Having mostly stayed out of the Holyrood betting I am minded to back No-SNP majority given the Comres. It means the polling spread is 42-52% for the SNP on the list. That puts the polling midpoint at exactly the level where the SNP would just miss out on smashing it on the Constituencies which they need to do to get a majority.
Only the GOLD STANDARD Ipsos Mori having a constituency vote of over 50% would stay my hand.
SNP no majority 4/5 with Betfred and Ladbrokes (plus or minus odds-boosts, I suppose). (Evens SNP majority.)
Ref discussion on previous thread about poverty in WVA, I looked at the Zillow site for real estate in Princeton WVA, and Welch WVA, both in McDowell County. Houses available for under $50k. Not necessarily anything you'd want to live in ...
On Rightmove there are terraced houses starting at £5000 in Hartlepool.
Auctions with a starting price of £5000, from memory. Not the same thing...
@Foxy can you post a link on this. The lowest prices seem to be more like 50k for the lower end liveable 2 bed terraced.
This is the only 5k I can find, which is a come and get me auction EPC F small terrace, which looks as though it needs a full refurb, which will be several 10s of K.
Sturgeon says she WON’T hold a referendum if Boris says No
Am now confused
‘Nicola Sturgeon here confirming that if she doesn't get a Section 30 order from the UK Government, then there will be no wildcat independence referendum.
Of course. The question is: what will fundamentalist Nats like Malcolmg do when she meekly agrees. They will go nuts
She will be out on her arse soon anyway, one of the court cases will finally do for her and her ne'er do well husband. They will have to explain the missing 600K of ringfenced members money that cannot be found. If she tries to bottle it again she will not last long , she is in the last chance saloon.
Ref discussion on previous thread about poverty in WVA, I looked at the Zillow site for real estate in Princeton WVA, and Welch WVA, both in McDowell County. Houses available for under $50k. Not necessarily anything you'd want to live in ...
You might be surprised. Princeton is (as I recall) pretty nice (nicer than Welch anyway). Up in the mountains close to the VA line.
Nearby Bluefield (WV & VA) used to be famous back in the day, for an ice cream parlor that gave out free ice cream when the summertime temperature broke 90F or thereabouts. Was really advertising the fact that, in the dog days of summer, Bluefield had some of the cooler weather in the general area.
No, clearly some nice bits of Princeton (Jewel of the South, no less), but I was referring to the $50k houses as not being something you'd want
Princeton WV is only about 90 minutes from Roanoke, too.
And within commuting distance of Liberty University in Lynchburg.
Even closer to Radford University, Radford VA which is a wee bit more liberal artsy than LU (to put it mildly) but no competition on the basketball court.
To be clear, I quite like Appalachia, at least the natural beauty.
Here in Scotland, gap years before heading off to Uni are not a thing. But when our middle lad and his best friend finished their Uni degrees they then decided to do just that before they settled down to finding a future real job. They then immediately set off to the US to walk the Appalachian Trail, they started in Georgia and completed it in five and half months meeting many new friends along the way. They quickly joined up with two American lads who like them had just finished Uni and built such a solid friendship that they have been over to visit us in Scotland.
Hello, Fitalass! Long time no see on PB, good to read your comment.
Good to see you too, I am back because I am following the Scottish Holyrood election closely.
After the Times YouGov and the Scotsmans Savanta ComRes last night which shows a real disparity in the polling, we are still waiting for the P&J/Dundee Courier Survation poll and an Ipsos More on the eve of the election.
Hi Fitalass.
Ditto welcome back.
Hi Squareroot2, good to see some familiar posters on PB.
I disappeared or barely posted for some considerable while as I got really disillusioned with politics but I find the left's loathing and with no real plan as to ousting Boris bar arguing about wallpaper fascinating. The left is irrelevant and impotent.
I don't always agree with Rentoul's take but the observation quoted in the thread header that Labour want to continue campaigning against the nasty Tory party that they know they can beat rather than seeking to address the one they are facing now is a real hammer and nail point.
We saw very much the same thing in Scotland when they continued to campaign against such a fantastical Tory party and neglected to engage with the SNP who proceeded to pretty much wipe them off the face of the earth with barely a shot in anger in reply.
The difference between the Tory party of s28 and the Tory party that passed the Gay Marriage Act is plain for all to see except those who don't want to see it. That minority is not very good at persuading others though, no matter how hard they try to create some equivalence.
Reminds you of how the Tories continued to campaign, equally unsuccessfully, against the early Blair, harping back to the winter of discontent and all the demon eyes stuff.
Ref discussion on previous thread about poverty in WVA, I looked at the Zillow site for real estate in Princeton WVA, and Welch WVA, both in McDowell County. Houses available for under $50k. Not necessarily anything you'd want to live in ...
On Rightmove there are terraced houses starting at £5000 in Hartlepool.
Auctions with a starting price of £5000, from memory. Not the same thing...
@Foxy can you post a link on this. The lowest prices seem to be more like 50k for the lower end liveable 2 bed terraced.
This is the only 5k I can find, which is a come and get me auction EPC F small terrace, which looks as though it needs a full refurb, which will be several 10s of K.
Sturgeon says she WON’T hold a referendum if Boris says No
Am now confused
‘Nicola Sturgeon here confirming that if she doesn't get a Section 30 order from the UK Government, then there will be no wildcat independence referendum.
More seriously, is this Big Fish paying attention to her polling data? And setting up Boris as a semi-permanent boogie man, as long as he is the Prime Minister / Gatekeeper of Union?
She has never wanted to hold one, prefers to be the big fish in a little pond with someone to blame for all the mistakes. She will swan off to some fancy job in UN or Europe with her £5M property portfolio. She is only interested in herself. She will kick it down the road as long as she can but is on her last legs.
Yes, not a book that I like. The depictions of the Ewell family as "White Trash" and the villains of the tale are rather disturbing.
The complicity in not investigating the death of Mr Ewell is as wrong as any other act in the book.
I have similar disquiet about the ending of "Of Mice and Men" complicity in murder, but justified by the author as justice served, when it is the opposite.
Funnily enough, when I read it as a set text at school it made a deep and lasting impression on me - for the good, I feel.
It is a well written book, with multiple overlapped themes, but some of the conclusions to be drawn are very dark indeed. The impossibility of justice, the power of the middle class respectable folk to selectively enforce laws on the poor, both white and black.
