I think some of these “Labour frontbenchers” need to get over themselves. Starmer is right that they can’t just continue with the policy of refusing to take a stand on major national issues of the day. And nobody is going to suggest that any future criticism of a future poor performing economy will be invalid because of a failure to oppose the deal, when the only realistic alternative was far worse.
This is not 2017-19 when it was possible to at least make an argument that supporting the Govt was tantamount to abandoning their supporters who still held out hope of avoiding Brexit altogether. Harping back to Brexiteers “promises” that haven’t been realised cut no ice, when everyone knows they were phoney.
The treaty will pass as the government has a majority of 80. Opposition parties who can see what it is should vote against. It isn't deal or no deal. Its the deal or the deal - it will pass.
It's the trolley problem. The Lib Dems are choosing to stand aside while Labour are choosing to switch the points.
SR BA PPE (Open)
Nah, its going to pass anyway. No one will remember how anyone other than the Tories voted, so no point in a whip.
We need to win back a pile of Leave seats in 2024. It matters.
Yes you do. And in these seats people have decided that Labour had failed them over a long period and were sold on Brexit as the solution.
The problem is that Brexit isn't the solution. And by 2024 that will be painfully obvious. Selling this as the Tory Brexit disaster will be easier if they are not seen as complicit in bringing it in.
Brexit happened 11 months ago.
It did. And for 11 months inertia carried us along with no changes. Now we see the changes. Now we see the exciting new future that will restore the life chances of people in all those ex-Labour seats. They will be back in control of their lives, earning more, doing more, with better life prospects for their children.
Except that they won't. One quick horror for swathes of the population will be the ending of EU subsidies and investments. For all of the "what did the EU ever do for us" comments the truth is quite a lot in the areas that voted leave. That cash is gone, and the Tories aren't replacing it...
Not something that opposition to the deal will make the slightest difference to. The vote on the deal isn't a vote to continue EU subsidies. It is possible to vote for the deal whilst firmly pointing out all its flaws in what it doesn't deliver. And advocate changes in future. The idea that if everything goes badly then the Conservatives will be credibly be able to deflect future Labour criticism because they saw no deal as even worse is i think nonsense.
The Conservatives pretty much mirrored Labour spending plans throughout the 2000s. That didn't prevent them making political hay post the financial crisis, however much Labour tried.
I fear you are whistling in the wind - those who don't accept Brexit seem to think that endless ramping up of project fear will eventually see the hordes of undesirables littering the towns of northern England rushing back gratefully to the cradle of civilisation -Brussels - begging to be let back on board the great USE project to strains of 'Ode to Joy'. Note that the economic calamity which awaits is always just a little way down the road...until it gets postponed for the umpteenth time. Meanwhile everyone else shrugs and moves on. Starmer has made the right call but like so many Labour leaders before him will probably be punished by the ultras for his political nous.
"the endless ramping up of project fear" is the past. Now we have reality. Difficult to dismiss something bad as "project fear" when its just happened to you.
We were told there would be an immediate year long recession from a Leave vote. When it didn't happen, they said it would once we actually invoked Article 50. When that didn't happen, they said it would when we actually left the EU. When that didn't happen, they said it would when we finished the transition period. Now transition is here, they are going to try to blame Brexit for the COVID effects that started six months ago. It is completely shameless.
So? Those were political predictions from politicians trying to win a political argument. That is not equivalent to the professional opinions of people who do something specific for a living.
There is a difference between George Osborne lying about an emergency budget and the logistics industry laying out in detail how the deal fucks them and by them they mean you.
People will learn the difference. Quickly.
None of this has any relevance to whether Labour MPs should choose to sustain internal splits within the Labour Party over an issue which will make no actual difference to the vote at hand. I repeat, if the predicted disaster ensues, nobody is going to say it's all Labour's fault for voting for it as an alternative to no deal. Whatever fantasy world is being created about further transition extensions that even if they were to somehow happen, would serve no purpose other than to delay no deal until we were a bit more ready for it.
Disagree with Starmer's stance if you must. But once he's made his stance clear, his MPs (particularly his front bench) should back it.
Absolutely and I expect that most will. The loony bin will vote against as they always do - perhaps other MPs could be encouraged to defect to Corbyn's new Peace and Antisemitism Party. Would do the Labour Party the world of good to be rid them.
What has actually happened though? A whole year of massive disruption linked to Covid 19 has seen true hardship for millions and thunderous criticism of the government which has left them level pegging in the opinion polls. Are you really convinced that the loss of an educational project and some regional grants all of which are being replaced by government funds will do the trick. I mean you say it is reality now - if so why on earth is Labour voting for it and why are the seething hordes not marching on London right now? I mean I agree the deal is imperfect and I'd have preferred to stay in the EU but you know that many remainers always were half hearted about it. The only place in Europe wth regular civli disobediance over the past few months is Paris - did they all take a wrong turning before reaching London? Starmer wants to move on. He is right.
Nobody cares about Erasmus as nobody uses it. The regional funds absolutely will not be replaced neither will the farming subsidies. The Tories have a long and proud track record of not spending money on such things that aren't about to suddenly be overturned in some fit of concern for the lower orders. People won't notice straight away - but the people in run down areas which have at least benefited from EU investment into local projects won't even be getting that.
If we are very lucky the good people at places like Toyota and Nissan will reconfigure their supply chain so that their UK factories uniquely don't operate to their just in time model and will remain open.
I bet the farming subsidies will be back - indeed, I'd bet that British farmers will receive higher subsidies in future than they used to.
Perhaps once we get through Christmas the government might want to put better arrangements in for the trucks they are going to park at Manston / Ashford / the M20
Manston Airport is literally a concentration camp. No gas chambers obviously, but the kind other countries at war put in place.
I doubt those drivers will ever go to Britain again. I can't blame them.
Lol. The reports on the news showed most were very relaxed and understanding about the situation. The drivers will be back - it 's their living.
You do understand that most of them are not only not being paid right now but have lost the opportunity to be working and therefore paid?
Per kilometre. They don't earn when sat in queues. Yes, this queue is days longer than they will be next year. But they will still be lengthy and pointless.
What has actually happened though? A whole year of massive disruption linked to Covid 19 has seen true hardship for millions and thunderous criticism of the government which has left them level pegging in the opinion polls. Are you really convinced that the loss of an educational project and some regional grants all of which are being replaced by government funds will do the trick. I mean you say it is reality now - if so why on earth is Labour voting for it and why are the seething hordes not marching on London right now? I mean I agree the deal is imperfect and I'd have preferred to stay in the EU but you know that many remainers always were half hearted about it. The only place in Europe wth regular civli disobediance over the past few months is Paris - did they all take a wrong turning before reaching London? Starmer wants to move on. He is right.
Nobody cares about Erasmus as nobody uses it. The regional funds absolutely will not be replaced neither will the farming subsidies. The Tories have a long and proud track record of not spending money on such things that aren't about to suddenly be overturned in some fit of concern for the lower orders. People won't notice straight away - but the people in run down areas which have at least benefited from EU investment into local projects won't even be getting that.
If we are very lucky the good people at places like Toyota and Nissan will reconfigure their supply chain so that their UK factories uniquely don't operate to their just in time model and will remain open.
Or they'll maintain a just in time model that is reliant on insourced UK supply chains possibly?
Of course! Perhaps we will rebuild British industry and stop off-sourcing everything for a fast profit! The Tories are very good on such measures, and now they have their new ability to intervene I am Very Confident that they will step in to nationalise Toyota when they pull the plug.
Perhaps once we get through Christmas the government might want to put better arrangements in for the trucks they are going to park at Manston / Ashford / the M20
Manston Airport is literally a concentration camp. No gas chambers obviously, but the kind other countries at war put in place.
I doubt those drivers will ever go to Britain again. I can't blame them.
Lol. The reports on the news showed most were very relaxed and understanding about the situation. The drivers will be back - it 's their living.
You do understand that most of them are not only not being paid right now but have lost the opportunity to be working and therefore paid?
Per kilometre. They don't earn when sat in queues. Yes, this queue is days longer than they will be next year. But they will still be lengthy and pointless.
Then they should aim their ire at Macron.
For this queue they probably should. For the queues to follow? No, that would be our doing.
I think some of these “Labour frontbenchers” need to get over themselves. Starmer is right that they can’t just continue with the policy of refusing to take a stand on major national issues of the day. And nobody is going to suggest that any future criticism of a future poor performing economy will be invalid because of a failure to oppose the deal, when the only realistic alternative was far worse.
This is not 2017-19 when it was possible to at least make an argument that supporting the Govt was tantamount to abandoning their supporters who still held out hope of avoiding Brexit altogether. Harping back to Brexiteers “promises” that haven’t been realised cut no ice, when everyone knows they were phoney.
The treaty will pass as the government has a majority of 80. Opposition parties who can see what it is should vote against. It isn't deal or no deal. Its the deal or the deal - it will pass.
It's the trolley problem. The Lib Dems are choosing to stand aside while Labour are choosing to switch the points.
SR BA PPE (Open)
Nah, its going to pass anyway. No one will remember how anyone other than the Tories voted, so no point in a whip.
We need to win back a pile of Leave seats in 2024. It matters.
The key is not to lose Remain seats at the same time...
They've got nowhere else to go...
Haven't we heard that before?
That's why I chose those words. But in seriousness, while a few may vote for other parties of the centre left and left I don't see retention of the Guardianista vote to be too much of a problem. We are still led by a north London lawyer, after all. We need to be bigging up the northern and midland voices on the front bench, and saying the things that our lost voters are interested in.
Once we are in government the gender neutral bathrooms will take care of themselves. Until then, we should shut up about stuff that makes us look out of touch with the average person in the street. And I include Israel - Palestine on that list.
Yes, but why should centrist Remainers who voted Tory in 2019 in fear of Corbyn switch to Starmer? No reason at all.
I won't be voting Labour under Starmer. Mrs Foxy might. I am more inclined to vote Green again.
Perhaps once we get through Christmas the government might want to put better arrangements in for the trucks they are going to park at Manston / Ashford / the M20
Manston Airport is literally a concentration camp. No gas chambers obviously, but the kind other countries at war put in place.
I doubt those drivers will ever go to Britain again. I can't blame them.
Lol. The reports on the news showed most were very relaxed and understanding about the situation. The drivers will be back - it 's their living.
You do understand that most of them are not only not being paid right now but have lost the opportunity to be working and therefore paid?
Per kilometre. They don't earn when sat in queues. Yes, this queue is days longer than they will be next year. But they will still be lengthy and pointless.
Then they should aim their ire at Macron.
For this queue they probably should. For the queues to follow? No, that would be our doing.
I think some of these “Labour frontbenchers” need to get over themselves. Starmer is right that they can’t just continue with the policy of refusing to take a stand on major national issues of the day. And nobody is going to suggest that any future criticism of a future poor performing economy will be invalid because of a failure to oppose the deal, when the only realistic alternative was far worse.
This is not 2017-19 when it was possible to at least make an argument that supporting the Govt was tantamount to abandoning their supporters who still held out hope of avoiding Brexit altogether. Harping back to Brexiteers “promises” that haven’t been realised cut no ice, when everyone knows they were phoney.
The treaty will pass as the government has a majority of 80. Opposition parties who can see what it is should vote against. It isn't deal or no deal. Its the deal or the deal - it will pass.
It's the trolley problem. The Lib Dems are choosing to stand aside while Labour are choosing to switch the points.
SR BA PPE (Open)
Nah, its going to pass anyway. No one will remember how anyone other than the Tories voted, so no point in a whip.
We need to win back a pile of Leave seats in 2024. It matters.
Yes you do. And in these seats people have decided that Labour had failed them over a long period and were sold on Brexit as the solution.
The problem is that Brexit isn't the solution. And by 2024 that will be painfully obvious. Selling this as the Tory Brexit disaster will be easier if they are not seen as complicit in bringing it in.
Brexit happened 11 months ago.
It did. And for 11 months inertia carried us along with no changes. Now we see the changes. Now we see the exciting new future that will restore the life chances of people in all those ex-Labour seats. They will be back in control of their lives, earning more, doing more, with better life prospects for their children.
Except that they won't. One quick horror for swathes of the population will be the ending of EU subsidies and investments. For all of the "what did the EU ever do for us" comments the truth is quite a lot in the areas that voted leave. That cash is gone, and the Tories aren't replacing it...
Not something that opposition to the deal will make the slightest difference to. The vote on the deal isn't a vote to continue EU subsidies. It is possible to vote for the deal whilst firmly pointing out all its flaws in what it doesn't deliver. And advocate changes in future. The idea that if everything goes badly then the Conservatives will be credibly be able to deflect future Labour criticism because they saw no deal as even worse is i think nonsense.
The Conservatives pretty much mirrored Labour spending plans throughout the 2000s. That didn't prevent them making political hay post the financial crisis, however much Labour tried.
I fear you are whistling in the wind - those who don't accept Brexit seem to think that endless ramping up of project fear will eventually see the hordes of undesirables littering the towns of northern England rushing back gratefully to the cradle of civilisation -Brussels - begging to be let back on board the great USE project to strains of 'Ode to Joy'. Note that the economic calamity which awaits is always just a little way down the road...until it gets postponed for the umpteenth time. Meanwhile everyone else shrugs and moves on. Starmer has made the right call but like so many Labour leaders before him will probably be punished by the ultras for his political nous.
"the endless ramping up of project fear" is the past. Now we have reality. Difficult to dismiss something bad as "project fear" when its just happened to you.
We were told there would be an immediate year long recession from a Leave vote. When it didn't happen, they said it would once we actually invoked Article 50. When that didn't happen, they said it would when we actually left the EU. When that didn't happen, they said it would when we finished the transition period. Now transition is here, they are going to try to blame Brexit for the COVID effects that started six months ago. It is completely shameless.
So? Those were political predictions from politicians trying to win a political argument. That is not equivalent to the professional opinions of people who do something specific for a living.
There is a difference between George Osborne lying about an emergency budget and the logistics industry laying out in detail how the deal fucks them and by them they mean you.
People will learn the difference. Quickly.
None of this has any relevance to whether Labour MPs should choose to sustain internal splits within the Labour Party over an issue which will make no actual difference to the vote at hand. I repeat, if the predicted disaster ensues, nobody is going to say it's all Labour's fault for voting for it as an alternative to no deal. Whatever fantasy world is being created about further transition extensions that even if they were to somehow happen, would serve no purpose other than to delay no deal until we were a bit more ready for it.
Disagree with Starmer's stance if you must. But once he's made his stance clear, his MPs (particularly his front bench) should back it.
Absolutely and I expect that most will. The loony bin will vote against as they always do - perhaps other MPs could be encouraged to defect to Corbyn's new Peace and Antisemitism Party. Would do the Labour Party the world of good to be rid them.
There are reports of several imminent resignations from the frontbench (probably not shadow cabinet though). From MPs in Remain constituencies who are saying that voting for the deal will be a 'betrayal' of their voters.
The devil is in the detail - it always is and 1,246 pages suggests a lot of detail.
Boris Johnson's predictably bouncy optimism sounds even more hollow than usual - I appreciate a Deal represents the avoidance of chaos but to dress it up as the greatest event since the last one is absurd.
What it has done is turn the page on a significant chapter in British history - I suspect our relationship with the EU will improve markedly now we are on the outside. The problem for us is and remains to be the failure of anyone in power to advance a coherent argument for the way forward for the United Kingdom.
For that reason, the Deal, for all its not doubt many limitations, will go ahead simply because there's no stomach to countenance the opposite whether that may be a descent into the chaos of WTO or a return for more negotiation. It's done - for better or worse, we have to move on and start having a proper national conversation about the way forward.
