The schools policy is untenable, this Government is dangerously incompetent
In fairness Horse, it’s not the government only, it is the civil servants at the DfE, who have been demonstrating dangerous incompetence with unbearable smugness since 1944.
As you can see from my summaries, there are very big gaps in the data.
Tomorrow will be Murder Tuesday with a vengeance.
Wednesdays figures will be the bad ones, I think.
Waverley (ex-Tier 2, changing to 4 on Boxing Day) has cases up 135% (274->471) on last week. People from the surrounding Tier 4 areas flooded in for Christmas shopping and eating out. It's a good example of why Tier designation should not be in small geographical areas but at the least by region.
Sadly the Tier 4 folk were too stupid/selfish/ignorant to follow the rules.
Same thing happening up here with people heading from West Yorkshire to North Yorkshire to go on the lash.
I made a similar point at the end of that thread - you see that difference not just in the UK but across Europe. The same was true about Switzerland too, along with the UK one of the only nations not to have been occupied by a foreign power since the start of the 20th century.
Yet you have Sweden which is part of the EU but not the Eurozone and Ireland which is both part of the EU and part of the EuroZone.
Ireland is why I chose a starting date of the start of the twentieth century and not since WWII. Being occupied is most certainly a part of Irish folk history.
Sweden is a more Eurosceptic semi divorced outside like the UK was pre Brexit, as you said outside of the Eurozone.
Didn't Sweden rule Norway in the early years of the 20th C?
Norway was also occupied by the Nazis. It is one of the exceptions - history of occupation but not integrating.
And a right mess we made of trying to help them fight the Nazis off.
The Norwegian campaign was certainly a right mess, but actually we had planned to occupy Norway, just that Germany got there first. We were expecting to be welcomed, though I am not sure that was realistic.
On the previous thread you said to conquer England you should have the first name Julius or William.
Leaving aside Sweyn Forkbeard, have you forgotten that Julius Caesar actually failed in both his attempted invasions of Britannia? So actually the first name you need is Flavius, not Julius.
Edit - that’ll teach me to post without checking. I thought Vespasian was in command of the force, but at that time he was only Legatus of II Augusta and Aulus Plautius was the overall commander.
So Aulus experts got it wrong...
Surely Tiberius? T. Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus was the one i/c and turned up for the big defeat and victory parade with elephants (not Elefants) in Camulodunum. and the one who got hailed as Imperator.
The latest polling has Warnock winning but Perdue holding on which would mean the Democrats pick up one of the Georgia Senate seats but the GOP hold the other.
That would make Biden the first incoming President not to see his party have control of both chambers of Congress since Bush Snr in 1989.
The GOP would have a 1 seat Senate majority with Mitt Romney having the casting vote (Romney being the only GOP Senator who voted to impeach Trump), effectively making Romney the most powerful figure in US politics from January after Biden himself https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1343424698311438337?s=20
On the previous thread you said to conquer England you should have the first name Julius or William.
Leaving aside Sweyn Forkbeard, have you forgotten that Julius Caesar actually failed in both his attempted invasions of Britannia? So actually the first name you need is Flavius, not Julius.
Edit - that’ll teach me to post without checking. I thought Vespasian was in command of the force, but at that time he was only Legatus of II Augusta and Aulus Plautius was the overall commander.
So Aulus experts got it wrong...
Surely Tiberius? T. Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus was the one i/c and turned up for the big defeat and victory parade with elephants (not Elefants) in Camulodunum. and the one who got hailed as Imperator.
He was the Emperor. But he was only there for 16 days and took part in no fighting, although mysteriously he took the title ‘Britannicus’ to note he was the conqueror of Britannia.
Post-Brexit, India and UK may finalise trade agreements in areas like pharmaceuticals, fintech, chemicals, defence manufacturing, petroleum and food products by 2021, as the two countries are keen on early harvest deals while continuing negotiations for a comprehensive free trade agreement (FTA), two officials said.
“The two sides are working on the finer details pertaining to about five-six sectors as some announcements are expected during UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s India visit in January 2021,” one of the officials said.
I haven't been able to find out how much it cost us to participate in Erasmus+, but our £100m for Turing doesn't seem too far out of line with the €118m funding that we got from Erasmus in 2015. I'd imagine it cost us somewhat more as we did tend to be a net contributor in EU schemes.
The latest Erasmus stats I saw showed about 16,000 UK students going to the EU and 35,000 EU students coming to the UK. Erasmus accounted for about half of UK overseas student placements.
I thought we had a load of whingers complaining earlier that Turing couldn't work because Erasmus numbers are reciprocal?
It was curious to see the explosion of outrage over the UK no longer participating in the Erasmus scheme. We were told it broadened young people’s horizons by sending British undergraduates to study at a European university. We were told our young people are being deprived of this opportunity. But having spent my pre-politics career working with young people, Erasmus and deprivation are not things I’ve ever associated with one another.