Foxy, the reality of America which is still true today.
Not under Starmer though. and I can't see under who else in the current PLP.
I don't think Starmer can *win* an election. However a Conservative leader could *lose* an election against Starmer.
There's a difference I think.
I don't think you can win in 2024. But LAB can/will win in 2029. No party has won six elections in a row.
Starmer can get LAB back into a 1992 position particularly if LAB come back in Scotland, which can happen if we have an independence referendum which Sturgeon loses and then people turn against SNP.
It all depends on the economy after the job retention scheme closes.
As a former student of economics I struggle not to see hard times ahead. However, there are plenty of jobs available now the Eastern Europeans have returned home, but do we have the workforce that wants to work hard and for not very much? The government will promote entrepreneurship, but how many barbers shops can any one high street sustain?
If I am wrong and the economy runs along nicely on cheap borrowing and house price inflation, the Conservative Party are in for as long as they want.
The people on benefits will not take a cut in money to go out and work in those jobs for certain.
Ref discussion on previous thread about poverty in WVA, I looked at the Zillow site for real estate in Princeton WVA, and Welch WVA, both in McDowell County. Houses available for under $50k. Not necessarily anything you'd want to live in ...
You might be surprised. Princeton is (as I recall) pretty nice (nicer than Welch anyway). Up in the mountains close to the VA line.
Nearby Bluefield (WV & VA) used to be famous back in the day, for an ice cream parlor that gave out free ice cream when the summertime temperature broke 90F or thereabouts. Was really advertising the fact that, in the dog days of summer, Bluefield had some of the cooler weather in the general area.
No, clearly some nice bits of Princeton (Jewel of the South, no less), but I was referring to the $50k houses as not being something you'd want
Princeton WV is only about 90 minutes from Roanoke, too.
And within commuting distance of Liberty University in Lynchburg.
Even closer to Radford University, Radford VA which is a wee bit more liberal artsy than LU (to put it mildly) but no competition on the basketball court.
To be clear, I quite like Appalachia, at least the natural beauty.
Here in Scotland, gap years before heading off to Uni are not a thing. But when our middle lad and his best friend finished their Uni degrees they then decided to do just that before they settled down to finding a future real job. They then immediately set off to the US to walk the Appalachian Trail, they started in Georgia and completed it in five and half months meeting many new friends along the way. They quickly joined up with two American lads who like them had just finished Uni and built such a solid friendship that they have been over to visit us in Scotland.
Hello, Fitalass! Long time no see on PB, good to read your comment.
Good to see you too, I am back because I am following the Scottish Holyrood election closely.
After the Times YouGov and the Scotsmans Savanta ComRes last night which shows a real disparity in the polling, we are still waiting for the P&J/Dundee Courier Survation poll and an Ipsos More on the eve of the election.
Hi Fitalass.
Ditto welcome back.
Hi Squareroot2, good to see some familiar posters on PB.
I disappeared or barely posted for some considerable while as I got really disillusioned with politics but I find the left's loathing and with no real plan as to ousting Boris bar arguing about wallpaper fascinating. The left is irrelevant and impotent.
I don't always agree with Rentoul's take but the observation quoted in the thread header that Labour want to continue campaigning against the nasty Tory party that they know they can beat rather than seeking to address the one they are facing now is a real hammer and nail point.
We saw very much the same thing in Scotland when they continued to campaign against such a fantastical Tory party and neglected to engage with the SNP who proceeded to pretty much wipe them off the face of the earth with barely a shot in anger in reply.
The difference between the Tory party of s28 and the Tory party that passed the Gay Marriage Act is plain for all to see except those who don't want to see it. That minority is not very good at persuading others though, no matter how hard they try to create some equivalence.
Yes, Rentoul makes an important point.
Of course the Nasty Party may well return via Priti, or harsh austerity, or both, but in the meantime it is difficult for Labour to outspending Johnson, and arguing for financial sanity doesn't fit either.
Even so, despite a boring leader and few eye-catching policies, depending on which poll you choose, Labour is only a few percent short of the Tory vote share. It wouldn't take much of a surge for Labour to be ahead, with either a more charismatic campaigner as leader (Rayner) or some eye catching policies (abolition of student fees ala 2017).
Before: Jersey authorities talk directly to Normandy authorities who talk to their fishermen.
Now: Normandy fishermen talk to Normandy authorities who relay info to French government, who tell the EU, who tell the UK, who then tell the Jersey authorities.
Is it any wonder its got cocked up? The issue appears to be that some Normandy fishermen haven't provided all the information the treaty requires them to do....and Jersey is sticking to the letter of the treaty....
Not under Starmer though. and I can't see under who else in the current PLP.
I don't think Starmer can *win* an election. However a Conservative leader could *lose* an election against Starmer.
There's a difference I think.
I don't think you can win in 2024. But LAB can/will win in 2029. No party has won six elections in a row.
Starmer can get LAB back into a 1992 position particularly if LAB come back in Scotland, which can happen if we have an independence referendum which Sturgeon loses and then people turn against SNP.
It all depends on the economy after the job retention scheme closes.
As a former student of economics I struggle not to see hard times ahead. However, there are plenty of jobs available now the Eastern Europeans have returned home, but do we have the workforce that wants to work hard and for not very much? The government will promote entrepreneurship, but how many barbers shops can any one high street sustain?
If I am wrong and the economy runs along nicely on cheap borrowing and house price inflation, the Conservative Party are in for as long as they want.
The people on benefits will not take a cut in money to go out and work in those jobs for certain.
Foxjr2 and his mates at Uni are all managing to pick up hospitality jobs for the summer in London. Not too many Slovakian barmaids are left. Care homes may struggle though.
I wonder if these late "bad news" polling stories for Labour about areas like Hartlepool are in themselves contributing to a slight late swing away from Labour. The previous media narrative had all been "Tory sleaze and polls closing" for the last 10 days or so.
Ref discussion on previous thread about poverty in WVA, I looked at the Zillow site for real estate in Princeton WVA, and Welch WVA, both in McDowell County. Houses available for under $50k. Not necessarily anything you'd want to live in ...
You might be surprised. Princeton is (as I recall) pretty nice (nicer than Welch anyway). Up in the mountains close to the VA line.