I am nearly certain, the UK will find life very uncomfortable outside the EU. The UK is too big to be told what to do and in any case the whole point of Brexit was to take control. On the other hand the EU is the only show in town in Europe. The UK can't just ignore the EU and only deal with Australia, although it will try to sometimes. It will at different times also try to co-opt the EU and to undermine it. It will probably fail at all three. Meanwhile the EU will either ignore the UK or lean heavily on the UK to agree to what it wants. It doesn't promise to be a particularly happy relationship.
The lead story in the Express gives a taste of what the discourse in the UK will be like: "EU braced for pandemonium as Dan Hannan warns THREE countries will follow UK out of bloc". The Brexiteer obsession with waiting for the collapse of the EU won't go away.
The devil is in the detail - it always is and 1,246 pages suggests a lot of detail.
Boris Johnson's predictably bouncy optimism sounds even more hollow than usual - I appreciate a Deal represents the avoidance of chaos but to dress it up as the greatest event since the last one is absurd.
What it has done is turn the page on a significant chapter in British history - I suspect our relationship with the EU will improve markedly now we are on the outside. The problem for us is and remains to be the failure of anyone in power to advance a coherent argument for the way forward for the United Kingdom.
For that reason, the Deal, for all its not doubt many limitations, will go ahead simply because there's no stomach to countenance the opposite whether that may be a descent into the chaos of WTO or a return for more negotiation. It's done - for better or worse, we have to move on and start having a proper national conversation about the way forward.
I am nearly certain, the UK will find life very uncomfortable outside the EU. The UK is too big to be told what to do and in any case the whole point of Brexit was to take control. On the other hand the EU is the only show in town in Europe. The UK can't just ignore the EU and only deal with Australia, although it will try to sometimes. It will at different times also try to co-opt the EU and to undermine it. It will probably fail at all three. Meanwhile the EU will either ignore the UK or lean heavily on the UK to agree to what it wants. It doesn't promise to be a particularly happy relationship.
The lead story in the Express gives a taste of what the discourse in the UK will be like: "EU braced for pandemonium as Dan Hannan warns THREE countries will follow UK out of bloc". The Brexiteer obsession with waiting for the collapse of the EU won't go away.
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Sorry Alex.
The Government have an EIGHTY SEAT majority, and it’s government alone who have negotiated it, created the deal. If the only way they can get votes for it is they have run the clock down, that goes completely against the better democracy they claim brexit is all about. It goes against all democracy.
If you tolerate having to vote for this because the clock has run down, burning down the parliament will be next.
To believe in democracy you have to believe everyone in parliament can vote with their conscience on what they think of the deal, for the country and their constituents, without the weapon of no deal held to their heads.
If then it passes, it passes. That’s democracy saying yes. And, if governments deal can’t pass despite an eighty seat majority over all other parties, democracy is saying no.
If you are selling anything else, any snake oil politics, no ones buying.
No, my argument is nothing to do with Labour needing to support the deal to ensure it passes. It will pass regardless, there is no doubt of that. The arguments are different to those over the Withdrawal Agreement, when Labour was confronted with an active choice to assist its passage or cause maximum trouble for a weak Government and exploiting the discontent on Tory backbenches (a choice IMO they got horribly wrong).
My argument is simply about what Labour needs to do to move on. Accept the world as it is and look forward, not the world as some might like it to be and look back.
If something is wrong you put it right. Calmly. Cooley.
Brexit and brexiteers don’t understand sovereignty nor democracy, and this needs to be put right.
If this country is going to take back control from the globalisation, deindustrialisation and stagnation it’s been suffering from for decades, it needs to wake up from its Brexit pipe dreams and protect its financial interests better than this arrangement.
It is possible for one of the 27 to reject the deal or that it does not get through the European Parliament, so are there betting odds on that possibility?
Perhaps once we get through Christmas the government might want to put better arrangements in for the trucks they are going to park at Manston / Ashford / the M20
Manston Airport is literally a concentration camp. No gas chambers obviously, but the kind other countries at war put in place.
I doubt those drivers will ever go to Britain again. I can't blame them.
Lol. The reports on the news showed most were very relaxed and understanding about the situation. The drivers will be back - it 's their living.
You do understand that most of them are not only not being paid right now but have lost the opportunity to be working and therefore paid?
Per kilometre. They don't earn when sat in queues. Yes, this queue is days longer than they will be next year. But they will still be lengthy and pointless.
Then they should aim their ire at Macron.
For this queue they probably should. For the queues to follow? No, that would be our doing.
Not sure that's quite right (I express no views on the steps Macron took). On a like for like basis (given that this involves testing an entire population) i suspect 240 per 100k is equivalent to a lot lower rate within the general UK testing regime (where the results are based on tests on about 3-4% of the population)
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Except Starmer is a policy vacuum, vision free. All we know is that despite being a strong Remainer, he backs Brexit out of political expediency. I don't think voters in the Purple Wall are stupid enough to fall for that. He either needs to enthuse them for Labour on some other issue, or find other seats that he can appeal to.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
It is possible for one of the 27 to reject the deal or that it does not get through the European Parliament, so are there betting odds on that possibility?
There seems to be some lack of clarity about this. Some reports say that this doesn't require ratification by national parliaments as it doesn't involve "shared competences". But i don't know what the definitive positions is. All the headline reporting seems to imply the latter.
Basically, if so, the regional Walloon parliament can't stop it.
The devil is in the detail - it always is and 1,246 pages suggests a lot of detail.
Boris Johnson's predictably bouncy optimism sounds even more hollow than usual - I appreciate a Deal represents the avoidance of chaos but to dress it up as the greatest event since the last one is absurd.
What it has done is turn the page on a significant chapter in British history - I suspect our relationship with the EU will improve markedly now we are on the outside. The problem for us is and remains to be the failure of anyone in power to advance a coherent argument for the way forward for the United Kingdom.
For that reason, the Deal, for all its not doubt many limitations, will go ahead simply because there's no stomach to countenance the opposite whether that may be a descent into the chaos of WTO or a return for more negotiation. It's done - for better or worse, we have to move on and start having a proper national conversation about the way forward.
I am nearly certain, the UK will find life very uncomfortable outside the EU. The UK is too big to be told what to do and in any case the whole point of Brexit was to take control. On the other hand the EU is the only show in town in Europe. The UK can't just ignore the EU and only deal with Australia, although it will try to sometimes. It will at different times also try to co-opt the EU and to undermine it. It will probably fail at all three. Meanwhile the EU will either ignore the UK or lean heavily on the UK to agree to what it wants. It doesn't promise to be a particularly happy relationship.
The lead story in the Express gives a taste of what the discourse in the UK will be like: "EU braced for pandemonium as Dan Hannan warns THREE countries will follow UK out of bloc". The Brexiteer obsession with waiting for the collapse of the EU won't go away.
It is possible for one of the 27 to reject the deal or that it does not get through the European Parliament, so are there betting odds on that possibility?
There seems to be some lack of clarity about this. Some reports say that this doesn't require ratification by national parliaments as it doesn't involve "shared competences". But i don't know what the definitive positions is. All the headline reporting seems to imply the latter.
Basically, if so, the regional Walloon parliament can't stop it.
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Except Starmer is a policy vacuum, vision free. All we know is that despite being a strong Remainer, he backs Brexit out of political expediency. I don't think voters in the Purple Wall are stupid enough to fall for that. He either needs to enthuse them for Labour on some other issue, or find other seats that he can appeal to.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
Did he? Wasn't the story of 2017 in many Northern seats one of Tory over-reach? Making significant gains, but not enough to breach the dam.
I think some of these “Labour frontbenchers” need to get over themselves. Starmer is right that they can’t just continue with the policy of refusing to take a stand on major national issues of the day. And nobody is going to suggest that any future criticism of a future poor performing economy will be invalid because of a failure to oppose the deal, when the only realistic alternative was far worse.
This is not 2017-19 when it was possible to at least make an argument that supporting the Govt was tantamount to abandoning their supporters who still held out hope of avoiding Brexit altogether. Harping back to Brexiteers “promises” that haven’t been realised cut no ice, when everyone knows they were phoney.
The treaty will pass as the government has a majority of 80. Opposition parties who can see what it is should vote against. It isn't deal or no deal. Its the deal or the deal - it will pass.
It's the trolley problem. The Lib Dems are choosing to stand aside while Labour are choosing to switch the points.
SR BA PPE (Open)
Nah, its going to pass anyway. No one will remember how anyone other than the Tories voted, so no point in a whip.
We need to win back a pile of Leave seats in 2024. It matters.
The key is not to lose Remain seats at the same time...
They've got nowhere else to go...
Haven't we heard that before?
That's why I chose those words. But in seriousness, while a few may vote for other parties of the centre left and left I don't see retention of the Guardianista vote to be too much of a problem. We are still led by a north London lawyer, after all. We need to be bigging up the northern and midland voices on the front bench, and saying the things that our lost voters are interested in.
Once we are in government the gender neutral bathrooms will take care of themselves. Until then, we should shut up about stuff that makes us look out of touch with the average person in the street. And I include Israel - Palestine on that list.
Yes, but why should centrist Remainers who voted Tory in 2019 in fear of Corbyn switch to Starmer? No reason at all.
I won't be voting Labour under Starmer. Mrs Foxy might. I am more inclined to vote Green again.
To answer your question, the first of many reasons is that the fear of Corbyn has been removed. And I think that most centrist Remainers will accept that the ship of Brexit has sailed, even if the small proportion of obsessives who won't seem heavily represented here.
I think some of these “Labour frontbenchers” need to get over themselves. Starmer is right that they can’t just continue with the policy of refusing to take a stand on major national issues of the day. And nobody is going to suggest that any future criticism of a future poor performing economy will be invalid because of a failure to oppose the deal, when the only realistic alternative was far worse.
This is not 2017-19 when it was possible to at least make an argument that supporting the Govt was tantamount to abandoning their supporters who still held out hope of avoiding Brexit altogether. Harping back to Brexiteers “promises” that haven’t been realised cut no ice, when everyone knows they were phoney.
The treaty will pass as the government has a majority of 80. Opposition parties who can see what it is should vote against. It isn't deal or no deal. Its the deal or the deal - it will pass.
It's the trolley problem. The Lib Dems are choosing to stand aside while Labour are choosing to switch the points.
SR BA PPE (Open)
Nah, its going to pass anyway. No one will remember how anyone other than the Tories voted, so no point in a whip.
We need to win back a pile of Leave seats in 2024. It matters.
The key is not to lose Remain seats at the same time...
Perhaps once we get through Christmas the government might want to put better arrangements in for the trucks they are going to park at Manston / Ashford / the M20
Manston Airport is literally a concentration camp. No gas chambers obviously, but the kind other countries at war put in place.
I doubt those drivers will ever go to Britain again. I can't blame them.
Lol. The reports on the news showed most were very relaxed and understanding about the situation. The drivers will be back - it 's their living.
You do understand that most of them are not only not being paid right now but have lost the opportunity to be working and therefore paid?
Per kilometre. They don't earn when sat in queues. Yes, this queue is days longer than they will be next year. But they will still be lengthy and pointless.
Then they should aim their ire at Macron.
For this queue they probably should. For the queues to follow? No, that would be our doing.
I'd argue small number statistics, and the fact that they have now been stuck for how long this side of the border? They haven't just been sitting in their cabins.
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
I'd like Sir Keir to perhaps allow his MPs a free vote, or perhaps abstain, whilst making it very clear that (a) this is because there hasn't been time to study the text in detail and (b) the Labour Party will be using the text as a basis for framing future policy so as to move the country forward.
The devil is in the detail - it always is and 1,246 pages suggests a lot of detail.
Boris Johnson's predictably bouncy optimism sounds even more hollow than usual - I appreciate a Deal represents the avoidance of chaos but to dress it up as the greatest event since the last one is absurd.
What it has done is turn the page on a significant chapter in British history - I suspect our relationship with the EU will improve markedly now we are on the outside. The problem for us is and remains to be the failure of anyone in power to advance a coherent argument for the way forward for the United Kingdom.
For that reason, the Deal, for all its not doubt many limitations, will go ahead simply because there's no stomach to countenance the opposite whether that may be a descent into the chaos of WTO or a return for more negotiation. It's done - for better or worse, we have to move on and start having a proper national conversation about the way forward.
I am nearly certain, the UK will find life very uncomfortable outside the EU. The UK is too big to be told what to do and in any case the whole point of Brexit was to take control. On the other hand the EU is the only show in town in Europe. The UK can't just ignore the EU and only deal with Australia, although it will try to sometimes. It will at different times also try to co-opt the EU and to undermine it. It will probably fail at all three. Meanwhile the EU will either ignore the UK or lean heavily on the UK to agree to what it wants. It doesn't promise to be a particularly happy relationship.
The lead story in the Express gives a taste of what the discourse in the UK will be like: "EU braced for pandemonium as Dan Hannan warns THREE countries will follow UK out of bloc". The Brexiteer obsession with waiting for the collapse of the EU won't go away.
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Sorry Alex.
The Government have an EIGHTY SEAT majority, and it’s government alone who have negotiated it, created the deal. If the only way they can get votes for it is they have run the clock down, that goes completely against the better democracy they claim brexit is all about. It goes against all democracy.
If you tolerate having to vote for this because the clock has run down, burning down the parliament will be next.
To believe in democracy you have to believe everyone in parliament can vote with their conscience on what they think of the deal, for the country and their constituents, without the weapon of no deal held to their heads.
If then it passes, it passes. That’s democracy saying yes. And, if governments deal can’t pass despite an eighty seat majority over all other parties, democracy is saying no.
If you are selling anything else, any snake oil politics, no ones buying.
No, my argument is nothing to do with Labour needing to support the deal to ensure it passes. It will pass regardless, there is no doubt of that. The arguments are different to those over the Withdrawal Agreement, when Labour was confronted with an active choice to assist its passage or cause maximum trouble for a weak Government and exploiting the discontent on Tory backbenches (a choice IMO they got horribly wrong).
My argument is simply about what Labour needs to do to move on. Accept the world as it is and look forward, not the world as some might like it to be and look back.
If something is wrong you put it right. Calmly. Cooley.
Brexit and brexiteers don’t understand sovereignty nor democracy, and this needs to be put right.
If this country is going to take back control from the globalisation, deindustrialisation and stagnation it’s been suffering from for decades, it needs to wake up from its Brexit pipe dreams and protect its financial interests better than this arrangement.
One good aspect of the Deal is that it ties us to strong social and environmental protections under the LPF. There can be no "Singapore on Thames*" under the Deal. Either there is no change (in which case, what was the point?), or the decision is to appeal to the Purple Wall via protectionism, which Labour will struggle to outflank.
* as ever, it is never "Singapore on Trent or Tyne..."
What has actually happened though? A whole year of massive disruption linked to Covid 19 has seen true hardship for millions and thunderous criticism of the government which has left them level pegging in the opinion polls. Are you really convinced that the loss of an educational project and some regional grants all of which are being replaced by government funds will do the trick. I mean you say it is reality now - if so why on earth is Labour voting for it and why are the seething hordes not marching on London right now? I mean I agree the deal is imperfect and I'd have preferred to stay in the EU but you know that many remainers always were half hearted about it. The only place in Europe wth regular civli disobediance over the past few months is Paris - did they all take a wrong turning before reaching London? Starmer wants to move on. He is right.
Nobody cares about Erasmus as nobody uses it. The regional funds absolutely will not be replaced neither will the farming subsidies. The Tories have a long and proud track record of not spending money on such things that aren't about to suddenly be overturned in some fit of concern for the lower orders. People won't notice straight away - but the people in run down areas which have at least benefited from EU investment into local projects won't even be getting that.
If we are very lucky the good people at places like Toyota and Nissan will reconfigure their supply chain so that their UK factories uniquely don't operate to their just in time model and will remain open.
I bet the farming subsidies will be back - indeed, I'd bet that British farmers will receive higher subsidies in future than they used to.