The outrage is largely coming from a collection of the firmly middle class and affluent anti-Brexit folk – TV broadcasters and QCs among them. They had been on Erasmus themselves and expected it to be a rite of passage for their children and their children’s children, not least for the advantage it will likely give them in the labour market. But I worked with thousands of young people for nearly two decades before I became an MP and almost none of them had taken part in Erasmus. It wasn’t that they did not study languages or go to good universities – many did. Rather, it was that the young people we worked with were from low-income families.
So this particular reduction of elitism in the education system is not the Politics of Envy, then, and is to be welcomed.
Unlike other (and rather more significant) reductions of elitism in the education system such as - plucking one from a hat - reducing the ability of the affluent to purchase educational privilege for their offspring via private schools.
On the previous thread you said to conquer England you should have the first name Julius or William.
Leaving aside Sweyn Forkbeard, have you forgotten that Julius Caesar actually failed in both his attempted invasions of Britannia? So actually the first name you need is Flavius, not Julius.
Edit - that’ll teach me to post without checking. I thought Vespasian was in command of the force, but at that time he was only Legatus of II Augusta and Aulus Plautius was the overall commander.
So Aulus experts got it wrong...
Surely Tiberius? T. Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus was the one i/c and turned up for the big defeat and victory parade with elephants (not Elefants) in Camulodunum. and the one who got hailed as Imperator.
He was the Emperor. But he was only there for 16 days and took part in no fighting, although mysteriously he took the title ‘Britannicus’ to note he was the conqueror of Britannia.
Well, there you are - he's the one who gets the credit. Bloody senior managers.
On the previous thread you said to conquer England you should have the first name Julius or William.
Leaving aside Sweyn Forkbeard, have you forgotten that Julius Caesar actually failed in both his attempted invasions of Britannia? So actually the first name you need is Flavius, not Julius.
Edit - that’ll teach me to post without checking. I thought Vespasian was in command of the force, but at that time he was only Legatus of II Augusta and Aulus Plautius was the overall commander.
So Aulus experts got it wrong...
Surely Tiberius? T. Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus was the one i/c and turned up for the big defeat and victory parade with elephants (not Elefants) in Camulodunum. and the one who got hailed as Imperator.
He was the Emperor. But he was only there for 16 days and took part in no fighting, although mysteriously he took the title ‘Britannicus’ to note he was the conqueror of Britannia.
The best conquerors are those who get others to do the conquering for them.
Lets hope they don't work out that to save the 2% of their seed potatoes that go to the EU by rejoining they'll sacrifice the 48% that goes to England & Wales....
No. It was in answer to TSE's question "Did I imagine it or did a Trump supporter advocate boycotting the Georgia runoffs because the Dominion machines would then give the GOP candidates a negative total which would allow SCOTUS to award the 2020 election to Trump?" Someone answered before me. The answer was - No you didn't imagine it.
I'm skiied out for now. I've enjoyed today. I can give it. And I can take it. I'm never ever been personally rude to anyone on here. And generally people aren't rude back - which is great. A bit of rough and tumble. And you learn things too.
The schools policy is untenable, this Government is dangerously incompetent
Hmmmmm.. and you think Labour would do any better? They are all as bad as each other. In fact the criticism is probably more incompetent that the actualite!
TLDR: It’s a major achievement to agree a deal, but it is very thin for services and indeed less accommodating than recent EU deals with Japan, Aus/NZ, and others.
The schools policy is untenable, this Government is dangerously incompetent
In fairness Horse, it’s not the government only, it is the civil servants at the DfE, who have been demonstrating dangerous incompetence with unbearable smugness since 1944.
I haven't been able to find out how much it cost us to participate in Erasmus+, but our £100m for Turing doesn't seem too far out of line with the €118m funding that we got from Erasmus in 2015. I'd imagine it cost us somewhat more as we did tend to be a net contributor in EU schemes.
The latest Erasmus stats I saw showed about 16,000 UK students going to the EU and 35,000 EU students coming to the UK. Erasmus accounted for about half of UK overseas student placements.
I thought we had a load of whingers complaining earlier that Turing couldn't work because Erasmus numbers are reciprocal?
It was curious to see the explosion of outrage over the UK no longer participating in the Erasmus scheme. We were told it broadened young people’s horizons by sending British undergraduates to study at a European university. We were told our young people are being deprived of this opportunity. But having spent my pre-politics career working with young people, Erasmus and deprivation are not things I’ve ever associated with one another.
The outrage is largely coming from a collection of the firmly middle class and affluent anti-Brexit folk – TV broadcasters and QCs among them. They had been on Erasmus themselves and expected it to be a rite of passage for their children and their children’s children, not least for the advantage it will likely give them in the labour market. But I worked with thousands of young people for nearly two decades before I became an MP and almost none of them had taken part in Erasmus. It wasn’t that they did not study languages or go to good universities – many did. Rather, it was that the young people we worked with were from low-income families.