Nearby Bluefield (WV & VA) used to be famous back in the day, for an ice cream parlor that gave out free ice cream when the summertime temperature broke 90F or thereabouts. Was really advertising the fact that, in the dog days of summer, Bluefield had some of the cooler weather in the general area.
No, clearly some nice bits of Princeton (Jewel of the South, no less), but I was referring to the $50k houses as not being something you'd want
Princeton WV is only about 90 minutes from Roanoke, too.
And within commuting distance of Liberty University in Lynchburg.
Even closer to Radford University, Radford VA which is a wee bit more liberal artsy than LU (to put it mildly) but no competition on the basketball court.
To be clear, I quite like Appalachia, at least the natural beauty.
Asheville’s a great place to visit, and stay, and at odds with the wider image of North Carolina. Some good walking in the surrounding area. Lynchburg is an interesting place that has clearly gone through deindustrialization and mostly survived. And I had a very good lunch in Roanoke; they were wise to change the name from Big Lick.
If you drive from north to south in Kentucky you go from the immaculate white picket fences of the stud farms in and around Lexington to the grinding poverty of people selling their socks on their porches near Cumberland Gap.
My north to south in Kentucky was on the western side, and the area in the south by the lakes isn’t particularly poor.
Sturgeon says she WON’T hold a referendum if Boris says No
Am now confused
‘Nicola Sturgeon here confirming that if she doesn't get a Section 30 order from the UK Government, then there will be no wildcat independence referendum.
Agent P lying about what Sturgeon said? Well I never. Even providing the video to show they are lying about takes moxie though.
She did not say if she doesn't get a Section 30 order she will not hold a referendum. She said she would not hold an illegal referendum.
But if you remember the plan the SNP published the idea is to pass the legislation to hold the referendum then get the UK Government to sue to prove its illegality.
If the UK gov don't sue the it is de facto legal. If they do sue it goes to the courts.
Sturgeon says she WON’T hold a referendum if Boris says No
Am now confused
‘Nicola Sturgeon here confirming that if she doesn't get a Section 30 order from the UK Government, then there will be no wildcat independence referendum.
Its hypothetical. Even Johnson can recognise what a democratic mandate is. Leave is about to get a huge one when the results are announced at the weekend.
Vaccines minister Nadhim Zahawi: 'It's great to see Spain and France and Germany really beginning to accelerate their vaccination programmes. We send millions of the nanoparticles that carry the Pfizer messenger RNA that delivers those jabs from the UK to the EU...
...'and they send us back both the Pfizer vaccine and of course other vaccines. It's much better to work together on this stuff than to allow some of these operational challenges to become confrontational.'
Just looking at the Scottish polling, the interesting thing about the ComRes figures is that they had the SNP at 49% in the constituency vote a month ago. So for them to now have them at 42% suggests they have detected something.
Before: Jersey authorities talk directly to Normandy authorities who talk to their fishermen.
Now: Normandy fishermen talk to Normandy authorities who relay info to French government, who tell the EU, who tell the UK, who then tell the Jersey authorities.
Is it any wonder its got cocked up? The issue appears to be that some Normandy fishermen haven't provided all the information the treaty requires them to do....and Jersey is sticking to the letter of the treaty....
Thanks.
Am I correct that the CIs have a right to the same 200 miles EEZ as everyone else. But that it would be implemented via the UK Government via a process initiated by the CIs or with consent from the 3 CI Parliaments?
Yes, not a book that I like. The depictions of the Ewell family as "White Trash" and the villains of the tale are rather disturbing.
The complicity in not investigating the death of Mr Ewell is as wrong as any other act in the book.
I have similar disquiet about the ending of "Of Mice and Men" complicity in murder, but justified by the author as justice served, when it is the opposite.
Funnily enough, when I read it as a set text at school it made a deep and lasting impression on me - for the good, I feel.
It is a well written book, with multiple overlapped themes, but some of the conclusions to be drawn are very dark indeed. The impossibility of justice, the power of the middle class respectable folk to selectively enforce laws on the poor, both white and black.
Foxy, the reality of America which is still true today.
Yes, that is true.
I think though that the fate of Mr Ewell is seen as justice in the book when the reality is injustice. It is OK to kill as long as you kill people who are unwanted, and you are middle class.
I will no doubt repeat this point when @TheJezziah gets on but as regards Jezza's electability. During the Lab leadership contest my local Lab MP asked me, as a then Tory activist, who I would want as Lab leader.
I said Jezza.
She was quite mocking and dismissive (she was a Jezza fan). But I was right and so were the £3-ers.
Whatever the relative vote shares, Jezza lead the Labour Party to it's worst defeat in eons and delivered an 80-seat Cons majority. Job done.
As for SKS' electability, we shall see.
Letting your enemy choose your leader was always a bold plan! It would be like Labour lumbering the Tories with John Redwood.
According to @TheJezziah the enemy also chose SKS.
The opposition occupies the benches in front of you.
Before: Jersey authorities talk directly to Normandy authorities who talk to their fishermen.
Now: Normandy fishermen talk to Normandy authorities who relay info to French government, who tell the EU, who tell the UK, who then tell the Jersey authorities.
Is it any wonder its got cocked up? The issue appears to be that some Normandy fishermen haven't provided all the information the treaty requires them to do....and Jersey is sticking to the letter of the treaty....
I’m assuming that the whole electricity concept was a daft question from a backbencher that the Mail has got overexcited by?
Although I feel sorry for Guernsey if their power was switched off as well due to a dispute between Jersey and France
Ps missed that the shellfish war has been resolved by reclassifying UK waters in line with EU environmental norms vs our own higher standards
Not under Starmer though. and I can't see under who else in the current PLP.
I don't think Starmer can *win* an election. However a Conservative leader could *lose* an election against Starmer.
There's a difference I think.
I don't think you can win in 2024. But LAB can/will win in 2029. No party has won six elections in a row.
Starmer can get LAB back into a 1992 position particularly if LAB come back in Scotland, which can happen if we have an independence referendum which Sturgeon loses and then people turn against SNP.
It all depends on the economy after the job retention scheme closes.
