated and Emily Thornberry's a snob?
It’s not that it’s a secret - it’s whether he recognises it as an interest to declare. Which is somewhat unlikely, but not quite as ridiculous.
I see Foxy has rather better made the point.
It's his father in law and his wife's business, not his.
I am not saying they will disappear, I am saying it will be better for their underlying political cause (as opposed to the party) if they disband. They won't of course.
Well, I suppose the SDP is a good example of how useful splitting and disbanding can be. After all, they managed to subvert and take over BOTH Labour and the Conservatives over two decades and you can pretty much argue from 1997-2016, we had an extended period of SDP Government. I imagine David Owen would consider both Blair and Cameron a bit washy-washy but both would have fitted comfortably in the 1980s SDP.
As you say, the LDs won't disband - why should they? I'd like to think as time goes on and we pull away from both the Coalition period and Brexit, the party will re-discover its primary purpose which is, and let's be blunt about it, to be a reasonable protest home for disillusioned Conservative and Labour voters.
After all, nobody seriously thinks the Conservative Party is conservative and Labour certainly doesn't represent working people so why should the Liberal Democrats have to be liberal or indeed even democratic? Everyone on here seems to have a different definition of conservative, liberal, social democrat, socialist, Marxist, libertarian, anarchist, nihilist or whatever.
You don’t abandon your family, social life and reason to be here over something as facile as politics, where else are like minded people to meet and hold sausage and cider socials and have raffles?
The Conservative Party used to be the place where upper middle-class parents sought a suitable match for their son or daughter. Obviously, in the era of Boris Johnson, that may not be the case.
I see the Guardian are making a big deal out of Rishi not declaring that his father in law is a billionaire. Apparently it's a huge secret that they (actually the private eye) have exposed. Honestly, these smears are becoming extremely tiresome.
It's this kind of reporting that makes the Guardian an unserious newspaper.
In what way was it a secret? We all knew it, didn't we?
Just as we all know Johnson's a serial liar and adulterer, Macdonnell was privately educated and Emily Thornberry's a snob?
It’s not that it’s a secret - it’s whether he recognises it as an interest to declare. Which is somewhat unlikely, but not quite as ridiculous.
I see Foxy has rather better made the point.
It's his father in law and his wife's business, not his.
Yes, so has to be declared 🙄
Are either of his wife of father in law MPs?
They don't have to be in order to be declared.
I am a little surprised that you oppose transparency in these things.
"Sunak is bound by the ministerial code, which requires him to declare any financial interests that are “relevant” to his responsibilities, and which could conflict with his duty to the public. Ministers must also declare those interests of their close family, including siblings, parents, spouse and in-laws, which might give rise to a conflict.
But Sunak’s entry mentions no family members other than his wife, and only refers to her ownership of a small, UK-based venture capital company."
Mr R-M doing his best to win hearts and minds. Pretty obvious what he means.
'Rees-Mogg said that he appreciated his fellow Tory’s point, adding: “The last Labour government decided to take a wrecking ball to our constitution and made a bit of a muddle with it.
“Some of their most foolish interventions were their constitutional blunders which were out of step with many centuries of our parliamentary democracy. Blairite constitutional tinkering has weakened our parliament and has helped to divide the United Kingdom.
“I hope that this government finds an effective way of restoring our constitution to its proper form.”'
Memo: Devolution is even more popular in Scotland than independence.
Vote Tory End Devolution! Not quite the resonance of Take Back Control or Get Brexit Done imho.
I see the Guardian are making a big deal out of Rishi not declaring that his father in law is a billionaire. Apparently it's a huge secret that they (actually the private eye) have exposed. Honestly, these smears are becoming extremely tiresome.
It's this kind of reporting that makes the Guardian an unserious newspaper.
In what way was it a secret? We all knew it, didn't we?
Just as we all know Johnson's a serial liar and adulterer, Macdonnell was privately educated and Emily Thornberry's a snob?
It’s not that it’s a secret - it’s whether he recognises it as an interest to declare. Which is somewhat unlikely, but not quite as ridiculous.
I see Foxy has rather better made the point.
It's his father in law and his wife's business, not his.
Yes, so has to be declared 🙄
Are either of his wife of father in law MPs?
Don't worry. Thommo will be along soon enough to pick up the slack on this.
Mr R-M doing his best to win hearts and minds. Pretty obvious what he means.
'Rees-Mogg said that he appreciated his fellow Tory’s point, adding: “The last Labour government decided to take a wrecking ball to our constitution and made a bit of a muddle with it.
“Some of their most foolish interventions were their constitutional blunders which were out of step with many centuries of our parliamentary democracy. Blairite constitutional tinkering has weakened our parliament and has helped to divide the United Kingdom.
“I hope that this government finds an effective way of restoring our constitution to its proper form.”'
Memo: Devolution is even more popular in Scotland than independence.
Vote Tory End Devolution! Not quite the resonance of Take Back Control or Get Brexit Done imho.
It's also contrary to what Mr Ross has been pushing in Scotland, pretty much, given how busy Mr R was reverse-ferreting over his overlord Mr Johnson's claims that devolution in itself was a disaster.
A thought provoking thread header from Herders. He should write them more often ...
Hmm. [edit] Who is going to lead Better Together Mark 2? For the hearts and heads stuff. In 2014 the Tories got SLAB to front for them, pretty much, in Scotland.
SLAB have learnt their lesson, one presumes.
Who's going to bell the cat this time round? Gordon Brown is yesterday's person - and has made four or five promises of federalism too many. Neil Oliver is just a TV figure talking about old battles, to many people. SKS is too sensible. Michael Gove?
A quote from Neil Oliver's latest paean to the union: "My dream of Britain requires just me myself alone".
I see the Guardian are making a big deal out of Rishi not declaring that his father in law is a billionaire. Apparently it's a huge secret that they (actually the private eye) have exposed. Honestly, these smears are becoming extremely tiresome.
It's this kind of reporting that makes the Guardian an unserious newspaper.
In what way was it a secret? We all knew it, didn't we?
Just as we all know Johnson's a serial liar and adulterer, Macdonnell was privately educated and Emily Thornberry's a snob?
It’s not that it’s a secret - it’s whether he recognises it as an interest to declare. Which is somewhat unlikely, but not quite as ridiculous.
I see Foxy has rather better made the point.
It's his father in law and his wife's business, not his.
Yes, so has to be declared 🙄
Are either of his wife of father in law MPs?
Don't worry. Thommo will be along soon enough to pick up the slack on this.
Look, if it was any of our business he would have told us. He didn't, so it isn't. Know your place, plebs.
In that respect they just never been able to put the reneging of the Tuition Fee Pledge behind them.
The LibDems could represent -- the young. The main political parties have largely ignored them, so that intergenerational unfairness has become hugely entrenched in the UK. This could be the LibDem's rallying point.
Some ideas for the LibDems:
1. Average age of Parliament is way too old -- the average age of MPs is ~ 50. There are far too few MPs between 20 and 30. Guarantee to shortlist a young person for winnable seats. Get the average age of the LibDem MPs way below the Tory and Labour MPs, so the LibDems actually look like they represent young people & it looks like young people have a stake in politics.
2. Cancel all University tuition fees. During the pandemic, it is perfectly reasonable to argue the University experience has been substandard anyhow (through no particular fault of anyone) and so they should certainly be cancelled. This is the perfect opportunity for the LibDems to go further -- making amends for their historic blunder -- and cancel them altogether, past and future. If Germany can do it, if the Netherlands can do it, then the UK can make University education free, or almost so.
3. Expel Nick Clegg. He is a Facebook shill now, anyhow. The best way to expunge the errors of the past is public scapegoating. David Steele has been thrown out for less, IMO.
4. The pandemic has destroyed the opportunities of many young people (who are almost wholly immune to the virus). They have been required to make truly huge sacrifices to keep (primarily) older people safe. We hear about this regularly from Cyclefree, but this will become an enormous issue by the time of the next election. Compensate young people by a Covid Fund (a one-off tax levied on the property of the old, who benefitted from their sacrifice).
5. You'll have to get rid of Stolid Ed, of course. Despite the Slap, you should have gone for Layla.
A thought provoking thread header from Herders. He should write them more often ...
Hmm. [edit] Who is going to lead Better Together Mark 2? For the hearts and heads stuff. In 2014 the Tories got SLAB to front for them, pretty much, in Scotland.
SLAB have learnt their lesson, one presumes.
Who's going to bell the cat this time round? Gordon Brown is yesterday's person - and has made four or five promises of federalism too many. Neil Oliver is just a TV figure talking about old battles, to many people. SKS is too sensible. Michael Gove?
A quote from Neil Oliver's latest paean to the union: "My dream of Britain requires just me myself alone".
Crivvens, a [edit] British parallel to a Sinn Feiner? Whatever next ...
I see the Guardian are making a big deal out of Rishi not declaring that his father in law is a billionaire. Apparently it's a huge secret that they (actually the private eye) have exposed. Honestly, these smears are becoming extremely tiresome.
It's this kind of reporting that makes the Guardian an unserious newspaper.
In what way was it a secret? We all knew it, didn't we?
Just as we all know Johnson's a serial liar and adulterer, Macdonnell was privately educated and Emily Thornberry's a snob?
It’s not that it’s a secret - it’s whether he recognises it as an interest to declare. Which is somewhat unlikely, but not quite as ridiculous.
I see Foxy has rather better made the point.
It's his father in law and his wife's business, not his.
Yes, so has to be declared 🙄
Are either of his wife of father in law MPs?
They don't have to be in order to be declared.
I am a little surprised that you oppose transparency in these things.
"Sunak is bound by the ministerial code, which requires him to declare any financial interests that are “relevant” to his responsibilities, and which could conflict with his duty to the public. Ministers must also declare those interests of their close family, including siblings, parents, spouse and in-laws, which might give rise to a conflict.