The Spectator is wrong. The Erasmus kerfuffle is not about rich Remainers getting shot of the kids for an extended gap year, it is more mundane. It is because someone found and tweeted a clip of Boris saying he'd protect and preserve it.
The latest polling has Warnock winning but Perdue holding on which would mean the Democrats pick up one of the Georgia Senate seats but the GOP hold the other.
That would make Biden the first incoming President not to see his party have control of both chambers of Congress since Bush Snr in 1989.
The GOP would have a 1 seat Senate majority with Mitt Romney having the casting vote (Romney being the only GOP Senator who voted to impeach Trump), effectively making Romney the most powerful figure in US politics from January after Biden himself https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1343424698311438337?s=20
What do they do if one of the senators dies? Just hold a byelection or something more sinister?
On the previous thread you said to conquer England you should have the first name Julius or William.
Leaving aside Sweyn Forkbeard, have you forgotten that Julius Caesar actually failed in both his attempted invasions of Britannia? So actually the first name you need is Flavius, not Julius.
Edit - that’ll teach me to post without checking. I thought Vespasian was in command of the force, but at that time he was only Legatus of II Augusta and Aulus Plautius was the overall commander.
So Aulus experts got it wrong...
Surely Tiberius? T. Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus was the one i/c and turned up for the big defeat and victory parade with elephants (not Elefants) in Camulodunum. and the one who got hailed as Imperator.
Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus was Claudius, not Tiberius.
No. It was in answer to TSE's question "Did I imagine it or did a Trump supporter advocate boycotting the Georgia runoffs because the Dominion machines would then give the GOP candidates a negative total which would allow SCOTUS to award the 2020 election to Trump?" Someone answered before me. The answer was - No you didn't imagine it.
I'm skiied out for now. I've enjoyed today. I can give it. And I can take it. I'm never ever been personally rude to anyone on here. And generally people aren't rude back - which is great. A bit of rough and tumble. And you learn things too.
No, can't be too thin skinned on here. Or you can, rather, but if so you'll probably suffer a loss of equilibrium and be constantly snorting and reaching for the toffees.
The latest polling has Warnock winning but Perdue holding on which would mean the Democrats pick up one of the Georgia Senate seats but the GOP hold the other.
That would make Biden the first incoming President not to see his party have control of both chambers of Congress since Bush Snr in 1989.
The GOP would have a 1 seat Senate majority with Mitt Romney having the casting vote (Romney being the only GOP Senator who voted to impeach Trump), effectively making Romney the most powerful figure in US politics from January after Biden himself https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1343424698311438337?s=20
What do they do if one of the senators dies? Just hold a byelection or something more sinister?
The Governor appoints, ratified by the state legislatures, then a Special election.
I made a similar point at the end of that thread - you see that difference not just in the UK but across Europe. The same was true about Switzerland too, along with the UK one of the only nations not to have been occupied by a foreign power since the start of the 20th century.
Yet you have Sweden which is part of the EU but not the Eurozone and Ireland which is both part of the EU and part of the EuroZone.
Ireland is why I chose a starting date of the start of the twentieth century and not since WWII. Being occupied is most certainly a part of Irish folk history.
Sweden is a more Eurosceptic semi divorced outside like the UK was pre Brexit, as you said outside of the Eurozone.
Didn't Sweden rule Norway in the early years of the 20th C?
Norway was also occupied by the Nazis. It is one of the exceptions - history of occupation but not integrating.
And a right mess we made of trying to help them fight the Nazis off.
The Norwegian campaign was certainly a right mess, but actually we had planned to occupy Norway, just that Germany got there first. We were expecting to be welcomed, though I am not sure that was realistic.
On the previous thread you said to conquer England you should have the first name Julius or William.
Leaving aside Sweyn Forkbeard, have you forgotten that Julius Caesar actually failed in both his attempted invasions of Britannia? So actually the first name you need is Flavius, not Julius.
Edit - that’ll teach me to post without checking. I thought Vespasian was in command of the force, but at that time he was only Legatus of II Augusta and Aulus Plautius was the overall commander.
So Aulus experts got it wrong...
Surely Tiberius? T. Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus was the one i/c and turned up for the big defeat and victory parade with elephants (not Elefants) in Camulodunum. and the one who got hailed as Imperator.
He was the Emperor. But he was only there for 16 days and took part in no fighting, although mysteriously he took the title ‘Britannicus’ to note he was the conqueror of Britannia.
The best conquerors are those who get others to do the conquering for them.
DUP walking through the lobbies with SNP, strangely fitting
The DUP, the SNP and the LDs all forming an anti Deal trio while the Tories and Labour go arm in arm through the lobbies to pass the Deal.
What a combination
Presume PC and Green will also vote against. Presume Alliance also. And Jeremy Corbyn. SDLP?
