Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

What YouGov was reporting a year ago today – politicalbetting.com

13567

Comments

  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,429
    edited April 2021
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Floater said:
    Why are some types of protesters allowed to hold banners like this without getting arrested, whereas others would be?
    Assuming it's legit, I'm inclined to think they should be arrested and prosecuted for encouraging violence.
    It was all rather peaceful in Leicester

    https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1378329057302081542?s=19
    That's a truly amazing concrete monstrosity!
    The clock tower is Victorian, and generally agreed to be the centre of the city. In the background is the Haymarket Centre, which is a bit of an eyesore. Leicester City centre is a mixture of mostly Victorian gothic, and a fair bit of post war concrete. Most British cities are architecturally a mess.
    Slightly unfair. Britain boasts a multitude of gorgeous market towns undamaged by war or post war development (and thousands of villages)

    The larger towns, and cities, sadly what you say is true, with rare exceptions that we all know - Oxford, Cambridge, Bath, York. Edinburgh (all the places tourists want to go).

    I can remember growing up in a largely Georgian-Tudor-medieval small city in the west of England when the council casually knocked down an entire Tudor coaching inn, complete with galleries (ie an absolute gem, would be world class Grade 1 now) and it happened without a murmur. The replacement was shabby offices which themselves were knocked down about a decade later.

    Weep for Britain. What the Luftwaffe failed to do, we did to ourselves
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,662
    edited April 2021

    https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1378394708242804749

    Why would BoJo want somebody from the most left-wing organisation on Earth to be in his team? Or did the Daily Mail lie to me again

    They worked together at the Telegraph as did her husband as deputy and editorial directors.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,052
    edited April 2021

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Floater said:
    Why are some types of protesters allowed to hold banners like this without getting arrested, whereas others would be?
    Assuming it's legit, I'm inclined to think they should be arrested and prosecuted for encouraging violence.
    It was all rather peaceful in Leicester

    https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1378329057302081542?s=19
    That's a truly amazing concrete monstrosity!
    The clock tower is Victorian, and generally agreed to be the centre of the city. In the background is the Haymarket Centre, which is a bit of an eyesore. Leicester City centre is a mixture of mostly Victorian gothic, and a fair bit of post war concrete. Most British cities are architecturally a mess.
    Alas, all of our cities and most of our towns suffer from carbuncles. The centres of many of the post-War New Towns consist of little else (the centre of Stevenage, for example, could do with being demolished and rebuilt almost entirely from scratch.) It'll be the work of centuries to put right all of the damage.
    Too often we're adding to the damage, rather than seeking to put it right.

    The hideous new development at Nine Elms is an obvious example.

    Why are architects so obsessed with building ugly boxes?
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Why attempt to restore the prerogative? Presumably a short bill that explicitly places the matter of dissolution in the hands of the sitting Prime Minister would have the same effect?
    Because Boris Johnson is a power hungry arse.
    And creating a situation where he can sign the paperwork himself, as opposed to having a ceremonial performance in which he asks the Queen for permission that she won't refuse anyway, runs counter to your assertion... how, exactly?
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 3,639

    algarkirk said:

    isam said:

    stodge said:

    isam said:


    No one can claim to know about the next election with certainty - that's why you look at the data, compare it with previous trends, listen to what people are saying and use your brain to make a judgement - how do you think gamblers make a living?

    Sir Keir may be a decent bloke, I am sure he means well, but that doesn't stop me noticing that his ratings are crap, and that Leaders of the Opposition with such ratings, whose party trails in the polls, when up against a PM that the public find more charismatic, don't really get the top job. I am banging on about it because no one else seems to want to admit it. This place is called politcal betting after all, and I am someone who bets a lot, and likes politics, I assumed others might too

    That aside, where's the market in which we can use this information?

    Should we be on the Conservatives at Evens to win Hartlepool because Starmer's ratings are so bad?

    I've had a look at the Betfair market - £14 to back the Conservatives to win most seats at 1.58 or £24 on Labour at 2.58. Not exactly frantic - what would you suggest? Based on how bad Starmer's ratings are and the electoral mountain so often pointed out by OGH and others, I assume you'll be on at 1.58 - looks a good bet if you don't mind the cash sitting there for three years and, to be fair, it's still miles better than any savings account.
    I think Labour are worthy favs in Hartlepool really. They should be on past form, although other posters with local knowledge seem to disagree

    I am on Con most seats at 1.79

    Con Maj anything above EVS I think is good
    There just isn't a reason for the Tories to win Hartlepool. Labour held it in 2019 and since then the polls have narrowed in Labour's favour a few points. People who only vote about Brexit will stay home, and Brexit party voters who vote will split between the parties. Narrow win for Labour.
    No chance for CON in Hartlepool. LAB to win no problems.
    This anti-ramping is so dull.

    CON clearly has *a* chance, and those actually involved in Teesside politics think it's a good chance.
    If that is you and Rochdale I remain confident in my assessment!
    Your assessment is just wrong. Objectively, CON clearly have a chance. In fact CON MPs are very confident if the reports are to be believed.

    But no, that isn't me. I know very little about Teesside politics.
    Ok let's see on 7 May 👍
  • Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Perhaps you'd care to clarify? - seems out of line with the 'five year term'.
    Click the download report here

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06111/

    On page 8 you'll notice this

    Following the early election, in December 2019, the next election is scheduled to take place on 2 May 2024. Parliament will be dissolved on 26 March 2024.

    and

    There is provision for the Prime Minister to make an order to extend this date for a maximum of two months to deal with unexpected developments. He/she must set out the reasons for the delay, and such an order must be approved by both Houses of Parliament before it can be made. One precedent is the foot and mouth disease outbreak in 2001 which delayed local elections by one month. (In 2001, the general election was held on the same day as the delayed local elections.)
    Thanks. I hadn't appreciated that May was explicitly favoued.

    Ok, so May 2024 is an even more likely date than I'd thought.
    I think May 2024 will be the date for GE simply for no other reason that boundary changes recommendations will not be received until July 2023.

    The primary legislation has been passed but I suspect there may be issues from the Welsh and the Tories (if the Tories look like they will win Wales) about reducing the Welsh number of MPs by 20%.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    algarkirk said:

    isam said:

    stodge said:

    isam said:


    No one can claim to know about the next election with certainty - that's why you look at the data, compare it with previous trends, listen to what people are saying and use your brain to make a judgement - how do you think gamblers make a living?

    Sir Keir may be a decent bloke, I am sure he means well, but that doesn't stop me noticing that his ratings are crap, and that Leaders of the Opposition with such ratings, whose party trails in the polls, when up against a PM that the public find more charismatic, don't really get the top job. I am banging on about it because no one else seems to want to admit it. This place is called politcal betting after all, and I am someone who bets a lot, and likes politics, I assumed others might too

    That aside, where's the market in which we can use this information?

    Should we be on the Conservatives at Evens to win Hartlepool because Starmer's ratings are so bad?

    I've had a look at the Betfair market - £14 to back the Conservatives to win most seats at 1.58 or £24 on Labour at 2.58. Not exactly frantic - what would you suggest? Based on how bad Starmer's ratings are and the electoral mountain so often pointed out by OGH and others, I assume you'll be on at 1.58 - looks a good bet if you don't mind the cash sitting there for three years and, to be fair, it's still miles better than any savings account.
    I think Labour are worthy favs in Hartlepool really. They should be on past form, although other posters with local knowledge seem to disagree

    I am on Con most seats at 1.79

    Con Maj anything above EVS I think is good
    There just isn't a reason for the Tories to win Hartlepool. Labour held it in 2019 and since then the polls have narrowed in Labour's favour a few points. People who only vote about Brexit will stay home, and Brexit party voters who vote will split between the parties. Narrow win for Labour.
    No chance for CON in Hartlepool. LAB to win no problems.
    This anti-ramping is so dull.

    CON clearly has *a* chance, and those actually involved in Teesside politics think it's a good chance.
    If that is you and Rochdale I remain confident in my assessment!
    Your assessment is just wrong. Objectively, CON clearly have a chance. In fact CON MPs are very confident if the reports are to be believed.

    But no, that isn't me. I know very little about Teesside politics.
    Ok let's see on 7 May 👍
    Let's see what? You asserted that "CON have no chance". That's clearly wrong, regardless of what happens on 7 May.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,662
    edited April 2021

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Why attempt to restore the prerogative? Presumably a short bill that explicitly places the matter of dissolution in the hands of the sitting Prime Minister would have the same effect?
    Because Boris Johnson is a power hungry arse.
    And creating a situation where he can sign the paperwork himself, as opposed to having a ceremonial performance in which he asks the Queen for permission that she won't refuse anyway, runs counter to your assertion... how, exactly?
    That he wants to codify that the royal prerogative isn't judicially reviewable.

    Issues related to the prorogation of 2019 says hello.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Why attempt to restore the prerogative? Presumably a short bill that explicitly places the matter of dissolution in the hands of the sitting Prime Minister would have the same effect?
    Because Boris Johnson is a power hungry arse.
    Speaking of which...

    https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1378395371160887298
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,870

    algarkirk said:

    isam said:

    stodge said:

    isam said:


    No one can claim to know about the next election with certainty - that's why you look at the data, compare it with previous trends, listen to what people are saying and use your brain to make a judgement - how do you think gamblers make a living?