But Sunak’s entry mentions no family members other than his wife, and only refers to her ownership of a small, UK-based venture capital company."
Only one catch there. Does breaking the Ministerial Code have any actual consequences?
If only we had a way of knowing the PM's thinking in the matter.
I see the Guardian are making a big deal out of Rishi not declaring that his father in law is a billionaire. Apparently it's a huge secret that they (actually the private eye) have exposed. Honestly, these smears are becoming extremely tiresome.
It's this kind of reporting that makes the Guardian an unserious newspaper.
In what way was it a secret? We all knew it, didn't we?
Just as we all know Johnson's a serial liar and adulterer, Macdonnell was privately educated and Emily Thornberry's a snob?
It’s not that it’s a secret - it’s whether he recognises it as an interest to declare. Which is somewhat unlikely, but not quite as ridiculous.
I see Foxy has rather better made the point.
It's his father in law and his wife's business, not his.
Yes, so has to be declared 🙄
Are either of his wife of father in law MPs?
Charlotte Hogg had to resign because of doing something similar, what makes you think Tory MPs should be exempt?
I think a commitment to move Faslane to Plymouth or Portsmouth would be useful as that is a very specific issue for a lot of people, removing that from the equation is, IMO, a simple way of winning a few people over.
Where is the new equivalent of RNAD Coulport going to be? You'd have to demolish half of Pompey or Guzz.
Truthfully, the obvious place to put a new Faslane wouldn't be Plymouth, but Anglesey. Take over the old Anglesey Aluminium site and add a bit of security, and have night life somewhere near Bangor.
And because the local economy since that site closed is in a more desperate condition than the liver of somebody who agreed to drink one sip of wine every time Trump lies on Twitter, there probably wouldn't be much protest.
That's fine, my point was to remove it from Scotland which has long been a point of contention.
Not particularly disagreeing with you, but there's a certain strand of Unionist opinion that actually sees Faslane/Coulport as a symbol of the Union, and that removing it would be damaging. I'm pretty sure that BJ, Gove etc are part of that strand.
I was truthfully thinking more of what to do with it if Scotland goes independent, because that's when it becomes obvious it can't stay. Faslane isn't Sevastapol.
And I can't see relocating the main base to Plymouth causing anything but chaos.
Christ, don't give HYUFD ideas about a Crimean option, he'll be planning an annexation of Argyll and Bute afore ye know it.
Argyll was originally annexed, though, wasn't it? It was part of Dalriada. Perhaps it should return to being joined with Antrim? If we are in to that kind of thing...
The clue is in the name, after all.
Annexation by the People of the Seax would be a radical departure though..
True. Although your parliament is located in one of the Saxon kingdoms, of course.
Anyway, I suspect there would be local support to remove the nuclear base from wherever it was. I doubt it is a particularly Scottish issue. There might be a majority wanting to keep it, as long as it isn't next to them.
I see the Guardian are making a big deal out of Rishi not declaring that his father in law is a billionaire. Apparently it's a huge secret that they (actually the private eye) have exposed. Honestly, these smears are becoming extremely tiresome.
It's this kind of reporting that makes the Guardian an unserious newspaper.
In what way was it a secret? We all knew it, didn't we?
Just as we all know Johnson's a serial liar and adulterer, Macdonnell was privately educated and Emily Thornberry's a snob?
It’s not that it’s a secret - it’s whether he recognises it as an interest to declare. Which is somewhat unlikely, but not quite as ridiculous.
I see Foxy has rather better made the point.
It's his father in law and his wife's business, not his.
Yes, so has to be declared 🙄
Are either of his wife of father in law MPs?
Charlotte Hogg had to resign because of doing something similar, what makes you think Tory MPs should be exempt?
The whole point of the chumocracy is bunging jobs and contracts to family, friends and people you meet in pubs.
Trump has taught our lot that their is nothing to be ashamed of in venal kleptocracy. The mugs will vote for you anyway because of statues or something.
The Guardian article does raise some questions, but is also very smeary at the same time. His wife owning less than 1% in a company who in India sells stuff on Amazon calls into question Rishi ability to make calls over how to deal with Amazon in the UK...i mean come on. If that is the standard,. the only person who could be chancellor is somebody whose entire family has no investments in anything ever and do not work in any sort of position of vague responsibility at a private company...by thise standards even Gordon Brown would have had an issue, as his brother had a big positiion in an energy company.
Here for anybody interested in the entrails of the Corbyn Project is a very good (imo) piece in the LRB by James Butler. Thought I'd share before I delete the bookmark. It reviews 2 books on the subject, the Owen Jones one and the one by Pogrund & Maguire, and it's so thorough that having read it you don't really need to buy the books. Too late for me since I've already bought the OJ.
In that respect they just never been able to put the reneging of the Tuition Fee Pledge behind them.
The LibDems could represent -- the young. The main political parties have largely ignored them, so that intergenerational unfairness has become hugely entrenched in the UK. This could be the LibDem's rallying point.
Some ideas for the LibDems:
1. Average age of Parliament is way too old -- the average age of MPs is ~ 50. There are far too few MPs between 20 and 30. Guarantee to shortlist a young person for winnable seats. Get the average age of the LibDem MPs way below the Tory and Labour MPs, so the LibDems actually look like they represent young people & it looks like young people have a stake in politics.
2. Cancel all University tuition fees. During the pandemic, it is perfectly reasonable to argue the University experience has been substandard anyhow (through no particular fault of anyone) and so they should certainly be cancelled. This is the perfect opportunity for the LibDems to go further -- making amends for their historic blunder -- and cancel them altogether, past and future. If Germany can do it, if the Netherlands can do it, then the UK can make University education free, or almost so.
3. Expel Nick Clegg. He is a Facebook shill now, anyhow. The best way to expunge the errors of the past is public scapegoating. David Steele has been thrown out for less, IMO.
4. The pandemic has destroyed the opportunities of many young people (who are almost wholly immune to the virus). They have been required to make truly huge sacrifices to keep (primarily) older people safe. We hear about this regularly from Cyclefree, but this will become an enormous issue by the time of the next election. Compensate young people by a Covid Fund (a one-off tax levied on the property of the old, who benefitted from their sacrifice).
5. You'll have to get rid of Stolid Ed, of course. Despite the Slap, you should have gone for Layla.
I've never been tempted by the LibDems, but I think criticism of Davey is a bit unfair. The bandwidth for "What do opposition parties think?" is very small at present - the media are vaguely interested in splits, but otherwise they really don't care what Labour or LibDems or Greens or anyone else is saying. An option would be to be wildly radical - call for the abolition of the monarchy, merger with Canada, or whatever - but that would get attention at the price of just looking weird. Patience is required at present.
I see the Guardian are making a big deal out of Rishi not declaring that his father in law is a billionaire. Apparently it's a huge secret that they (actually the private eye) have exposed. Honestly, these smears are becoming extremely tiresome.
It's this kind of reporting that makes the Guardian an unserious newspaper.
In what way was it a secret? We all knew it, didn't we?
Just as we all know Johnson's a serial liar and adulterer, Macdonnell was privately educated and Emily Thornberry's a snob?
It’s not that it’s a secret - it’s whether he recognises it as an interest to declare. Which is somewhat unlikely, but not quite as ridiculous.
I see Foxy has rather better made the point.
It's his father in law and his wife's business, not his.
Yes, so has to be declared 🙄
Are either of his wife of father in law MPs?
As with vaccine trials the rules are what they are, not what you would like them to be, and are easily ascertained.
"REQUIREMENTS FOR DECLARATION
4. Members are required, subject to the paragraphs below, to declare any financial interests which satisfy the test of relevance, including:
a) past financial interests (normally limited to those active within the last twelve months);
b) indirect financial interests, such as the financial interests of a spouse or partner, or another family member, if the Member is aware or could reasonably be expected to be aware of that interest. It is not necessary to identify the person concerned: a formula such as "A member of my family has a financial interest in [ ]"will usually suffice. The definition of a family member is as under Category 9 of the Register;"
In that respect they just never been able to put the reneging of the Tuition Fee Pledge behind them.
The LibDems could represent -- the young. The main political parties have largely ignored them, so that intergenerational unfairness has become hugely entrenched in the UK. This could be the LibDem's rallying point.
Some ideas for the LibDems:
1. Average age of Parliament is way too old -- the average age of MPs is ~ 50. There are far too few MPs between 20 and 30. Guarantee to shortlist a young person for winnable seats. Get the average age of the LibDem MPs way below the Tory and Labour MPs, so the LibDems actually look like they represent young people & it looks like young people have a stake in politics.
2. Cancel all University tuition fees. During the pandemic, it is perfectly reasonable to argue the University experience has been substandard anyhow (through no particular fault of anyone) and so they should certainly be cancelled. This is the perfect opportunity for the LibDems to go further -- making amends for their historic blunder -- and cancel them altogether, past and future. If Germany can do it, if the Netherlands can do it, then the UK can make University education free, or almost so.
3. Expel Nick Clegg. He is a Facebook shill now, anyhow. The best way to expunge the errors of the past is public scapegoating. David Steele has been thrown out for less, IMO.
4. The pandemic has destroyed the opportunities of many young people (who are almost wholly immune to the virus). They have been required to make truly huge sacrifices to keep (primarily) older people safe. We hear about this regularly from Cyclefree, but this will become an enormous issue by the time of the next election. Compensate young people by a Covid Fund (a one-off tax levied on the property of the old, who benefitted from their sacrifice).
5. You'll have to get rid of Stolid Ed, of course. Despite the Slap, you should have gone for Layla.
I've never been tempted by the LibDems, but I think criticism of Davey is a bit unfair. The bandwidth for "What do opposition parties think?" is very small at present - the media are vaguely interested in splits, but otherwise they really don't care what Labour or LibDems or Greens or anyone else is saying. An option would be to be wildly radical - call for the abolition of the monarchy, merger with Canada, or whatever - but that would get attention at the price of just looking weird. Patience is required at present.