As a former student of economics I struggle not to see hard times ahead. However, there are plenty of jobs available now the Eastern Europeans have returned home, but do we have the workforce that wants to work hard and for not very much? The government will promote entrepreneurship, but how many barbers shops can any one high street sustain?
If I am wrong and the economy runs along nicely on cheap borrowing and house price inflation, the Conservative Party are in for as long as they want.
The people on benefits will not take a cut in money to go out and work in those jobs for certain.
Foxjr2 and his mates at Uni are all managing to pick up hospitality jobs for the summer in London. Not too many Slovakian barmaids are left. Care homes may struggle though.
Care homes doing fine on recruitment - drawing on the retail pool. More worried about the government vaccination limit for LA placements
TBH It will take some years before the UK can change its direction of travel. Several other agreements will be lapsing soon and this will only add to the difficulties for UK exports. When that becomes clear I think there will be some concerted moves towards greater cooperation, but who knows how long it will take? Many UK companies are already setting up inside the single market, so UK tax revenues are set to fall too.
Sturgeon says she WON’T hold a referendum if Boris says No
Am now confused
‘Nicola Sturgeon here confirming that if she doesn't get a Section 30 order from the UK Government, then there will be no wildcat independence referendum.
Agent P lying about what Sturgeon said? Well I never. Even providing the video to show they are lying about takes moxie though.
She did not say if she doesn't get a Section 30 order she will not hold a referendum. She said she would not hold an illegal referendum.
But if you remember the plan the SNP published the idea is to pass the legislation to hold the referendum then get the UK Government to sue to prove its illegality.
If the UK gov don't sue the it is de facto legal. If they do sue it goes to the courts.
No… just because the UK doesn’t sue doesn’t make it legal “ipso facto” or anything else.
Funny as @TheJezziah is, there is a serious point to make - the political antennae of Keir Starmer.
In the Pools by-election, IDStarmer decided that he wanted Dr Paul Williams to be the candidate and had the selection process cancelled and the candidate imposed. This is hardly a new thing in the party - and the Corbyn cult were just as bad at doing it as other past leaders.
The problem is that his choice of candidate was perhaps the worst one possible. Dr Paul is a genuinely great guy, dedicated to the people he represents, a medical leader, a pragmatist. But he was also the poster boy for the People's Vote campaign. And was inserted into a seat that was the most batshit of leave in the region with a long history of batshittery.
When I heard they had selected Paul I posted on here "Tory gain nailed on". I was astonished they would select him AND pull him from the PCC election he had a reasonable chance to win. That their pledge rate is down to 40% is a disaster beyond anything I could imagine - the people of Hartlepool are going to punish Labour for this misstep.
Jezziah might be droning on and on and on until he starts foaming at the mouth, but he is absolutely right to question Starmer's leadership. If he can personally intervene in Hartlepool and personally get the decision this decision so massively wrong, then what else is he getting wrong? Aside from the photo of him taking the knee...
Jezziah and BJO want the solution to be a return to Corbynism - that would be an even bigger disaster. So here we are Labour - what you were under Corbyn was a disaster, what you are under Starmer is a disaster. The way forward cannot be a return to x or to y, it needs to be something new.
And there is their big problem. The two sides are so busy fighting the opposing ferrets in their sack that they are unaware that the river they are adrift on is heading for the waterfall. A 3rd way is needed, neither side will agree it, so over they go. This much is self-evident, England is lost to the Tories and to the reactionary ideas of gammon, hence my move north of the wall.
Sturgeon says she WON’T hold a referendum if Boris says No
Am now confused
‘Nicola Sturgeon here confirming that if she doesn't get a Section 30 order from the UK Government, then there will be no wildcat independence referendum.
Its hypothetical. Even Johnson can recognise what a democratic mandate is. Leave is about to get a huge one when the results are announced at the weekend.
It's not hypothetical - the last thing Sturgeon wants is an actual referendum - for that way lies victory or irrelevance.
If however she can avoid the referendum occurring that another grievance that will allow her to both remain in power and use as a distraction anything doesn't work out correctly.
lots of discussion on scotland and hartlepool, but less on the police and crime commissioners. A lot has changed since 2016 and a lot of those elections were surprisingly close.
Before: Jersey authorities talk directly to Normandy authorities who talk to their fishermen.
Now: Normandy fishermen talk to Normandy authorities who relay info to French government, who tell the EU, who tell the UK, who then tell the Jersey authorities.
Is it any wonder its got cocked up? The issue appears to be that some Normandy fishermen haven't provided all the information the treaty requires them to do....and Jersey is sticking to the letter of the treaty....
I’m assuming that the whole electricity concept was a daft question from a backbencher that the Mail has got overexcited by?
Although I feel sorry for Guernsey if their power was switched off as well due to a dispute between Jersey and France
Ps missed that the shellfish war has been resolved by reclassifying UK waters in line with EU environmental norms vs our own higher standards
Yes, by agreeing to follow EU rules, some of the barriers to trade imposed by Brexit can be circumvented. I expect more EU alignment to be quietly agreed in the future. Indeed that is the way to resolve the NI border issues, by following EU regulations on food and agriculture.
Before: Jersey authorities talk directly to Normandy authorities who talk to their fishermen.
Now: Normandy fishermen talk to Normandy authorities who relay info to French government, who tell the EU, who tell the UK, who then tell the Jersey authorities.
Is it any wonder its got cocked up? The issue appears to be that some Normandy fishermen haven't provided all the information the treaty requires them to do....and Jersey is sticking to the letter of the treaty....
Thanks.
Am I correct that the CIs have a right to the same 200 miles EEZ as everyone else. But that it would be implemented via the UK Government via a process initiated by the CIs or with consent from the 3 CI Parliaments?
I don't know the specific details, but in general the UK government is responsible for the external relations of the Crown Dependencies, which they do via consultation with the local governments. It looks like the Normandy fishermen are encountering similar problems to NI businesses - lots of new paperwork, imperfectly (or not at all) understood.....
Not under Starmer though. and I can't see under who else in the current PLP.
I don't think Starmer can *win* an election. However a Conservative leader could *lose* an election against Starmer.
There's a difference I think.
I don't think you can win in 2024. But LAB can/will win in 2029. No party has won six elections in a row.
Starmer can get LAB back into a 1992 position particularly if LAB come back in Scotland, which can happen if we have an independence referendum which Sturgeon loses and then people turn against SNP.