Apparently there are also 5 independents, I have no idea who they are.
So the Independents are (along with presumed inclination): Jeremy Corbyn - Against Jonathan Edwards - Against Margaret Ferrier - Against Claudia Webbe - Against Julian Lewis - ?
As you can see from my summaries, there are very big gaps in the data.
Tomorrow will be Murder Tuesday with a vengeance.
Wednesdays figures will be the bad ones, I think.
Waverley (ex-Tier 2, changing to 4 on Boxing Day) has cases up 135% (274->471) on last week. People from the surrounding Tier 4 areas flooded in for Christmas shopping and eating out. It's a good example of why Tier designation should not be in small geographical areas but at the least by region.
Sadly the Tier 4 folk were too stupid/selfish/ignorant to follow the rules.
Same thing happening up here with people heading from West Yorkshire to North Yorkshire to go on the lash.
And here, with people from Southampton and Portsmouth coming to Cowes and Ryde for nights out. Now the island is in tier three and Cowes and Ryde are the hotspots.
I might be changing my mind on Labour strategy here. It would perhaps be better to vote Against on the grounds that the deal is too thin.
Labour voting against could sink it, they don't have the option of luxuriating in their own self indulgence that the other opposition parties do. Abstention, or a free vote would be acceptable.
The Euro Parliament committee responsible for Erasmus and all things education in the EU is called the CULT Committee. I think we might be better off out!
I might be changing my mind on Labour strategy here. It would perhaps be better to vote Against on the grounds that the deal is too thin.
i think you're right though the point Owen Jones is making is comparing apples and pears. They should vote against for the simple reason that no sensible party should be seen voting for something that puts us in a worse position than the one we're in at the moment.
I might be changing my mind on Labour strategy here. It would perhaps be better to vote Against on the grounds that the deal is too thin.
The problem is that the options are deal or no-deal, and if Labour vote against it could see a a Tory rebellion led by the no-deal fans in the ERG. The only sensible choice they have, is to embrace the deal and move on from here.
No. It was in answer to TSE's question "Did I imagine it or did a Trump supporter advocate boycotting the Georgia runoffs because the Dominion machines would then give the GOP candidates a negative total which would allow SCOTUS to award the 2020 election to Trump?" Someone answered before me. The answer was - No you didn't imagine it.
I'm skiied out for now. I've enjoyed today. I can give it. And I can take it. I'm never ever been personally rude to anyone on here. And generally people aren't rude back - which is great. A bit of rough and tumble. And you learn things too.
Ummmm what was posted was a Biden supporter mocking Trump supporters suggesting they boycott.
Yet to see an actual Trump supporter suggest it.
So far any boycott suggestions seem to be elaborate banter not serious.
Why is Lucas Lucas wibbling about Erasmus when she should be focusing on issues like the wholesale habitat destruction and species loss caused by the CAP?
Nothing Green about students jetting around Europe for their jollies.
They must vote for the deal on the grounds it is much, much better than No Deal, to put Brexit to bed and to win back the Red Wall which is giving Labour a fair hearing (and on current polling is swinging back).
A vote for will kill the Tory electoral strategy stone-dead, as long as Labour does not walk into any more culture wars.
I might be changing my mind on Labour strategy here. It would perhaps be better to vote Against on the grounds that the deal is too thin.
i think you're right though the point Owen Jones is making is comparing apples and pears. They should vote against for the simple reason that no sensible party should be seen voting for something that puts us in a worse position than the one we're in at the moment.
The position we're in at the moment in absence of a deal is a catastrophic crash out to having no deal whatsoever with the EU. Voting against the deal is to vote for vote for no deal. It might make John Redwood happy, but it's not any good for those of us who work in the real world.
Edit: Just asked my solidly remain/labour supporting other half, she'd vote for along the same lines as @CorrectHorseBattery is putting forward.
I might be changing my mind on Labour strategy here. It would perhaps be better to vote Against on the grounds that the deal is too thin.
Labour voting against could sink it, they don't have the option of luxuriating in their own self indulgence that the other opposition parties do. Abstention, or a free vote would be acceptable.
They can’t sink it. There is no sign of an ERG rebellion, for example.
So, I believe they do have the option and I wouldn’t really call taking any vote in Parliament on something of this gravity “self-indulgence”.
I might be changing my mind on Labour strategy here. It would perhaps be better to vote Against on the grounds that the deal is too thin.
no sensible party should be seen voting for something that puts us in a worse position than the one we're in at the moment.
Indeed. Voting against would result in "No Deal' - which most commentators think would be worse than the deal on offer.
SKS should say "we'll support this deal and as Labour governments have done in the past negotiate a better, closer deal with the EU when returned to power"
Leave the amateur dramatics to the separatists/drama queens.
I might be changing my mind on Labour strategy here. It would perhaps be better to vote Against on the grounds that the deal is too thin.