At a personal level, I think Ed Davey is fine (I have met him a few times).
But, he is not the person to dig the LibDems out of their hole.
In that respect they just never been able to put the reneging of the Tuition Fee Pledge behind them.
The LibDems could represent -- the young. The main political parties have largely ignored them, so that intergenerational unfairness has become hugely entrenched in the UK. This could be the LibDem's rallying point.
Some ideas for the LibDems:
1. Average age of Parliament is way too old -- the average age of MPs is ~ 50. There are far too few MPs between 20 and 30. Guarantee to shortlist a young person for winnable seats. Get the average age of the LibDem MPs way below the Tory and Labour MPs, so the LibDems actually look like they represent young people & it looks like young people have a stake in politics.
2. Cancel all University tuition fees. During the pandemic, it is perfectly reasonable to argue the University experience has been substandard anyhow (through no particular fault of anyone) and so they should certainly be cancelled. This is the perfect opportunity for the LibDems to go further -- making amends for their historic blunder -- and cancel them altogether, past and future. If Germany can do it, if the Netherlands can do it, then the UK can make University education free, or almost so.
3. Expel Nick Clegg. He is a Facebook shill now, anyhow. The best way to expunge the errors of the past is public scapegoating. David Steele has been thrown out for less, IMO.
4. The pandemic has destroyed the opportunities of many young people (who are almost wholly immune to the virus). They have been required to make truly huge sacrifices to keep (primarily) older people safe. We hear about this regularly from Cyclefree, but this will become an enormous issue by the time of the next election. Compensate young people by a Covid Fund (a one-off tax levied on the property of the old, who benefitted from their sacrifice).
5. You'll have to get rid of Stolid Ed, of course. Despite the Slap, you should have gone for Layla.
I've never been tempted by the LibDems, but I think criticism of Davey is a bit unfair. The bandwidth for "What do opposition parties think?" is very small at present - the media are vaguely interested in splits, but otherwise they really don't care what Labour or LibDems or Greens or anyone else is saying. An option would be to be wildly radical - call for the abolition of the monarchy, merger with Canada, or whatever - but that would get attention at the price of just looking weird. Patience is required at present.
At a personal level, I think Ed Davey is fine (I have met him a few times).
But, he is not the person to dig the LibDems out of their hole.
That's not the question though. The question is, 'is anyone available likely to do better at the moment?'
To which the answer is a pretty clear 'no.'
He may surprise on the upside. Grimond got the job because he was the only member of the party other than Davies with a safe seat, but he turned out to be a diamond.
The Guardian article does raise some questions, but is also very smeary at the same time. His wife owning less than 1% in a company who in India sells stuff on Amazon calls into question Rishi ability to make calls over how to deal with Amazon in the UK...i mean come on. If that is the standard,. the only person who could be chancellor is somebody whose entire family has no investments in anything ever and do not work in any sort of position of vague responsibility at a private company...by thise standards even Gordon Brown would have had an issue, as his brother had a big positiion in an energy company.
The problem isn't the ownership, it's the failure to disclose it. This is very simple stuff for anyone who is acting in any capacity as a senior manager or in a professional capacity in a listed company.
The Guardian article does raise some questions, but is also very smeary at the same time. His wife owning less than 1% in a company who in India sells stuff on Amazon calls into question Rishi ability to make calls over how to deal with Amazon in the UK...i mean come on. If that is the standard,. the only person who could be chancellor is somebody whose entire family has no investments in anything ever and do not work in any sort of position of vague responsibility at a private company...by thise standards even Gordon Brown would have had an issue, as his brother had a big positiion in an energy company.
A big position in an energy company who were allowed to take over British Energy when he was Prime Minister, in fact. I don't recall any bleatings from the Guardian at that time.
The end point would be that everyone in the legislature and all their relatives should be forced to use blind trusts. I'm not sure how that works for family businesses though.
In that respect they just never been able to put the reneging of the Tuition Fee Pledge behind them.
The LibDems could represent -- the young. The main political parties have largely ignored them, so that intergenerational unfairness has become hugely entrenched in the UK. This could be the LibDem's rallying point.
Some ideas for the LibDems:
1. Average age of Parliament is way too old -- the average age of MPs is ~ 50. There are far too few MPs between 20 and 30. Guarantee to shortlist a young person for winnable seats. Get the average age of the LibDem MPs way below the Tory and Labour MPs, so the LibDems actually look like they represent young people & it looks like young people have a stake in politics.
2. Cancel all University tuition fees. During the pandemic, it is perfectly reasonable to argue the University experience has been substandard anyhow (through no particular fault of anyone) and so they should certainly be cancelled. This is the perfect opportunity for the LibDems to go further -- making amends for their historic blunder -- and cancel them altogether, past and future. If Germany can do it, if the Netherlands can do it, then the UK can make University education free, or almost so.
3. Expel Nick Clegg. He is a Facebook shill now, anyhow. The best way to expunge the errors of the past is public scapegoating. David Steele has been thrown out for less, IMO.
4. The pandemic has destroyed the opportunities of many young people (who are almost wholly immune to the virus). They have been required to make truly huge sacrifices to keep (primarily) older people safe. We hear about this regularly from Cyclefree, but this will become an enormous issue by the time of the next election. Compensate young people by a Covid Fund (a one-off tax levied on the property of the old, who benefitted from their sacrifice).
5. You'll have to get rid of Stolid Ed, of course. Despite the Slap, you should have gone for Layla.
I've never been tempted by the LibDems, but I think criticism of Davey is a bit unfair. The bandwidth for "What do opposition parties think?" is very small at present - the media are vaguely interested in splits, but otherwise they really don't care what Labour or LibDems or Greens or anyone else is saying. An option would be to be wildly radical - call for the abolition of the monarchy, merger with Canada, or whatever - but that would get attention at the price of just looking weird. Patience is required at present.
At a personal level, I think Ed Davey is fine (I have met him a few times).
But, he is not the person to dig the LibDems out of their hole.
That's not the question though. The question is, 'is anyone available likely to do better at the moment?'
To which the answer is a pretty clear 'no.'
He may surprise on the upside. Grimond got the job because he was the only member of the party other than Davies with a safe seat, but he turned out to be a diamond.
Will Umunna stand to be an MP next time, or has he Chuka'd it in?
The LibDems could represent -- the young. The main political parties have largely ignored them, so that intergenerational unfairness has become hugely entrenched in the UK. This could be the LibDem's rallying point.
Some ideas for the LibDems:
1. Average age of Parliament is way too old -- the average age of MPs is ~ 50. There are far too few MPs between 20 and 30. Guarantee to shortlist a young person for winnable seats. Get the average age of the LibDem MPs way below the Tory and Labour MPs, so the LibDems actually look like they represent young people & it looks like young people have a stake in politics.
2. Cancel all University tuition fees. During the pandemic, it is perfectly reasonable to argue the University experience has been substandard anyhow (through no particular fault of anyone) and so they should certainly be cancelled. This is the perfect opportunity for the LibDems to go further -- making amends for their historic blunder -- and cancel them altogether, past and future. If Germany can do it, if the Netherlands can do it, then the UK can make University education free, or almost so.
3. Expel Nick Clegg. He is a Facebook shill now, anyhow. The best way to expunge the errors of the past is public scapegoating. David Steele has been thrown out for less, IMO.
4. The pandemic has destroyed the opportunities of many young people (who are almost wholly immune to the virus). They have been required to make truly huge sacrifices to keep (primarily) older people safe. We hear about this regularly from Cyclefree, but this will become an enormous issue by the time of the next election. Compensate young people by a Covid Fund (a one-off tax levied on the property of the old, who benefitted from their sacrifice).
5. You'll have to get rid of Stolid Ed, of course. Despite the Slap, you should have gone for Layla.
As an ex-member, I'll offer a few thoughts:
1) Most LD MPs work hard for many years to get elected. Layla is 38 but first stood in a GE in 2010 in Battersea. Daisy Cooper is similar age and also first stood in 2010. To walk into a "safe" LD seat at 25 - very difficult. Charles Kennedy took on a seat nobody expected him to win in 1983 and captured it on a 12% swing at an election the Conservatives won by a landslide. Most young MPs are "accidental" in that sense.
2) Yes, agreed. It was a catastrophic error but the mood of the times was very much along the lines of why should students get a free education when there are cuts being imposed elsewhere (remember "austerity"?)
3) I suppose if Labour throw out Jeremy Corbyn it's possible, Clegg is a marginal figure these days.
4) The problem is it would be enormously unpopular with the old and as we are frequently reminded, the old vote and they vote to keep everything they have. The young aren't as good at voting but when they do (in numbers), it is effective.
5) I disagree - Ed Davey is the right figure for now - I'm hoping Daisy Cooper will be the next leader. The problem is the party needs a USP to differentiate it from the other two parties. That will come but the Party must be quick to take the opportunity - the problem is when you are facing a populist, they will cleave to wherever public opinion is or seems to be irrespective of the inconsistencies.
The Guardian article does raise some questions, but is also very smeary at the same time. His wife owning less than 1% in a company who in India sells stuff on Amazon calls into question Rishi ability to make calls over how to deal with Amazon in the UK...i mean come on. If that is the standard,. the only person who could be chancellor is somebody whose entire family has no investments in anything ever and do not work in any sort of position of vague responsibility at a private company...by thise standards even Gordon Brown would have had an issue, as his brother had a big positiion in an energy company.
The problem isn't the ownership, it's the failure to disclose it. This is very simple stuff for anyone who is acting in any capacity as a senior manager or in a professional capacity in a listed company.