    Sir Keir may be a decent bloke, I am sure he means well, but that doesn't stop me noticing that his ratings are crap, and that Leaders of the Opposition with such ratings, whose party trails in the polls, when up against a PM that the public find more charismatic, don't really get the top job. I am banging on about it because no one else seems to want to admit it. This place is called politcal betting after all, and I am someone who bets a lot, and likes politics, I assumed others might too

    That aside, where's the market in which we can use this information?

    Should we be on the Conservatives at Evens to win Hartlepool because Starmer's ratings are so bad?

    I've had a look at the Betfair market - £14 to back the Conservatives to win most seats at 1.58 or £24 on Labour at 2.58. Not exactly frantic - what would you suggest? Based on how bad Starmer's ratings are and the electoral mountain so often pointed out by OGH and others, I assume you'll be on at 1.58 - looks a good bet if you don't mind the cash sitting there for three years and, to be fair, it's still miles better than any savings account.
    I think Labour are worthy favs in Hartlepool really. They should be on past form, although other posters with local knowledge seem to disagree

    I am on Con most seats at 1.79

    Con Maj anything above EVS I think is good
    There just isn't a reason for the Tories to win Hartlepool. Labour held it in 2019 and since then the polls have narrowed in Labour's favour a few points. People who only vote about Brexit will stay home, and Brexit party voters who vote will split between the parties. Narrow win for Labour.
    No chance for CON in Hartlepool. LAB to win no problems.
    This anti-ramping is so dull.

    CON clearly has *a* chance, and those actually involved in Teesside politics think it's a good chance.
    If that is you and Rochdale I remain confident in my assessment!
    Your assessment is just wrong. Objectively, CON clearly have a chance. In fact CON MPs are very confident if the reports are to be believed.

    But no, that isn't me. I know very little about Teesside politics.
    Ok let's see on 7 May 👍
    Let's see what? You asserted that "CON have no chance". That's clearly wrong, regardless of what happens on 7 May.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqdNe8u-Jsg
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,410

    https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1378394708242804749

    Why would BoJo want somebody from the most left-wing organisation on Earth to be in his team? Or did the Daily Mail lie to me again

    They worked together at the Telegraph as did her husband as deputy and editorial directors.
    Bloody lefties get everywhere with their wokery.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,710
    Fishing said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Floater said:
    Why are some types of protesters allowed to hold banners like this without getting arrested, whereas others would be?
    Assuming it's legit, I'm inclined to think they should be arrested and prosecuted for encouraging violence.
    It was all rather peaceful in Leicester

    https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1378329057302081542?s=19
    That's a truly amazing concrete monstrosity!
    The clock tower is Victorian, and generally agreed to be the centre of the city. In the background is the Haymarket Centre, which is a bit of an eyesore. Leicester City centre is a mixture of mostly Victorian gothic, and a fair bit of post war concrete. Most British cities are architecturally a mess.
    Alas, all of our cities and most of our towns suffer from carbuncles. The centres of many of the post-War New Towns consist of little else (the centre of Stevenage, for example, could do with being demolished and rebuilt almost entirely from scratch.) It'll be the work of centuries to put right all of the damage.
    Too often we're adding to the damage, rather than seeking to put it right.

    The hideous new development at Nine Elms is an obvious example.

    Why are architects so obsessed with building ugly boxes?
    Oh, I agree, very often we knock Sixties concrete down, and replace it with something as bad.

    A lot of city and town centres will look very rundown after unlocking. It's too late for a lot of retail.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,770

    https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1378394708242804749

    Why would BoJo want somebody from the most left-wing organisation on Earth to be in his team? Or did the Daily Mail lie to me again

    The Today programme is far better than the rest of the bbc.

    In my view the only really ghastly thing about the bbc is their 'news' website. Their crappy lovvey chatshows are awful, and I don't like Hew Edwards' sneer. Sometimes the propaganda seeps though elsewhere too. The website though - it's pure propaganda, and the Chinese are right to object - albeit they're in no place to complain about anything much.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,662
    edited April 2021

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Why attempt to restore the prerogative? Presumably a short bill that explicitly places the matter of dissolution in the hands of the sitting Prime Minister would have the same effect?
    Because Boris Johnson is a power hungry arse.
    And creating a situation where he can sign the paperwork himself, as opposed to having a ceremonial performance in which he asks the Queen for permission that she won't refuse anyway, runs counter to your assertion... how, exactly?
    But the Queen can refuse, prior to the FPTA the grounds for a monarch saying no an early election were clear, thanks to a letter written to The Times using a pseudonym.

    The Lascelles Principles were a constitutional convention in the United Kingdom between 1950 and 2011, under which the Sovereign could refuse a request from the Prime Minister to dissolve Parliament if three conditions were met:

    1) if the existing Parliament was still "vital, viable, and capable of doing its job",

    2) if a general election would be "detrimental to the national economy", and

    3) if the Sovereign could "rely on finding another prime minister who could govern for a reasonable period with a working majority in the House of Commons.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lascelles_Principles
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Floater said:
    Why are some types of protesters allowed to hold banners like this without getting arrested, whereas others would be?
    Assuming it's legit, I'm inclined to think they should be arrested and prosecuted for encouraging violence.
    It was all rather peaceful in Leicester

    https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1378329057302081542?s=19
    That's a truly amazing concrete monstrosity!
    Were they protesting against that hideous blight on their urban landscape?
    This would be entirely understandable. Lord alone knows what some of our post-War architects were thinking.
    What was Manny Shinwell thinking?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,429
    Floater said:
    if you have a banner saying "Kill Cops" then the cops are entirely justified in beating you to a pulp. The coppers shouldn't kill you, obvs, but beat the shit out of you? Yes
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,870
    Omnium said:

    https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1378394708242804749

    Why would BoJo want somebody from the most left-wing organisation on Earth to be in his team? Or did the Daily Mail lie to me again

    The Today programme is far better than the rest of the bbc.

    In my view the only really ghastly thing about the bbc is their 'news' website. Their crappy lovvey chatshows are awful, and I don't like Hew Edwards' sneer. Sometimes the propaganda seeps though elsewhere too. The website though - it's pure propaganda, and the Chinese are right to object - albeit they're in no place to complain about anything much.
    Your account has been taken over by a Chinese bot?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    Leon said:

    Floater said:
    if you have a banner saying "Kill Cops" then the cops are entirely justified in beating you to a pulp. The coppers shouldn't kill you, obvs, but beat the shit out of you? Yes
    What an absolutely ludicrous thing to say.

    You think police brutality should be public policy?

    Arrest them for inciting violence? Sure.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Perhaps you'd care to clarify? - seems out of line with the 'five year term'.
    Click the download report here

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06111/

    On page 8 you'll notice this

    Following the early election, in December 2019, the next election is scheduled to take place on 2 May 2024. Parliament will be dissolved on 26 March 2024.

    and

    There is provision for the Prime Minister to make an order to extend this date for a maximum of two months to deal with unexpected developments. He/she must set out the reasons for the delay, and such an order must be approved by both Houses of Parliament before it can be made. One precedent is the foot and mouth disease outbreak in 2001 which delayed local elections by one month. (In 2001, the general election was held on the same day as the delayed local elections.)
    Thanks. I hadn't appreciated that May was explicitly favoued.

    Ok, so May 2024 is an even more likely date than I'd thought.
    I think May 2024 will be the date for GE simply for no other reason that boundary changes recommendations will not be received until July 2023.

    The primary legislation has been passed but I suspect there may be issues from the Welsh and the Tories (if the Tories look like they will win Wales) about reducing the Welsh number of MPs by 20%.
    I was about to question whether there's any realistic prospect of the Conservative party winning the most seats in Wales in a Westminster election, but extraordinarily it appears that there is. On the current boundaries, their top five targets all have majorities of under 2,000 and require less than a 3% swing to capture; take those without losing any existing territory and they beat Labour, on vote share as well as seats.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,429

    Leon said:

    Floater said:
    if you have a banner saying "Kill Cops" then the cops are entirely justified in beating you to a pulp. The coppers shouldn't kill you, obvs, but beat the shit out of you? Yes
    What an absolutely ludicrous thing to say.

    You think police brutality should be public policy?

    Arrest them for inciting violence? Sure.
    No, beat them up. Beat them to a quivering mess. Saves time. I'm done with these wankers
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Floater said:
    if you have a banner saying "Kill Cops" then the cops are entirely justified in beating you to a pulp. The coppers shouldn't kill you, obvs, but beat the shit out of you? Yes
    What an absolutely ludicrous thing to say.

    You think police brutality should be public policy?

    Arrest them for inciting violence? Sure.
    No, beat them up. Beat them to a quivering mess. Saves time. I'm done with these wankers
    Yeah, because "beat them to a quivering mess" is the British way? I sometimes wonder if you're the unpatriotic one.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Perhaps you'd care to clarify? - seems out of line with the 'five year term'.
    Click the download report here

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06111/

    On page 8 you'll notice this

    Following the early election, in December 2019, the next election is scheduled to take place on 2 May 2024. Parliament will be dissolved on 26 March 2024.

    and

    There is provision for the Prime Minister to make an order to extend this date for a maximum of two months to deal with unexpected developments. He/she must set out the reasons for the delay, and such an order must be approved by both Houses of Parliament before it can be made. One precedent is the foot and mouth disease outbreak in 2001 which delayed local elections by one month. (In 2001, the general election was held on the same day as the delayed local elections.)
    Thanks. I hadn't appreciated that May was explicitly favoued.