The problem is that the options are deal or no-deal, and if Labour vote against it could see a a Tory rebellion led by the no-deal fans in the ERG. The only sensible choice they have, is to embrace the deal and move on from here.
Not necessarily so. In a vote that a government is bound to win, what matters is not so much what you are strictly voting for or against, but rather how the position you take might earn or lose you support in the future. For sure, a weakness of not voting for the government deal now is that you could be portrayed as technically having voted for no deal.
But stopping the analysis there is short sighted, since there may be considerable upside in not being tied to having supported a government deal that likely will become seen as deficient in coming months.
I might be changing my mind on Labour strategy here. It would perhaps be better to vote Against on the grounds that the deal is too thin.
i think you're right though the point Owen Jones is making is comparing apples and pears. They should vote against for the simple reason that no sensible party should be seen voting for something that puts us in a worse position than the one we're in at the moment.
The position we're in at the moment is we're about to leave the EU without a deal unless parliament passes this deal.
The SNP's goals here aren't the same as Labour, what do they care if England and Wales don't have a deal. The endgame for the SNP is dissolution of the union, followed by Scotland joining the EU. They have the least incentive of all to vote for the deal, along with Plaid. The deal does create divisions betwixt NI and rUK that would theoretically not be there if there was 'No deal'. So I'd fully expect DUP to vote against. There are good arguments for the SDLP to vote both for and against the deal, of course Sinn Fein will be abstaining !
Did I imagine it or did a Trump supporter advocate boycotting the Georgia runoffs because the Dominion machines would then give the GOP candidates a negative total which would allow SCOTUS to award the 2020 election to Trump?
Thank goodness the conspirators cannot read Twitter and tweak their algorithm to cheat without giving the game away.
OK. So. The algorithm results in more votes being counted past adjustment, than were actually cast?
Given that lists of who voted are completely public, how do you make sure the numbers match? You would have to claim people voted, who actually didn't. Which would be incredibly easy to discover: like two people, 15 minutes easy to discover.
On the previous thread you said to conquer England you should have the first name Julius or William.
Leaving aside Sweyn Forkbeard, have you forgotten that Julius Caesar actually failed in both his attempted invasions of Britannia? So actually the first name you need is Flavius, not Julius.
Edit - that’ll teach me to post without checking. I thought Vespasian was in command of the force, but at that time he was only Legatus of II Augusta and Aulus Plautius was the overall commander.
So Aulus experts got it wrong...
Surely Tiberius? T. Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus was the one i/c and turned up for the big defeat and victory parade with elephants (not Elefants) in Camulodunum. and the one who got hailed as Imperator.
He was the Emperor. But he was only there for 16 days and took part in no fighting, although mysteriously he took the title ‘Britannicus’ to note he was the conqueror of Britannia.
The best conquerors are those who get others to do the conquering for them.
I might be changing my mind on Labour strategy here. It would perhaps be better to vote Against on the grounds that the deal is too thin.
And "No Deal" is thinner.
I agree with Owen Jones, this line of argument is very weak.
Nobody seriously believes the SNP - or the Lib Dems for that matter - want a No Deal.
Then why are they voting that way?
It will get flung back at them from here to eternity - just like the SNP giving us Mrs Thatcher in 1979
It is only a Tory talking point that those voting against are voting “No Deal”, in any case Boris told us only a week ago we would “prosper mightily” in that scenario.
I might be changing my mind on Labour strategy here. It would perhaps be better to vote Against on the grounds that the deal is too thin.
Labour voting against could sink it, they don't have the option of luxuriating in their own self indulgence that the other opposition parties do. Abstention, or a free vote would be acceptable.
They can’t sink it. There is no sign of an ERG rebellion, for example.
So, I believe they do have the option and I wouldn’t really call taking any vote in Parliament on something of this gravity “self-indulgence”.
I'd say any vote where you know the outcome for the country would be worse if the result went your way is the definition of self indulgence. That's very clearly the case with this deal, unless you're pursuing another agenda (independence for example)
And he gave Jez a bit of a thrashing in his book. Not a leader, was the verdict.
One can't say that Owen (unlike the Yoons) can't pick out a dud bullet when he sees one. He used to be fairly anti SNP (mainly for them naughtily obstructing the big, gold Corbyn dream), has he changed?
I might be changing my mind on Labour strategy here. It would perhaps be better to vote Against on the grounds that the deal is too thin.
I think the original plan of abstention is still politically safest, personally.
I rarely disagree with you Sir but I do here.
Labour needs to show it's got over Brexit and is listening to the voters it lost.
Labour's strategy should be:
To return to a 2017 result as the baseline, that is primarily through the Red Wall. Those voters went because of Brexit and Corbyn.
To build on 2017 towards 280+ seats, they need to make gains in London and the South East. Those voters were previously scared by Corbyn, will they be scared of Starmer?
Hope for a Lib Dem revival, unlikely at the moment.