The Guardian made the above exact claim is my point...thats the smeary bit. The non-disclosure os the issue. But trying to claim his wife has a tiny investment in a company that uses a tech company to sell stuff in another country could effect his judgement on decision of the UK arm of that tech company is nonsense.
In that respect they just never been able to put the reneging of the Tuition Fee Pledge behind them.
The LibDems could represent -- the young. The main political parties have largely ignored them, so that intergenerational unfairness has become hugely entrenched in the UK. This could be the LibDem's rallying point.
Some ideas for the LibDems:
1. Average age of Parliament is way too old -- the average age of MPs is ~ 50. There are far too few MPs between 20 and 30. Guarantee to shortlist a young person for winnable seats. Get the average age of the LibDem MPs way below the Tory and Labour MPs, so the LibDems actually look like they represent young people & it looks like young people have a stake in politics.
2. Cancel all University tuition fees. During the pandemic, it is perfectly reasonable to argue the University experience has been substandard anyhow (through no particular fault of anyone) and so they should certainly be cancelled. This is the perfect opportunity for the LibDems to go further -- making amends for their historic blunder -- and cancel them altogether, past and future. If Germany can do it, if the Netherlands can do it, then the UK can make University education free, or almost so.
3. Expel Nick Clegg. He is a Facebook shill now, anyhow. The best way to expunge the errors of the past is public scapegoating. David Steele has been thrown out for less, IMO.
4. The pandemic has destroyed the opportunities of many young people (who are almost wholly immune to the virus). They have been required to make truly huge sacrifices to keep (primarily) older people safe. We hear about this regularly from Cyclefree, but this will become an enormous issue by the time of the next election. Compensate young people by a Covid Fund (a one-off tax levied on the property of the old, who benefitted from their sacrifice).
5. You'll have to get rid of Stolid Ed, of course. Despite the Slap, you should have gone for Layla.
I've never been tempted by the LibDems, but I think criticism of Davey is a bit unfair. The bandwidth for "What do opposition parties think?" is very small at present - the media are vaguely interested in splits, but otherwise they really don't care what Labour or LibDems or Greens or anyone else is saying. An option would be to be wildly radical - call for the abolition of the monarchy, merger with Canada, or whatever - but that would get attention at the price of just looking weird. Patience is required at present.
Exactly focus on May make sure your clean and untainted by current issues. Show the local voters that things will continue after covid
In that respect they just never been able to put the reneging of the Tuition Fee Pledge behind them.
The LibDems could represent -- the young. The main political parties have largely ignored them, so that intergenerational unfairness has become hugely entrenched in the UK. This could be the LibDem's rallying point.
Some ideas for the LibDems:
1. Average age of Parliament is way too old -- the average age of MPs is ~ 50. There are far too few MPs between 20 and 30. Guarantee to shortlist a young person for winnable seats. Get the average age of the LibDem MPs way below the Tory and Labour MPs, so the LibDems actually look like they represent young people & it looks like young people have a stake in politics.
2. Cancel all University tuition fees. During the pandemic, it is perfectly reasonable to argue the University experience has been substandard anyhow (through no particular fault of anyone) and so they should certainly be cancelled. This is the perfect opportunity for the LibDems to go further -- making amends for their historic blunder -- and cancel them altogether, past and future. If Germany can do it, if the Netherlands can do it, then the UK can make University education free, or almost so.
3. Expel Nick Clegg. He is a Facebook shill now, anyhow. The best way to expunge the errors of the past is public scapegoating. David Steele has been thrown out for less, IMO.
4. The pandemic has destroyed the opportunities of many young people (who are almost wholly immune to the virus). They have been required to make truly huge sacrifices to keep (primarily) older people safe. We hear about this regularly from Cyclefree, but this will become an enormous issue by the time of the next election. Compensate young people by a Covid Fund (a one-off tax levied on the property of the old, who benefitted from their sacrifice).
5. You'll have to get rid of Stolid Ed, of course. Despite the Slap, you should have gone for Layla.
I've never been tempted by the LibDems, but I think criticism of Davey is a bit unfair. The bandwidth for "What do opposition parties think?" is very small at present - the media are vaguely interested in splits, but otherwise they really don't care what Labour or LibDems or Greens or anyone else is saying. An option would be to be wildly radical - call for the abolition of the monarchy, merger with Canada, or whatever - but that would get attention at the price of just looking weird. Patience is required at present.
At a personal level, I think Ed Davey is fine (I have met him a few times).
But, he is not the person to dig the LibDems out of their hole.
That's not the question though. The question is, 'is anyone available likely to do better at the moment?'
To which the answer is a pretty clear 'no.'
He may surprise on the upside. Grimond got the job because he was the only member of the party other than Davies with a safe seat, but he turned out to be a diamond.
Well, I am not sure the answer is 'no'.
The Labour, LibDem & Tory parties are led by three white blokes who are all in their late fifties, early sixties. SKS is the oldest, just.
The LibDems could have done something different by choosing Layla -- she would have been a big, big gamble, but they have very little to lose. The upside was much greater than the downside.
(In much the same way, the Labour party should have gone for Rayner or Nandy, IMO).
The Guardian article does raise some questions, but is also very smeary at the same time. His wife owning less than 1% in a company who in India sells stuff on Amazon calls into question Rishi ability to make calls over how to deal with Amazon in the UK...i mean come on. If that is the standard,. the only person who could be chancellor is somebody whose entire family has no investments in anything ever and do not work in any sort of position of vague responsibility at a private company...by thise standards even Gordon Brown would have had an issue, as his brother had a big positiion in an energy company.
The problem isn't the ownership, it's the failure to disclose it. This is very simple stuff for anyone who is acting in any capacity as a senior manager or in a professional capacity in a listed company.
The Guardian made the above exact claim is my point...thats the smeary bit. The non-disclosure os the issue. But trying to claim his wife has a tiny investment in a company that uses a tech company to sell stuff in another country could effect his judgement on decision of the UK arm of that tech company is nonsense.
Clutching my pearls. Of course it is only the Guardian that ever runs smeary stories about politicians. You would never catch that kind of thing about say the leader of the opposition in the Times or the Daily Mail.
We need direct Scottish participation and representation in the UK Government with major cabinet portfolios, more shared experiences, and I'd be willing to explore policy solutions for this, world-class competence, and more communication of the benefits of the Union and how it listens to and works for Scotland - enhancing its strength and profile on the world stage.
How about a quota of British cabinet positions appointed by the Scottish government?
The Guardian article does raise some questions, but is also very smeary at the same time. His wife owning less than 1% in a company who in India sells stuff on Amazon calls into question Rishi ability to make calls over how to deal with Amazon in the UK...i mean come on. If that is the standard,. the only person who could be chancellor is somebody whose entire family has no investments in anything ever and do not work in any sort of position of vague responsibility at a private company...by thise standards even Gordon Brown would have had an issue, as his brother had a big positiion in an energy company.
The problem isn't the ownership, it's the failure to disclose it. This is very simple stuff for anyone who is acting in any capacity as a senior manager or in a professional capacity in a listed company.
The Guardian made the above exact claim is my point...thats the smeary bit. The non-disclosure os the issue. But trying to claim his wife has a tiny investment in a company that uses a tech company to sell stuff in another country could effect his judgement on decision of the UK arm of that tech company is nonsense.
Clutching my pearls. Of course it is only the Guardian that ever runs smeary stories about politicians. You would never catch that kind of thing about say the leader of the opposition in the Times or the Daily Mail.
I thought the guardian set itself higher standards?
The Guardian article does raise some questions, but is also very smeary at the same time. His wife owning less than 1% in a company who in India sells stuff on Amazon calls into question Rishi ability to make calls over how to deal with Amazon in the UK...i mean come on. If that is the standard,. the only person who could be chancellor is somebody whose entire family has no investments in anything ever and do not work in any sort of position of vague responsibility at a private company...by thise standards even Gordon Brown would have had an issue, as his brother had a big positiion in an energy company.
The problem isn't the ownership, it's the failure to disclose it. This is very simple stuff for anyone who is acting in any capacity as a senior manager or in a professional capacity in a listed company.
The Guardian made the above exact claim is my point...thats the smeary bit. The non-disclosure os the issue. But trying to claim his wife has a tiny investment in a company that uses a tech company to sell stuff in another country could effect his judgement on decision of the UK arm of that tech company is nonsense.
Clutching my pearls. Of course it is only the Guardian that ever runs smeary stories about politicians. You would never catch that kind of thing about say the leader of the opposition in the Times or the Daily Mail.
I thought the guardian set itself higher standards?
In the area of tax efficiency they set the gold standard.
4) The problem is it would be enormously unpopular with the old and as we are frequently reminded, the old vote and they vote to keep everything they have. The young aren't as good at voting but when they do (in numbers), it is effective.
.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I disagree on 4 quite strongly.
It would be unpopular with the old, but it would also be the right thing to do -- a system in which the old vote and they vote to keep everything they have and so we must not upset the old means nothing ever will really change.
Young people are almost wholly immune. They have been asked to make huge sacrifices for others during COVID -- it is the perfect time to say they should be rewarded or compensated.
The Guardian article does raise some questions, but is also very smeary at the same time. His wife owning less than 1% in a company who in India sells stuff on Amazon calls into question Rishi ability to make calls over how to deal with Amazon in the UK...i mean come on. If that is the standard,. the only person who could be chancellor is somebody whose entire family has no investments in anything ever and do not work in any sort of position of vague responsibility at a private company...by thise standards even Gordon Brown would have had an issue, as his brother had a big positiion in an energy company.
The problem isn't the ownership, it's the failure to disclose it. This is very simple stuff for anyone who is acting in any capacity as a senior manager or in a professional capacity in a listed company.
The Guardian made the above exact claim is my point...thats the smeary bit. The non-disclosure os the issue. But trying to claim his wife has a tiny investment in a company that uses a tech company to sell stuff in another country could effect his judgement on decision of the UK arm of that tech company is nonsense.