George Eustice implied farmers' incomes would be protected through higher prices induced by making EU food more expensive. He won't be able to use tariffs to do that now there is a deal, but perhaps NTBs will have an effect. This implies a switch from direct subsidies provided by government to price support paid for by consumers
This government isn't at all consistent however. It wants to join CPTPP, which is essentially set up in the interests of producer countries, in particular Australia and Canada, and which would enable a flood of cheap imports that would undermine British farmers. I suspect CPTPP may not happen when it comes to it. It will upset too many vested interests for what is fundamentally an ideological project.
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Except Starmer is a policy vacuum, vision free. All we know is that despite being a strong Remainer, he backs Brexit out of political expediency. I don't think voters in the Purple Wall are stupid enough to fall for that. He either needs to enthuse them for Labour on some other issue, or find other seats that he can appeal to.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
Did he? Wasn't the story of 2017 in many Northern seats one of Tory over-reach? Making significant gains, but not enough to breach the dam.
Labor gained 36 seats in 2017, 28 of them from the Tories, and most of them old coalfield seats.
Perhaps once we get through Christmas the government might want to put better arrangements in for the trucks they are going to park at Manston / Ashford / the M20
Manston Airport is literally a concentration camp. No gas chambers obviously, but the kind other countries at war put in place.
I doubt those drivers will ever go to Britain again. I can't blame them.
Lol. The reports on the news showed most were very relaxed and understanding about the situation. The drivers will be back - it 's their living.
You do understand that most of them are not only not being paid right now but have lost the opportunity to be working and therefore paid?
Per kilometre. They don't earn when sat in queues. Yes, this queue is days longer than they will be next year. But they will still be lengthy and pointless.
Then they should aim their ire at Macron.
For this queue they probably should. For the queues to follow? No, that would be our doing.
Not sure that's quite right (I express no views on the steps Macron took). On a like for like basis (given that this involves testing an entire population) i suspect 240 per 100k is equivalent to a lot lower rate within the general UK testing regime (where the results are based on tests on about 3-4% of the population)
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Except Starmer is a policy vacuum, vision free. All we know is that despite being a strong Remainer, he backs Brexit out of political expediency. I don't think voters in the Purple Wall are stupid enough to fall for that. He either needs to enthuse them for Labour on some other issue, or find other seats that he can appeal to.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
Did he? Wasn't the story of 2017 in many Northern seats one of Tory over-reach? Making significant gains, but not enough to breach the dam.
Labor gained 36 seats in 2017, 28 of them from the Tories, and most of them old coalfield seats.
The devil is in the detail - it always is and 1,246 pages suggests a lot of detail.
Boris Johnson's predictably bouncy optimism sounds even more hollow than usual - I appreciate a Deal represents the avoidance of chaos but to dress it up as the greatest event since the last one is absurd.
What it has done is turn the page on a significant chapter in British history - I suspect our relationship with the EU will improve markedly now we are on the outside. The problem for us is and remains to be the failure of anyone in power to advance a coherent argument for the way forward for the United Kingdom.
For that reason, the Deal, for all its not doubt many limitations, will go ahead simply because there's no stomach to countenance the opposite whether that may be a descent into the chaos of WTO or a return for more negotiation. It's done - for better or worse, we have to move on and start having a proper national conversation about the way forward.
Oh, the way forward is obvious enough. Charge the taxpayer 1.5 times the cost of this disaster and continue to buy off pensioners with the excess cash.
Perhaps once we get through Christmas the government might want to put better arrangements in for the trucks they are going to park at Manston / Ashford / the M20
Manston Airport is literally a concentration camp. No gas chambers obviously, but the kind other countries at war put in place.
I doubt those drivers will ever go to Britain again. I can't blame them.
Lol. The reports on the news showed most were very relaxed and understanding about the situation. The drivers will be back - it 's their living.
You do understand that most of them are not only not being paid right now but have lost the opportunity to be working and therefore paid?
Per kilometre. They don't earn when sat in queues. Yes, this queue is days longer than they will be next year. But they will still be lengthy and pointless.
Then they should aim their ire at Macron.
For this queue they probably should. For the queues to follow? No, that would be our doing.
Not sure that's quite right (I express no views on the steps Macron took). On a like for like basis (given that this involves testing an entire population) i suspect 240 per 100k is equivalent to a lot lower rate within the general UK testing regime (where the results are based on tests on about 3-4% of the population)
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Except Starmer is a policy vacuum, vision free. All we know is that despite being a strong Remainer, he backs Brexit out of political expediency. I don't think voters in the Purple Wall are stupid enough to fall for that. He either needs to enthuse them for Labour on some other issue, or find other seats that he can appeal to.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
Before Starmer could hope to ever win back former Red Wall Labour voters, he had first to defuse the two main reasons why they turned against Labour. They were: 1. Corbyn and 2. Attempts to frustrate Brexit from 2017 onwards. Starmer has done the first. He intends to turn the second into an irrelevant distant memory. After that, he has another 4 years to articulate a set of values which form the basis of a clear policy offer on issues which play to Labour's strengths and which he will hope will define future voting choices. You're being a tad impatient in expecting all that to be in place in December 2020, not 2024.
Perhaps once we get through Christmas the government might want to put better arrangements in for the trucks they are going to park at Manston / Ashford / the M20
Manston Airport is literally a concentration camp. No gas chambers obviously, but the kind other countries at war put in place.
I doubt those drivers will ever go to Britain again. I can't blame them.
Lol. The reports on the news showed most were very relaxed and understanding about the situation. The drivers will be back - it 's their living.
You do understand that most of them are not only not being paid right now but have lost the opportunity to be working and therefore paid?
Per kilometre. They don't earn when sat in queues. Yes, this queue is days longer than they will be next year. But they will still be lengthy and pointless.
Then they should aim their ire at Macron.
For this queue they probably should. For the queues to follow? No, that would be our doing.
Not sure that's quite right (I express no views on the steps Macron took). On a like for like basis (given that this involves testing an entire population) i suspect 240 per 100k is equivalent to a lot lower rate within the general UK testing regime (where the results are based on tests on about 3-4% of the population)
Which shows infection rates of 0.57-2.54% - London seems to be the highest.
24 out of 10,000 is 0.24%.
The key here, is that this is a whole population sample, not just testing those with a cough or friends of someone with a cough.
So the truck drivers seem to have *half* the COVID rate of the lowest area in England.
As you say - a journalists type who is unable to understand that different numbers mean different things.
1 in 400 testing positive in what appears an asymptomatic population is quite a high rate. When you allow that the Lateral Flow test will miss half of asymptomatic positives, it is clearly a risk to allow to travel. 1 in 200 is likely to be the real rate.
Hi all, I just found a good link with all the *confirmed* vaccine order from the UK:
AstraZeneca / Oxford - 100m Novavax - 60m Sanofi / GSK - 60m Valneva - 60m (with an option for 130m more) Pfizer/BioNTech - 40m Johnson & Johnson - 30m Moderna - 7
Of these, AstraZeneca will hopefully be approved in the next few weeks. Novavax and J&J should get results in January (and if they're positive) could be approved by the end of the first quarter.
The Sanofi vaccine is being pushed back to (at earliest) the second half of 2021, so we shouldn't expect too much from that. Valneva is very early stage (it's in Phase 1 / 2 at the moment, but because it uses actual inactivated CV19 as its material, it has a high likelihood of success.)
If Novavax and J&J and AZN are all approved in Q1, then the pace of vaccinations should be pretty quick by the middle of next year.
Fingers crossed.
I think a key question is the pace of delivery. Last I heard both Pfizer and Astra were yielding more slowly than hoped. I know we aren't expecting any Moderna doses until "spring at the earliest". Do we know how quickly J&J would deliver?
I still foresee a very tricky period between vaccinating the over 70s, after which deaths should seriously drop, and vaccinating enough (over 50s or even down to 40s) so that hospitals can cope with demand if restrictions are mostly lifted. The best hope to make this situation work would be to be vaccinating at great speed, so that the intervening period isn't too long. Otherwise the pressure to release restrictions may be unbearable, even if hospitals then collapse and a lot of middle-aged people die.
Perhaps once we get through Christmas the government might want to put better arrangements in for the trucks they are going to park at Manston / Ashford / the M20
Manston Airport is literally a concentration camp. No gas chambers obviously, but the kind other countries at war put in place.
I doubt those drivers will ever go to Britain again. I can't blame them.
Lol. The reports on the news showed most were very relaxed and understanding about the situation. The drivers will be back - it 's their living.
You do understand that most of them are not only not being paid right now but have lost the opportunity to be working and therefore paid?
Per kilometre. They don't earn when sat in queues. Yes, this queue is days longer than they will be next year. But they will still be lengthy and pointless.
Then they should aim their ire at Macron.
For this queue they probably should. For the queues to follow? No, that would be our doing.
Not sure that's quite right (I express no views on the steps Macron took). On a like for like basis (given that this involves testing an entire population) i suspect 240 per 100k is equivalent to a lot lower rate within the general UK testing regime (where the results are based on tests on about 3-4% of the population)
For dessert this evening we had gluten-free Christmas pudding with Ben and Jerry's cookie dough ice cream. Yum
I had Xmas pud soaked in cognac with vanilla ice cream followed by a large cigar and more cognac, Xmas music blaring on my balcony waving to passers by who without exception called up Merry Christmas.
The devil is in the detail - it always is and 1,246 pages suggests a lot of detail.
Boris Johnson's predictably bouncy optimism sounds even more hollow than usual - I appreciate a Deal represents the avoidance of chaos but to dress it up as the greatest event since the last one is absurd.
What it has done is turn the page on a significant chapter in British history - I suspect our relationship with the EU will improve markedly now we are on the outside. The problem for us is and remains to be the failure of anyone in power to advance a coherent argument for the way forward for the United Kingdom.
For that reason, the Deal, for all its not doubt many limitations, will go ahead simply because there's no stomach to countenance the opposite whether that may be a descent into the chaos of WTO or a return for more negotiation. It's done - for better or worse, we have to move on and start having a proper national conversation about the way forward.
I am nearly certain, the UK will find life very uncomfortable outside the EU. The UK is too big to be told what to do and in any case the whole point of Brexit was to take control. On the other hand the EU is the only show in town in Europe. The UK can't just ignore the EU and only deal with Australia, although it will try to sometimes. It will at different times also try to co-opt the EU and to undermine it. It will probably fail at all three. Meanwhile the EU will either ignore the UK or lean heavily on the UK to agree to what it wants. It doesn't promise to be a particularly happy relationship.
The lead story in the Express gives a taste of what the discourse in the UK will be like: "EU braced for pandemonium as Dan Hannan warns THREE countries will follow UK out of bloc". The Brexiteer obsession with waiting for the collapse of the EU won't go away.
Breaking up the EU is a logical goal for Brexiteers . The EU is hardly going to treat the UK better as a non-member and so remains a problem as a powerful and coherent bloc. Thing is, Brexiteers are unlikely to succeed in destroying the EU and in the meantime they antagonise member states, making the whole situation more toxic.
Perhaps once we get through Christmas the government might want to put better arrangements in for the trucks they are going to park at Manston / Ashford / the M20
Manston Airport is literally a concentration camp. No gas chambers obviously, but the kind other countries at war put in place.
I doubt those drivers will ever go to Britain again. I can't blame them.
Lol. The reports on the news showed most were very relaxed and understanding about the situation. The drivers will be back - it 's their living.
You do understand that most of them are not only not being paid right now but have lost the opportunity to be working and therefore paid?
Per kilometre. They don't earn when sat in queues. Yes, this queue is days longer than they will be next year. But they will still be lengthy and pointless.
Then they should aim their ire at Macron.
For this queue they probably should. For the queues to follow? No, that would be our doing.
Not sure that's quite right (I express no views on the steps Macron took). On a like for like basis (given that this involves testing an entire population) i suspect 240 per 100k is equivalent to a lot lower rate within the general UK testing regime (where the results are based on tests on about 3-4% of the population)
Which shows infection rates of 0.57-2.54% - London seems to be the highest.
24 out of 10,000 is 0.24%.
The key here, is that this is a whole population sample, not just testing those with a cough or friends of someone with a cough.
So the truck drivers seem to have *half* the COVID rate of the lowest area in England.
As you say - a journalists type who is unable to understand that different numbers mean different things.
1 in 400 testing positive in what appears an asymptomatic population is quite a high rate. When you allow that the Lateral Flow test will miss half of asymptomatic positives, it is clearly a risk to allow to travel. 1 in 200 is likely to be the real rate.
Who is saying they are all asymptomatic? Of course there is a risk to travel, but to say that hauliers have a worse infection rate than Tier 4 is just not substantiated.
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Except Starmer is a policy vacuum, vision free. All we know is that despite being a strong Remainer, he backs Brexit out of political expediency. I don't think voters in the Purple Wall are stupid enough to fall for that. He either needs to enthuse them for Labour on some other issue, or find other seats that he can appeal to.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
Did he? Wasn't the story of 2017 in many Northern seats one of Tory over-reach? Making significant gains, but not enough to breach the dam.
Labor gained 36 seats in 2017, 28 of them from the Tories, and most of them old coalfield seats.
For all his faults, and there are plenty of those, Corbyn got the juices flowing in a way that Starmer has not.
I wasn't referencing seats. I was referencing votes. Although i'm basing it on my possibly faulty memory/perception not factual numbers so not sure what they show.
For dessert this evening we had gluten-free Christmas pudding with Ben and Jerry's cookie dough ice cream. Yum
Doesn't the gluten in the cookie dough slightly negate the benefit of the pudding?
You're being logical. I had a quick scan and I couldn't see a problem. Maybe they're using license on the "dough". As a "type two" celiac it's not a matter of life and death. But I'll double check tomorrow. Jeez, it's so easy to let your guard down. For instance Leo & Perrins Worcestershire sauce has barley vinegar. Bugger.
Yes I think there is some wheat. It'll be my little experiment.
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Except Starmer is a policy vacuum, vision free. All we know is that despite being a strong Remainer, he backs Brexit out of political expediency. I don't think voters in the Purple Wall are stupid enough to fall for that. He either needs to enthuse them for Labour on some other issue, or find other seats that he can appeal to.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
Before Starmer could hope to ever win back former Red Wall Labour voters, he had first to defuse the two main reasons why they turned against Labour. They were: 1. Corbyn and 2. Attempts to frustrate Brexit from 2017 onwards. Starmer has done the first. He intends to turn the second into an irrelevant distant memory. After that, he has another 4 years to articulate a set of values which form the basis of a clear policy offer on issues which play to Labour's strengths and which he will hope will define future voting choices. You're being a tad impatient in expecting all that to be in place in December 2020, not 2024.
I liked the strap-line of his recent speech, A new leadership or something like that. Basically stating Under New Management with all that implies.
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Except Starmer is a policy vacuum, vision free. All we know is that despite being a strong Remainer, he backs Brexit out of political expediency. I don't think voters in the Purple Wall are stupid enough to fall for that. He either needs to enthuse them for Labour on some other issue, or find other seats that he can appeal to.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
Did he? Wasn't the story of 2017 in many Northern seats one of Tory over-reach? Making significant gains, but not enough to breach the dam.
Labor gained 36 seats in 2017, 28 of them from the Tories, and most of them old coalfield seats.
Perhaps once we get through Christmas the government might want to put better arrangements in for the trucks they are going to park at Manston / Ashford / the M20
Manston Airport is literally a concentration camp. No gas chambers obviously, but the kind other countries at war put in place.
I doubt those drivers will ever go to Britain again. I can't blame them.
Lol. The reports on the news showed most were very relaxed and understanding about the situation. The drivers will be back - it 's their living.
You do understand that most of them are not only not being paid right now but have lost the opportunity to be working and therefore paid?
Per kilometre. They don't earn when sat in queues. Yes, this queue is days longer than they will be next year. But they will still be lengthy and pointless.
Then they should aim their ire at Macron.