It all depends on the economy after the job retention scheme closes.
As a former student of economics I struggle not to see hard times ahead. However, there are plenty of jobs available now the Eastern Europeans have returned home, but do we have the workforce that wants to work hard and for not very much? The government will promote entrepreneurship, but how many barbers shops can any one high street sustain?
If I am wrong and the economy runs along nicely on cheap borrowing and house price inflation, the Conservative Party are in for as long as they want.
The people on benefits will not take a cut in money to go out and work in those jobs for certain.
This is the key point. Work does not pay. The Tories strategy is to cut welfare so that it is even more punative than taking these jobs. Which is fine as a slogan but means you have an underclass unable to keep the roof over their heads no matter how hard they work.
Just looking at the Scottish polling, the interesting thing about the ComRes figures is that they had the SNP at 49% in the constituency vote a month ago. So for them to now have them at 42% suggests they have detected something.
Didn’t ComRes fcuk up their Indy poll weighting for 3 months?
Sturgeon says she WON’T hold a referendum if Boris says No
Am now confused
‘Nicola Sturgeon here confirming that if she doesn't get a Section 30 order from the UK Government, then there will be no wildcat independence referendum.
Its hypothetical. Even Johnson can recognise what a democratic mandate is. Leave is about to get a huge one when the results are announced at the weekend.
It's not hypothetical - the last thing Sturgeon wants is an actual referendum - for that way lies victory or irrelevance.
If however she can avoid the referendum occurring that another grievance that will allow her to both remain in power and use as a distraction anything doesn't work out correctly.
Disagree. The SNP and their pro-independence allies are going to have a sizeable majority in Holyrood. Either Sturgeon produces a referendum in this parliament to come or the SNP will choose a leader who will.
Sturgeon says she WON’T hold a referendum if Boris says No
Am now confused
‘Nicola Sturgeon here confirming that if she doesn't get a Section 30 order from the UK Government, then there will be no wildcat independence referendum.
Agent P lying about what Sturgeon said? Well I never. Even providing the video to show they are lying about takes moxie though.
She did not say if she doesn't get a Section 30 order she will not hold a referendum. She said she would not hold an illegal referendum.
But if you remember the plan the SNP published the idea is to pass the legislation to hold the referendum then get the UK Government to sue to prove its illegality.
If the UK gov don't sue the it is de facto legal. If they do sue it goes to the courts.
No… just because the UK doesn’t sue doesn’t make it legal “ipso facto” or anything else.
Uk government just ignores it.
No that's not right. The Scotland Act says that if the UK Government thinks an Act by the Scottish Parliament is outside of its jurisdiction (eg a new referendum) then the UK Government has 14 (?) days to lodge a case with the Supreme Court.
No Supreme Court filing, then the Scottish legislation is by definition legal. If there is a Supreme Court filing, then the Supreme Court determines if its legal or illegal.
Not under Starmer though. and I can't see under who else in the current PLP.
I don't think Starmer can *win* an election. However a Conservative leader could *lose* an election against Starmer.
There's a difference I think.
I don't think you can win in 2024. But LAB can/will win in 2029. No party has won six elections in a row.
Starmer can get LAB back into a 1992 position particularly if LAB come back in Scotland, which can happen if we have an independence referendum which Sturgeon loses and then people turn against SNP.
It all depends on the economy after the job retention scheme closes.
As a former student of economics I struggle not to see hard times ahead. However, there are plenty of jobs available now the Eastern Europeans have returned home, but do we have the workforce that wants to work hard and for not very much? The government will promote entrepreneurship, but how many barbers shops can any one high street sustain?
If I am wrong and the economy runs along nicely on cheap borrowing and house price inflation, the Conservative Party are in for as long as they want.
The people on benefits will not take a cut in money to go out and work in those jobs for certain.
This is the key point. Work does not pay. The Tories strategy is to cut welfare so that it is even more punative than taking these jobs. Which is fine as a slogan but means you have an underclass unable to keep the roof over their heads no matter how hard they work.
Work does pay. The minimum wage now is close to £10 per hour.
The problem isn't wages, the problem is the tax and benefit system.
lots of discussion on scotland and hartlepool, but less on the police and crime commissioners. A lot has changed since 2016 and a lot of those elections were surprisingly close.
Sturgeon says she WON’T hold a referendum if Boris says No
Am now confused
‘Nicola Sturgeon here confirming that if she doesn't get a Section 30 order from the UK Government, then there will be no wildcat independence referendum.
Its hypothetical. Even Johnson can recognise what a democratic mandate is. Leave is about to get a huge one when the results are announced at the weekend.
Correct, but not the Leave mandate you are referring to.
When Johnson wins Hartlepool on Friday, he will interpret that getting Brexit done and his error-free, inch-perfect pandemic performance (what other assessment can he make?) has delivered for him. He will not give a jot for Scotland or Northern Ireland, he will be more interested in his vanquishing of spurious stories of wallpaper, corrupt procurement and lies about bodies piling high. He will read Hartlepool as a sign of his invincibility, and who can argue with that. He has captured the zeitgeist.
Sixteen years since the last Labour GE win? Bring on the next 16.years of the imperious World King .
Just looking at the Scottish polling, the interesting thing about the ComRes figures is that they had the SNP at 49% in the constituency vote a month ago. So for them to now have them at 42% suggests they have detected something.
Didn’t ComRes fcuk up their Indy poll weighting for 3 months?
Did they? Well, maybe they've messed up again. Maybe.
Before: Jersey authorities talk directly to Normandy authorities who talk to their fishermen.
Now: Normandy fishermen talk to Normandy authorities who relay info to French government, who tell the EU, who tell the UK, who then tell the Jersey authorities.
Is it any wonder its got cocked up? The issue appears to be that some Normandy fishermen haven't provided all the information the treaty requires them to do....and Jersey is sticking to the letter of the treaty....
I’m assuming that the whole electricity concept was a daft question from a backbencher that the Mail has got overexcited by?
Although I feel sorry for Guernsey if their power was switched off as well due to a dispute between Jersey and France
Ps missed that the shellfish war has been resolved by reclassifying UK waters in line with EU environmental norms vs our own higher standards
Yes, by agreeing to follow EU rules, some of the barriers to trade imposed by Brexit can be circumvented. I expect more EU alignment to be quietly agreed in the future. Indeed that is the way to resolve the NI border issues, by following EU regulations on food and agriculture.