Clutching my pearls. Of course it is only the Guardian that ever runs smeary stories about politicians. You would never catch that kind of thing about say the leader of the opposition in the Times or the Daily Mail.
I thought the guardian set itself higher standards?
Well they haven't started on Sunak's grandparents yet!
I would very much doubt it unless they had also repeated the allegations on her donations page.
I suspect however she is in big trouble if she's not able to argue the story was true. It's not like that weirdo from Bath where Dugdale's comments were ruled wrong, but a reasonable interpretation of the comments expressed as an honest opinion. This is criminality she was alleging.
She has thrown in the towel I believe, so that is all by the bye. And if she is liable for costs - you'd need a Court order, but in principle if you fund litigation you can be on the hook for costs. Compare the situation where A sues B but in practice A has been sorted out by his own insurers and it's really A's insurers suing B or B's insurers.. If A loses his insurers pay up.
Is it the case in law that if you fund litigation then you're on the hook for costs?
Isn't it the case that A is liable to B but A's insurance has agreed in advance to pay that liability? I don't think donors to a crowdfunding have agreed to future liabilities if the case is lost.
We need direct Scottish participation and representation in the UK Government with major cabinet portfolios, more shared experiences, and I'd be willing to explore policy solutions for this, world-class competence, and more communication of the benefits of the Union and how it listens to and works for Scotland - enhancing its strength and profile on the world stage.
How about a quota of British cabinet positions appointed by the Scottish government?
Also Wales and NI?
For a start, the Secretary of State "for" Scotland could be appointed by the Scottish Government. That would restore the constitution, as that was historically to represent the Scottish administration on the Cabinet.
The problem faced by the LibDems which undermines any recovery prospects is that new - and more attractive- protest vehicles are now readily available to disillusioned supporters of the main parties.Alienated left of centre voters are now more likely to vote Green - or SNP in Scotland - whilst those on the right are likely to be drawn to the Brexit party or something like Ukip in some form.No longer are they the obvious repository of protest votes or the NOTA option.
The Guardian article does raise some questions, but is also very smeary at the same time. His wife owning less than 1% in a company who in India sells stuff on Amazon calls into question Rishi ability to make calls over how to deal with Amazon in the UK...i mean come on. If that is the standard,. the only person who could be chancellor is somebody whose entire family has no investments in anything ever and do not work in any sort of position of vague responsibility at a private company...by thise standards even Gordon Brown would have had an issue, as his brother had a big positiion in an energy company.
The problem isn't the ownership, it's the failure to disclose it. This is very simple stuff for anyone who is acting in any capacity as a senior manager or in a professional capacity in a listed company.
The Guardian made the above exact claim is my point...thats the smeary bit. The non-disclosure os the issue. But trying to claim his wife has a tiny investment in a company that uses a tech company to sell stuff in another country could effect his judgement on decision of the UK arm of that tech company is nonsense.
Clutching my pearls. Of course it is only the Guardian that ever runs smeary stories about politicians. You would never catch that kind of thing about say the leader of the opposition in the Times or the Daily Mail.
I thought the guardian set itself higher standards?
In that respect they just never been able to put the reneging of the Tuition Fee Pledge behind them.
The LibDems could represent -- the young. The main political parties have largely ignored them, so that intergenerational unfairness has become hugely entrenched in the UK. This could be the LibDem's rallying point.
Some ideas for the LibDems:
1. Average age of Parliament is way too old -- the average age of MPs is ~ 50. There are far too few MPs between 20 and 30. Guarantee to shortlist a young person for winnable seats. Get the average age of the LibDem MPs way below the Tory and Labour MPs, so the LibDems actually look like they represent young people & it looks like young people have a stake in politics.
2. Cancel all University tuition fees. During the pandemic, it is perfectly reasonable to argue the University experience has been substandard anyhow (through no particular fault of anyone) and so they should certainly be cancelled. This is the perfect opportunity for the LibDems to go further -- making amends for their historic blunder -- and cancel them altogether, past and future. If Germany can do it, if the Netherlands can do it, then the UK can make University education free, or almost so.
3. Expel Nick Clegg. He is a Facebook shill now, anyhow. The best way to expunge the errors of the past is public scapegoating. David Steele has been thrown out for less, IMO.
4. The pandemic has destroyed the opportunities of many young people (who are almost wholly immune to the virus). They have been required to make truly huge sacrifices to keep (primarily) older people safe. We hear about this regularly from Cyclefree, but this will become an enormous issue by the time of the next election. Compensate young people by a Covid Fund (a one-off tax levied on the property of the old, who benefitted from their sacrifice).
5. You'll have to get rid of Stolid Ed, of course. Despite the Slap, you should have gone for Layla.
I've never been tempted by the LibDems, but I think criticism of Davey is a bit unfair. The bandwidth for "What do opposition parties think?" is very small at present - the media are vaguely interested in splits, but otherwise they really don't care what Labour or LibDems or Greens or anyone else is saying. An option would be to be wildly radical - call for the abolition of the monarchy, merger with Canada, or whatever - but that would get attention at the price of just looking weird. Patience is required at present.
At a personal level, I think Ed Davey is fine (I have met him a few times).
But, he is not the person to dig the LibDems out of their hole.
That's not the question though. The question is, 'is anyone available likely to do better at the moment?'
To which the answer is a pretty clear 'no.'
He may surprise on the upside. Grimond got the job because he was the only member of the party other than Davies with a safe seat, but he turned out to be a diamond.
Well, I am not sure the answer is 'no'.
The Labour, LibDem & Tory parties are led by three white blokes who are all in their late fifties, early sixties. SKS is the oldest, just.
The LibDems could have done something different by choosing Layla -- she would have been a big, big gamble, but they have very little to lose. The upside was much greater than the downside.
(In much the same way, the Labour party should have gone for Rayner or Nandy, IMO).
I like Layla, but she is too erratic for leadership. We made that mistake with Jo Swinson of appointing a younger and female leader, because she was these things and see how that turned out. Personally I think Davey would have managed the wrangling in the hung parliament much better, and would in particular not gone for Revoke, or been quite so open to defectors. Both were mistakes.
Pale, male, and a bit stale perhaps, but Davey is a much cannier political operator. I think he would cope well in a hung parliament resulting from a poll like todays Yougov.
Personally, I think the party should have stuck by Tim Farron in 2017. He offered a distinctive voice, and I rather liked him.
In that respect they just never been able to put the reneging of the Tuition Fee Pledge behind them.
The LibDems could represent -- the young. The main political parties have largely ignored them, so that intergenerational unfairness has become hugely entrenched in the UK. This could be the LibDem's rallying point.
Some ideas for the LibDems:
1. Average age of Parliament is way too old -- the average age of MPs is ~ 50. There are far too few MPs between 20 and 30. Guarantee to shortlist a young person for winnable seats. Get the average age of the LibDem MPs way below the Tory and Labour MPs, so the LibDems actually look like they represent young people & it looks like young people have a stake in politics.
2. Cancel all University tuition fees. During the pandemic, it is perfectly reasonable to argue the University experience has been substandard anyhow (through no particular fault of anyone) and so they should certainly be cancelled. This is the perfect opportunity for the LibDems to go further -- making amends for their historic blunder -- and cancel them altogether, past and future. If Germany can do it, if the Netherlands can do it, then the UK can make University education free, or almost so.
3. Expel Nick Clegg. He is a Facebook shill now, anyhow. The best way to expunge the errors of the past is public scapegoating. David Steele has been thrown out for less, IMO.
4. The pandemic has destroyed the opportunities of many young people (who are almost wholly immune to the virus). They have been required to make truly huge sacrifices to keep (primarily) older people safe. We hear about this regularly from Cyclefree, but this will become an enormous issue by the time of the next election. Compensate young people by a Covid Fund (a one-off tax levied on the property of the old, who benefitted from their sacrifice).
5. You'll have to get rid of Stolid Ed, of course. Despite the Slap, you should have gone for Layla.
I've never been tempted by the LibDems, but I think criticism of Davey is a bit unfair. The bandwidth for "What do opposition parties think?" is very small at present - the media are vaguely interested in splits, but otherwise they really don't care what Labour or LibDems or Greens or anyone else is saying. An option would be to be wildly radical - call for the abolition of the monarchy, merger with Canada, or whatever - but that would get attention at the price of just looking weird. Patience is required at present.
At a personal level, I think Ed Davey is fine (I have met him a few times).
But, he is not the person to dig the LibDems out of their hole.
That's not the question though. The question is, 'is anyone available likely to do better at the moment?'
To which the answer is a pretty clear 'no.'
He may surprise on the upside. Grimond got the job because he was the only member of the party other than Davies with a safe seat, but he turned out to be a diamond.
Well, I am not sure the answer is 'no'.
The Labour, LibDem & Tory parties are led by three white blokes who are all in their late fifties, early sixties. SKS is the oldest, just.
The LibDems could have done something different by choosing Layla -- she would have been a big, big gamble, but they have very little to lose. The upside was much greater than the downside.
(In much the same way, the Labour party should have gone for Rayner or Nandy, IMO).
Well, I have thought of Layla Moran, and I am still happy the answer is ‘no.’
In that respect they just never been able to put the reneging of the Tuition Fee Pledge behind them.
The LibDems could represent -- the young. The main political parties have largely ignored them, so that intergenerational unfairness has become hugely entrenched in the UK. This could be the LibDem's rallying point.
Some ideas for the LibDems:
1. Average age of Parliament is way too old -- the average age of MPs is ~ 50. There are far too few MPs between 20 and 30. Guarantee to shortlist a young person for winnable seats. Get the average age of the LibDem MPs way below the Tory and Labour MPs, so the LibDems actually look like they represent young people & it looks like young people have a stake in politics.