For this queue they probably should. For the queues to follow? No, that would be our doing.
Not sure that's quite right (I express no views on the steps Macron took). On a like for like basis (given that this involves testing an entire population) i suspect 240 per 100k is equivalent to a lot lower rate within the general UK testing regime (where the results are based on tests on about 3-4% of the population)
Which shows infection rates of 0.57-2.54% - London seems to be the highest.
24 out of 10,000 is 0.24%.
The key here, is that this is a whole population sample, not just testing those with a cough or friends of someone with a cough.
So the truck drivers seem to have *half* the COVID rate of the lowest area in England.
As you say - a journalists type who is unable to understand that different numbers mean different things.
1 in 400 testing positive in what appears an asymptomatic population is quite a high rate. When you allow that the Lateral Flow test will miss half of asymptomatic positives, it is clearly a risk to allow to travel. 1 in 200 is likely to be the real rate.
One of the problems in this is not seeing equivalents to the ONS surveys in the rest of Europe. Is any one else doing such surveys? Links?
Perhaps once we get through Christmas the government might want to put better arrangements in for the trucks they are going to park at Manston / Ashford / the M20
Manston Airport is literally a concentration camp. No gas chambers obviously, but the kind other countries at war put in place.
I doubt those drivers will ever go to Britain again. I can't blame them.
Lol. The reports on the news showed most were very relaxed and understanding about the situation. The drivers will be back - it 's their living.
You do understand that most of them are not only not being paid right now but have lost the opportunity to be working and therefore paid?
Per kilometre. They don't earn when sat in queues. Yes, this queue is days longer than they will be next year. But they will still be lengthy and pointless.
Then they should aim their ire at Macron.
For this queue they probably should. For the queues to follow? No, that would be our doing.
Not sure that's quite right (I express no views on the steps Macron took). On a like for like basis (given that this involves testing an entire population) i suspect 240 per 100k is equivalent to a lot lower rate within the general UK testing regime (where the results are based on tests on about 3-4% of the population)
Which shows infection rates of 0.57-2.54% - London seems to be the highest.
24 out of 10,000 is 0.24%.
The key here, is that this is a whole population sample, not just testing those with a cough or friends of someone with a cough.
So the truck drivers seem to have *half* the COVID rate of the lowest area in England.
As you say - a journalists type who is unable to understand that different numbers mean different things.
1 in 400 testing positive in what appears an asymptomatic population is quite a high rate. When you allow that the Lateral Flow test will miss half of asymptomatic positives, it is clearly a risk to allow to travel. 1 in 200 is likely to be the real rate.
Is it likely to be an asymptomatic population? If there was one group of workers likely to try to carry on with symptoms and avoid home isolation (not considering there doing so being a threat to anyone but themselves) i would think self employed truck drivers would possibly be high on the list of potentials.
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Except Starmer is a policy vacuum, vision free. All we know is that despite being a strong Remainer, he backs Brexit out of political expediency. I don't think voters in the Purple Wall are stupid enough to fall for that. He either needs to enthuse them for Labour on some other issue, or find other seats that he can appeal to.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
Did he? Wasn't the story of 2017 in many Northern seats one of Tory over-reach? Making significant gains, but not enough to breach the dam.
Labor gained 36 seats in 2017, 28 of them from the Tories, and most of them old coalfield seats.
For all his faults, and there are plenty of those, Corbyn got the juices flowing in a way that Starmer has not.
Starmer has yet to fight an election and Corbyn was totally dreadful at GE2019
He is up in the polls by 10%, so not a bad start, and it does seem there is a higher than average swing to Labour in the "Purple Wall".
Nonetheless, it is not just Labour voters wondering what he actually believes, and his choice of nonentities for the front bench does not inspire confidence. Better than Johnson, but that is a pretty low bar. He needs to give people that vision thing.
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Except Starmer is a policy vacuum, vision free. All we know is that despite being a strong Remainer, he backs Brexit out of political expediency. I don't think voters in the Purple Wall are stupid enough to fall for that. He either needs to enthuse them for Labour on some other issue, or find other seats that he can appeal to.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
Did he? Wasn't the story of 2017 in many Northern seats one of Tory over-reach? Making significant gains, but not enough to breach the dam.
Labor gained 36 seats in 2017, 28 of them from the Tories, and most of them old coalfield seats.
For all his faults, and there are plenty of those, Corbyn got the juices flowing in a way that Starmer has not.
Starmer has yet to fight an election and Corbyn was totally dreadful at GE2019
He is up in the polls by 10%, so not a bad start, and it does seem there is a higher than average swing to Labour in the "Purple Wall".
Nonetheless, it is not just Labour voters wondering what he actually believes, and his choice of nonentities for the front bench does not inspire confidence. Better than Johnson, but that is a pretty low bar. He needs to give people that vision thing.
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Except Starmer is a policy vacuum, vision free. All we know is that despite being a strong Remainer, he backs Brexit out of political expediency. I don't think voters in the Purple Wall are stupid enough to fall for that. He either needs to enthuse them for Labour on some other issue, or find other seats that he can appeal to.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
Did he? Wasn't the story of 2017 in many Northern seats one of Tory over-reach? Making significant gains, but not enough to breach the dam.
Labor gained 36 seats in 2017, 28 of them from the Tories, and most of them old coalfield seats.
For all his faults, and there are plenty of those, Corbyn got the juices flowing in a way that Starmer has not.
In 2019 Corbyn lost 60 seats and got the lowest number of Labour seats since 1935, at 202 even lower than the 209 seats Foot managed.
He got the juices flowing but mainly to ensure he did not become PM!
I am no Corbynite, but Labour did manage to generate enthusiasm in 2017 that they could not in 2019. It clearly was possible to gain seats in the North in 2017, as the facts show.
I think some of these “Labour frontbenchers” need to get over themselves. Starmer is right that they can’t just continue with the policy of refusing to take a stand on major national issues of the day. And nobody is going to suggest that any future criticism of a future poor performing economy will be invalid because of a failure to oppose the deal, when the only realistic alternative was far worse.
This is not 2017-19 when it was possible to at least make an argument that supporting the Govt was tantamount to abandoning their supporters who still held out hope of avoiding Brexit altogether. Harping back to Brexiteers “promises” that haven’t been realised cut no ice, when everyone knows they were phoney.
The treaty will pass as the government has a majority of 80. Opposition parties who can see what it is should vote against. It isn't deal or no deal. Its the deal or the deal - it will pass.
It's the trolley problem. The Lib Dems are choosing to stand aside while Labour are choosing to switch the points.
SR BA PPE (Open)
Nah, its going to pass anyway. No one will remember how anyone other than the Tories voted, so no point in a whip.
We need to win back a pile of Leave seats in 2024. It matters.
The key is not to lose Remain seats at the same time...
They've got nowhere else to go...
Haven't we heard that before?
That's why I chose those words. But in seriousness, while a few may vote for other parties of the centre left and left I don't see retention of the Guardianista vote to be too much of a problem. We are still led by a north London lawyer, after all. We need to be bigging up the northern and midland voices on the front bench, and saying the things that our lost voters are interested in.
Once we are in government the gender neutral bathrooms will take care of themselves. Until then, we should shut up about stuff that makes us look out of touch with the average person in the street. And I include Israel - Palestine on that list.
Yes, but why should centrist Remainers who voted Tory in 2019 in fear of Corbyn switch to Starmer? No reason at all.
I won't be voting Labour under Starmer. Mrs Foxy might. I am more inclined to vote Green again.
You've answered the question. If fear of Corbyn was the impediment that stopped them voting Lab then that is no longer the case and they can return to the fold. Unless they are fanatical rejoiners then Labour's vision of life outside EU should be more to their taste than the version Priti or The Truss will be serving up in 2024.
The devil is in the detail - it always is and 1,246 pages suggests a lot of detail.
Boris Johnson's predictably bouncy optimism sounds even more hollow than usual - I appreciate a Deal represents the avoidance of chaos but to dress it up as the greatest event since the last one is absurd.
What it has done is turn the page on a significant chapter in British history - I suspect our relationship with the EU will improve markedly now we are on the outside. The problem for us is and remains to be the failure of anyone in power to advance a coherent argument for the way forward for the United Kingdom.
For that reason, the Deal, for all its not doubt many limitations, will go ahead simply because there's no stomach to countenance the opposite whether that may be a descent into the chaos of WTO or a return for more negotiation. It's done - for better or worse, we have to move on and start having a proper national conversation about the way forward.
I am nearly certain, the UK will find life very uncomfortable outside the EU. The UK is too big to be told what to do and in any case the whole point of Brexit was to take control. On the other hand the EU is the only show in town in Europe. The UK can't just ignore the EU and only deal with Australia, although it will try to sometimes. It will at different times also try to co-opt the EU and to undermine it. It will probably fail at all three. Meanwhile the EU will either ignore the UK or lean heavily on the UK to agree to what it wants. It doesn't promise to be a particularly happy relationship.
The lead story in the Express gives a taste of what the discourse in the UK will be like: "EU braced for pandemonium as Dan Hannan warns THREE countries will follow UK out of bloc". The Brexiteer obsession with waiting for the collapse of the EU won't go away.
Very odd of him to forecast the Dutch or the Danes are likely to be the next to vote out. According to Pew, Support for the EU has risen pretty consistently in the Netherlands over the last six or seven years and is now roughly 2:1 in favour. (The Danes have similar levels of support for the EU.)
Much more likely, I would have thought, to be Italy, or one of the Eastern European countries who clashes constantly with the Commission.
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Except Starmer is a policy vacuum, vision free. All we know is that despite being a strong Remainer, he backs Brexit out of political expediency. I don't think voters in the Purple Wall are stupid enough to fall for that. He either needs to enthuse them for Labour on some other issue, or find other seats that he can appeal to.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
Did he? Wasn't the story of 2017 in many Northern seats one of Tory over-reach? Making significant gains, but not enough to breach the dam.
Labor gained 36 seats in 2017, 28 of them from the Tories, and most of them old coalfield seats.
For all his faults, and there are plenty of those, Corbyn got the juices flowing in a way that Starmer has not.
Starmer has yet to fight an election and Corbyn was totally dreadful at GE2019
He is up in the polls by 10%, so not a bad start, and it does seem there is a higher than average swing to Labour in the "Purple Wall".
Nonetheless, it is not just Labour voters wondering what he actually believes, and his choice of nonentities for the front bench does not inspire confidence. Better than Johnson, but that is a pretty low bar. He needs to give people that vision thing.
Biden didn't
Biden didn't need to get much swing to win. Indeed 1% seemed to do it. Labour needs to get closer to a 10% swing. Mediocrity won't do it.
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Except Starmer is a policy vacuum, vision free. All we know is that despite being a strong Remainer, he backs Brexit out of political expediency. I don't think voters in the Purple Wall are stupid enough to fall for that. He either needs to enthuse them for Labour on some other issue, or find other seats that he can appeal to.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
Did he? Wasn't the story of 2017 in many Northern seats one of Tory over-reach? Making significant gains, but not enough to breach the dam.
Labor gained 36 seats in 2017, 28 of them from the Tories, and most of them old coalfield seats.
For all his faults, and there are plenty of those, Corbyn got the juices flowing in a way that Starmer has not.
In 2019 Corbyn lost 60 seats and got the lowest number of Labour seats since 1935, at 202 even lower than the 209 seats Foot managed.
He got the juices flowing but mainly to ensure he did not become PM!
I am no Corbynite, but Labour did manage to generate enthusiasm in 2017 that they could not in 2019. It clearly was possible to gain seats in the North in 2017, as the facts show.
They got enthusiasm in 2017 only mainly from Remainers who did not think there was any risk of Corbyn becoming PM but wanted to stop a hard Brexit and from Leavers who thought he would deliver Brexit.
By 2019 many of the former had gone LD and many of the latter in the Redwall had gone Tory.
In 2017 he was also up against May, a relatively dull administrative leader, by 2019 he was up against Boris, the most charismatic Tory leader since Thatcher
Perhaps once we get through Christmas the government might want to put better arrangements in for the trucks they are going to park at Manston / Ashford / the M20
Manston Airport is literally a concentration camp. No gas chambers obviously, but the kind other countries at war put in place.
I doubt those drivers will ever go to Britain again. I can't blame them.
Lol. The reports on the news showed most were very relaxed and understanding about the situation. The drivers will be back - it 's their living.
You do understand that most of them are not only not being paid right now but have lost the opportunity to be working and therefore paid?
Per kilometre. They don't earn when sat in queues. Yes, this queue is days longer than they will be next year. But they will still be lengthy and pointless.
Then they should aim their ire at Macron.
For this queue they probably should. For the queues to follow? No, that would be our doing.
Not sure that's quite right (I express no views on the steps Macron took). On a like for like basis (given that this involves testing an entire population) i suspect 240 per 100k is equivalent to a lot lower rate within the general UK testing regime (where the results are based on tests on about 3-4% of the population)
Which shows infection rates of 0.57-2.54% - London seems to be the highest.
24 out of 10,000 is 0.24%.
The key here, is that this is a whole population sample, not just testing those with a cough or friends of someone with a cough.
So the truck drivers seem to have *half* the COVID rate of the lowest area in England.
As you say - a journalists type who is unable to understand that different numbers mean different things.
1 in 400 testing positive in what appears an asymptomatic population is quite a high rate. When you allow that the Lateral Flow test will miss half of asymptomatic positives, it is clearly a risk to allow to travel. 1 in 200 is likely to be the real rate.
Who is saying they are all asymptomatic? Of course there is a risk to travel, but to say that hauliers have a worse infection rate than Tier 4 is just not substantiated.
Hi all, I just found a good link with all the *confirmed* vaccine order from the UK:
AstraZeneca / Oxford - 100m Novavax - 60m Sanofi / GSK - 60m Valneva - 60m (with an option for 130m more) Pfizer/BioNTech - 40m Johnson & Johnson - 30m Moderna - 7
Of these, AstraZeneca will hopefully be approved in the next few weeks. Novavax and J&J should get results in January (and if they're positive) could be approved by the end of the first quarter.
The Sanofi vaccine is being pushed back to (at earliest) the second half of 2021, so we shouldn't expect too much from that. Valneva is very early stage (it's in Phase 1 / 2 at the moment, but because it uses actual inactivated CV19 as its material, it has a high likelihood of success.)
If Novavax and J&J and AZN are all approved in Q1, then the pace of vaccinations should be pretty quick by the middle of next year.
Fingers crossed.
I think a key question is the pace of delivery. Last I heard both Pfizer and Astra were yielding more slowly than hoped. I know we aren't expecting any Moderna doses until "spring at the earliest". Do we know how quickly J&J would deliver?
I still foresee a very tricky period between vaccinating the over 70s, after which deaths should seriously drop, and vaccinating enough (over 50s or even down to 40s) so that hospitals can cope with demand if restrictions are mostly lifted. The best hope to make this situation work would be to be vaccinating at great speed, so that the intervening period isn't too long. Otherwise the pressure to release restrictions may be unbearable, even if hospitals then collapse and a lot of middle-aged people die.
--AS
Respiratory diseases dislike warm, dry weather. Fingers crossed we get a decent Spring, the wretched bug drops off from about April time, and that buys us enough time to get most of the population jabbed.
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Except Starmer is a policy vacuum, vision free. All we know is that despite being a strong Remainer, he backs Brexit out of political expediency. I don't think voters in the Purple Wall are stupid enough to fall for that. He either needs to enthuse them for Labour on some other issue, or find other seats that he can appeal to.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
Did he? Wasn't the story of 2017 in many Northern seats one of Tory over-reach? Making significant gains, but not enough to breach the dam.
Labor gained 36 seats in 2017, 28 of them from the Tories, and most of them old coalfield seats.
For all his faults, and there are plenty of those, Corbyn got the juices flowing in a way that Starmer has not.