I might be changing my mind on Labour strategy here. It would perhaps be better to vote Against on the grounds that the deal is too thin.
I think the original plan of abstention is still politically safest, personally.
I think a reasonable "cover all the bases" position for the LotO would be "free vote" with personal recommendation in favour - whipped abstention is almost as bad as #NoDealNicola
DUP walking through the lobbies with SNP, strangely fitting
The DUP, the SNP and the LDs all forming an anti Deal trio while the Tories and Labour go arm in arm through the lobbies to pass the Deal.
What a combination
Not sure all of Labour will
And maybe not all the Tories.
Possibly but the indications are the ERG will vote for
I'll be interested to see the size of the Con vote against. I've heard 10 but I'll be surprised if it's that many. Even Farage is on board and that says a lot even if it turns out it's for a peerage or something. Johnson has pulled this off, I think, as regards the politics of it. He's da man right now. Best enjoy it because I sense the pandemic is about to get very nasty indeed.
I might be changing my mind on Labour strategy here. It would perhaps be better to vote Against on the grounds that the deal is too thin.
Labour voting against could sink it, they don't have the option of luxuriating in their own self indulgence that the other opposition parties do. Abstention, or a free vote would be acceptable.
They can’t sink it. There is no sign of an ERG rebellion, for example.
So, I believe they do have the option and I wouldn’t really call taking any vote in Parliament on something of this gravity “self-indulgence”.
I'd say any vote where you know the outcome for the country would be worse if the result went your way is the definition of self indulgence. That's very clearly the case with this deal, unless you're pursuing another agenda (independence for example)
Let’s play the “What If”.
The government is defeated by a coalition of Opposition and ERG votes. Does a “No Deal” then become likely?
Did I imagine it or did a Trump supporter advocate boycotting the Georgia runoffs because the Dominion machines would then give the GOP candidates a negative total which would allow SCOTUS to award the 2020 election to Trump?
Thank goodness the conspirators cannot read Twitter and tweak their algorithm to cheat without giving the game away.
OK. So. The algorithm results in more votes being counted past adjustment, than were actually cast?
Given that lists of who voted are completely public, how do you make sure the numbers match? You would have to claim people voted, who actually didn't. Which would be incredibly easy to discover: like two people, 15 minutes easy to discover.
Nonsense, that's just how sneaky Dominion and their paymasters are. Why, their very name is a giveaway.
I might be changing my mind on Labour strategy here. It would perhaps be better to vote Against on the grounds that the deal is too thin.
Labour voting against could sink it, they don't have the option of luxuriating in their own self indulgence that the other opposition parties do. Abstention, or a free vote would be acceptable.
They can’t sink it. There is no sign of an ERG rebellion, for example.
So, I believe they do have the option and I wouldn’t really call taking any vote in Parliament on something of this gravity “self-indulgence”.
I'd say any vote where you know the outcome for the country would be worse if the result went your way is the definition of self indulgence. That's very clearly the case with this deal, unless you're pursuing another agenda (independence for example)
Let’s play the “What If”.
The government is defeated by a coalition of Opposition and ERG votes. Does a “No Deal” then become likely?
Not really.
It won't be, even if the ERG all vote against and the mood music suggests that is unlikely, most Tory and Labour MPs will vote for the Deal and it will pass with about 2/3 of MPs in favour.
Both Boris and Starmer are whipping Tory and Labour MPs to vote for the Deal
The SNP's goals here aren't the same as Labour, what do they care if England and Wales don't have a deal. The endgame for the SNP is dissolution of the union, followed by Scotland joining the EU. They have the least incentive of all to vote for the deal, along with Plaid. The deal does create divisions betwixt NI and rUK that would theoretically not be there if there was 'No deal'. So I'd fully expect DUP to vote against. There are good arguments for the SDLP to vote both for and against the deal, of course Sinn Fein will be abstaining !
Wales voted Leave though unlike Scotland so Plaid cannot ignore that
And he gave Jez a bit of a thrashing in his book. Not a leader, was the verdict.
One can't say that Owen (unlike the Yoons) can't pick out a dud bullet when he sees one. He used to be fairly anti SNP (mainly for them naughtily obstructing the big, gold Corbyn dream), has he changed?
I'd say he has then, yes. Although if Sindy were standing in the way of Jerusalem in England's green & pleasant - which it isn't - I imagine he would be dead against.
Worth remember that the GSK-Sanofi vaccine is unlikely to be approved until 3Q 2021 at the earliest.
The EU has reasonable sized orders for J&J (200m doses, single shot) and for Moderna (80m, two shots). If those all come through in the first half of 2021, they'll do OK.
But if J&J doesn't work, then the EU will be incredibly dependent on CureVac, which is another mRNA vaccine, and which only started Phase 3 at the beginning of this month. Realistically, CureVac is unlikely to be approved until early Q2 at the soonest.