    Ok, so May 2024 is an even more likely date than I'd thought.
    I think May 2024 will be the date for GE simply for no other reason that boundary changes recommendations will not be received until July 2023.

    The primary legislation has been passed but I suspect there may be issues from the Welsh and the Tories (if the Tories look like they will win Wales) about reducing the Welsh number of MPs by 20%.
    The Tories are more likely to favour the reduction in seats because it makes it plausible for them to win Wales. It’s the Valleys where the heaviest cuts will fall and although the Tories have made progress there they’re still not in serious contention to win any seats on current boundaries except possibly Gower and a very long shot at Blaenau Gwent.

    Plus the changes if along the lines proposed would exterminate Labour outside the south, cut Plaid Cymru in half by costing them the current Carmarthen East and Ceredigion seats and leave Newport and Llanelli both looking vulnerable to a fairly modest Tory swing.

    So I do not see that as a problem. There might be a couple of cases of two Tory MPs fighting for the same seat in the north east but actually there are enough tempting targets to go round to buy off any losers.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,547

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Why attempt to restore the prerogative? Presumably a short bill that explicitly places the matter of dissolution in the hands of the sitting Prime Minister would have the same effect?
    Because Boris Johnson is a power hungry arse.
    And creating a situation where he can sign the paperwork himself, as opposed to having a ceremonial performance in which he asks the Queen for permission that she won't refuse anyway, runs counter to your assertion... how, exactly?
    That he wants to codify that the royal prerogative isn't judicially reviewable.

    Issues related to the prorogation of 2019 says hello.
    It's a mess. Caused by: A terrible FTPA Act; an utterly foolish decision by the Tories to prorogue; and a wrong, bull in a china shop decision of the Supreme Court to declare a foolish but not fascist deed a nullity.

    Trying to declare stuff to be non justiciable is an incitement to lawyers and courts to have a go. Getting round obstacles has been the lifeblood of the legal tradition since the Bill of Middlesex and longer. And quite right too.

    Our constitution is crown in parliament. Severing the link between the two by removing the crown's jurisdiction would be a republican act, and muck up something that has served us well since 1688, and rescued a then failing system.

    The best we can do is try to get back to a pre FTPA situation. Recently the Supreme Court has been rowing back a little from confronting government. Having gone too far in the prorogation case, where the government lost a case it should have easily won, in Begum recently, to much surprise, the government won a case it should have lost and the SC was too ready to allow the government to act in an arbitrary way. Perhaps they are in a post-Hale mood of penitence for being so absurd over the prorogation trifle.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    I would wonder if the government had lost their minds, were it not for the minor detail I never thought they found them in the first place.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Perhaps you'd care to clarify? - seems out of line with the 'five year term'.
    Click the download report here

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06111/

    On page 8 you'll notice this

    Following the early election, in December 2019, the next election is scheduled to take place on 2 May 2024. Parliament will be dissolved on 26 March 2024.

    and

    There is provision for the Prime Minister to make an order to extend this date for a maximum of two months to deal with unexpected developments. He/she must set out the reasons for the delay, and such an order must be approved by both Houses of Parliament before it can be made. One precedent is the foot and mouth disease outbreak in 2001 which delayed local elections by one month. (In 2001, the general election was held on the same day as the delayed local elections.)
    Thanks. I hadn't appreciated that May was explicitly favoued.

    Ok, so May 2024 is an even more likely date than I'd thought.
    I think May 2024 will be the date for GE simply for no other reason that boundary changes recommendations will not be received until July 2023.

    The primary legislation has been passed but I suspect there may be issues from the Welsh and the Tories (if the Tories look like they will win Wales) about reducing the Welsh number of MPs by 20%.
    I was about to question whether there's any realistic prospect of the Conservative party winning the most seats in Wales in a Westminster election, but extraordinarily it appears that there is. On the current boundaries, their top five targets all have majorities of under 2,000 and require less than a 3% swing to capture; take those without losing any existing territory and they beat Labour, on vote share as well as seats.
    Shame that Mike doesn’t seem to have been interested in that header of mine, which went into this in some detail.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Why attempt to restore the prerogative? Presumably a short bill that explicitly places the matter of dissolution in the hands of the sitting Prime Minister would have the same effect?
    Because Boris Johnson is a power hungry arse.
    And creating a situation where he can sign the paperwork himself, as opposed to having a ceremonial performance in which he asks the Queen for permission that she won't refuse anyway, runs counter to your assertion... how, exactly?
    But the Queen can refuse, prior to the FPTA the grounds for a monarch saying no an early election were clear, thanks to a letter written to The Times using a pseudonym.

    The Lascelles Principles were a constitutional convention in the United Kingdom between 1950 and 2011, under which the Sovereign could refuse a request from the Prime Minister to dissolve Parliament if three conditions were met:

    1) if the existing Parliament was still "vital, viable, and capable of doing its job",

    2) if a general election would be "detrimental to the national economy", and

    3) if the Sovereign could "rely on finding another prime minister who could govern for a reasonable period with a working majority in the House of Commons.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lascelles_Principles
    That being the case, I'm still confused as to why a Prime Minister who is "a power hungry arse" would want to try to reinstate an expired prerogative - which gives the Queen at least a residual power to frustrate his will - rather than passing an Act which gives him unrestrained authority over dissolution.

    Are there any other important surviving prerogatives that he can also exercise on the monarch's behalf, which he might seek to defend from judicial review via the expedient of having this one reinstated, and clarified as not being subject to judicial review in the process? This all seems rather convoluted.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    edited April 2021
  • ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Perhaps you'd care to clarify? - seems out of line with the 'five year term'.
    Click the download report here

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06111/

    On page 8 you'll notice this

    Following the early election, in December 2019, the next election is scheduled to take place on 2 May 2024. Parliament will be dissolved on 26 March 2024.

    and

    There is provision for the Prime Minister to make an order to extend this date for a maximum of two months to deal with unexpected developments. He/she must set out the reasons for the delay, and such an order must be approved by both Houses of Parliament before it can be made. One precedent is the foot and mouth disease outbreak in 2001 which delayed local elections by one month. (In 2001, the general election was held on the same day as the delayed local elections.)
    Thanks. I hadn't appreciated that May was explicitly favoued.

    Ok, so May 2024 is an even more likely date than I'd thought.
    I think May 2024 will be the date for GE simply for no other reason that boundary changes recommendations will not be received until July 2023.

    The primary legislation has been passed but I suspect there may be issues from the Welsh and the Tories (if the Tories look like they will win Wales) about reducing the Welsh number of MPs by 20%.
    The Tories are more likely to favour the reduction in seats because it makes it plausible for them to win Wales. It’s the Valleys where the heaviest cuts will fall and although the Tories have made progress there they’re still not in serious contention to win any seats on current boundaries except possibly Gower and a very long shot at Blaenau Gwent.

    Plus the changes if along the lines proposed would exterminate Labour outside the south, cut Plaid Cymru in half by costing them the current Carmarthen East and Ceredigion seats and leave Newport and Llanelli both looking vulnerable to a fairly modest Tory swing.

    So I do not see that as a problem. There might be a couple of cases of two Tory MPs fighting for the same seat in the north east but actually there are enough tempting targets to go round to buy off any losers.
    I was talking more about the optics, it isn't inconceivable that the Tories win* the Senedd elections next month that creates momentum for them for them in the GE, it'll be easy attack line for Labour to use about the Tories reducing Welsh influence in Parliament when they need it the most.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,547
    ydoethur said:

    I would wonder if the government had lost their minds, were it not for the minor detail I never thought they found them in the first place.
    They must be. Did I see Jezza on an anti vaccine passport demo? If so this government has achieved the impossible: Jezza and liberty loving centre right on the same barricade.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Perhaps you'd care to clarify? - seems out of line with the 'five year term'.
    Click the download report here

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06111/

    On page 8 you'll notice this

    Following the early election, in December 2019, the next election is scheduled to take place on 2 May 2024. Parliament will be dissolved on 26 March 2024.

    and

    There is provision for the Prime Minister to make an order to extend this date for a maximum of two months to deal with unexpected developments. He/she must set out the reasons for the delay, and such an order must be approved by both Houses of Parliament before it can be made. One precedent is the foot and mouth disease outbreak in 2001 which delayed local elections by one month. (In 2001, the general election was held on the same day as the delayed local elections.)
    Thanks. I hadn't appreciated that May was explicitly favoued.

    Ok, so May 2024 is an even more likely date than I'd thought.
    I think May 2024 will be the date for GE simply for no other reason that boundary changes recommendations will not be received until July 2023.

    The primary legislation has been passed but I suspect there may be issues from the Welsh and the Tories (if the Tories look like they will win Wales) about reducing the Welsh number of MPs by 20%.
    I was about to question whether there's any realistic prospect of the Conservative party winning the most seats in Wales in a Westminster election, but extraordinarily it appears that there is. On the current boundaries, their top five targets all have majorities of under 2,000 and require less than a 3% swing to capture; take those without losing any existing territory and they beat Labour, on vote share as well as seats.
    Shame that Mike doesn’t seem to have been interested in that header of mine, which went into this in some detail.
    Are you sure he saw it? He’s usually keen on threads - he’s published 2 of mine on political history
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,547
    edited April 2021

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Why attempt to restore the prerogative? Presumably a short bill that explicitly places the matter of dissolution in the hands of the sitting Prime Minister would have the same effect?
    Because Boris Johnson is a power hungry arse.
    And creating a situation where he can sign the paperwork himself, as opposed to having a ceremonial performance in which he asks the Queen for permission that she won't refuse anyway, runs counter to your assertion... how, exactly?
    But the Queen can refuse, prior to the FPTA the grounds for a monarch saying no an early election were clear, thanks to a letter written to The Times using a pseudonym.