Starmer has yet to fight an election and Corbyn was totally dreadful at GE2019
He is up in the polls by 10%, so not a bad start, and it does seem there is a higher than average swing to Labour in the "Purple Wall".
Nonetheless, it is not just Labour voters wondering what he actually believes, and his choice of nonentities for the front bench does not inspire confidence. Better than Johnson, but that is a pretty low bar. He needs to give people that vision thing.
Biden didn't
'Biden didn't need to get much swing to win. Indeed 1% seemed to do it. Labour needs to get closer to a 10% swing. Mediocrity won't do it.'
Labour needs 10% to get a majority but about 5% would probably enable it to form a government with the SNP and LDs providing confidence and supply
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Except Starmer is a policy vacuum, vision free. All we know is that despite being a strong Remainer, he backs Brexit out of political expediency. I don't think voters in the Purple Wall are stupid enough to fall for that. He either needs to enthuse them for Labour on some other issue, or find other seats that he can appeal to.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
Did he? Wasn't the story of 2017 in many Northern seats one of Tory over-reach? Making significant gains, but not enough to breach the dam.
Labor gained 36 seats in 2017, 28 of them from the Tories, and most of them old coalfield seats.
For all his faults, and there are plenty of those, Corbyn got the juices flowing in a way that Starmer has not.
Conservative to Labour (28) Battersea Bedford Brighton Kemptown Bristol North West Bury North Canterbury Cardiff North Colne Valley Crewe and Nantwich Croydon Central Derby North Enfield Southgate Gower High Peak Ipswich Keighley Kensington Lincoln Peterborough Plymouth Sutton and Devonport Portsmouth South Reading East Stockton South Stroud Vale of Clwyd Warrington South Warwick and Leamington Weaver Vale
I think only Gower could be described as a 'coalfield' seat.
Altogether half of Labour's gains were in southern England.
Hi all, I just found a good link with all the *confirmed* vaccine order from the UK:
AstraZeneca / Oxford - 100m Novavax - 60m Sanofi / GSK - 60m Valneva - 60m (with an option for 130m more) Pfizer/BioNTech - 40m Johnson & Johnson - 30m Moderna - 7
Of these, AstraZeneca will hopefully be approved in the next few weeks. Novavax and J&J should get results in January (and if they're positive) could be approved by the end of the first quarter.
The Sanofi vaccine is being pushed back to (at earliest) the second half of 2021, so we shouldn't expect too much from that. Valneva is very early stage (it's in Phase 1 / 2 at the moment, but because it uses actual inactivated CV19 as its material, it has a high likelihood of success.)
If Novavax and J&J and AZN are all approved in Q1, then the pace of vaccinations should be pretty quick by the middle of next year.
Fingers crossed.
I think a key question is the pace of delivery. Last I heard both Pfizer and Astra were yielding more slowly than hoped. I know we aren't expecting any Moderna doses until "spring at the earliest". Do we know how quickly J&J would deliver?
I still foresee a very tricky period between vaccinating the over 70s, after which deaths should seriously drop, and vaccinating enough (over 50s or even down to 40s) so that hospitals can cope with demand if restrictions are mostly lifted. The best hope to make this situation work would be to be vaccinating at great speed, so that the intervening period isn't too long. Otherwise the pressure to release restrictions may be unbearable, even if hospitals then collapse and a lot of middle-aged people die.
--AS
J&J is the crucial one. They've been manufacturing since September, and their vaccine is a single dose.
If they get positive results (ideally up there with Pfizer and Moderna), then we stand a good chance of getting our pace of vaccinations into the million plus per week.
I think some of these “Labour frontbenchers” need to get over themselves. Starmer is right that they can’t just continue with the policy of refusing to take a stand on major national issues of the day. And nobody is going to suggest that any future criticism of a future poor performing economy will be invalid because of a failure to oppose the deal, when the only realistic alternative was far worse.
This is not 2017-19 when it was possible to at least make an argument that supporting the Govt was tantamount to abandoning their supporters who still held out hope of avoiding Brexit altogether. Harping back to Brexiteers “promises” that haven’t been realised cut no ice, when everyone knows they were phoney.
The treaty will pass as the government has a majority of 80. Opposition parties who can see what it is should vote against. It isn't deal or no deal. Its the deal or the deal - it will pass.
It's the trolley problem. The Lib Dems are choosing to stand aside while Labour are choosing to switch the points.
SR BA PPE (Open)
Nah, its going to pass anyway. No one will remember how anyone other than the Tories voted, so no point in a whip.
We need to win back a pile of Leave seats in 2024. It matters.
The key is not to lose Remain seats at the same time...
They've got nowhere else to go...
Haven't we heard that before?
That's why I chose those words. But in seriousness, while a few may vote for other parties of the centre left and left I don't see retention of the Guardianista vote to be too much of a problem. We are still led by a north London lawyer, after all. We need to be bigging up the northern and midland voices on the front bench, and saying the things that our lost voters are interested in.
Once we are in government the gender neutral bathrooms will take care of themselves. Until then, we should shut up about stuff that makes us look out of touch with the average person in the street. And I include Israel - Palestine on that list.
Yes, but why should centrist Remainers who voted Tory in 2019 in fear of Corbyn switch to Starmer? No reason at all.
I won't be voting Labour under Starmer. Mrs Foxy might. I am more inclined to vote Green again.
You've answered the question. If fear of Corbyn was the impediment that stopped them voting Lab then that is no longer the case and they can return to the fold. Unless they are fanatical rejoiners then Labour's vision of life outside EU should be more to their taste than the version Priti or The Truss will be serving up in 2024.
And you have just answered the question of why the appeal to former Labour Brexiteers will flop. You cannot out Brexit the Brexit party.
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Except Starmer is a policy vacuum, vision free. All we know is that despite being a strong Remainer, he backs Brexit out of political expediency. I don't think voters in the Purple Wall are stupid enough to fall for that. He either needs to enthuse them for Labour on some other issue, or find other seats that he can appeal to.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
Did he? Wasn't the story of 2017 in many Northern seats one of Tory over-reach? Making significant gains, but not enough to breach the dam.
Labor gained 36 seats in 2017, 28 of them from the Tories, and most of them old coalfield seats.
For all his faults, and there are plenty of those, Corbyn got the juices flowing in a way that Starmer has not.
Starmer has yet to fight an election and Corbyn was totally dreadful at GE2019
He is up in the polls by 10%, so not a bad start, and it does seem there is a higher than average swing to Labour in the "Purple Wall".
Nonetheless, it is not just Labour voters wondering what he actually believes, and his choice of nonentities for the front bench does not inspire confidence. Better than Johnson, but that is a pretty low bar. He needs to give people that vision thing.
I think Starmer is has a defined moral purpose that he can put up against the moral turpitude and associated incompetence of the Johnson administration. He could go much stronger on the corruption angle, IMO. He doesn't have any discernible ideas (neither does Johnson but he seems to get by purely with culture wars). However Starmer does have someone on his team, who is good at policy - Ed Miliband. He should use him. Miliband's policies were so good, they have largely been stolen by the Tories.
Hi all, I just found a good link with all the *confirmed* vaccine order from the UK:
AstraZeneca / Oxford - 100m Novavax - 60m Sanofi / GSK - 60m Valneva - 60m (with an option for 130m more) Pfizer/BioNTech - 40m Johnson & Johnson - 30m Moderna - 7
Of these, AstraZeneca will hopefully be approved in the next few weeks. Novavax and J&J should get results in January (and if they're positive) could be approved by the end of the first quarter.
The Sanofi vaccine is being pushed back to (at earliest) the second half of 2021, so we shouldn't expect too much from that. Valneva is very early stage (it's in Phase 1 / 2 at the moment, but because it uses actual inactivated CV19 as its material, it has a high likelihood of success.)
If Novavax and J&J and AZN are all approved in Q1, then the pace of vaccinations should be pretty quick by the middle of next year.
Fingers crossed.
I think a key question is the pace of delivery. Last I heard both Pfizer and Astra were yielding more slowly than hoped. I know we aren't expecting any Moderna doses until "spring at the earliest". Do we know how quickly J&J would deliver?
I still foresee a very tricky period between vaccinating the over 70s, after which deaths should seriously drop, and vaccinating enough (over 50s or even down to 40s) so that hospitals can cope with demand if restrictions are mostly lifted. The best hope to make this situation work would be to be vaccinating at great speed, so that the intervening period isn't too long. Otherwise the pressure to release restrictions may be unbearable, even if hospitals then collapse and a lot of middle-aged people die.
--AS
Respiratory diseases dislike warm, dry weather. Fingers crossed we get a decent Spring, the wretched bug drops off from about April time, and that buys us enough time to get most of the population jabbed.
Together with the oldies and vulnerable being vaccinated and the number of others who will have had covid by then there should be a good deal of herd immunity by spring.
The devil is in the detail - it always is and 1,246 pages suggests a lot of detail.
Boris Johnson's predictably bouncy optimism sounds even more hollow than usual - I appreciate a Deal represents the avoidance of chaos but to dress it up as the greatest event since the last one is absurd.
What it has done is turn the page on a significant chapter in British history - I suspect our relationship with the EU will improve markedly now we are on the outside. The problem for us is and remains to be the failure of anyone in power to advance a coherent argument for the way forward for the United Kingdom.
For that reason, the Deal, for all its not doubt many limitations, will go ahead simply because there's no stomach to countenance the opposite whether that may be a descent into the chaos of WTO or a return for more negotiation. It's done - for better or worse, we have to move on and start having a proper national conversation about the way forward.
I am nearly certain, the UK will find life very uncomfortable outside the EU. The UK is too big to be told what to do and in any case the whole point of Brexit was to take control. On the other hand the EU is the only show in town in Europe. The UK can't just ignore the EU and only deal with Australia, although it will try to sometimes. It will at different times also try to co-opt the EU and to undermine it. It will probably fail at all three. Meanwhile the EU will either ignore the UK or lean heavily on the UK to agree to what it wants. It doesn't promise to be a particularly happy relationship.
The lead story in the Express gives a taste of what the discourse in the UK will be like: "EU braced for pandemonium as Dan Hannan warns THREE countries will follow UK out of bloc". The Brexiteer obsession with waiting for the collapse of the EU won't go away.
Very odd of him to forecast the Dutch or the Danes are likely to be the next to vote out. According to Pew, Support for the EU has risen pretty consistently in the Netherlands over the last six or seven years and is now roughly 2:1 in favour. (The Danes have similar levels of support for the EU.)
Much more likely, I would have thought, to be Italy, or one of the Eastern European countries who clashes constantly with the Commission.
Well this was before the disaster that was the EU vaccine procurement strategy.
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Except Starmer is a policy vacuum, vision free. All we know is that despite being a strong Remainer, he backs Brexit out of political expediency. I don't think voters in the Purple Wall are stupid enough to fall for that. He either needs to enthuse them for Labour on some other issue, or find other seats that he can appeal to.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
Did he? Wasn't the story of 2017 in many Northern seats one of Tory over-reach? Making significant gains, but not enough to breach the dam.
Labor gained 36 seats in 2017, 28 of them from the Tories, and most of them old coalfield seats.
For all his faults, and there are plenty of those, Corbyn got the juices flowing in a way that Starmer has not.
In 2019 Corbyn lost 60 seats and got the lowest number of Labour seats since 1935, at 202 even lower than the 209 seats Foot managed.
He got the juices flowing but mainly to ensure he did not become PM!
I am no Corbynite, but Labour did manage to generate enthusiasm in 2017 that they could not in 2019. It clearly was possible to gain seats in the North in 2017, as the facts show.
They got enthusiasm in 2017 only mainly from Remainers who did not think there was any risk of Corbyn becoming PM but wanted to stop a hard Brexit and from Leavers who thought he would deliver Brexit.
By 2019 many of the former had gone LD and many of the latter in the Redwall had gone Tory.
In 2017 he was also up against May, a relatively dull administrative leader, by 2019 he was up against Boris, the most charismatic Tory leader since Thatcher
There was plenty of enthusiasm for Corbyn among students and recent graduates.
What Starmer does regarding student debt will be interesting.
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Except Starmer is a policy vacuum, vision free. All we know is that despite being a strong Remainer, he backs Brexit out of political expediency. I don't think voters in the Purple Wall are stupid enough to fall for that. He either needs to enthuse them for Labour on some other issue, or find other seats that he can appeal to.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
Did he? Wasn't the story of 2017 in many Northern seats one of Tory over-reach? Making significant gains, but not enough to breach the dam.
Labor gained 36 seats in 2017, 28 of them from the Tories, and most of them old coalfield seats.
For all his faults, and there are plenty of those, Corbyn got the juices flowing in a way that Starmer has not.
Conservative to Labour (28) Battersea Bedford Brighton Kemptown Bristol North West Bury North Canterbury Cardiff North Colne Valley Crewe and Nantwich Croydon Central Derby North Enfield Southgate Gower High Peak Ipswich Keighley Kensington Lincoln Peterborough Plymouth Sutton and Devonport Portsmouth South Reading East Stockton South Stroud Vale of Clwyd Warrington South Warwick and Leamington Weaver Vale
I think only Gower could be described as a 'coalfield' seat.
Altogether half of Labour's gains were in southern England.
Yes, "old coalfield" is perhaps a not very accurate shorthand for the English and Welsh rustbelt. Those gains were in places that Labour could not appeal to in 2019 though. It was hard to outspend a spendthrift Johnson party, wanting to buy their votes.
The devil is in the detail - it always is and 1,246 pages suggests a lot of detail.
Boris Johnson's predictably bouncy optimism sounds even more hollow than usual - I appreciate a Deal represents the avoidance of chaos but to dress it up as the greatest event since the last one is absurd.
What it has done is turn the page on a significant chapter in British history - I suspect our relationship with the EU will improve markedly now we are on the outside. The problem for us is and remains to be the failure of anyone in power to advance a coherent argument for the way forward for the United Kingdom.
For that reason, the Deal, for all its not doubt many limitations, will go ahead simply because there's no stomach to countenance the opposite whether that may be a descent into the chaos of WTO or a return for more negotiation. It's done - for better or worse, we have to move on and start having a proper national conversation about the way forward.
I am nearly certain, the UK will find life very uncomfortable outside the EU. The UK is too big to be told what to do and in any case the whole point of Brexit was to take control. On the other hand the EU is the only show in town in Europe. The UK can't just ignore the EU and only deal with Australia, although it will try to sometimes. It will at different times also try to co-opt the EU and to undermine it. It will probably fail at all three. Meanwhile the EU will either ignore the UK or lean heavily on the UK to agree to what it wants. It doesn't promise to be a particularly happy relationship.
The lead story in the Express gives a taste of what the discourse in the UK will be like: "EU braced for pandemonium as Dan Hannan warns THREE countries will follow UK out of bloc". The Brexiteer obsession with waiting for the collapse of the EU won't go away.
In fairness to Lord Hannan, his words are much more cautious than the headline implies. It's obviously just speculation.
IMHO it's time for people here to shut up about what EU member countries may or may not do in that regard. Speculation of that sort is too much like gossip spoken within the victim's hearing. Damaging and offensive.
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Except Starmer is a policy vacuum, vision free. All we know is that despite being a strong Remainer, he backs Brexit out of political expediency. I don't think voters in the Purple Wall are stupid enough to fall for that. He either needs to enthuse them for Labour on some other issue, or find other seats that he can appeal to.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
Did he? Wasn't the story of 2017 in many Northern seats one of Tory over-reach? Making significant gains, but not enough to breach the dam.
Labor gained 36 seats in 2017, 28 of them from the Tories, and most of them old coalfield seats.
For all his faults, and there are plenty of those, Corbyn got the juices flowing in a way that Starmer has not.
In 2019 Corbyn lost 60 seats and got the lowest number of Labour seats since 1935, at 202 even lower than the 209 seats Foot managed.
He got the juices flowing but mainly to ensure he did not become PM!