I might be changing my mind on Labour strategy here. It would perhaps be better to vote Against on the grounds that the deal is too thin.
Labour voting against could sink it, they don't have the option of luxuriating in their own self indulgence that the other opposition parties do. Abstention, or a free vote would be acceptable.
They can’t sink it. There is no sign of an ERG rebellion, for example.
So, I believe they do have the option and I wouldn’t really call taking any vote in Parliament on something of this gravity “self-indulgence”.
I'd say any vote where you know the outcome for the country would be worse if the result went your way is the definition of self indulgence. That's very clearly the case with this deal, unless you're pursuing another agenda (independence for example)
Let’s play the “What If”.
The government is defeated by a coalition of Opposition and ERG votes. Does a “No Deal” then become likely?
Not really.
It won't be, even if the ERG all vote against and the mood music suggests that is unlikely, most Tory and Labour MPs will vote for the Deal and it will pass without about 2/3 of MPs in favour
I know that.
I am rebutting the talking point out about by the Tories that voting Against is to vote No Deal.
Labour should vote on the Deal’s merits, I think. How does it measure up to Brexiter promise?
Of course there is zero time to actually come to a considered opinion on this, given government timetabling - but perhaps that’s another argument to vote Against.
DUP walking through the lobbies with SNP, strangely fitting
The DUP, the SNP and the LDs all forming an anti Deal trio while the Tories and Labour go arm in arm through the lobbies to pass the Deal.
What a combination
Not sure all of Labour will
And maybe not all the Tories.
Possibly but the indications are the ERG will vote for
I'll be interested to see the size of the Con vote against. I've heard 10 but I'll be surprised if it's that many. Even Farage is on board and that says a lot even if it turns out it's for a peerage or something. Johnson has pulled this off, I think, as regards the politics of it. He's da man right now. Best enjoy it because I sense the pandemic is about to get very nasty indeed.
To be honest I am not enjoying any of this either Brexit or covid
I am content that a deal has been agreed and seemingly our relationship with the EU has not been fractured as would have been the case in a no deal
The country needs to move on and improve the deal and of course the spotlight must now move to vaccinating the country as soon as possible
Worth remember that the GSK-Sanofi vaccine is unlikely to be approved until 3Q 2021 at the earliest. CureVac is also
The EU has reasonable sized orders for J&J (200m doses, single shot) and for Moderna (80m, two shots). If those all come through in the first half of 2021, they'll do OK.
But if J&J doesn't work, then the EU will be incredibly dependent on CureVac, which is another mRNA vaccine, and which only started Phase 3 at the beginning of this month. Realistically, CureVac is unlikely to be approved until early Q2 at the soonest.
CureVac expects first results at the beginning of April 2021, so approval is more likely (if it happens) no sooner than June 2021.
Comments
I believe 3-0 is the standard scoreline awarded to the team who shows up.
https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1343600155875008519?s=20
Caviar Introduces Custom 'Pure Gold' AirPods Max for $108,000
https://www.macrumors.com/2020/12/28/caviar-pure-gold-airpods-max/
Same thing happening up here with people heading from West Yorkshire to North Yorkshire to go on the lash.
That would make Biden the first incoming President not to see his party have control of both chambers of Congress since Bush Snr in 1989.
The GOP would have a 1 seat Senate majority with Mitt Romney having the casting vote (Romney being the only GOP Senator who voted to impeach Trump), effectively making Romney the most powerful figure in US politics from January after Biden himself
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1343424698311438337?s=20
“The two sides are working on the finer details pertaining to about five-six sectors as some announcements are expected during UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s India visit in January 2021,” one of the officials said.
https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/india-and-uk-to-finalise-early-harvest-trade-deals-by-2021-ahead-of-comprehensive-fta/story-5uJXlXlae71Xqdg9Zcei6J.html
Unlike other (and rather more significant) reductions of elitism in the education system such as - plucking one from a hat - reducing the ability of the affluent to purchase educational privilege for their offspring via private schools.
You live and learn.
https://twitter.com/ScotNational/status/1343606890060599296?s=20
Lets hope they don't work out that to save the 2% of their seed potatoes that go to the EU by rejoining they'll sacrifice the 48% that goes to England & Wales....
Someone answered before me. The answer was - No you didn't imagine it.
I'm skiied out for now. I've enjoyed today.
I can give it. And I can take it. I'm never ever been personally rude to anyone on here. And generally people aren't rude back - which is great. A bit of rough and tumble. And you learn things too.
TLDR: It’s a major achievement to agree a deal, but it is very thin for services and indeed less accommodating than recent EU deals with Japan, Aus/NZ, and others.
https://twitter.com/antonspisak/status/1343519072416362498?s=21
What a combination
https://twitter.com/DaveClark_AFP/status/1343572908917071873?s=20
Presume Alliance also. And Jeremy Corbyn.
SDLP?