    The Lascelles Principles were a constitutional convention in the United Kingdom between 1950 and 2011, under which the Sovereign could refuse a request from the Prime Minister to dissolve Parliament if three conditions were met:

    1) if the existing Parliament was still "vital, viable, and capable of doing its job",

    2) if a general election would be "detrimental to the national economy", and

    3) if the Sovereign could "rely on finding another prime minister who could govern for a reasonable period with a working majority in the House of Commons.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lascelles_Principles
    That being the case, I'm still confused as to why a Prime Minister who is "a power hungry arse" would want to try to reinstate an expired prerogative - which gives the Queen at least a residual power to frustrate his will - rather than passing an Act which gives him unrestrained authority over dissolution.

    Are there any other important surviving prerogatives that he can also exercise on the monarch's behalf, which he might seek to defend from judicial review via the expedient of having this one reinstated, and clarified as not being subject to judicial review in the process? This all seems rather convoluted.
    Declaration of war.

    I think the SC's rubbish decision in the prorogation case means that there needs to be a major clarification of the issues here. Goodness knows how.

  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,429
    Fishing said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Floater said:
    Why are some types of protesters allowed to hold banners like this without getting arrested, whereas others would be?
    Assuming it's legit, I'm inclined to think they should be arrested and prosecuted for encouraging violence.
    It was all rather peaceful in Leicester

    https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1378329057302081542?s=19
    That's a truly amazing concrete monstrosity!
    The clock tower is Victorian, and generally agreed to be the centre of the city. In the background is the Haymarket Centre, which is a bit of an eyesore. Leicester City centre is a mixture of mostly Victorian gothic, and a fair bit of post war concrete. Most British cities are architecturally a mess.
    Alas, all of our cities and most of our towns suffer from carbuncles. The centres of many of the post-War New Towns consist of little else (the centre of Stevenage, for example, could do with being demolished and rebuilt almost entirely from scratch.) It'll be the work of centuries to put right all of the damage.
    Too often we're adding to the damage, rather than seeking to put it right.

    The hideous new development at Nine Elms is an obvious example.

    Why are architects so obsessed with building ugly boxes?
    Hard to say. At least the new London towers have the vigour of height. The problem is the proximity of London City Airport and Heathrow means there is a ceiling on scale - the Shard is as high as you can go, because of CAA safety limits.

    This is the reason Canary Wharf is gaining an unpleasant table top appearance, when a pyramidal effect is generally considered more aesthetically pleasing: ie one massive tower with others being supportive but smaller

    On the other hand I thought 22 Bishopsgate was an unmediated disaster (compared to the Pinnacle which was meant to be there) but from some angles (eg the South Bank) is works really well

    https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/photo/man-stands-looking-at-the-city-of-london-on-a-snowy-royalty-free-image/1303332198?adppopup=true
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,662
    edited April 2021

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Why attempt to restore the prerogative? Presumably a short bill that explicitly places the matter of dissolution in the hands of the sitting Prime Minister would have the same effect?
    Because Boris Johnson is a power hungry arse.
    And creating a situation where he can sign the paperwork himself, as opposed to having a ceremonial performance in which he asks the Queen for permission that she won't refuse anyway, runs counter to your assertion... how, exactly?
    But the Queen can refuse, prior to the FPTA the grounds for a monarch saying no an early election were clear, thanks to a letter written to The Times using a pseudonym.

    The Lascelles Principles were a constitutional convention in the United Kingdom between 1950 and 2011, under which the Sovereign could refuse a request from the Prime Minister to dissolve Parliament if three conditions were met:

    1) if the existing Parliament was still "vital, viable, and capable of doing its job",

    2) if a general election would be "detrimental to the national economy", and

    3) if the Sovereign could "rely on finding another prime minister who could govern for a reasonable period with a working majority in the House of Commons.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lascelles_Principles
    That being the case, I'm still confused as to why a Prime Minister who is "a power hungry arse" would want to try to reinstate an expired prerogative - which gives the Queen at least a residual power to frustrate his will - rather than passing an Act which gives him unrestrained authority over dissolution.

    Are there any other important surviving prerogatives that he can also exercise on the monarch's behalf, which he might seek to defend from judicial review via the expedient of having this one reinstated, and clarified as not being subject to judicial review in the process? This all seems rather convoluted.
    By taking power away from Parliament and giving it someone unelected saying it cannot be reviewed.

    Well there's the royal prerogative regarding military action, that's the biggie.

    Blair created a precedent in the run up to war in Iraq by granting Parliament a vote.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,421
    Once we're all vaccinated the public health emergency is over. All this crap is just makework.

    I don't understand the government's thinking. Do they think that this will remind people of their vaccination, and prolong their gratitude?

    I hope that people would tire very quickly of Boris's Bugging.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Perhaps you'd care to clarify? - seems out of line with the 'five year term'.
    Click the download report here

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06111/

    On page 8 you'll notice this

    Following the early election, in December 2019, the next election is scheduled to take place on 2 May 2024. Parliament will be dissolved on 26 March 2024.

    and

    There is provision for the Prime Minister to make an order to extend this date for a maximum of two months to deal with unexpected developments. He/she must set out the reasons for the delay, and such an order must be approved by both Houses of Parliament before it can be made. One precedent is the foot and mouth disease outbreak in 2001 which delayed local elections by one month. (In 2001, the general election was held on the same day as the delayed local elections.)
    Thanks. I hadn't appreciated that May was explicitly favoued.

    Ok, so May 2024 is an even more likely date than I'd thought.
    I think May 2024 will be the date for GE simply for no other reason that boundary changes recommendations will not be received until July 2023.

    The primary legislation has been passed but I suspect there may be issues from the Welsh and the Tories (if the Tories look like they will win Wales) about reducing the Welsh number of MPs by 20%.
    The Tories are more likely to favour the reduction in seats because it makes it plausible for them to win Wales. It’s the Valleys where the heaviest cuts will fall and although the Tories have made progress there they’re still not in serious contention to win any seats on current boundaries except possibly Gower and a very long shot at Blaenau Gwent.

    Plus the changes if along the lines proposed would exterminate Labour outside the south, cut Plaid Cymru in half by costing them the current Carmarthen East and Ceredigion seats and leave Newport and Llanelli both looking vulnerable to a fairly modest Tory swing.

    So I do not see that as a problem. There might be a couple of cases of two Tory MPs fighting for the same seat in the north east but actually there are enough tempting targets to go round to buy off any losers.
    I was talking more about the optics, it isn't inconceivable that the Tories win* the Senedd elections next month that creates momentum for them for them in the GE, it'll be easy attack line for Labour to use about the Tories reducing Welsh influence in Parliament when they need it the most.
    I do not think that will resonate outside the Cardiff/Swansea/Merthyr triangle, if I’m honest. The immediate riposte is ‘you’ve had influence for years and things keep getting worse. Let’s try influencing the other lot.’

    Bear in mind, there is only one seat Labour have never held at any level in Wales. They’ve held all the others at one time or another and done fuck all with it. A trade Union exec once told me with a straight face that Nicholas Edwards had done far more for Wales than ever Peter Hain did (On the one occasion I met him, Edwards himself agreed, incidentally, and wasn’t amused when I tripped him up over one or two of his claims).

    So I think there isn’t a problem for the Tories in cutting seats outside the Valleys, and there aren’t many likely to go there anyway, while inside the valleys it will make no difference anyway.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,431
    ydoethur said:

    I would wonder if the government had lost their minds, were it not for the minor detail I never thought they found them in the first place.
    I’m wondering who is supposed to be checking? Buildings scattered all over campus, so security on the door to all of them? Or an immense traffic jam as we roll onto campus? This is turning into madness. The point of the vaccines is to return to normal life, or as close as possible. This would not be not normal life.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Perhaps you'd care to clarify? - seems out of line with the 'five year term'.
    Click the download report here

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06111/

    On page 8 you'll notice this

    Following the early election, in December 2019, the next election is scheduled to take place on 2 May 2024. Parliament will be dissolved on 26 March 2024.

    and

    There is provision for the Prime Minister to make an order to extend this date for a maximum of two months to deal with unexpected developments. He/she must set out the reasons for the delay, and such an order must be approved by both Houses of Parliament before it can be made. One precedent is the foot and mouth disease outbreak in 2001 which delayed local elections by one month. (In 2001, the general election was held on the same day as the delayed local elections.)
    Thanks. I hadn't appreciated that May was explicitly favoued.

    Ok, so May 2024 is an even more likely date than I'd thought.
    I think May 2024 will be the date for GE simply for no other reason that boundary changes recommendations will not be received until July 2023.