I am no Corbynite, but Labour did manage to generate enthusiasm in 2017 that they could not in 2019. It clearly was possible to gain seats in the North in 2017, as the facts show.
They got enthusiasm in 2017 only mainly from Remainers who did not think there was any risk of Corbyn becoming PM but wanted to stop a hard Brexit and from Leavers who thought he would deliver Brexit.
By 2019 many of the former had gone LD and many of the latter in the Redwall had gone Tory.
In 2017 he was also up against May, a relatively dull administrative leader, by 2019 he was up against Boris, the most charismatic Tory leader since Thatcher
There was plenty of enthusiasm for Corbyn among students and recent graduates.
What Starmer does regarding student debt will be interesting.
Yes, Generational redistribution of wealth is a risky strategy, but potentially a successful one. Even fifty somethings like me are sympathetic.
Starmer has taken over the leadership of the opposition at an unusual time, even more so than Iain Duncan Smith post 9/11. That said he is going to have to start sketching out his ideas pretty soon. There's a real danger in Labour simply trying to be a status quo option when it comes to returning competencies (think Agriculture) with the consideration in mind that any such change would make it harder to rejoin the EU in future. Then there are the issues which were never EU competenices anyway e.g housing. Centre-right commentator Liam Halligan has written an interesting book on it.
I think some of these “Labour frontbenchers” need to get over themselves. Starmer is right that they can’t just continue with the policy of refusing to take a stand on major national issues of the day. And nobody is going to suggest that any future criticism of a future poor performing economy will be invalid because of a failure to oppose the deal, when the only realistic alternative was far worse.
This is not 2017-19 when it was possible to at least make an argument that supporting the Govt was tantamount to abandoning their supporters who still held out hope of avoiding Brexit altogether. Harping back to Brexiteers “promises” that haven’t been realised cut no ice, when everyone knows they were phoney.
The treaty will pass as the government has a majority of 80. Opposition parties who can see what it is should vote against. It isn't deal or no deal. Its the deal or the deal - it will pass.
It's the trolley problem. The Lib Dems are choosing to stand aside while Labour are choosing to switch the points.
SR BA PPE (Open)
Nah, its going to pass anyway. No one will remember how anyone other than the Tories voted, so no point in a whip.
We need to win back a pile of Leave seats in 2024. It matters.
The key is not to lose Remain seats at the same time...
They've got nowhere else to go...
Haven't we heard that before?
That's why I chose those words. But in seriousness, while a few may vote for other parties of the centre left and left I don't see retention of the Guardianista vote to be too much of a problem. We are still led by a north London lawyer, after all. We need to be bigging up the northern and midland voices on the front bench, and saying the things that our lost voters are interested in.
Once we are in government the gender neutral bathrooms will take care of themselves. Until then, we should shut up about stuff that makes us look out of touch with the average person in the street. And I include Israel - Palestine on that list.
Yes, but why should centrist Remainers who voted Tory in 2019 in fear of Corbyn switch to Starmer? No reason at all.
I won't be voting Labour under Starmer. Mrs Foxy might. I am more inclined to vote Green again.
You've answered the question. If fear of Corbyn was the impediment that stopped them voting Lab then that is no longer the case and they can return to the fold. Unless they are fanatical rejoiners then Labour's vision of life outside EU should be more to their taste than the version Priti or The Truss will be serving up in 2024.
And you have just answered the question of why the appeal to former Labour Brexiteers will flop. You cannot out Brexit the Brexit party.
No, we move on from Brexit and appeal to those voters on bread and butter issues. Say things they want to listen to and agree with. Things that will make their lives better.
This doesn't mean trying to outflank others to their right. It means applying good old fashioned Labour values to address the challenges of society.
The devil is in the detail - it always is and 1,246 pages suggests a lot of detail.
Boris Johnson's predictably bouncy optimism sounds even more hollow than usual - I appreciate a Deal represents the avoidance of chaos but to dress it up as the greatest event since the last one is absurd.
What it has done is turn the page on a significant chapter in British history - I suspect our relationship with the EU will improve markedly now we are on the outside. The problem for us is and remains to be the failure of anyone in power to advance a coherent argument for the way forward for the United Kingdom.
For that reason, the Deal, for all its not doubt many limitations, will go ahead simply because there's no stomach to countenance the opposite whether that may be a descent into the chaos of WTO or a return for more negotiation. It's done - for better or worse, we have to move on and start having a proper national conversation about the way forward.
I am nearly certain, the UK will find life very uncomfortable outside the EU. The UK is too big to be told what to do and in any case the whole point of Brexit was to take control. On the other hand the EU is the only show in town in Europe. The UK can't just ignore the EU and only deal with Australia, although it will try to sometimes. It will at different times also try to co-opt the EU and to undermine it. It will probably fail at all three. Meanwhile the EU will either ignore the UK or lean heavily on the UK to agree to what it wants. It doesn't promise to be a particularly happy relationship.
The lead story in the Express gives a taste of what the discourse in the UK will be like: "EU braced for pandemonium as Dan Hannan warns THREE countries will follow UK out of bloc". The Brexiteer obsession with waiting for the collapse of the EU won't go away.
In fairness to Lord Hannan, his words are much more cautious than the headline implies. It's obviously just speculation.
IMHO it's time for people here to shut up about what EU member countries may or may not do in that regard. Speculation of that sort is too much like gossip spoken within the victim's hearing. Damaging and offensive.
There are a lot of people here who still want to be offensive to the EU and damage it. I don't think that's going to change.
I think some of these “Labour frontbenchers” need to get over themselves. Starmer is right that they can’t just continue with the policy of refusing to take a stand on major national issues of the day. And nobody is going to suggest that any future criticism of a future poor performing economy will be invalid because of a failure to oppose the deal, when the only realistic alternative was far worse.
This is not 2017-19 when it was possible to at least make an argument that supporting the Govt was tantamount to abandoning their supporters who still held out hope of avoiding Brexit altogether. Harping back to Brexiteers “promises” that haven’t been realised cut no ice, when everyone knows they were phoney.
The treaty will pass as the government has a majority of 80. Opposition parties who can see what it is should vote against. It isn't deal or no deal. Its the deal or the deal - it will pass.
It's the trolley problem. The Lib Dems are choosing to stand aside while Labour are choosing to switch the points.
SR BA PPE (Open)
Nah, its going to pass anyway. No one will remember how anyone other than the Tories voted, so no point in a whip.
We need to win back a pile of Leave seats in 2024. It matters.
The key is not to lose Remain seats at the same time...
They've got nowhere else to go...
Haven't we heard that before?
That's why I chose those words. But in seriousness, while a few may vote for other parties of the centre left and left I don't see retention of the Guardianista vote to be too much of a problem. We are still led by a north London lawyer, after all. We need to be bigging up the northern and midland voices on the front bench, and saying the things that our lost voters are interested in.
Once we are in government the gender neutral bathrooms will take care of themselves. Until then, we should shut up about stuff that makes us look out of touch with the average person in the street. And I include Israel - Palestine on that list.
Yes, but why should centrist Remainers who voted Tory in 2019 in fear of Corbyn switch to Starmer? No reason at all.
I won't be voting Labour under Starmer. Mrs Foxy might. I am more inclined to vote Green again.
You've answered the question. If fear of Corbyn was the impediment that stopped them voting Lab then that is no longer the case and they can return to the fold. Unless they are fanatical rejoiners then Labour's vision of life outside EU should be more to their taste than the version Priti or The Truss will be serving up in 2024.
And you have just answered the question of why the appeal to former Labour Brexiteers will flop. You cannot out Brexit the Brexit party.
No, we move on from Brexit and appeal to those voters on bread and butter issues. Say things they want to listen to and agree with. Things that will make their lives better.
This doesn't mean trying to outflank others to their right. It means applying good old fashioned Labour values to address the challenges of society.
Anyway, that's me done for the night.
Stay safe all.
Indeed.
What about, say, reversing the ongoing policy of decreasing the minimum sizes for rooms in properties? Why should the poor live in rabbit hutches?
The devil is in the detail - it always is and 1,246 pages suggests a lot of detail.
Boris Johnson's predictably bouncy optimism sounds even more hollow than usual - I appreciate a Deal represents the avoidance of chaos but to dress it up as the greatest event since the last one is absurd.
What it has done is turn the page on a significant chapter in British history - I suspect our relationship with the EU will improve markedly now we are on the outside. The problem for us is and remains to be the failure of anyone in power to advance a coherent argument for the way forward for the United Kingdom.
For that reason, the Deal, for all its not doubt many limitations, will go ahead simply because there's no stomach to countenance the opposite whether that may be a descent into the chaos of WTO or a return for more negotiation. It's done - for better or worse, we have to move on and start having a proper national conversation about the way forward.
I am nearly certain, the UK will find life very uncomfortable outside the EU. The UK is too big to be told what to do and in any case the whole point of Brexit was to take control. On the other hand the EU is the only show in town in Europe. The UK can't just ignore the EU and only deal with Australia, although it will try to sometimes. It will at different times also try to co-opt the EU and to undermine it. It will probably fail at all three. Meanwhile the EU will either ignore the UK or lean heavily on the UK to agree to what it wants. It doesn't promise to be a particularly happy relationship.
The lead story in the Express gives a taste of what the discourse in the UK will be like: "EU braced for pandemonium as Dan Hannan warns THREE countries will follow UK out of bloc". The Brexiteer obsession with waiting for the collapse of the EU won't go away.
Very odd of him to forecast the Dutch or the Danes are likely to be the next to vote out. According to Pew, Support for the EU has risen pretty consistently in the Netherlands over the last six or seven years and is now roughly 2:1 in favour. (The Danes have similar levels of support for the EU.)
Much more likely, I would have thought, to be Italy, or one of the Eastern European countries who clashes constantly with the Commission.
Well this was before the disaster that was the EU vaccine procurement strategy.
While we've undoubtedly done better than the EU to date, I would be cautious about rushing to count chickens. If for some reason AZN is not approved, and our Moderna doses don't arrive until late Spring, then we could rapidly go from hero to zero.
The devil is in the detail - it always is and 1,246 pages suggests a lot of detail.
Boris Johnson's predictably bouncy optimism sounds even more hollow than usual - I appreciate a Deal represents the avoidance of chaos but to dress it up as the greatest event since the last one is absurd.
What it has done is turn the page on a significant chapter in British history - I suspect our relationship with the EU will improve markedly now we are on the outside. The problem for us is and remains to be the failure of anyone in power to advance a coherent argument for the way forward for the United Kingdom.
For that reason, the Deal, for all its not doubt many limitations, will go ahead simply because there's no stomach to countenance the opposite whether that may be a descent into the chaos of WTO or a return for more negotiation. It's done - for better or worse, we have to move on and start having a proper national conversation about the way forward.
I am nearly certain, the UK will find life very uncomfortable outside the EU. The UK is too big to be told what to do and in any case the whole point of Brexit was to take control. On the other hand the EU is the only show in town in Europe. The UK can't just ignore the EU and only deal with Australia, although it will try to sometimes. It will at different times also try to co-opt the EU and to undermine it. It will probably fail at all three. Meanwhile the EU will either ignore the UK or lean heavily on the UK to agree to what it wants. It doesn't promise to be a particularly happy relationship.
The lead story in the Express gives a taste of what the discourse in the UK will be like: "EU braced for pandemonium as Dan Hannan warns THREE countries will follow UK out of bloc". The Brexiteer obsession with waiting for the collapse of the EU won't go away.
Very odd of him to forecast the Dutch or the Danes are likely to be the next to vote out. According to Pew, Support for the EU has risen pretty consistently in the Netherlands over the last six or seven years and is now roughly 2:1 in favour. (The Danes have similar levels of support for the EU.)
Much more likely, I would have thought, to be Italy, or one of the Eastern European countries who clashes constantly with the Commission.
Well this was before the disaster that was the EU vaccine procurement strategy.
While we've undoubtedly done better than the EU to date, I would be cautious about rushing to count chickens. If for some reason AZN is not approved, and our Moderna doses don't arrive until late Spring, then we could rapidly go from hero to zero.
Apparently, about 60% of those who received the vaccine when the number was 600K were over 80.
If that ratio holds, now we are up to 800K, that is 480K over 80s.
Which is 15% of the over 80s.
Getting even the first shot to all the over 80s will have a major, noticeable effect on hospitalisation and deaths.
Hi all, I just found a good link with all the *confirmed* vaccine order from the UK:
AstraZeneca / Oxford - 100m Novavax - 60m Sanofi / GSK - 60m Valneva - 60m (with an option for 130m more) Pfizer/BioNTech - 40m Johnson & Johnson - 30m Moderna - 7
Of these, AstraZeneca will hopefully be approved in the next few weeks. Novavax and J&J should get results in January (and if they're positive) could be approved by the end of the first quarter.
The Sanofi vaccine is being pushed back to (at earliest) the second half of 2021, so we shouldn't expect too much from that. Valneva is very early stage (it's in Phase 1 / 2 at the moment, but because it uses actual inactivated CV19 as its material, it has a high likelihood of success.)
If Novavax and J&J and AZN are all approved in Q1, then the pace of vaccinations should be pretty quick by the middle of next year.
Fingers crossed.
I think a key question is the pace of delivery. Last I heard both Pfizer and Astra were yielding more slowly than hoped. I know we aren't expecting any Moderna doses until "spring at the earliest". Do we know how quickly J&J would deliver?
I still foresee a very tricky period between vaccinating the over 70s, after which deaths should seriously drop, and vaccinating enough (over 50s or even down to 40s) so that hospitals can cope with demand if restrictions are mostly lifted. The best hope to make this situation work would be to be vaccinating at great speed, so that the intervening period isn't too long. Otherwise the pressure to release restrictions may be unbearable, even if hospitals then collapse and a lot of middle-aged people die.
--AS
Respiratory diseases dislike warm, dry weather. Fingers crossed we get a decent Spring, the wretched bug drops off from about April time, and that buys us enough time to get most of the population jabbed.
Together with the oldies and vulnerable being vaccinated and the number of others who will have had covid by then there should be a good deal of herd immunity by spring.
I think that's probably a bit hopeful, to be honest. Maybe 25% immune from having had it -- if it's much more than that, then Jan-Mar will have been truly dreadful -- and the oldies probably aren't responsible for much spread. Also if the new variant has higher R0 then the herd immunity threshold will be higher.
I hope warm weather might help, but it didn't seem to help much in the first wave. I think we're mainly relying on getting jabs into arms. And not at a million a week, more like half to one million per *day*. With a national effort I'm sure that's doable, but only if we have the doses.
RCS, J&J say they aim to make 1B doses in 2021. That doesn't seem to bode all that well for the UK getting a big chunk early in the year, unless for some reason we were near the front of the queue.
This is looking far ahead, though. First step is getting through the first months of the year, which are probably going to be awful in terms of hospital load and mortality, and getting the very vulnerable vaccinated to reduce deaths.
--AS
Edit: PS and happy Christmas to you all, though the sentiment seems out of place next to the topic at hand...
The devil is in the detail - it always is and 1,246 pages suggests a lot of detail.
Boris Johnson's predictably bouncy optimism sounds even more hollow than usual - I appreciate a Deal represents the avoidance of chaos but to dress it up as the greatest event since the last one is absurd.
What it has done is turn the page on a significant chapter in British history - I suspect our relationship with the EU will improve markedly now we are on the outside. The problem for us is and remains to be the failure of anyone in power to advance a coherent argument for the way forward for the United Kingdom.
For that reason, the Deal, for all its not doubt many limitations, will go ahead simply because there's no stomach to countenance the opposite whether that may be a descent into the chaos of WTO or a return for more negotiation. It's done - for better or worse, we have to move on and start having a proper national conversation about the way forward.