2. Cancel all University tuition fees. During the pandemic, it is perfectly reasonable to argue the University experience has been substandard anyhow (through no particular fault of anyone) and so they should certainly be cancelled. This is the perfect opportunity for the LibDems to go further -- making amends for their historic blunder -- and cancel them altogether, past and future. If Germany can do it, if the Netherlands can do it, then the UK can make University education free, or almost so.
3. Expel Nick Clegg. He is a Facebook shill now, anyhow. The best way to expunge the errors of the past is public scapegoating. David Steele has been thrown out for less, IMO.
4. The pandemic has destroyed the opportunities of many young people (who are almost wholly immune to the virus). They have been required to make truly huge sacrifices to keep (primarily) older people safe. We hear about this regularly from Cyclefree, but this will become an enormous issue by the time of the next election. Compensate young people by a Covid Fund (a one-off tax levied on the property of the old, who benefitted from their sacrifice).
5. You'll have to get rid of Stolid Ed, of course. Despite the Slap, you should have gone for Layla.
I think the LDs need electoral reform or else they are going to be squeezed out of our increasingly polarized politics. This is an interesting take though. The party for the young. Had not occurred to me as an option but I think it's worth a serious look. It would certainly give them the 2 things they sorely lack - definition and profile. It would also turn the LDs into something exciting. To be exciting (politically) you must become something that many of the people who do not vote for you fear winning elections and gaining power. As you imply, this does not spell Ed Davey, so a new leader would be required.
And is there a suitable piece of music at this point? Yes there is -
Mr R-M doing his best to win hearts and minds. Pretty obvious what he means.
'Rees-Mogg said that he appreciated his fellow Tory’s point, adding: “The last Labour government decided to take a wrecking ball to our constitution and made a bit of a muddle with it.
“Some of their most foolish interventions were their constitutional blunders which were out of step with many centuries of our parliamentary democracy. Blairite constitutional tinkering has weakened our parliament and has helped to divide the United Kingdom.
“I hope that this government finds an effective way of restoring our constitution to its proper form.”'
Memo: Devolution is even more popular in Scotland than independence.
Vote Tory End Devolution! Not quite the resonance of Take Back Control or Get Brexit Done imho.
In that respect they just never been able to put the reneging of the Tuition Fee Pledge behind them.
The LibDems could represent -- the young. The main political parties have largely ignored them, so that intergenerational unfairness has become hugely entrenched in the UK. This could be the LibDem's rallying point.
Some ideas for the LibDems:
1. Average age of Parliament is way too old -- the average age of MPs is ~ 50. There are far too few MPs between 20 and 30. Guarantee to shortlist a young person for winnable seats. Get the average age of the LibDem MPs way below the Tory and Labour MPs, so the LibDems actually look like they represent young people & it looks like young people have a stake in politics.
2. Cancel all University tuition fees. During the pandemic, it is perfectly reasonable to argue the University experience has been substandard anyhow (through no particular fault of anyone) and so they should certainly be cancelled. This is the perfect opportunity for the LibDems to go further -- making amends for their historic blunder -- and cancel them altogether, past and future. If Germany can do it, if the Netherlands can do it, then the UK can make University education free, or almost so.
3. Expel Nick Clegg. He is a Facebook shill now, anyhow. The best way to expunge the errors of the past is public scapegoating. David Steele has been thrown out for less, IMO.
4. The pandemic has destroyed the opportunities of many young people (who are almost wholly immune to the virus). They have been required to make truly huge sacrifices to keep (primarily) older people safe. We hear about this regularly from Cyclefree, but this will become an enormous issue by the time of the next election. Compensate young people by a Covid Fund (a one-off tax levied on the property of the old, who benefitted from their sacrifice).
5. You'll have to get rid of Stolid Ed, of course. Despite the Slap, you should have gone for Layla.
I've never been tempted by the LibDems, but I think criticism of Davey is a bit unfair. The bandwidth for "What do opposition parties think?" is very small at present - the media are vaguely interested in splits, but otherwise they really don't care what Labour or LibDems or Greens or anyone else is saying. An option would be to be wildly radical - call for the abolition of the monarchy, merger with Canada, or whatever - but that would get attention at the price of just looking weird. Patience is required at present.
At a personal level, I think Ed Davey is fine (I have met him a few times).
But, he is not the person to dig the LibDems out of their hole.
That's not the question though. The question is, 'is anyone available likely to do better at the moment?'
To which the answer is a pretty clear 'no.'
He may surprise on the upside. Grimond got the job because he was the only member of the party other than Davies with a safe seat, but he turned out to be a diamond.
Well, I am not sure the answer is 'no'.
The Labour, LibDem & Tory parties are led by three white blokes who are all in their late fifties, early sixties. SKS is the oldest, just.
The LibDems could have done something different by choosing Layla -- she would have been a big, big gamble, but they have very little to lose. The upside was much greater than the downside.
(In much the same way, the Labour party should have gone for Rayner or Nandy, IMO).
I like Layla, but she is too erratic for leadership. We made that mistake with Jo Swinson of appointing a younger and female leader, because she was these things and see how that turned out. Personally I think Davey would have managed the wrangling in the hung parliament much better, and would in particular not gone for Revoke, or been quite so open to defectors. Both were mistakes.
Pale, male, and a bit stale perhaps, but Davey is a much cannier political operator. I think he would cope well in a hung parliament resulting from a poll like todays Yougov.
Personally, I think the party should have stuck by Tim Farron in 2017. He offered a distinctive voice, and I rather liked him.
I agree the LibDems gambled with Swinson and lost. But then was the moment to double-down ...
I am also not quite as pessimistic on the LibDems (or on SLAB or on PC or other currently forsaken parties).
Because just look what Jacinda has done. She took over a party on an all-time historic low polling a few weeks before an election.
The right leader makes .... all the difference in the world.
Mr R-M doing his best to win hearts and minds. Pretty obvious what he means.
'Rees-Mogg said that he appreciated his fellow Tory’s point, adding: “The last Labour government decided to take a wrecking ball to our constitution and made a bit of a muddle with it.
“Some of their most foolish interventions were their constitutional blunders which were out of step with many centuries of our parliamentary democracy. Blairite constitutional tinkering has weakened our parliament and has helped to divide the United Kingdom.
“I hope that this government finds an effective way of restoring our constitution to its proper form.”'
Memo: Devolution is even more popular in Scotland than independence.
Vote Tory End Devolution! Not quite the resonance of Take Back Control or Get Brexit Done imho.
How about "Vote Tory Screw The Scots"?
Bit like 2015.
Well, it seems to work for @Big_G_NorthWales given he has both been voting Tory and happily married to a Scot for many years.
I see the Guardian are making a big deal out of Rishi not declaring that his father in law is a billionaire. Apparently it's a huge secret that they (actually the private eye) have exposed. Honestly, these smears are becoming extremely tiresome.
It's this kind of reporting that makes the Guardian an unserious newspaper.
It is more that he hasn't recorded his relationships in the register of interests, nor his wife's substantial shareholding in Infosys.
Mr R-M doing his best to win hearts and minds. Pretty obvious what he means.
'Rees-Mogg said that he appreciated his fellow Tory’s point, adding: “The last Labour government decided to take a wrecking ball to our constitution and made a bit of a muddle with it.
“Some of their most foolish interventions were their constitutional blunders which were out of step with many centuries of our parliamentary democracy. Blairite constitutional tinkering has weakened our parliament and has helped to divide the United Kingdom.
“I hope that this government finds an effective way of restoring our constitution to its proper form.”'
Memo: Devolution is even more popular in Scotland than independence.
Vote Tory End Devolution! Not quite the resonance of Take Back Control or Get Brexit Done imho.
Mr R-M doing his best to win hearts and minds. Pretty obvious what he means.
'Rees-Mogg said that he appreciated his fellow Tory’s point, adding: “The last Labour government decided to take a wrecking ball to our constitution and made a bit of a muddle with it.
“Some of their most foolish interventions were their constitutional blunders which were out of step with many centuries of our parliamentary democracy. Blairite constitutional tinkering has weakened our parliament and has helped to divide the United Kingdom.
“I hope that this government finds an effective way of restoring our constitution to its proper form.”'
Memo: Devolution is even more popular in Scotland than independence.
Vote Tory End Devolution! Not quite the resonance of Take Back Control or Get Brexit Done imho.
How about "Vote Tory Screw The Scots"?
Bit like 2015.
The precious union:
It’s a good job they used a man not a woman in that ad...
What's your issue with his capabilities? Didn't he cofound YouGov and have a big job in the oil industry? Have i missed some massive project disaster he was personally responsible?
I like Layla, but she is too erratic for leadership. We made that mistake with Jo Swinson of appointing a younger and female leader, because she was these things and see how that turned out. Personally I think Davey would have managed the wrangling in the hung parliament much better, and would in particular not gone for Revoke, or been quite so open to defectors. Both were mistakes.
"... too erratic for leadership ..." Mmmmm, borderline gender stereotyping, I'd say.
Tbf, similar arguments of stability, experience, reassurance and steadiness were made in favour of SKS, and against Rayner or Nandy.
It is quite clear in Wales that the female candidates who stood in the Labour & Tory leadership elections (Eluned Morgan and Suzy Davies) were way, way, way superior to the male candidates who actually won (Drakeford & Davies).
Still, remember Jacinda. There is a lesson there for all forsaken parties, if they care to learn it.
Yeah, don’t think care homes are getting the Pfizer vaccine yet. You could probably roll it out to central sites with high turnover like stadia or what Edinburgh council did with big office car parks. Getting it in single doses to vulnerable people in their homes will be harder. Had a look at the green book for Covid and the vaccine criteria are basically lifted from the flu jab for existing conditions, so if you get the flu jab (like me) you’ll be in Phase 1. I think I’m in tranche 6.
What's your issue with his capabilities? Didn't he cofound YouGov and have a big job in the oil industry? Have i missed some massive project disaster he was personally responsible?