    The primary legislation has been passed but I suspect there may be issues from the Welsh and the Tories (if the Tories look like they will win Wales) about reducing the Welsh number of MPs by 20%.
    I was about to question whether there's any realistic prospect of the Conservative party winning the most seats in Wales in a Westminster election, but extraordinarily it appears that there is. On the current boundaries, their top five targets all have majorities of under 2,000 and require less than a 3% swing to capture; take those without losing any existing territory and they beat Labour, on vote share as well as seats.
    Shame that Mike doesn’t seem to have been interested in that header of mine, which went into this in some detail.
    Are you sure he saw it? He’s usually keen on threads - he’s published 2 of mine on political history
    I sent it to the email address I’ve used before. It may have changed, of course.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    edited April 2021
    I can envisage us ending up in a situation where confused/frightened businesses simultaneously require staff to go around in masks everywhere, and keep practicing social distancing, and there's obsessive cleaning everywhere, and they're having to wave their vaccine passports ID cards both to get on public transport and to access their places of work. A total biosecurity state with paranoid checks and PPE absolutely everywhere. And God alone knows how many years it will go on for.

    I'd naively assumed that we might actually be rid of all this crap on June 21st - if for no other reason than we have been promised nightclubs back and there's no way on God's Earth they can work if everyone has to stand at least two metres apart and wear a fucking mask the entire time. But now I'm not so sure. After all, the Spanish authorities have instructed people on beach holidays to sunbathe in masks. The world's gone completely bloody mad.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207

    Once we're all vaccinated the public health emergency is over. All this crap is just makework.

    I don't understand the government's thinking. Do they think that this will remind people of their vaccination, and prolong their gratitude?

    I hope that people would tire very quickly of Boris's Bugging.
    So if I don't have the app I have to work from home?

    Oh no......
  • ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Perhaps you'd care to clarify? - seems out of line with the 'five year term'.
    Click the download report here

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06111/

    On page 8 you'll notice this

    Following the early election, in December 2019, the next election is scheduled to take place on 2 May 2024. Parliament will be dissolved on 26 March 2024.

    and

    There is provision for the Prime Minister to make an order to extend this date for a maximum of two months to deal with unexpected developments. He/she must set out the reasons for the delay, and such an order must be approved by both Houses of Parliament before it can be made. One precedent is the foot and mouth disease outbreak in 2001 which delayed local elections by one month. (In 2001, the general election was held on the same day as the delayed local elections.)
    Thanks. I hadn't appreciated that May was explicitly favoued.

    Ok, so May 2024 is an even more likely date than I'd thought.
    I think May 2024 will be the date for GE simply for no other reason that boundary changes recommendations will not be received until July 2023.

    The primary legislation has been passed but I suspect there may be issues from the Welsh and the Tories (if the Tories look like they will win Wales) about reducing the Welsh number of MPs by 20%.
    I was about to question whether there's any realistic prospect of the Conservative party winning the most seats in Wales in a Westminster election, but extraordinarily it appears that there is. On the current boundaries, their top five targets all have majorities of under 2,000 and require less than a 3% swing to capture; take those without losing any existing territory and they beat Labour, on vote share as well as seats.
    Shame that Mike doesn’t seem to have been interested in that header of mine, which went into this in some detail.
    Send it to me please.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,770

    Omnium said:

    https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1378394708242804749

    Why would BoJo want somebody from the most left-wing organisation on Earth to be in his team? Or did the Daily Mail lie to me again

    The Today programme is far better than the rest of the bbc.

    In my view the only really ghastly thing about the bbc is their 'news' website. Their crappy lovvey chatshows are awful, and I don't like Hew Edwards' sneer. Sometimes the propaganda seeps though elsewhere too. The website though - it's pure propaganda, and the Chinese are right to object - albeit they're in no place to complain about anything much.
    Your account has been taken over by a Chinese bot?
    Yeah, I know. Nonetheless I think the BBC are straying. The Chinese encourage speculative and propagandist reporting anyway in that they're very opaque.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,036
    Coz you can't eat your dinner while wearing a face covering.

    Next question?
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    edited April 2021
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Perhaps you'd care to clarify? - seems out of line with the 'five year term'.
    Click the download report here

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06111/

    On page 8 you'll notice this

    Following the early election, in December 2019, the next election is scheduled to take place on 2 May 2024. Parliament will be dissolved on 26 March 2024.

    and

    There is provision for the Prime Minister to make an order to extend this date for a maximum of two months to deal with unexpected developments. He/she must set out the reasons for the delay, and such an order must be approved by both Houses of Parliament before it can be made. One precedent is the foot and mouth disease outbreak in 2001 which delayed local elections by one month. (In 2001, the general election was held on the same day as the delayed local elections.)
    Thanks. I hadn't appreciated that May was explicitly favoued.

    Ok, so May 2024 is an even more likely date than I'd thought.
    I think May 2024 will be the date for GE simply for no other reason that boundary changes recommendations will not be received until July 2023.

    The primary legislation has been passed but I suspect there may be issues from the Welsh and the Tories (if the Tories look like they will win Wales) about reducing the Welsh number of MPs by 20%.
    The Tories are more likely to favour the reduction in seats because it makes it plausible for them to win Wales. It’s the Valleys where the heaviest cuts will fall and although the Tories have made progress there they’re still not in serious contention to win any seats on current boundaries except possibly Gower and a very long shot at Blaenau Gwent.

    Plus the changes if along the lines proposed would exterminate Labour outside the south, cut Plaid Cymru in half by costing them the current Carmarthen East and Ceredigion seats and leave Newport and Llanelli both looking vulnerable to a fairly modest Tory swing.

    So I do not see that as a problem. There might be a couple of cases of two Tory MPs fighting for the same seat in the north east but actually there are enough tempting targets to go round to buy off any losers.
    I was talking more about the optics, it isn't inconceivable that the Tories win* the Senedd elections next month that creates momentum for them for them in the GE, it'll be easy attack line for Labour to use about the Tories reducing Welsh influence in Parliament when they need it the most.
    I do not think that will resonate outside the Cardiff/Swansea/Merthyr triangle, if I’m honest. The immediate riposte is ‘you’ve had influence for years and things keep getting worse. Let’s try influencing the other lot.’

    Bear in mind, there is only one seat Labour have never held at any level in Wales. They’ve held all the others at one time or another and done fuck all with it. A trade Union exec once told me with a straight face that Nicholas Edwards had done far more for Wales than ever Peter Hain did (On the one occasion I met him, Edwards himself agreed, incidentally, and wasn’t amused when I tripped him up over one or two of his claims).

    So I think there isn’t a problem for the Tories in cutting seats outside the Valleys, and there aren’t many likely to go there anyway, while inside the valleys it will make no difference anyway.
    I agree.

    And there is an obvious way to buy off troublesome Welsh politicians.

    Increase the size of the Senedd, Which Llafur want to do anyhow.

    There are then plenty more jobs for ineffectual, mediocre & ambitious Welsh politicians (which is almost all of them).

    (I don't particularly agree that the size of the Senedd needs expanding, but the quid pro quo is almost inevitable).
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,429
    edited April 2021
    Just been to my first social engagement since.... God knows. A barbecue in bouji NW London. Freezing but great fun. Quite emotional

    In truth probably my first relaxed social thing for a year: the first time with a sense of real freedom, at least on the horizon

    It could be a one-off, or it could be indicative, but it was notably hedonistic. Think middle aged housewives doing lines of coke off the kitchen table (from John Lewis). If it is indicative, then we are in for a rip roaring 2020s
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1378413489413230595

    I wonder if they do that "employer of choice" crap
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Perhaps you'd care to clarify? - seems out of line with the 'five year term'.
    Click the download report here

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06111/

    On page 8 you'll notice this

    Following the early election, in December 2019, the next election is scheduled to take place on 2 May 2024. Parliament will be dissolved on 26 March 2024.

    and

    There is provision for the Prime Minister to make an order to extend this date for a maximum of two months to deal with unexpected developments. He/she must set out the reasons for the delay, and such an order must be approved by both Houses of Parliament before it can be made. One precedent is the foot and mouth disease outbreak in 2001 which delayed local elections by one month. (In 2001, the general election was held on the same day as the delayed local elections.)
    Thanks. I hadn't appreciated that May was explicitly favoued.

    Ok, so May 2024 is an even more likely date than I'd thought.
    I think May 2024 will be the date for GE simply for no other reason that boundary changes recommendations will not be received until July 2023.

    The primary legislation has been passed but I suspect there may be issues from the Welsh and the Tories (if the Tories look like they will win Wales) about reducing the Welsh number of MPs by 20%.
    I was about to question whether there's any realistic prospect of the Conservative party winning the most seats in Wales in a Westminster election, but extraordinarily it appears that there is. On the current boundaries, their top five targets all have majorities of under 2,000 and require less than a 3% swing to capture; take those without losing any existing territory and they beat Labour, on vote share as well as seats.
    Shame that Mike doesn’t seem to have been interested in that header of mine, which went into this in some detail.
    Send it to me please.
    Do you have an email address you can VM me? I could try and send it through VM but it’s quite long.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,410
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Perhaps you'd care to clarify? - seems out of line with the 'five year term'.
    Click the download report here

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06111/

    On page 8 you'll notice this

    Following the early election, in December 2019, the next election is scheduled to take place on 2 May 2024. Parliament will be dissolved on 26 March 2024.

    and

    There is provision for the Prime Minister to make an order to extend this date for a maximum of two months to deal with unexpected developments. He/she must set out the reasons for the delay, and such an order must be approved by both Houses of Parliament before it can be made. One precedent is the foot and mouth disease outbreak in 2001 which delayed local elections by one month. (In 2001, the general election was held on the same day as the delayed local elections.)
    Thanks. I hadn't appreciated that May was explicitly favoued.

    Ok, so May 2024 is an even more likely date than I'd thought.
    I think May 2024 will be the date for GE simply for no other reason that boundary changes recommendations will not be received until July 2023.