Apparently there are also 5 independents, I have no idea who they are.
https://twitter.com/CarolineLucas/status/1342132391163408384?s=20
https://twitter.com/derryjournal/status/1342850411586269185?s=20.
PC probably too
https://twitter.com/Adamprice/status/1342126822381727752?s=20
The 1 Alliance MP might abstain but will likely also vote against
https://twitter.com/StephenFarryMP/status/1342136870940123136?s=20.
https://www.englishelectric.org.uk/p949461847/h2DB60B58
Jeremy Corbyn - Against
Jonathan Edwards - Against
Margaret Ferrier - Against
Claudia Webbe - Against
Julian Lewis - ?
https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/1343299555102777346
https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/1343611759152812036?s=20
Entirely unrelated to how The Blessed Jeremy (PBUH) is voting, I'm sure....
Abstention, or a free vote would be acceptable.
*Actually a fat, plucked turkey
Yet to see an actual Trump supporter suggest it.
So far any boycott suggestions seem to be elaborate banter not serious.
Nothing Green about students jetting around Europe for their jollies.
But I'll go with Starmer's decision. He clearly judges this best for GE24 prospects.
They must vote for the deal on the grounds it is much, much better than No Deal, to put Brexit to bed and to win back the Red Wall which is giving Labour a fair hearing (and on current polling is swinging back).
A vote for will kill the Tory electoral strategy stone-dead, as long as Labour does not walk into any more culture wars.
Edit: Just asked my solidly remain/labour supporting other half, she'd vote for along the same lines as @CorrectHorseBattery is putting forward.
Nobody seriously believes the SNP - or the Lib Dems for that matter - want a No Deal.
And he gave Jez a bit of a thrashing in his book. Not a leader, was the verdict.
So, I believe they do have the option and I wouldn’t really call taking any vote in Parliament on something of this gravity “self-indulgence”.
SKS should say "we'll support this deal and as Labour governments have done in the past negotiate a better, closer deal with the EU when returned to power"
Leave the amateur dramatics to the separatists/drama queens.
But stopping the analysis there is short sighted, since there may be considerable upside in not being tied to having supported a government deal that likely will become seen as deficient in coming months.
The SNP's goals here aren't the same as Labour, what do they care if England and Wales don't have a deal. The endgame for the SNP is dissolution of the union, followed by Scotland joining the EU. They have the least incentive of all to vote for the deal, along with Plaid.
The deal does create divisions betwixt NI and rUK that would theoretically not be there if there was 'No deal'. So I'd fully expect DUP to vote against.
There are good arguments for the SDLP to vote both for and against the deal, of course Sinn Fein will be abstaining !
Given that lists of who voted are completely public, how do you make sure the numbers match? You would have to claim people voted, who actually didn't. Which would be incredibly easy to discover: like two people, 15 minutes easy to discover.
It will get flung back at them from here to eternity - just like the SNP giving us Mrs Thatcher in 1979
https://www.britishpathe.com/video/conquerors-end/query/Kent
https://www.britishpathe.com/video/armys-new-65-ton-tank/query/CONQUERORS
That's very clearly the case with this deal, unless you're pursuing another agenda (independence for example)
He used to be fairly anti SNP (mainly for them naughtily obstructing the big, gold Corbyn dream), has he changed?
Labour needs to show it's got over Brexit and is listening to the voters it lost.
Labour's strategy should be:
To return to a 2017 result as the baseline, that is primarily through the Red Wall. Those voters went because of Brexit and Corbyn.
To build on 2017 towards 280+ seats, they need to make gains in London and the South East. Those voters were previously scared by Corbyn, will they be scared of Starmer?
Hope for a Lib Dem revival, unlikely at the moment.
The government is defeated by a coalition of Opposition and ERG votes. Does a “No Deal” then become likely?
Not really.
Both Boris and Starmer are whipping Tory and Labour MPs to vote for the Deal
Worth remember that the GSK-Sanofi vaccine is unlikely to be approved until 3Q 2021 at the earliest.
The EU has reasonable sized orders for J&J (200m doses, single shot) and for Moderna (80m, two shots). If those all come through in the first half of 2021, they'll do OK.
But if J&J doesn't work, then the EU will be incredibly dependent on CureVac, which is another mRNA vaccine, and which only started Phase 3 at the beginning of this month. Realistically, CureVac is unlikely to be approved until early Q2 at the soonest.
I am rebutting the talking point out about by the Tories that voting Against is to vote No Deal.
Labour should vote on the Deal’s merits, I think. How does it measure up to Brexiter promise?
Of course there is zero time to actually come to a considered opinion on this, given government timetabling - but perhaps that’s another argument to vote Against.
I am content that a deal has been agreed and seemingly our relationship with the EU has not been fractured as would have been the case in a no deal
The country needs to move on and improve the deal and of course the spotlight must now move to vaccinating the country as soon as possible