He had some questionable dealings with Jeffrey Archer in the past.
What's your issue with his capabilities? Didn't he cofound YouGov and have a big job in the oil industry? Have i missed some massive project disaster he was personally responsible?
He had some questionable dealings with Jeffrey Archer in the past.
I think that would have been a very good appointment.
Nothing against NZ aside from politics but Hunt ran the NHS for years and therefore the flu jab rollout. He knows this shot like the back of his hand and I really don’t know why he’s not been tapped for these roles (aside from spite).
What's your issue with his capabilities? Didn't he cofound YouGov and have a big job in the oil industry? Have i missed some massive project disaster he was personally responsible?
He had some questionable dealings with Jeffrey Archer in the past.
Well he had some questionable.expenses too...but that isn't really the point. Mandelson had questionable dealings all over the place, but definitely a component operator as a government minister.
Scott n pasta says we are totally screwed, i presume because he believes he is totally incomponent. I don't have a strong opinion one way or another on him, but as i say perhaps i am missing something.
What's your issue with his capabilities? Didn't he cofound YouGov and have a big job in the oil industry? Have i missed some massive project disaster he was personally responsible?
He had some questionable dealings with Jeffrey Archer in the past.
I think that would have been a very good appointment.
Nothing against NZ aside from politics but Hunt ran the NHS for years and therefore the flu jab rollout. He knows this shot like the back of his hand and I really don’t know why he’s not been tapped for these roles (aside from spite).
As i say i would have offered it to him. Politically it would also be quite cute from Boris, olive branch out post cummings era, while if you were really naughty know that if he screws it up it will totally kill any reputation for boring compontence.
Mr R-M doing his best to win hearts and minds. Pretty obvious what he means.
'Rees-Mogg said that he appreciated his fellow Tory’s point, adding: “The last Labour government decided to take a wrecking ball to our constitution and made a bit of a muddle with it.
“Some of their most foolish interventions were their constitutional blunders which were out of step with many centuries of our parliamentary democracy. Blairite constitutional tinkering has weakened our parliament and has helped to divide the United Kingdom.
“I hope that this government finds an effective way of restoring our constitution to its proper form.”'
Memo: Devolution is even more popular in Scotland than independence.
Vote Tory End Devolution! Not quite the resonance of Take Back Control or Get Brexit Done imho.
How about "Vote Tory Screw The Scots"?
Bit like 2015.
The precious union:
It’s a good job they used a man not a woman in that ad...
I'm probably being dim having to work through a tedious TS at the moment, but why should a woman make any difference? IIRC they showed Mr Miliband in Ms Sturgeon's pocket.
I think that would look like petty politics. Even if the government do a decent job on vaccine rollout, there will definitely be opportunities to bash him when inevitably there will be some delay, so admin cockup, so subgroup edge cases when you are talking about vaccinating 10s of millions of people.
The LibDems could represent -- the young. The main political parties have largely ignored them, so that intergenerational unfairness has become hugely entrenched in the UK. This could be the LibDem's rallying point.
Some ideas for the LibDems:
1. Average age of Parliament is way too old -- the average age of MPs is ~ 50. There are far too few MPs between 20 and 30. Guarantee to shortlist a young person for winnable seats. Get the average age of the LibDem MPs way below the Tory and Labour MPs, so the LibDems actually look like they represent young people & it looks like young people have a stake in politics.
2. Cancel all University tuition fees. During the pandemic, it is perfectly reasonable to argue the University experience has been substandard anyhow (through no particular fault of anyone) and so they should certainly be cancelled. This is the perfect opportunity for the LibDems to go further -- making amends for their historic blunder -- and cancel them altogether, past and future. If Germany can do it, if the Netherlands can do it, then the UK can make University education free, or almost so.
3. Expel Nick Clegg. He is a Facebook shill now, anyhow. The best way to expunge the errors of the past is public scapegoating. David Steele has been thrown out for less, IMO.
4. The pandemic has destroyed the opportunities of many young people (who are almost wholly immune to the virus). They have been required to make truly huge sacrifices to keep (primarily) older people safe. We hear about this regularly from Cyclefree, but this will become an enormous issue by the time of the next election. Compensate young people by a Covid Fund (a one-off tax levied on the property of the old, who benefitted from their sacrifice).
5. You'll have to get rid of Stolid Ed, of course. Despite the Slap, you should have gone for Layla.
As an ex-member, I'll offer a few thoughts:
1) Most LD MPs work hard for many years to get elected. Layla is 38 but first stood in a GE in 2010 in Battersea. Daisy Cooper is similar age and also first stood in 2010. To walk into a "safe" LD seat at 25 - very difficult. Charles Kennedy took on a seat nobody expected him to win in 1983 and captured it on a 12% swing at an election the Conservatives won by a landslide. Most young MPs are "accidental" in that sense.
2) Yes, agreed. It was a catastrophic error but the mood of the times was very much along the lines of why should students get a free education when there are cuts being imposed elsewhere (remember "austerity"?)
3) I suppose if Labour throw out Jeremy Corbyn it's possible, Clegg is a marginal figure these days.
4) The problem is it would be enormously unpopular with the old and as we are frequently reminded, the old vote and they vote to keep everything they have. The young aren't as good at voting but when they do (in numbers), it is effective.
5) I disagree - Ed Davey is the right figure for now - I'm hoping Daisy Cooper will be the next leader. The problem is the party needs a USP to differentiate it from the other two parties. That will come but the Party must be quick to take the opportunity - the problem is when you are facing a populist, they will cleave to wherever public opinion is or seems to be irrespective of the inconsistencies.
I think Point 5 is the key one - what do the LDs stand for and represent. I couldn't name a single LD policy and I'm interested in politics. In one sense, a LD / Green coalition may make sense - focus on the environment, liberal social issues etc with the Greens benefiting from the LD's organisational structure and the LDs benefiting from the Greens' image and environmental cause. Even then, that is not a panacea.
Good job that circuit breaker was a massive success...
Pubs and restaurants would be banned from serving alcohol and forced to shut after 6pm if Wales adopts restrictions similar to Scotland's Tier 3 rules. Welsh Government leaders are understood to be considering bringing in restrictions similar to those adopted in the third of Scotland's four-tier coronavirus lockdown system.
I think that would have been a very good appointment.
Would raise Hunt's profile too much. A flawless - or even non-shambolic - vaccine rollout would put him back in contention as a challenger to Boris. Hence Patel bigging up NZ. He is harmless.
We need direct Scottish participation and representation in the UK Government with major cabinet portfolios, more shared experiences, and I'd be willing to explore policy solutions for this, world-class competence, and more communication of the benefits of the Union and how it listens to and works for Scotland - enhancing its strength and profile on the world stage.
How about a quota of British cabinet positions appointed by the Scottish government?
I wouldn't take anything off the table right now.
Scotland's MPs are going to be largely nationalist for the foreseeable future, otherwise locking themselves out of UK Governments that will invariably be Labour or Conservative and providing their own feedback narrative for separation.
Both main parties - and the LDs - need to think creatively in how to respond to that to save the Union.
Good job that circuit breaker was a massive success...
Pubs and restaurants would be banned from serving alcohol and forced to shut after 6pm if Wales adopts restrictions similar to Scotland's Tier 3 rules. Welsh Government leaders are understood to be considering bringing in restrictions similar to those adopted in the third of Scotland's four-tier coronavirus lockdown system.
The Scottish tier system seems to have been reasonably well calibrated. <800 cases today with positivity rate <5%. First time in a while we’ve seen cases under 1k and inside the WHO 5% envelope.
It's not really a cock up, they one of the sponsors of the England team.
A mystery why they deleted it then.
Because the average Welsh rugby fan is as nice as a paper cut on the todger.
In terms of sporting opponents I despise the Welsh are top of the league, even worse than Chelsea fans.
I'm not the slickest twitter operator but a 'may the best team win' with some jokey reference to hoping it would be England might have been smarter. Whadda I know though.
One of the best moves Sturgeon made was severely limiting household mixing much earlier on than England. That plus limiting travel between regions are two big steps you can take to limit transmission and spread.
The problem with Welsh approach is they sold this idea you could do a couple of weeks of lockdown (which isn't long enough and there were some absolutely stupid pointless restrictions in some areas of life) and then immediately jumped from that to a national level of much lower restrictions than everywhere else in the UK...despite a) not knowing how much you have actually squashed the levels and b) definitely still having two areas of extremely high levels of infection.
The Guardian article does raise some questions, but is also very smeary at the same time. His wife owning less than 1% in a company who in India sells stuff on Amazon calls into question Rishi ability to make calls over how to deal with Amazon in the UK...i mean come on. If that is the standard,. the only person who could be chancellor is somebody whose entire family has no investments in anything ever and do not work in any sort of position of vague responsibility at a private company...by thise standards even Gordon Brown would have had an issue, as his brother had a big positiion in an energy company.
A big position in an energy company who were allowed to take over British Energy when he was Prime Minister, in fact. I don't recall any bleatings from the Guardian at that time.
The end point would be that everyone in the legislature and all their relatives should be forced to use blind trusts. I'm not sure how that works for family businesses though.
So my son decides he wants to be an MP....you say any investments I have must go into a blind trust. I think most family members will turn round and say "sorry no, I am not putting my finances in a blind trust just so you can get a job"
It's not really a cock up, they one of the sponsors of the England team.
A mystery why they deleted it then.
Because the average Welsh rugby fan is as nice as a paper cut on the todger.
In terms of sporting opponents I despise the Welsh are top of the league, even worse than Chelsea fans.
I'm not the slickest twitter operator but a 'may the best team win' with some jokey reference to hoping it would be England might have been smarter. Whadda I know though.
That's what you do for most teams, just not the Welsh.
Comments
Mr R-M doing his best to win hearts and minds. Pretty obvious what he means.