I am nearly certain, the UK will find life very uncomfortable outside the EU. The UK is too big to be told what to do and in any case the whole point of Brexit was to take control. On the other hand the EU is the only show in town in Europe. The UK can't just ignore the EU and only deal with Australia, although it will try to sometimes. It will at different times also try to co-opt the EU and to undermine it. It will probably fail at all three. Meanwhile the EU will either ignore the UK or lean heavily on the UK to agree to what it wants. It doesn't promise to be a particularly happy relationship.
The lead story in the Express gives a taste of what the discourse in the UK will be like: "EU braced for pandemonium as Dan Hannan warns THREE countries will follow UK out of bloc". The Brexiteer obsession with waiting for the collapse of the EU won't go away.
Breaking up the EU is a logical goal for Brexiteers . The EU is hardly going to treat the UK better as a non-member and so remains a problem as a powerful and coherent bloc. Thing is, Brexiteers are unlikely to succeed in destroying the EU and in the meantime they antagonise member states, making the whole situation more toxic.
Sorry but this is utter confected rubbish. I expect the EU, and every other power, to act in its own interests, not to 'treat the UK better'. It's their prerogative to do that, and ours to look after our own interests.
The devil is in the detail - it always is and 1,246 pages suggests a lot of detail.
Boris Johnson's predictably bouncy optimism sounds even more hollow than usual - I appreciate a Deal represents the avoidance of chaos but to dress it up as the greatest event since the last one is absurd.
What it has done is turn the page on a significant chapter in British history - I suspect our relationship with the EU will improve markedly now we are on the outside. The problem for us is and remains to be the failure of anyone in power to advance a coherent argument for the way forward for the United Kingdom.
For that reason, the Deal, for all its not doubt many limitations, will go ahead simply because there's no stomach to countenance the opposite whether that may be a descent into the chaos of WTO or a return for more negotiation. It's done - for better or worse, we have to move on and start having a proper national conversation about the way forward.
I am nearly certain, the UK will find life very uncomfortable outside the EU. The UK is too big to be told what to do and in any case the whole point of Brexit was to take control. On the other hand the EU is the only show in town in Europe. The UK can't just ignore the EU and only deal with Australia, although it will try to sometimes. It will at different times also try to co-opt the EU and to undermine it. It will probably fail at all three. Meanwhile the EU will either ignore the UK or lean heavily on the UK to agree to what it wants. It doesn't promise to be a particularly happy relationship.
The lead story in the Express gives a taste of what the discourse in the UK will be like: "EU braced for pandemonium as Dan Hannan warns THREE countries will follow UK out of bloc". The Brexiteer obsession with waiting for the collapse of the EU won't go away.
Very odd of him to forecast the Dutch or the Danes are likely to be the next to vote out. According to Pew, Support for the EU has risen pretty consistently in the Netherlands over the last six or seven years and is now roughly 2:1 in favour. (The Danes have similar levels of support for the EU.)
Much more likely, I would have thought, to be Italy, or one of the Eastern European countries who clashes constantly with the Commission.
Well this was before the disaster that was the EU vaccine procurement strategy.
While we've undoubtedly done better than the EU to date, I would be cautious about rushing to count chickens. If for some reason AZN is not approved, and our Moderna doses don't arrive until late Spring, then we could rapidly go from hero to zero.
It is already known to be safe. I am assuming the only reason its approval has not yet been announced is news management.
The devil is in the detail - it always is and 1,246 pages suggests a lot of detail.
Boris Johnson's predictably bouncy optimism sounds even more hollow than usual - I appreciate a Deal represents the avoidance of chaos but to dress it up as the greatest event since the last one is absurd.
What it has done is turn the page on a significant chapter in British history - I suspect our relationship with the EU will improve markedly now we are on the outside. The problem for us is and remains to be the failure of anyone in power to advance a coherent argument for the way forward for the United Kingdom.
For that reason, the Deal, for all its not doubt many limitations, will go ahead simply because there's no stomach to countenance the opposite whether that may be a descent into the chaos of WTO or a return for more negotiation. It's done - for better or worse, we have to move on and start having a proper national conversation about the way forward.
I am nearly certain, the UK will find life very uncomfortable outside the EU. The UK is too big to be told what to do and in any case the whole point of Brexit was to take control. On the other hand the EU is the only show in town in Europe. The UK can't just ignore the EU and only deal with Australia, although it will try to sometimes. It will at different times also try to co-opt the EU and to undermine it. It will probably fail at all three. Meanwhile the EU will either ignore the UK or lean heavily on the UK to agree to what it wants. It doesn't promise to be a particularly happy relationship.
The lead story in the Express gives a taste of what the discourse in the UK will be like: "EU braced for pandemonium as Dan Hannan warns THREE countries will follow UK out of bloc". The Brexiteer obsession with waiting for the collapse of the EU won't go away.
In fairness to Lord Hannan, his words are much more cautious than the headline implies. It's obviously just speculation.
IMHO it's time for people here to shut up about what EU member countries may or may not do in that regard. Speculation of that sort is too much like gossip spoken within the victim's hearing. Damaging and offensive.
There are a lot of people here who still want to be offensive to the EU and damage it. I don't think that's going to change.
Would you care to name any of these people? If there are 'a lot' it shouldn't be hard. I can't think of any.
The devil is in the detail - it always is and 1,246 pages suggests a lot of detail.
Boris Johnson's predictably bouncy optimism sounds even more hollow than usual - I appreciate a Deal represents the avoidance of chaos but to dress it up as the greatest event since the last one is absurd.
What it has done is turn the page on a significant chapter in British history - I suspect our relationship with the EU will improve markedly now we are on the outside. The problem for us is and remains to be the failure of anyone in power to advance a coherent argument for the way forward for the United Kingdom.
For that reason, the Deal, for all its not doubt many limitations, will go ahead simply because there's no stomach to countenance the opposite whether that may be a descent into the chaos of WTO or a return for more negotiation. It's done - for better or worse, we have to move on and start having a proper national conversation about the way forward.
I am nearly certain, the UK will find life very uncomfortable outside the EU. The UK is too big to be told what to do and in any case the whole point of Brexit was to take control. On the other hand the EU is the only show in town in Europe. The UK can't just ignore the EU and only deal with Australia, although it will try to sometimes. It will at different times also try to co-opt the EU and to undermine it. It will probably fail at all three. Meanwhile the EU will either ignore the UK or lean heavily on the UK to agree to what it wants. It doesn't promise to be a particularly happy relationship.
The lead story in the Express gives a taste of what the discourse in the UK will be like: "EU braced for pandemonium as Dan Hannan warns THREE countries will follow UK out of bloc". The Brexiteer obsession with waiting for the collapse of the EU won't go away.
Very odd of him to forecast the Dutch or the Danes are likely to be the next to vote out. According to Pew, Support for the EU has risen pretty consistently in the Netherlands over the last six or seven years and is now roughly 2:1 in favour. (The Danes have similar levels of support for the EU.)
Much more likely, I would have thought, to be Italy, or one of the Eastern European countries who clashes constantly with the Commission.
Well this was before the disaster that was the EU vaccine procurement strategy.
While we've undoubtedly done better than the EU to date, I would be cautious about rushing to count chickens. If for some reason AZN is not approved, and our Moderna doses don't arrive until late Spring, then we could rapidly go from hero to zero.
It is already known to be safe. I am assuming the only reason its approval has not yet been announced is news management.
Or that they haven't yet decided on the optimum/preferred dosing strategy. That needs to be sorted first, otherwise the questions will start about why the rollout is taking so long.
The devil is in the detail - it always is and 1,246 pages suggests a lot of detail.
Boris Johnson's predictably bouncy optimism sounds even more hollow than usual - I appreciate a Deal represents the avoidance of chaos but to dress it up as the greatest event since the last one is absurd.
What it has done is turn the page on a significant chapter in British history - I suspect our relationship with the EU will improve markedly now we are on the outside. The problem for us is and remains to be the failure of anyone in power to advance a coherent argument for the way forward for the United Kingdom.
For that reason, the Deal, for all its not doubt many limitations, will go ahead simply because there's no stomach to countenance the opposite whether that may be a descent into the chaos of WTO or a return for more negotiation. It's done - for better or worse, we have to move on and start having a proper national conversation about the way forward.
I am nearly certain, the UK will find life very uncomfortable outside the EU. The UK is too big to be told what to do and in any case the whole point of Brexit was to take control. On the other hand the EU is the only show in town in Europe. The UK can't just ignore the EU and only deal with Australia, although it will try to sometimes. It will at different times also try to co-opt the EU and to undermine it. It will probably fail at all three. Meanwhile the EU will either ignore the UK or lean heavily on the UK to agree to what it wants. It doesn't promise to be a particularly happy relationship.
The lead story in the Express gives a taste of what the discourse in the UK will be like: "EU braced for pandemonium as Dan Hannan warns THREE countries will follow UK out of bloc". The Brexiteer obsession with waiting for the collapse of the EU won't go away.
Very odd of him to forecast the Dutch or the Danes are likely to be the next to vote out. According to Pew, Support for the EU has risen pretty consistently in the Netherlands over the last six or seven years and is now roughly 2:1 in favour. (The Danes have similar levels of support for the EU.)
Much more likely, I would have thought, to be Italy, or one of the Eastern European countries who clashes constantly with the Commission.
Well this was before the disaster that was the EU vaccine procurement strategy.
While we've undoubtedly done better than the EU to date, I would be cautious about rushing to count chickens. If for some reason AZN is not approved, and our Moderna doses don't arrive until late Spring, then we could rapidly go from hero to zero.
It is already known to be safe. I am assuming the only reason its approval has not yet been announced is news management.
I don't think that's true: there have been reported issues with the AZN vaccine both in Brazil and in India. If there were no other working vaccines, then I think that would be handwaved away. But with Pfizer and Moderna being both more effective, and having fewer issues, then it's quite possible the government is going to be cautious. (Especially with J&J on the horizon.)
Hi all, I just found a good link with all the *confirmed* vaccine order from the UK:
AstraZeneca / Oxford - 100m Novavax - 60m Sanofi / GSK - 60m Valneva - 60m (with an option for 130m more) Pfizer/BioNTech - 40m Johnson & Johnson - 30m Moderna - 7
Of these, AstraZeneca will hopefully be approved in the next few weeks. Novavax and J&J should get results in January (and if they're positive) could be approved by the end of the first quarter.
The Sanofi vaccine is being pushed back to (at earliest) the second half of 2021, so we shouldn't expect too much from that. Valneva is very early stage (it's in Phase 1 / 2 at the moment, but because it uses actual inactivated CV19 as its material, it has a high likelihood of success.)
If Novavax and J&J and AZN are all approved in Q1, then the pace of vaccinations should be pretty quick by the middle of next year.
Fingers crossed.
I think a key question is the pace of delivery. Last I heard both Pfizer and Astra were yielding more slowly than hoped. I know we aren't expecting any Moderna doses until "spring at the earliest". Do we know how quickly J&J would deliver?
I still foresee a very tricky period between vaccinating the over 70s, after which deaths should seriously drop, and vaccinating enough (over 50s or even down to 40s) so that hospitals can cope with demand if restrictions are mostly lifted. The best hope to make this situation work would be to be vaccinating at great speed, so that the intervening period isn't too long. Otherwise the pressure to release restrictions may be unbearable, even if hospitals then collapse and a lot of middle-aged people die.
--AS
Respiratory diseases dislike warm, dry weather. Fingers crossed we get a decent Spring, the wretched bug drops off from about April time, and that buys us enough time to get most of the population jabbed.
Together with the oldies and vulnerable being vaccinated and the number of others who will have had covid by then there should be a good deal of herd immunity by spring.
I think that's probably a bit hopeful, to be honest. Maybe 25% immune from having had it -- if it's much more than that, then Jan-Mar will have been truly dreadful -- and the oldies probably aren't responsible for much spread. Also if the new variant has higher R0 then the herd immunity threshold will be higher.
I hope warm weather might help, but it didn't seem to help much in the first wave. I think we're mainly relying on getting jabs into arms. And not at a million a week, more like half to one million per *day*. With a national effort I'm sure that's doable, but only if we have the doses.
RCS, J&J say they aim to make 1B doses in 2021. That doesn't seem to bode all that well for the UK getting a big chunk early in the year, unless for some reason we were near the front of the queue.
This is looking far ahead, though. First step is getting through the first months of the year, which are probably going to be awful in terms of hospital load and mortality, and getting the very vulnerable vaccinated to reduce deaths.
--AS
Edit: PS and happy Christmas to you all, though the sentiment seems out of place next to the topic at hand...
We were the second announced purchaser for J&J, so I would guess we're near the front of the queue. (Although queues can be unilaterally changed by chequebook of course...)
Hi all, I just found a good link with all the *confirmed* vaccine order from the UK:
AstraZeneca / Oxford - 100m Novavax - 60m Sanofi / GSK - 60m Valneva - 60m (with an option for 130m more) Pfizer/BioNTech - 40m Johnson & Johnson - 30m Moderna - 7
Of these, AstraZeneca will hopefully be approved in the next few weeks. Novavax and J&J should get results in January (and if they're positive) could be approved by the end of the first quarter.
The Sanofi vaccine is being pushed back to (at earliest) the second half of 2021, so we shouldn't expect too much from that. Valneva is very early stage (it's in Phase 1 / 2 at the moment, but because it uses actual inactivated CV19 as its material, it has a high likelihood of success.)
If Novavax and J&J and AZN are all approved in Q1, then the pace of vaccinations should be pretty quick by the middle of next year.
Fingers crossed.
I think a key question is the pace of delivery. Last I heard both Pfizer and Astra were yielding more slowly than hoped. I know we aren't expecting any Moderna doses until "spring at the earliest". Do we know how quickly J&J would deliver?
I still foresee a very tricky period between vaccinating the over 70s, after which deaths should seriously drop, and vaccinating enough (over 50s or even down to 40s) so that hospitals can cope with demand if restrictions are mostly lifted. The best hope to make this situation work would be to be vaccinating at great speed, so that the intervening period isn't too long. Otherwise the pressure to release restrictions may be unbearable, even if hospitals then collapse and a lot of middle-aged people die.
--AS
Respiratory diseases dislike warm, dry weather. Fingers crossed we get a decent Spring, the wretched bug drops off from about April time, and that buys us enough time to get most of the population jabbed.
Together with the oldies and vulnerable being vaccinated and the number of others who will have had covid by then there should be a good deal of herd immunity by spring.
I think that's probably a bit hopeful, to be honest. Maybe 25% immune from having had it -- if it's much more than that, then Jan-Mar will have been truly dreadful -- and the oldies probably aren't responsible for much spread. Also if the new variant has higher R0 then the herd immunity threshold will be higher.
I hope warm weather might help, but it didn't seem to help much in the first wave. I think we're mainly relying on getting jabs into arms. And not at a million a week, more like half to one million per *day*. With a national effort I'm sure that's doable, but only if we have the doses.
RCS, J&J say they aim to make 1B doses in 2021. That doesn't seem to bode all that well for the UK getting a big chunk early in the year, unless for some reason we were near the front of the queue.
This is looking far ahead, though. First step is getting through the first months of the year, which are probably going to be awful in terms of hospital load and mortality, and getting the very vulnerable vaccinated to reduce deaths.
--AS
Edit: PS and happy Christmas to you all, though the sentiment seems out of place next to the topic at hand...
We were the second announced purchaser for J&J, so I would guess we're near the front of the queue. (Although queues can be unilaterally changed by chequebook of course...)
Ah, that's good, I hadn't realized we were early on that. Presumably the contract is structured such that we get x doses in total, including y% of the batch produced by date z, and so on. That's what seemed to happen with Pfizer when they produced fewer than expected: we got our proportion of the first batch, with the rest being made up later (not sure how much later).
WCBS local* NYC news at 6pm said that “human remains” had been found at the Nashville bomb site, but CBS World News at 6.30pm had not mentioned it, so I guess it’s not been confirmed. Apparently the RV containing the bomb had a loudspeaker that started warning there was a bomb about fifteen minutes before it detonated.