Not my understanding. We reviewed the classification and changed it from B to A. It always qualified as A but we called it B because we had higher standards. (The difference on trade between A and B didn’t matter while we were in the EEA).
We’ve not changed the rules one iota. Just the classification
Before: Jersey authorities talk directly to Normandy authorities who talk to their fishermen.
Now: Normandy fishermen talk to Normandy authorities who relay info to French government, who tell the EU, who tell the UK, who then tell the Jersey authorities.
Is it any wonder its got cocked up? The issue appears to be that some Normandy fishermen haven't provided all the information the treaty requires them to do....and Jersey is sticking to the letter of the treaty....
I’m assuming that the whole electricity concept was a daft question from a backbencher that the Mail has got overexcited by?
Although I feel sorry for Guernsey if their power was switched off as well due to a dispute between Jersey and France
Ps missed that the shellfish war has been resolved by reclassifying UK waters in line with EU environmental norms vs our own higher standards
Yes, by agreeing to follow EU rules, some of the barriers to trade imposed by Brexit can be circumvented. I expect more EU alignment to be quietly agreed in the future. Indeed that is the way to resolve the NI border issues, by following EU regulations on food and agriculture.
Not my understanding. We reviewed the classification and changed it from B to A. It always qualified as A but we called it B because we had higher standards. (The difference on trade between A and B didn’t matter while we were in the EEA).
We’ve not changed the rules one iota. Just the classification
Just looking at the Scottish polling, the interesting thing about the ComRes figures is that they had the SNP at 49% in the constituency vote a month ago. So for them to now have them at 42% suggests they have detected something.
Didn’t ComRes fcuk up their Indy poll weighting for 3 months?
Did they? Well, maybe they've messed up again. Maybe.
Brussels’ decision will reportedly be at odds with several EU countries, including the Baltic nations and the Netherlands, that are said to support the UK joining.
TheCityUK CEO Miles Celic said it was “hard to understand” the recommendation.
“All of the non-EU parties to Lugano: Iceland, Norway and Switzerland, have indicated their support for the UK’s application and a relationship with the Single Market is not listed as a requirement of membership of the Convention,” he continued.
“We now hope that EU Member States will vote to support the UK’s application, as doing so has clear benefits for the citizens of all signatories to the treaty. However, other mechanisms exist which mean UK court judgments will continue to be enforceable throughout EU and EFTA.”
Sturgeon says she WON’T hold a referendum if Boris says No
Am now confused
‘Nicola Sturgeon here confirming that if she doesn't get a Section 30 order from the UK Government, then there will be no wildcat independence referendum.
Agent P lying about what Sturgeon said? Well I never. Even providing the video to show they are lying about takes moxie though.
She did not say if she doesn't get a Section 30 order she will not hold a referendum. She said she would not hold an illegal referendum.
But if you remember the plan the SNP published the idea is to pass the legislation to hold the referendum then get the UK Government to sue to prove its illegality.
If the UK gov don't sue the it is de facto legal. If they do sue it goes to the courts.
No… just because the UK doesn’t sue doesn’t make it legal “ipso facto” or anything else.
Uk government just ignores it.
No that's not right. The Scotland Act says that if the UK Government thinks an Act by the Scottish Parliament is outside of its jurisdiction (eg a new referendum) then the UK Government has 14 (?) days to lodge a case with the Supreme Court.
No Supreme Court filing, then the Scottish legislation is by definition legal. If there is a Supreme Court filing, then the Supreme Court determines if its legal or illegal.
I fear I'm going to have to break out the flow chart again.
Before: Jersey authorities talk directly to Normandy authorities who talk to their fishermen.
Now: Normandy fishermen talk to Normandy authorities who relay info to French government, who tell the EU, who tell the UK, who then tell the Jersey authorities.
Is it any wonder its got cocked up? The issue appears to be that some Normandy fishermen haven't provided all the information the treaty requires them to do....and Jersey is sticking to the letter of the treaty....
I’m assuming that the whole electricity concept was a daft question from a backbencher that the Mail has got overexcited by?
Although I feel sorry for Guernsey if their power was switched off as well due to a dispute between Jersey and France
Ps missed that the shellfish war has been resolved by reclassifying UK waters in line with EU environmental norms vs our own higher standards
Yes, by agreeing to follow EU rules, some of the barriers to trade imposed by Brexit can be circumvented. I expect more EU alignment to be quietly agreed in the future. Indeed that is the way to resolve the NI border issues, by following EU regulations on food and agriculture.
Not my understanding. We reviewed the classification and changed it from B to A. It always qualified as A but we called it B because we had higher standards. (The difference on trade between A and B didn’t matter while we were in the EEA).
We’ve not changed the rules one iota. Just the classification
Before: Jersey authorities talk directly to Normandy authorities who talk to their fishermen.
Now: Normandy fishermen talk to Normandy authorities who relay info to French government, who tell the EU, who tell the UK, who then tell the Jersey authorities.
Is it any wonder its got cocked up? The issue appears to be that some Normandy fishermen haven't provided all the information the treaty requires them to do....and Jersey is sticking to the letter of the treaty....
I’m assuming that the whole electricity concept was a daft question from a backbencher that the Mail has got overexcited by?
Although I feel sorry for Guernsey if their power was switched off as well due to a dispute between Jersey and France
Ps missed that the shellfish war has been resolved by reclassifying UK waters in line with EU environmental norms vs our own higher standards
Yes, by agreeing to follow EU rules, some of the barriers to trade imposed by Brexit can be circumvented. I expect more EU alignment to be quietly agreed in the future. Indeed that is the way to resolve the NI border issues, by following EU regulations on food and agriculture.
Not my understanding. We reviewed the classification and changed it from B to A. It always qualified as A but we called it B because we had higher standards. (The difference on trade between A and B didn’t matter while we were in the EEA).
We’ve not changed the rules one iota. Just the classification
So we've dropped our standards to match EU ones?
Or got the standards running in parallel?
We are keeping our standards but changing the marking scheme
(We’d called it B so we had a lever to increase environmental standards. I guess we’ll need to introduce an A* grade next)
Funny as @TheJezziah is, there is a serious point to make - the political antennae of Keir Starmer.