    The primary legislation has been passed but I suspect there may be issues from the Welsh and the Tories (if the Tories look like they will win Wales) about reducing the Welsh number of MPs by 20%.
    The Tories are more likely to favour the reduction in seats because it makes it plausible for them to win Wales. It’s the Valleys where the heaviest cuts will fall and although the Tories have made progress there they’re still not in serious contention to win any seats on current boundaries except possibly Gower and a very long shot at Blaenau Gwent.

    Plus the changes if along the lines proposed would exterminate Labour outside the south, cut Plaid Cymru in half by costing them the current Carmarthen East and Ceredigion seats and leave Newport and Llanelli both looking vulnerable to a fairly modest Tory swing.

    So I do not see that as a problem. There might be a couple of cases of two Tory MPs fighting for the same seat in the north east but actually there are enough tempting targets to go round to buy off any losers.
    I was talking more about the optics, it isn't inconceivable that the Tories win* the Senedd elections next month that creates momentum for them for them in the GE, it'll be easy attack line for Labour to use about the Tories reducing Welsh influence in Parliament when they need it the most.
    I do not think that will resonate outside the Cardiff/Swansea/Merthyr triangle, if I’m honest. The immediate riposte is ‘you’ve had influence for years and things keep getting worse. Let’s try influencing the other lot.’

    Bear in mind, there is only one seat Labour have never held at any level in Wales. They’ve held all the others at one time or another and done fuck all with it. A trade Union exec once told me with a straight face that Nicholas Edwards had done far more for Wales than ever Peter Hain did (On the one occasion I met him, Edwards himself agreed, incidentally, and wasn’t amused when I tripped him up over one or two of his claims).

    So I think there isn’t a problem for the Tories in cutting seats outside the Valleys, and there aren’t many likely to go there anyway, while inside the valleys it will make no difference anyway.
    Aren't a number of seats in North Wales to go too? Labour only holds one of them.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    That’s a bit harsh. I’ve known some amusing clowns.
  • ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Perhaps you'd care to clarify? - seems out of line with the 'five year term'.
    Click the download report here

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06111/

    On page 8 you'll notice this

    Following the early election, in December 2019, the next election is scheduled to take place on 2 May 2024. Parliament will be dissolved on 26 March 2024.

    and

    There is provision for the Prime Minister to make an order to extend this date for a maximum of two months to deal with unexpected developments. He/she must set out the reasons for the delay, and such an order must be approved by both Houses of Parliament before it can be made. One precedent is the foot and mouth disease outbreak in 2001 which delayed local elections by one month. (In 2001, the general election was held on the same day as the delayed local elections.)
    Thanks. I hadn't appreciated that May was explicitly favoued.

    Ok, so May 2024 is an even more likely date than I'd thought.
    I think May 2024 will be the date for GE simply for no other reason that boundary changes recommendations will not be received until July 2023.

    The primary legislation has been passed but I suspect there may be issues from the Welsh and the Tories (if the Tories look like they will win Wales) about reducing the Welsh number of MPs by 20%.
    I was about to question whether there's any realistic prospect of the Conservative party winning the most seats in Wales in a Westminster election, but extraordinarily it appears that there is. On the current boundaries, their top five targets all have majorities of under 2,000 and require less than a 3% swing to capture; take those without losing any existing territory and they beat Labour, on vote share as well as seats.
    Shame that Mike doesn’t seem to have been interested in that header of mine, which went into this in some detail.
    Send it to me please.
    Do you have an email address you can VM me? I could try and send it through VM but it’s quite long.
    Check your VM.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,234
    Omnium said:

    https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1378394708242804749

    Why would BoJo want somebody from the most left-wing organisation on Earth to be in his team? Or did the Daily Mail lie to me again

    The Today programme is far better than the rest of the bbc.

    In my view the only really ghastly thing about the bbc is their 'news' website. Their crappy lovvey chatshows are awful, and I don't like Hew Edwards' sneer. Sometimes the propaganda seeps though elsewhere too. The website though - it's pure propaganda, and the Chinese are right to object - albeit they're in no place to complain about anything much.
    When she moved to the Today programme, they deliberately made it more tabloid - sensationalist, going for people, trying to chew up politicians etc.

    I now hardly listen at all, where 10 years ago it was the wallpaper.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    dixiedean said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Perhaps you'd care to clarify? - seems out of line with the 'five year term'.
    Click the download report here

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06111/

    On page 8 you'll notice this

    Following the early election, in December 2019, the next election is scheduled to take place on 2 May 2024. Parliament will be dissolved on 26 March 2024.

    and

    There is provision for the Prime Minister to make an order to extend this date for a maximum of two months to deal with unexpected developments. He/she must set out the reasons for the delay, and such an order must be approved by both Houses of Parliament before it can be made. One precedent is the foot and mouth disease outbreak in 2001 which delayed local elections by one month. (In 2001, the general election was held on the same day as the delayed local elections.)
    Thanks. I hadn't appreciated that May was explicitly favoued.

    Ok, so May 2024 is an even more likely date than I'd thought.
    I think May 2024 will be the date for GE simply for no other reason that boundary changes recommendations will not be received until July 2023.

    The primary legislation has been passed but I suspect there may be issues from the Welsh and the Tories (if the Tories look like they will win Wales) about reducing the Welsh number of MPs by 20%.
    The Tories are more likely to favour the reduction in seats because it makes it plausible for them to win Wales. It’s the Valleys where the heaviest cuts will fall and although the Tories have made progress there they’re still not in serious contention to win any seats on current boundaries except possibly Gower and a very long shot at Blaenau Gwent.

    Plus the changes if along the lines proposed would exterminate Labour outside the south, cut Plaid Cymru in half by costing them the current Carmarthen East and Ceredigion seats and leave Newport and Llanelli both looking vulnerable to a fairly modest Tory swing.

    So I do not see that as a problem. There might be a couple of cases of two Tory MPs fighting for the same seat in the north east but actually there are enough tempting targets to go round to buy off any losers.
    I was talking more about the optics, it isn't inconceivable that the Tories win* the Senedd elections next month that creates momentum for them for them in the GE, it'll be easy attack line for Labour to use about the Tories reducing Welsh influence in Parliament when they need it the most.
    I do not think that will resonate outside the Cardiff/Swansea/Merthyr triangle, if I’m honest. The immediate riposte is ‘you’ve had influence for years and things keep getting worse. Let’s try influencing the other lot.’

    Bear in mind, there is only one seat Labour have never held at any level in Wales. They’ve held all the others at one time or another and done fuck all with it. A trade Union exec once told me with a straight face that Nicholas Edwards had done far more for Wales than ever Peter Hain did (On the one occasion I met him, Edwards himself agreed, incidentally, and wasn’t amused when I tripped him up over one or two of his claims).

    So I think there isn’t a problem for the Tories in cutting seats outside the Valleys, and there aren’t many likely to go there anyway, while inside the valleys it will make no difference anyway.
    Aren't a number of seats in North Wales to go too? Labour only holds one of them.
    The way the boundaries were being drawn, with Anglesey protected, that Labour seat is in effect the only one that goes.

    There might be a bit of a scuffle between the MP for Montgomeryshire and one of the Clwyd seats, but elsewhere it’s as you were.

    In the south west, helpfully, the redrawn seats pitch incumbent Tories against incumbent PC.
  • So Sir Alan Duncan has improved his views on Boris Johnson, I remember this exchange from 2018.

    Sir Alan Duncan – who would go to great pains to give a nuanced and balanced critique of Theresa May's ailing leadership when asked – was happy to sum up his opinion of Boris in a single word ("C*nt").
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541

    Once we're all vaccinated the public health emergency is over. All this crap is just makework.

    I don't understand the government's thinking. Do they think that this will remind people of their vaccination, and prolong their gratitude?

    I hope that people would tire very quickly of Boris's Bugging.
    The story is sourced from the company developing it, not the Govt intending to use it. The idea that Granny will scan QR codes on the way into Sunday lunch should have been reported on Thursday’s date, not the 3rd...


  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,770
    MattW said:

    Omnium said:

    https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1378394708242804749

    Why would BoJo want somebody from the most left-wing organisation on Earth to be in his team? Or did the Daily Mail lie to me again

    The Today programme is far better than the rest of the bbc.

    In my view the only really ghastly thing about the bbc is their 'news' website. Their crappy lovvey chatshows are awful, and I don't like Hew Edwards' sneer. Sometimes the propaganda seeps though elsewhere too. The website though - it's pure propaganda, and the Chinese are right to object - albeit they're in no place to complain about anything much.
    When she moved to the Today programme, they deliberately made it more tabloid - sensationalist, going for people, trying to chew up politicians etc.

    I now hardly listen at all, where 10 years ago it was the wallpaper.
    I used to read the Independent - religiously, every day (20 years ago). Alas, times change.

    I still like the Today programme though.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,533
    Would that apply to MPs? One way of marginalising the rebel Tories. But has Rees-Mogg been informed?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,204
    tlg86 said:
    17 year olds, antivaxxers and pregnant women all together in the Kop then ?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,429

    So Sir Alan Duncan has improved his views on Boris Johnson, I remember this exchange from 2018.