'Rees-Mogg said that he appreciated his fellow Tory’s point, adding: “The last Labour government decided to take a wrecking ball to our constitution and made a bit of a muddle with it.
“Some of their most foolish interventions were their constitutional blunders which were out of step with many centuries of our parliamentary democracy. Blairite constitutional tinkering has weakened our parliament and has helped to divide the United Kingdom.
“I hope that this government finds an effective way of restoring our constitution to its proper form.”'
Memo: Devolution is even more popular in Scotland than independence.
As you say, the LDs won't disband - why should they? I'd like to think as time goes on and we pull away from both the Coalition period and Brexit, the party will re-discover its primary purpose which is, and let's be blunt about it, to be a reasonable protest home for disillusioned Conservative and Labour voters.
After all, nobody seriously thinks the Conservative Party is conservative and Labour certainly doesn't represent working people so why should the Liberal Democrats have to be liberal or indeed even democratic? Everyone on here seems to have a different definition of conservative, liberal, social democrat, socialist, Marxist, libertarian, anarchist, nihilist or whatever.
I am a little surprised that you oppose transparency in these things.
"Sunak is bound by the ministerial code, which requires him to declare any financial interests that are “relevant” to his responsibilities, and which could conflict with his duty to the public. Ministers must also declare those interests of their close family, including siblings, parents, spouse and in-laws, which might give rise to a conflict.
But Sunak’s entry mentions no family members other than his wife, and only refers to her ownership of a small, UK-based venture capital company."
Not quite the resonance of Take Back Control or Get Brexit Done imho.
Some ideas for the LibDems:
1. Average age of Parliament is way too old -- the average age of MPs is ~ 50. There are far too few MPs between 20 and 30. Guarantee to shortlist a young person for winnable seats. Get the average age of the LibDem MPs way below the Tory and Labour MPs, so the LibDems actually look like they represent young people & it looks like young people have a stake in politics.
2. Cancel all University tuition fees. During the pandemic, it is perfectly reasonable to argue the University experience has been substandard anyhow (through no particular fault of anyone) and so they should certainly be cancelled. This is the perfect opportunity for the LibDems to go further -- making amends for their historic blunder -- and cancel them altogether, past and future. If Germany can do it, if the Netherlands can do it, then the UK can make University education free, or almost so.
3. Expel Nick Clegg. He is a Facebook shill now, anyhow. The best way to expunge the errors of the past is public scapegoating. David Steele has been thrown out for less, IMO.
4. The pandemic has destroyed the opportunities of many young people (who are almost wholly immune to the virus). They have been required to make truly huge sacrifices to keep (primarily) older people safe. We hear about this regularly from Cyclefree, but this will become an enormous issue by the time of the next election. Compensate young people by a Covid Fund (a one-off tax levied on the property of the old, who benefitted from their sacrifice).
5. You'll have to get rid of Stolid Ed, of course. Despite the Slap, you should have gone for Layla.
Does breaking the Ministerial Code have any actual consequences?
If only we had a way of knowing the PM's thinking in the matter.
https://twitter.com/PaulBrown_UK/status/1332673506627235841?s=19
Anyway, I suspect there would be local support to remove the nuclear base from wherever it was. I doubt it is a particularly Scottish issue. There might be a majority wanting to keep it, as long as it isn't next to them.
Trump has taught our lot that their is nothing to be ashamed of in venal kleptocracy. The mugs will vote for you anyway because of statues or something.
https://twitter.com/timfarron/status/1332383405703618560?s=19
https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v42/n23/james-butler/failed-vocation
"REQUIREMENTS FOR DECLARATION
4. Members are required, subject to the paragraphs below, to declare any financial interests which satisfy the test of relevance, including:
a) past financial interests (normally limited to those active within the last twelve months);
b) indirect financial interests, such as the financial interests of a spouse or partner, or another family member, if the Member is aware or could reasonably be expected to be aware of that interest. It is not necessary to identify the person concerned: a formula such as "A member of my family has a financial interest in [ ]"will usually suffice. The definition of a family member is as under Category 9 of the Register;"
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmcode/1076/107605.htm
But, he is not the person to dig the LibDems out of their hole.
To which the answer is a pretty clear 'no.'
He may surprise on the upside. Grimond got the job because he was the only member of the party other than Davies with a safe seat, but he turned out to be a diamond.
The end point would be that everyone in the legislature and all their relatives should be forced to use blind trusts. I'm not sure how that works for family businesses though.
1) Most LD MPs work hard for many years to get elected. Layla is 38 but first stood in a GE in 2010 in Battersea. Daisy Cooper is similar age and also first stood in 2010. To walk into a "safe" LD seat at 25 - very difficult. Charles Kennedy took on a seat nobody expected him to win in 1983 and captured it on a 12% swing at an election the Conservatives won by a landslide. Most young MPs are "accidental" in that sense.
2) Yes, agreed. It was a catastrophic error but the mood of the times was very much along the lines of why should students get a free education when there are cuts being imposed elsewhere (remember "austerity"?)
3) I suppose if Labour throw out Jeremy Corbyn it's possible, Clegg is a marginal figure these days.
4) The problem is it would be enormously unpopular with the old and as we are frequently reminded, the old vote and they vote to keep everything they have. The young aren't as good at voting but when they do (in numbers), it is effective.
5) I disagree - Ed Davey is the right figure for now - I'm hoping Daisy Cooper will be the next leader. The problem is the party needs a USP to differentiate it from the other two parties. That will come but the Party must be quick to take the opportunity - the problem is when you are facing a populist, they will cleave to wherever public opinion is or seems to be irrespective of the inconsistencies.
The Labour, LibDem & Tory parties are led by three white blokes who are all in their late fifties, early sixties. SKS is the oldest, just.
The LibDems could have done something different by choosing Layla -- she would have been a big, big gamble, but they have very little to lose. The upside was much greater than the downside.
(In much the same way, the Labour party should have gone for Rayner or Nandy, IMO).
It would be unpopular with the old, but it would also be the right thing to do -- a system in which the old vote and they vote to keep everything they have and so we must not upset the old means nothing ever will really change.
Young people are almost wholly immune. They have been asked to make huge sacrifices for others during COVID -- it is the perfect time to say they should be rewarded or compensated.
Where is Cyclefree when we need her?
Isn't it the case that A is liable to B but A's insurance has agreed in advance to pay that liability? I don't think donors to a crowdfunding have agreed to future liabilities if the case is lost.
For a start, the Secretary of State "for" Scotland could be appointed by the Scottish Government. That would restore the constitution, as that was historically to represent the Scottish administration on the Cabinet.
That is, used to.
Perhaps.
Pale, male, and a bit stale perhaps, but Davey is a much cannier political operator. I think he would cope well in a hung parliament resulting from a poll like todays Yougov.
Personally, I think the party should have stuck by Tim Farron in 2017. He offered a distinctive voice, and I rather liked him.
And is there a suitable piece of music at this point? Yes there is -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxNohANhJiA
Bit like 2015.
I am also not quite as pessimistic on the LibDems (or on SLAB or on PC or other currently forsaken parties).
Because just look what Jacinda has done. She took over a party on an all-time historic low polling a few weeks before an election.
The right leader makes .... all the difference in the world.
https://twitter.com/pritipatel/status/1332694572749660160
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/27/hospitals-england-told-prepare-early-december-covid-vaccine-rollout-nhs
Tbf, similar arguments of stability, experience, reassurance and steadiness were made in favour of SKS, and against Rayner or Nandy.
It is quite clear in Wales that the female candidates who stood in the Labour & Tory leadership elections (Eluned Morgan and Suzy Davies) were way, way, way superior to the male candidates who actually won (Drakeford & Davies).
Still, remember Jacinda. There is a lesson there for all forsaken parties, if they care to learn it.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1335675/Leaders-received-no-answers-over-charity-millions.html
Scott n pasta says we are totally screwed, i presume because he believes he is totally incomponent. I don't have a strong opinion one way or another on him, but as i say perhaps i am missing something.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jan/25/nadhim-zahawi-facing-more-pressure-over-presidents-club-event
I mean wearing a musical tie in Parliament.
Nadhim Zahawi, Tory MP for Stratford-upon-Avon, was given a ticking off after his musical tie disrupted his own speech in Parliament.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ML_ySRkvyGQ
You cannot trust anyone with such poor sartorial choices.
https://twitter.com/JuliaHB1/status/1332611265240440832?s=20
Pubs and restaurants would be banned from serving alcohol and forced to shut after 6pm if Wales adopts restrictions similar to Scotland's Tier 3 rules. Welsh Government leaders are understood to be considering bringing in restrictions similar to those adopted in the third of Scotland's four-tier coronavirus lockdown system.
I mean they'd accidentally inject us all with Covid-19.
Scotland's MPs are going to be largely nationalist for the foreseeable future, otherwise locking themselves out of UK Governments that will invariably be Labour or Conservative and providing their own feedback narrative for separation.
Both main parties - and the LDs - need to think creatively in how to respond to that to save the Union.
In terms of sporting opponents I despise the Welsh are top of the league, even worse than Chelsea fans.
https://twitter.com/BeschlossDC/status/1332699814396633090?s=20
"relating to covid". What on earth does that mean?
Iriots - all of them.
One of the best moves Sturgeon made was severely limiting household mixing much earlier on than England. That plus limiting travel between regions are two big steps you can take to limit transmission and spread.
The problem with Welsh approach is they sold this idea you could do a couple of weeks of lockdown (which isn't long enough and there were some absolutely stupid pointless restrictions in some areas of life) and then immediately jumped from that to a national level of much lower restrictions than everywhere else in the UK...despite a) not knowing how much you have actually squashed the levels and b) definitely still having two areas of extremely high levels of infection.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/11/28/swedish-government-sidelines-epidemiologist-steered-countrys/