In the Pools by-election, IDStarmer decided that he wanted Dr Paul Williams to be the candidate and had the selection process cancelled and the candidate imposed. This is hardly a new thing in the party - and the Corbyn cult were just as bad at doing it as other past leaders.
The problem is that his choice of candidate was perhaps the worst one possible. Dr Paul is a genuinely great guy, dedicated to the people he represents, a medical leader, a pragmatist. But he was also the poster boy for the People's Vote campaign. And was inserted into a seat that was the most batshit of leave in the region with a long history of batshittery.
When I heard they had selected Paul I posted on here "Tory gain nailed on". I was astonished they would select him AND pull him from the PCC election he had a reasonable chance to win. That their pledge rate is down to 40% is a disaster beyond anything I could imagine - the people of Hartlepool are going to punish Labour for this misstep.
Jezziah might be droning on and on and on until he starts foaming at the mouth, but he is absolutely right to question Starmer's leadership. If he can personally intervene in Hartlepool and personally get the decision this decision so massively wrong, then what else is he getting wrong? Aside from the photo of him taking the knee...
Jezziah and BJO want the solution to be a return to Corbynism - that would be an even bigger disaster. So here we are Labour - what you were under Corbyn was a disaster, what you are under Starmer is a disaster. The way forward cannot be a return to x or to y, it needs to be something new.
And there is their big problem. The two sides are so busy fighting the opposing ferrets in their sack that they are unaware that the river they are adrift on is heading for the waterfall. A 3rd way is needed, neither side will agree it, so over they go. This much is self-evident, England is lost to the Tories and to the reactionary ideas of gammon, hence my move north of the wall.
Another part of the issue is that I don't think Hartlepool was in a position to pick a sane Labour candidate so someone did need to be imposed. The issue then came to who was the best suitable candidate and then the only real option was Dr Paul Williams.
The great unknown is did Dr Williams seek to be the Hartlepool candidate or did he switch because SKS asked him to.
Of its the former then Dr Williams is a fool and if it's the latter than Dr Williams is again a fool for not understanding what that consequences would be - as both you and me could see the end result from miles away.
Funny as @TheJezziah is, there is a serious point to make - the political antennae of Keir Starmer.
In the Pools by-election, IDStarmer decided that he wanted Dr Paul Williams to be the candidate and had the selection process cancelled and the candidate imposed. This is hardly a new thing in the party - and the Corbyn cult were just as bad at doing it as other past leaders.
The problem is that his choice of candidate was perhaps the worst one possible. Dr Paul is a genuinely great guy, dedicated to the people he represents, a medical leader, a pragmatist. But he was also the poster boy for the People's Vote campaign. And was inserted into a seat that was the most batshit of leave in the region with a long history of batshittery.
This is a good point. What evidence we have of Keir’s strategic nous so far is not good.
Some of the whipped votes have been iffy. There’s been a reluctance to reach out to tactical allies either in the LDs or even on the Tory backbenches.
He needs to deliver a good reshuffle after these results, sadly including his shadow Chancellor (I say sadly, because she was just promoted too early and inauspicious circs).
Edit: there is evidence enough of decent cut through from Nandy, Rayner, Lammy etc to assemble a decent front bench.
Before: Jersey authorities talk directly to Normandy authorities who talk to their fishermen.
Now: Normandy fishermen talk to Normandy authorities who relay info to French government, who tell the EU, who tell the UK, who then tell the Jersey authorities.
Is it any wonder its got cocked up? The issue appears to be that some Normandy fishermen haven't provided all the information the treaty requires them to do....and Jersey is sticking to the letter of the treaty....
Although I feel sorry for Guernsey if their power was switched off as well due to a dispute between Jersey and France
Guernsey has on-island generation in case of a fault with the cable - all France is doing is its demonstrating its a potentially unreliable supplier.
Not under Starmer though. and I can't see under who else in the current PLP.
I don't think Starmer can *win* an election. However a Conservative leader could *lose* an election against Starmer.
There's a difference I think.
I don't think you can win in 2024. But LAB can/will win in 2029. No party has won six elections in a row.
Starmer can get LAB back into a 1992 position particularly if LAB come back in Scotland, which can happen if we have an independence referendum which Sturgeon loses and then people turn against SNP.
It all depends on the economy after the job retention scheme closes.
As a former student of economics I struggle not to see hard times ahead. However, there are plenty of jobs available now the Eastern Europeans have returned home, but do we have the workforce that wants to work hard and for not very much? The government will promote entrepreneurship, but how many barbers shops can any one high street sustain?
If I am wrong and the economy runs along nicely on cheap borrowing and house price inflation, the Conservative Party are in for as long as they want.
The people on benefits will not take a cut in money to go out and work in those jobs for certain.
This is the key point. Work does not pay. The Tories strategy is to cut welfare so that it is even more punative than taking these jobs. Which is fine as a slogan but means you have an underclass unable to keep the roof over their heads no matter how hard they work.
Work does pay. The minimum wage now is close to £10 per hour.
The problem isn't wages, the problem is the tax and benefit system.
For someone who spends all day and everyday fawning over a character who claims he cannot get by on less than £300k per year and then exclaims "the problem isn't wages", I think you are having a laugh, aren't you?
Not under Starmer though. and I can't see under who else in the current PLP.
I don't think Starmer can *win* an election. However a Conservative leader could *lose* an election against Starmer.
There's a difference I think.
I don't think you can win in 2024. But LAB can/will win in 2029. No party has won six elections in a row.
Starmer can get LAB back into a 1992 position particularly if LAB come back in Scotland, which can happen if we have an independence referendum which Sturgeon loses and then people turn against SNP.
It all depends on the economy after the job retention scheme closes.
As a former student of economics I struggle not to see hard times ahead. However, there are plenty of jobs available now the Eastern Europeans have returned home, but do we have the workforce that wants to work hard and for not very much? The government will promote entrepreneurship, but how many barbers shops can any one high street sustain?
If I am wrong and the economy runs along nicely on cheap borrowing and house price inflation, the Conservative Party are in for as long as they want.
Round here more than I ever thought was possible especially at £10 or so a cut. Mind you a fair few appear to be Turkish Barbers were the lack of trade doesn't matter provided you can subsidies yourself and hit the 5 years residency you came here to get.