    Sir Alan Duncan – who would go to great pains to give a nuanced and balanced critique of Theresa May's ailing leadership when asked – was happy to sum up his opinion of Boris in a single word ("C*nt").
    Alan Duncan is the short man's short man
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,207
    Floater said:
    That is also a reminder that - while we will have gotten out of this before the EU - we can't pat ourselves on the back and say that we've handled the crisis perfectly.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Foxy said:

    isam said:

    RobD said:

    isam said:

    The latest in a series of headers full of excuses for Sir Keir's underperformance. You can understand why - if Sir Keir is seen to be a failure then Remainers who like to blame Corbyn for the majority Boris won will have to face the truth; it was all about Brexit, not Jezza

    We could build a simple program to replace you.

    while (true) {
    console.write("Keir Starmer is crap");
    }
    To be fair he backs up what he says with polling data.
    You can use polling data to backup the point that Keir is currently less popular than Boris Johnson, granted, but that doesn't tell us with any certainty how he's going to fare in the next election. There's frankly too many events that could occur in the meantime.
    No one can claim to know about the next election with certainty - that's why you look at the data, compare it with previous trends, listen to what people are saying and use your brain to make a judgement - how do you think gamblers make a living?

    Sir Keir may be a decent bloke, I am sure he means well, but that doesn't stop me noticing that his ratings are crap, and that Leaders of the Opposition with such ratings, whose party trails in the polls, when up against a PM that the public find more charismatic, don't really get the top job. I am banging on about it because no one else seems to want to admit it. This place is called politcal betting after all, and I am someone who bets a lot, and likes politics, I assumed others might too

    No, I think there is something to what you say. Johnson is a mendacious buffoon, but a highly competent campaigner, and while marmite, a lot of people are fooled and charmed by him.

    In reality, the only time Johnson has been faced with a strong political opponent was in the 2008 London Mayoral contest against Livingstone when the latter still had credibility but was weighed down by an unpopular Labour Government. He only narrowly won ew-election in 2012 with Livingstone a much diminished figure.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,207
    Floater said:

    https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1378413489413230595

    I wonder if they do that "employer of choice" crap

    I actually feel a little for Amazon here: I know many people who have done delivery driving gigs in the past, and sometimes you need to go, and very often there isn't a public convenience around. With the US often having pretty severe laws on public urination, it's not that uncommon to pee in a bottle.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,429
    rcs1000 said:

    Floater said:
    That is also a reminder that - while we will have gotten out of this before the EU - we can't pat ourselves on the back and say that we've handled the crisis perfectly.
    What this shows is that we were doing averagely, by European standards, until we got hammered by the Kentish Variant (which is now hammering others)

    This does not excuse our government and our scientists their many tragic, grievous errors (eg treating it like flu, mask advice, travel quarantine, etc) but it is vital context.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,932
    DougSeal said:

    Once we're all vaccinated the public health emergency is over. All this crap is just makework.

    I don't understand the government's thinking. Do they think that this will remind people of their vaccination, and prolong their gratitude?

    I hope that people would tire very quickly of Boris's Bugging.
    The story is sourced from the company developing it, not the Govt intending to use it. The idea that Granny will scan QR codes on the way into Sunday lunch should have been reported on Thursday’s date, not the 3rd...


    That's really the source of the story? The Telegraph sure has gone downhill.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,429
    rcs1000 said:

    Floater said:

    https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1378413489413230595

    I wonder if they do that "employer of choice" crap

    I actually feel a little for Amazon here: I know many people who have done delivery driving gigs in the past, and sometimes you need to go, and very often there isn't a public convenience around. With the US often having pretty severe laws on public urination, it's not that uncommon to pee in a bottle.
    I've done it multiple times. Once when I was about to miss a plane flying out of Fort Lauderdale, Fla, and returning the car AND pulling over for a pee would have wasted too much time. I peed in a bottle

    It is often more hygienic than going to some concrete corner and doing your biz, as long as you dispose of the bottle sensibly
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,548
    edited April 2021
    ydoethur said:

    I would wonder if the government had lost their minds, were it not for the minor detail I never thought they found them in the first place.
    That really is going to cause a fabulous number of law suits if they push ahead with it.

    No legal requirement to have the app but you are not allowed back into the office without it.
    Companies try to force people to have the app - which is a change in their terms and conditions.
    People refuse.
    Company left with choice. Sack people and face unfair dismissal legal action or back down and people allowed to work from home indefinitely.

    The Government are genuinely mad if they try to force this through.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Floater said:
    That is also a reminder that - while we will have gotten out of this before the EU - we can't pat ourselves on the back and say that we've handled the crisis perfectly.
    What this shows is that we were doing averagely, by European standards, until we got hammered by the Kentish Variant (which is now hammering others)

    This does not excuse our government and our scientists their many tragic, grievous errors (eg treating it like flu, mask advice, travel quarantine, etc) but it is vital context.
    The PHE seroprevalence survey last week showed that around 40% of 16-24 year olds had Covid antibodies. It may be true to say that the Kentish Variant gave our vaccination drive a head start. At the cost of roughly 70,000 lives.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    dixiedean said:

    ydoethur said:

    algarkirk said:

    2023 for an early election IMHO, I think before then people will ask "what for?"

    Yes. More likely 2023 than 2022, but if some events somehow made it 'necessary' Boris would go when ever he could get away with it and win. A 2022 win would give him space till 2027 and 8 years as PM - as long as Asquith and Churchill.

    A just possible candidate for an 'emergency' election would be for a mandate about Scotland and/or a mandate for 'renegotiating' the UK/EU deal on Ireland - which cannot survive as it stands.

    No risk of pb running out of speculation material.
    I’ll be amazed if he goes before 2023. Look what happened to May when she tried that.

    May 2024 is the likely and logical date.

    By then of course he will be very nearly 60, if still in office, and may be thinking about retirement anyway.
    There is also the matter of the new seat boundaries: we are still operating on a very old set now and an election in 2022 would probably still have to be on the old ones.
    Yep. Report is only due July 1 2023.
    Given it needs to be signed off, then new associations set up to select candidates, and that the GE is 2 May 2024, pretty much anything early will be on existing boundaries.
    An election could still be held in October 2023.Electoral boundary changes were approved in April 1983 with a GE taking place a mere two months later.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    ydoethur said:

    dixiedean said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Under the FTPA the latest an election can be held is the 2nd of July 2024.

    Repealing the FTPA isn't as easy as assumed, it's going to be tricky trying to restore a royal prerogative power especially as the government is going to argue the prerogative powers are not judicially reviewable, that's why the government has got the Lords involved at this early stage.

    Perhaps you'd care to clarify? - seems out of line with the 'five year term'.
    Click the download report here

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06111/

    On page 8 you'll notice this

    Following the early election, in December 2019, the next election is scheduled to take place on 2 May 2024. Parliament will be dissolved on 26 March 2024.

    and

    There is provision for the Prime Minister to make an order to extend this date for a maximum of two months to deal with unexpected developments. He/she must set out the reasons for the delay, and such an order must be approved by both Houses of Parliament before it can be made. One precedent is the foot and mouth disease outbreak in 2001 which delayed local elections by one month. (In 2001, the general election was held on the same day as the delayed local elections.)
    Thanks. I hadn't appreciated that May was explicitly favoued.

    Ok, so May 2024 is an even more likely date than I'd thought.
    I think May 2024 will be the date for GE simply for no other reason that boundary changes recommendations will not be received until July 2023.

    The primary legislation has been passed but I suspect there may be issues from the Welsh and the Tories (if the Tories look like they will win Wales) about reducing the Welsh number of MPs by 20%.
    The Tories are more likely to favour the reduction in seats because it makes it plausible for them to win Wales. It’s the Valleys where the heaviest cuts will fall and although the Tories have made progress there they’re still not in serious contention to win any seats on current boundaries except possibly Gower and a very long shot at Blaenau Gwent.

    Plus the changes if along the lines proposed would exterminate Labour outside the south, cut Plaid Cymru in half by costing them the current Carmarthen East and Ceredigion seats and leave Newport and Llanelli both looking vulnerable to a fairly modest Tory swing.

    So I do not see that as a problem. There might be a couple of cases of two Tory MPs fighting for the same seat in the north east but actually there are enough tempting targets to go round to buy off any losers.
    I was talking more about the optics, it isn't inconceivable that the Tories win* the Senedd elections next month that creates momentum for them for them in the GE, it'll be easy attack line for Labour to use about the Tories reducing Welsh influence in Parliament when they need it the most.
    I do not think that will resonate outside the Cardiff/Swansea/Merthyr triangle, if I’m honest. The immediate riposte is ‘you’ve had influence for years and things keep getting worse. Let’s try influencing the other lot.’

    Bear in mind, there is only one seat Labour have never held at any level in Wales. They’ve held all the others at one time or another and done fuck all with it. A trade Union exec once told me with a straight face that Nicholas Edwards had done far more for Wales than ever Peter Hain did (On the one occasion I met him, Edwards himself agreed, incidentally, and wasn’t amused when I tripped him up over one or two of his claims).

    So I think there isn’t a problem for the Tories in cutting seats outside the Valleys, and there aren’t many likely to go there anyway, while inside the valleys it will make no difference anyway.
    Aren't a number of seats in North Wales to go too? Labour only holds one of them.
    The way the boundaries were being drawn, with Anglesey protected, that Labour seat is in effect the only one that goes.

    There might be a bit of a scuffle between the MP for Montgomeryshire and one of the Clwyd seats, but elsewhere it’s as you were.