*There’s not such a rigid divide between local and national TV news in the US: the “local” news will cover major national and international stories too.
Would you care to name any of these people? If there are 'a lot' it shouldn't be hard. I can't think of any.
The person who wrote that Express headline further up this thread, the people wanking over the prospect of the EU vaccine programme being a disaster, the people wanking over the prospect of Ireland being punished by a no deal brexit, the people applauding the micro dick British gunboats headlines, the people who are desperate for the EU to fail at everything. One of your 'top' Unionist tweeters, Effie Deans, and her creepy fanbois epitomise them.
The devil is in the detail - it always is and 1,246 pages suggests a lot of detail.
Boris Johnson's predictably bouncy optimism sounds even more hollow than usual - I appreciate a Deal represents the avoidance of chaos but to dress it up as the greatest event since the last one is absurd.
What it has done is turn the page on a significant chapter in British history - I suspect our relationship with the EU will improve markedly now we are on the outside. The problem for us is and remains to be the failure of anyone in power to advance a coherent argument for the way forward for the United Kingdom.
For that reason, the Deal, for all its not doubt many limitations, will go ahead simply because there's no stomach to countenance the opposite whether that may be a descent into the chaos of WTO or a return for more negotiation. It's done - for better or worse, we have to move on and start having a proper national conversation about the way forward.
I am nearly certain, the UK will find life very uncomfortable outside the EU. The UK is too big to be told what to do and in any case the whole point of Brexit was to take control. On the other hand the EU is the only show in town in Europe. The UK can't just ignore the EU and only deal with Australia, although it will try to sometimes. It will at different times also try to co-opt the EU and to undermine it. It will probably fail at all three. Meanwhile the EU will either ignore the UK or lean heavily on the UK to agree to what it wants. It doesn't promise to be a particularly happy relationship.
The lead story in the Express gives a taste of what the discourse in the UK will be like: "EU braced for pandemonium as Dan Hannan warns THREE countries will follow UK out of bloc". The Brexiteer obsession with waiting for the collapse of the EU won't go away.
Breaking up the EU is a logical goal for Brexiteers . The EU is hardly going to treat the UK better as a non-member and so remains a problem as a powerful and coherent bloc. Thing is, Brexiteers are unlikely to succeed in destroying the EU and in the meantime they antagonise member states, making the whole situation more toxic.
Sorry but this is utter confected rubbish. I expect the EU, and every other power, to act in its own interests, not to 'treat the UK better'. It's their prerogative to do that, and ours to look after our own interests.
It does matter because the EU will effectively be making decisions for Europe, including the UK, in a whole raft of areas. To take a couple of examples in the current deal, batteries for electric vehicles and energy markets. These are where the UK sees a need to be integrated with Europe or it isn't viable to go alone. The EU will take those decisions, as you say in its own interest and without reference to the UK, which unlike eg Malta no longer has a vote. This means the EU will make decisions that the UK doesn't like, more often than it did before. (Quite a lot more than before, actually).
Would you care to name any of these people? If there are 'a lot' it shouldn't be hard. I can't think of any.
The person who wrote that Express headline further up this thread, the people wanking over the prospect of the EU vaccine programme being a disaster, the people wanking over the prospect of Ireland being punished by a no deal brexit, the people applauding the micro dick British gunboats headlines, the people who are desperate for the EU to fail at everything. One of your 'top' Unionist tweeters, Effie Deans, and her creepy fanbois epitomise them.
If the whole EU edifice comes crashing down, it proves that Johnson and his chums were even more awesome than the fanbois have been telling us for all these years.
I think some of these “Labour frontbenchers” need to get over themselves. Starmer is right that they can’t just continue with the policy of refusing to take a stand on major national issues of the day. And nobody is going to suggest that any future criticism of a future poor performing economy will be invalid because of a failure to oppose the deal, when the only realistic alternative was far worse.
This is not 2017-19 when it was possible to at least make an argument that supporting the Govt was tantamount to abandoning their supporters who still held out hope of avoiding Brexit altogether. Harping back to Brexiteers “promises” that haven’t been realised cut no ice, when everyone knows they were phoney.
The treaty will pass as the government has a majority of 80. Opposition parties who can see what it is should vote against. It isn't deal or no deal. Its the deal or the deal - it will pass.
It's the trolley problem. The Lib Dems are choosing to stand aside while Labour are choosing to switch the points.
SR BA PPE (Open)
Nah, its going to pass anyway. No one will remember how anyone other than the Tories voted, so no point in a whip.
We need to win back a pile of Leave seats in 2024. It matters.
The key is not to lose Remain seats at the same time...
They've got nowhere else to go...
Haven't we heard that before?
That's why I chose those words. But in seriousness, while a few may vote for other parties of the centre left and left I don't see retention of the Guardianista vote to be too much of a problem. We are still led by a north London lawyer, after all. We need to be bigging up the northern and midland voices on the front bench, and saying the things that our lost voters are interested in.
Once we are in government the gender neutral bathrooms will take care of themselves. Until then, we should shut up about stuff that makes us look out of touch with the average person in the street. And I include Israel - Palestine on that list.
Yes, but why should centrist Remainers who voted Tory in 2019 in fear of Corbyn switch to Starmer? No reason at all.
I won't be voting Labour under Starmer. Mrs Foxy might. I am more inclined to vote Green again.
You've answered the question. If fear of Corbyn was the impediment that stopped them voting Lab then that is no longer the case and they can return to the fold. Unless they are fanatical rejoiners then Labour's vision of life outside EU should be more to their taste than the version Priti or The Truss will be serving up in 2024.
And you have just answered the question of why the appeal to former Labour Brexiteers will flop. You cannot out Brexit the Brexit party.
No, we move on from Brexit and appeal to those voters on bread and butter issues. Say things they want to listen to and agree with. Things that will make their lives better.
This doesn't mean trying to outflank others to their right. It means applying good old fashioned Labour values to address the challenges of society.
Anyway, that's me done for the night.
Stay safe all.
100%. Most of us former Labour voters don't expect Labour to become Faragists. We just want them to take our views seriously, something neither the socialist left or the Remainer middle have done to date.
Personally, I think Labour should allow a free vote on it. The less-ERG-like Labour Brexiteers and assorted pragmatists can vote for the deal, thus nullifying any faint concern that the ERG can cause a bit more market-manipulating (perish the thought) chaos, while removing Boris's ability to say "well you voted for it" when problems arise later, if the shad cab abstain.
Labour have stood on the sidelines for 4 years swinging this way and that effectively letting different MPs play to different constituencies. Starmer correctly recognises that if the electorate are to take them seriously again people need to know what they stand for. Which means the leadership staking out clear positions, and the party following. Not forever having a conversation with itself or even worse trying to take 3 different positions on everything. Agree the deal doesn't meet the promises and expectations and the time of the referendum. Accept the logic nevertheless that the deal is better than no deal. And start to move forward setting out a united vision and direction for the future. It's time to move on.
Yes, I agree. Starmer has to become the Attlee to Johnson's Churchill. Instead of harking back to the past, he has define a positive vision of how to move the country forward that has more appeal than what Johnson is offering. Former Labour voters, who deserted the party over the last decade due to Brexit, can thank Johnson for winning the war, but stll decide that Starmer is better placed to win the peace.
Except Starmer is a policy vacuum, vision free. All we know is that despite being a strong Remainer, he backs Brexit out of political expediency. I don't think voters in the Purple Wall are stupid enough to fall for that. He either needs to enthuse them for Labour on some other issue, or find other seats that he can appeal to.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
Did he? Wasn't the story of 2017 in many Northern seats one of Tory over-reach? Making significant gains, but not enough to breach the dam.
Labor gained 36 seats in 2017, 28 of them from the Tories, and most of them old coalfield seats.
For all his faults, and there are plenty of those, Corbyn got the juices flowing in a way that Starmer has not.
Conservative to Labour (28) Battersea Bedford Brighton Kemptown Bristol North West Bury North Canterbury Cardiff North Colne Valley Crewe and Nantwich Croydon Central Derby North Enfield Southgate Gower High Peak Ipswich Keighley Kensington Lincoln Peterborough Plymouth Sutton and Devonport Portsmouth South Reading East Stockton South Stroud Vale of Clwyd Warrington South Warwick and Leamington Weaver Vale
I think only Gower could be described as a 'coalfield' seat.
Altogether half of Labour's gains were in southern England.
These are the 6 Lab to Tory gains in 2017: Two are mining to my knowledge - Mansfield and Derbyshre North-East. Middlesbrough S & Cleveand E and Stoke on Trent S are post-industrial. Not sure about Copeland (Cumbria) and Walsall.
Copeland[n 13] Derbyshire North East Mansfield Middlesbrough South and Cleveland East Stoke-on-Trent South Walsall North
An Air Canada Boeing Co 737-8 Max en route between Arizona and Montreal with three crew members onboard suffered an engine issue that forced the crew to divert the aircraft to Tucson, Arizona, the airline says.
Shortly after the take-off, the pilots received an “engine indication” and “decided to shut down one engine”, an Air Canada spokesman said on Friday.
“The aircraft then diverted to Tucson, where it landed normally and remains.”
It's fascinating how quickly this thread turned from Cuomo's attack on Trump's vicious criminality to preoccupation with the arcane complexities of the UK-EU deal
How short-sighted. On November 3, Trump was an unpleasant candidate with a real chance of winning the election: today he's a deranged criminal spending his last three weeks in the White House destroying the future of everyone who's ever supported him.
Including Farage.
In two months' time, with Farage as universally derided here as his buddy, and after 8 weeks of Brexit chaos, the Red Wall will be leading the demand to get back into the Single Market by Easter.
Comments
I won't be voting Labour under Starmer. Mrs Foxy might. I am more inclined to vote Green again.
https://twitter.com/PranMan/status/1342550183578624003
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1376692/eu-news-brexit-deal-boris-johnson-deal-trade-talks-italexit-netherlands-daniel-hannan-spt
🤔
Brexit and brexiteers don’t understand sovereignty nor democracy, and this needs to be put right.
If this country is going to take back control from the globalisation, deindustrialisation and stagnation it’s been suffering from for decades, it needs to wake up from its Brexit pipe dreams and protect its financial interests better than this arrangement.
For all his manifest flaws, Corbyn managed to win over the Northern seats against the trend of the last decades, in 2017 if not 2019.
Basically, if so, the regional Walloon parliament can't stop it.
* as ever, it is never "Singapore on Trent or Tyne..."
This government isn't at all consistent however. It wants to join CPTPP, which is essentially set up in the interests of producer countries, in particular Australia and Canada, and which would enable a flood of cheap imports that would undermine British farmers. I suspect CPTPP may not happen when it comes to it. It will upset too many vested interests for what is fundamentally an ideological project.
BBC News - Election 2017: Which seats changed hands?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40190856
For all his faults, and there are plenty of those, Corbyn got the juices flowing in a way that Starmer has not.
Let us look at the ONS COVID survey
https://www.ons.gov.uk/visualisations/dvc1120/region/datadownload.xlsx
Which shows infection rates of 0.57-2.54% - London seems to be the highest.
24 out of 10,000 is 0.24%.
The key here, is that this is a whole population sample, not just testing those with a cough or friends of someone with a cough.
So the truck drivers seem to have *half* the COVID rate of the lowest area in England.
As you say - a journalists type who is unable to understand that different numbers mean different things.
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/denig#26638cd2
I still foresee a very tricky period between vaccinating the over 70s, after which deaths should seriously drop, and vaccinating enough (over 50s or even down to 40s) so that hospitals can cope with demand if restrictions are mostly lifted. The best hope to make this situation work would be to be vaccinating at great speed, so that the intervening period isn't too long. Otherwise the pressure to release restrictions may be unbearable, even if hospitals then collapse and a lot of middle-aged people die.
--AS
Yes I think there is some wheat. It'll be my little experiment.
He got the juices flowing but mainly to ensure he did not become PM!
Nonetheless, it is not just Labour voters wondering what he actually believes, and his choice of nonentities for the front bench does not inspire confidence. Better than Johnson, but that is a pretty low bar. He needs to give people that vision thing.
Much more likely, I would have thought, to be Italy, or one of the Eastern European countries who clashes constantly with the Commission.
By 2019 many of the former had gone LD and many of the latter in the Redwall had gone Tory.
In 2017 he was also up against May, a relatively dull administrative leader, by 2019 he was up against Boris, the most charismatic Tory leader since Thatcher
Labour needs 10% to get a majority but about 5% would probably enable it to form a government with the SNP and LDs providing confidence and supply
Battersea
Bedford
Brighton Kemptown
Bristol North West
Bury North
Canterbury
Cardiff North
Colne Valley
Crewe and Nantwich
Croydon Central
Derby North
Enfield Southgate
Gower
High Peak
Ipswich
Keighley
Kensington
Lincoln
Peterborough
Plymouth Sutton and Devonport
Portsmouth South
Reading East
Stockton South
Stroud
Vale of Clwyd
Warrington South
Warwick and Leamington
Weaver Vale
I think only Gower could be described as a 'coalfield' seat.
Altogether half of Labour's gains were in southern England.
If they get positive results (ideally up there with Pfizer and Moderna), then we stand a good chance of getting our pace of vaccinations into the million plus per week.
What Starmer does regarding student debt will be interesting.
This doesn't mean trying to outflank others to their right. It means applying good old fashioned Labour values to address the challenges of society.
Anyway, that's me done for the night.
Stay safe all.
What about, say, reversing the ongoing policy of decreasing the minimum sizes for rooms in properties? Why should the poor live in rabbit hutches?
If that ratio holds, now we are up to 800K, that is 480K over 80s.
Which is 15% of the over 80s.
Getting even the first shot to all the over 80s will have a major, noticeable effect on hospitalisation and deaths.
I hope warm weather might help, but it didn't seem to help much in the first wave. I think we're mainly relying on getting jabs into arms. And not at a million a week, more like half to one million per *day*. With a national effort I'm sure that's doable, but only if we have the doses.
RCS, J&J say they aim to make 1B doses in 2021. That doesn't seem to bode all that well for the UK getting a big chunk early in the year, unless for some reason we were near the front of the queue.
This is looking far ahead, though. First step is getting through the first months of the year, which are probably going to be awful in terms of hospital load and mortality, and getting the very vulnerable vaccinated to reduce deaths.
--AS
Edit: PS and happy Christmas to you all, though the sentiment seems out of place next to the topic at hand...
--AS
*There’s not such a rigid divide between local and national TV news in the US: the “local” news will cover major national and international stories too.
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden_/status/1342386548109692929
What's the UK going to do about it?
You could see why Dazza didn't want to sully this top notch grub though.
https://twitter.com/daliagebrial/status/1342553977423097858?s=20
And it’s a Retriever: brings back those laws we try to throw away.
These are the 6 Lab to Tory gains in 2017: Two are mining to my knowledge - Mansfield and Derbyshre North-East. Middlesbrough S & Cleveand E and Stoke on Trent S are post-industrial. Not sure about Copeland (Cumbria) and Walsall.
Copeland[n 13]
Derbyshire North East
Mansfield
Middlesbrough South and Cleveland East
Stoke-on-Trent South
Walsall North
Shortly after the take-off, the pilots received an “engine indication” and “decided to shut down one engine”, an Air Canada spokesman said on Friday.
“The aircraft then diverted to Tucson, where it landed normally and remains.”
How short-sighted. On November 3, Trump was an unpleasant candidate with a real chance of winning the election: today he's a deranged criminal spending his last three weeks in the White House destroying the future of everyone who's ever supported him.
Including Farage.
In two months' time, with Farage as universally derided here as his buddy, and after 8 weeks of Brexit chaos, the Red Wall will be leading the demand to get back into the Single Market by Easter.