    In the south west, helpfully, the redrawn seats pitch incumbent Tories against incumbent PC.
    It doesn't appear to me as if there are sufficient seats in the North to go round for the available Tory MPs, even if we assume that the successor to the current Alyn & Deeside flips Lab to Con and that one extra seat is added, relative to the 2019 proposals, since Wales is now to receive 32 rather than 29 MPs. I guess that whoever is left without a chair when the music stops will be sent to try to lift Ceredigion plus whatever gets tacked onto it from Plaid, although then again I'm not sure I'd much fancy their chances. They might actually have more luck trying to prise Llanelli away from Labour, if it ends up having some more rural hinterland tacked onto it.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,932
    edited April 2021

    ydoethur said:

    I would wonder if the government had lost their minds, were it not for the minor detail I never thought they found them in the first place.
    That really is going to cause a fabulous number of law suits if they push ahead with it.

    No legal requirement to have the app but you are not allowed back into the office without it.
    Companies try to force people to have the app - which is a change in their terms and conditions.
    People refuse.
    Company left with choice. Sack people and face unfair dismissal legal action or back down and people allowed to work from home indefinitely.

    The Government are genuinely mad if they try to force this through.
    That tweet is quite misleading. It's all based on an interview with a company developing an app in Europe where they describe the potential use cases.

    In the article itself:

    A Government spokesman said: “The video on Netcompany's website states that all scenarios are fictitious and not indicative of how a certification system might work in the UK."

    It's crap journalism.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,858
    10! 10! Bloody hell. Italy 376, Vaccines. They work.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,710
    edited April 2021
    He worked closely with BoZo when the twit was at the FCO, so he is a pretty close witness.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,234
    edited April 2021
    OT:

    Hmmm. Seamus Heaney the 'language steeped in British cultural traditions' writer.

    I'd agree on Andrea Levy. Not sure I'd argue for Seamus Heaney.

    https://twitter.com/aylwyn_scally/status/1378383982514089984
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,932
    Foxy said:

    He worked closely with BoZo when twit was at the FCO, so he is a pretty close witness.
    That doesn't make him an unbiased observer.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,725

    ydoethur said:

    I would wonder if the government had lost their minds, were it not for the minor detail I never thought they found them in the first place.
    That really is going to cause a fabulous number of law suits if they push ahead with it.

    No legal requirement to have the app but you are not allowed back into the office without it.
    Companies try to force people to have the app - which is a change in their terms and conditions.
    People refuse.
    Company left with choice. Sack people and face unfair dismissal legal action or back down and people allowed to work from home indefinitely.

    The Government are genuinely mad if they try to force this through.
    Change the law. These are exceptional times.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,548
    MattW said:

    OT:

    Hmmm. Seamus Heaney the "steeped in British cultural traditions" writer.

    I'd agree on Andrea Levy. Not sure I'd argue for Seamus Heaney.

    https://twitter.com/aylwyn_scally/status/1378383982514089984

    To be fair he was in the Commonwealth for the first 10 years of his life :)
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,710

    Would that apply to MPs? One way of marginalising the rebel Tories. But has Rees-Mogg been informed?
    Is a quill and parchment version of the app available?
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,548

    ydoethur said:

    I would wonder if the government had lost their minds, were it not for the minor detail I never thought they found them in the first place.
    That really is going to cause a fabulous number of law suits if they push ahead with it.

    No legal requirement to have the app but you are not allowed back into the office without it.
    Companies try to force people to have the app - which is a change in their terms and conditions.
    People refuse.
    Company left with choice. Sack people and face unfair dismissal legal action or back down and people allowed to work from home indefinitely.

    The Government are genuinely mad if they try to force this through.
    Change the law. These are exceptional times.
    I doubt very much they will change the law. The whole point of this exercise is to force people into having the ID cards without it actually being a legal requirement. They want it all to be the fault of businesses rather than the Government. That way when it goes horribly wrong they can say it wasn't their intention for it to be enforced in that way. It is classic Johnson tactics.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,207
    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Floater said:
    That is also a reminder that - while we will have gotten out of this before the EU - we can't pat ourselves on the back and say that we've handled the crisis perfectly.
    What this shows is that we were doing averagely, by European standards, until we got hammered by the Kentish Variant (which is now hammering others)

    This does not excuse our government and our scientists their many tragic, grievous errors (eg treating it like flu, mask advice, travel quarantine, etc) but it is vital context.
    What that chart tells me is that a few travel restrictions last Summer and Autumn could have saved an awful lot of lives and prevented a severe Spring lockdown.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,429
    edited April 2021
    MattW said:

    OT:

    Hmmm. Seamus Heaney the "steeped in British cultural traditions" writer.

    https://twitter.com/aylwyn_scally/status/1378383982514089984

    That is completely right, unless you want to exclude Ireland from British culture, which is borderline insane given that Ireland WAS part of "Britain and Ireland" for hundreds of years, and Irish people (esp writers) have contributed enormously to British culture

    Also, Seamus Heaney was British, born in northern Ireland. Also, Seamus Heaney felt British enough to translate Beowulf, the ultimate Anglo-Saxon text, even as he also felt Irish. He owned both. Good for him.

    Surely this is good? Trying to make Britishness inclusive? Or would you rather that they narrow Britishness down to people with DNA from Jutland?

    What a load of drivel. The Left is obsessed with race yet has no idea what it actually believes, or why, because they are all scared of saying the wrong thing, which might get them cancelled next week
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    edited April 2021
    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Floater said:
    That is also a reminder that - while we will have gotten out of this before the EU - we can't pat ourselves on the back and say that we've handled the crisis perfectly.
    What this shows is that we were doing averagely, by European standards, until we got hammered by the Kentish Variant (which is now hammering others)

    This does not excuse our government and our scientists their many tragic, grievous errors (eg treating it like flu, mask advice, travel quarantine, etc) but it is vital context.
    What that chart tells me is that a few travel restrictions last Summer and Autumn could have saved an awful lot of lives and prevented a severe Spring lockdown.
    Problem is, when you're on top of it, you're under pressure to relax restrictions. That's not to say that mistakes weren't made, but I don't think it's as simple as to say that we could have just made a couple of changes and everything would have been much better.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    I'm not sure how. Their candidates can't even promise action on travellers pitching camp where they oughtn't without the party's entire left flank having a collective meltdown.

    That is, I know all this culture wars crap is both corrosive and a deep inconvenience, but it can't just be wished away given what kind of organisation the Labour Party has become. I'm not sure that the leadership can even propose an increase in police numbers without the Corbyn movement going into spasm. A lot of them think the police are the enemy. And stop and search is bound to come up as well before very long, too...
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,877

    ydoethur said:

    I would wonder if the government had lost their minds, were it not for the minor detail I never thought they found them in the first place.
    That really is going to cause a fabulous number of law suits if they push ahead with it.

    No legal requirement to have the app but you are not allowed back into the office without it.
    Companies try to force people to have the app - which is a change in their terms and conditions.
    People refuse.
    Company left with choice. Sack people and face unfair dismissal legal action or back down and people allowed to work from home indefinitely.

    The Government are genuinely mad if they try to force this through.
    Change the law. These are exceptional times.
    I doubt very much they will change the law. The whole point of this exercise is to force people into having the ID cards without it actually being a legal requirement. They want it all to be the fault of businesses rather than the Government. That way when it goes horribly wrong they can say it wasn't their intention for it to be enforced in that way. It is classic Johnson tactics.
    I still don't understand what vaxport advocates think these things are going to accomplish in the first place. If I am vaccinated and have a vax port and catch covid I will still be mixing with them just like I would be if there was no passport.

    If R shoots up despite everyone being vaccinated then we just have to live with it or accept a lockdown for evermore.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    rcs1000 said:

    Floater said:
    That is also a reminder that - while we will have gotten out of this before the EU - we can't pat ourselves on the back and say that we've handled the crisis perfectly.
    No we certainly haven't.

    Shame they chose not to learn from our mistakes
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,234
    Leon said:

    MattW said:

    OT:

    Hmmm. Seamus Heaney the "steeped in British cultural traditions" writer.

    https://twitter.com/aylwyn_scally/status/1378383982514089984

    That is completely right, unless you want to exclude Ireland from British culture, which is borderline insane given that Ireland WAS part of "Britain and Ireland" for hundreds of years, and Irish people (esp writers) have contributed enormously to British culture

    Also, Seamus Heaney was British, born in northern Ireland. Also, Seamus Heaney felt British enough to translate Beowulf, the ultimate Anglo-Saxon text, even as he also felt Irish. He owned both. Good for him.

    Surely this is good? Trying to make Britishness inclusive? Or would you rather that they narrow Britishness down to people with DNA from Jutland?

    What a load of drivel. The Left is obsessed with race yet has no idea what it actually believes, or why, because they are all scared of saying the wrong thing, which might get them cancelled next week
    The people on that thread aren't too happy about it :smile:
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,429
    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Floater said:
    That is also a reminder that - while we will have gotten out of this before the EU - we can't pat ourselves on the back and say that we've handled the crisis perfectly.
    What this shows is that we were doing averagely, by European standards, until we got hammered by the Kentish Variant (which is now hammering others)

    This does not excuse our government and our scientists their many tragic, grievous errors (eg treating it like flu, mask advice, travel quarantine, etc) but it is vital context.
    What that chart tells me is that a few travel restrictions last Summer and Autumn could have saved an awful lot of lives and prevented a severe Spring lockdown.
    No, the Kentish Variant was a total googly
This discussion has been closed.