Sturgeon says she WON’T hold a referendum if Boris says No
Am now confused
‘Nicola Sturgeon here confirming that if she doesn't get a Section 30 order from the UK Government, then there will be no wildcat independence referendum.
Its hypothetical. Even Johnson can recognise what a democratic mandate is. Leave is about to get a huge one when the results are announced at the weekend.
It's not hypothetical - the last thing Sturgeon wants is an actual referendum - for that way lies victory or irrelevance.
If however she can avoid the referendum occurring that another grievance that will allow her to both remain in power and use as a distraction anything doesn't work out correctly.
Not only that- victory will lead to a loss of relevance. Once the referendum is won, the practical questions become dominant, which will be much less fun. Then, finally, when the job is done the circus tent will have to be folded away.
Use the threat of a referendum to keep chiselling baubles and increased bits of autonomy, but don't actually call one. It worked for the Catalan nationalists for decades.
SIndy, like the Culture War and the Brexit War, is much more useful as a war that continues forever than as a war that's ever won.
Before: Jersey authorities talk directly to Normandy authorities who talk to their fishermen.
Now: Normandy fishermen talk to Normandy authorities who relay info to French government, who tell the EU, who tell the UK, who then tell the Jersey authorities.
Is it any wonder its got cocked up? The issue appears to be that some Normandy fishermen haven't provided all the information the treaty requires them to do....and Jersey is sticking to the letter of the treaty....
I’m assuming that the whole electricity concept was a daft question from a backbencher that the Mail has got overexcited by?
Although I feel sorry for Guernsey if their power was switched off as well due to a dispute between Jersey and France
Ps missed that the shellfish war has been resolved by reclassifying UK waters in line with EU environmental norms vs our own higher standards
Yes, by agreeing to follow EU rules, some of the barriers to trade imposed by Brexit can be circumvented. I expect more EU alignment to be quietly agreed in the future. Indeed that is the way to resolve the NI border issues, by following EU regulations on food and agriculture.
Not my understanding. We reviewed the classification and changed it from B to A. It always qualified as A but we called it B because we had higher standards. (The difference on trade between A and B didn’t matter while we were in the EEA).
We’ve not changed the rules one iota. Just the classification
Agreed to follow the EU classification and rules.
No. We are following the same rules as before.
As a worked example (made up numbers):
EU standard - 80+ points classes you as Category A and 60+ points classes as grade B.
UK historic score using the same measurement scale 85 points. But we call it class B because we draw the cut at 90. We therefore have a bunch of obligations on environmental improvement.
We have now reclassified as class A because we are above 80 points. We have not changed our scoring system or lifted any of the improvement requirements. We’ve just changed the grade on the front of the paper.
(As an aside this nonsense is only necessary because the EU promised that we could continue to import as before and then broke their promise)
Funny as @TheJezziah is, there is a serious point to make - the political antennae of Keir Starmer.
In the Pools by-election, IDStarmer decided that he wanted Dr Paul Williams to be the candidate and had the selection process cancelled and the candidate imposed. This is hardly a new thing in the party - and the Corbyn cult were just as bad at doing it as other past leaders.
The problem is that his choice of candidate was perhaps the worst one possible. Dr Paul is a genuinely great guy, dedicated to the people he represents, a medical leader, a pragmatist. But he was also the poster boy for the People's Vote campaign. And was inserted into a seat that was the most batshit of leave in the region with a long history of batshittery.
When I heard they had selected Paul I posted on here "Tory gain nailed on". I was astonished they would select him AND pull him from the PCC election he had a reasonable chance to win. That their pledge rate is down to 40% is a disaster beyond anything I could imagine - the people of Hartlepool are going to punish Labour for this misstep.
Jezziah might be droning on and on and on until he starts foaming at the mouth, but he is absolutely right to question Starmer's leadership. If he can personally intervene in Hartlepool and personally get the decision this decision so massively wrong, then what else is he getting wrong? Aside from the photo of him taking the knee...
Jezziah and BJO want the solution to be a return to Corbynism - that would be an even bigger disaster. So here we are Labour - what you were under Corbyn was a disaster, what you are under Starmer is a disaster. The way forward cannot be a return to x or to y, it needs to be something new.
And there is their big problem. The two sides are so busy fighting the opposing ferrets in their sack that they are unaware that the river they are adrift on is heading for the waterfall. A 3rd way is needed, neither side will agree it, so over they go. This much is self-evident, England is lost to the Tories and to the reactionary ideas of gammon, hence my move north of the wall.
Another part of the issue is that I don't think Hartlepool was in a position to pick a sane Labour candidate so someone did need to be imposed. The issue then came to who was the best suitable candidate and then the only real option was Dr Paul Williams.
The great unknown is did Dr Williams seek to be the Hartlepool candidate or did he switch because SKS asked him to.
Of its the former then Dr Williams is a fool and if it's the latter than Dr Williams is again a fool for not understanding what that consequences would be - as both you and me could see the end result from miles away.
"The issue then came to who was the best suitable candidate and then the only real option was Dr Paul Williams."
The "only real option" was someone who was obviously going to get pummelled for their ultra anti-Brexit stance? If so, Labour is in a far, far worse position than we imagine.
Labour needs to find a way of ending the Brexit Wars. They need to say they respect Brexit was a legitimate outcome - and they respect the people who voted for it. Even then, they are still years behind Boris on "implementing the will of the voters". Boris (on this at least) comes across as natural. Whenever Brexit is mentioned, Labour continue to look like you've dropped a scorpion down their pants.
Look at @theSNP roadmap to referendum. This is SNP’s official policy. See para 10 - one option is to declare that Scots parly has power to call referendum. Certainly not basecase & not preferred SNP route; advisory Ref would also not be implemented
Before: Jersey authorities talk directly to Normandy authorities who talk to their fishermen.
Now: Normandy fishermen talk to Normandy authorities who relay info to French government, who tell the EU, who tell the UK, who then tell the Jersey authorities.
Is it any wonder its got cocked up? The issue appears to be that some Normandy fishermen haven't provided all the information the treaty requires them to do....and Jersey is sticking to the letter of the treaty....
I’m assuming that the whole electricity concept was a daft question from a backbencher that the Mail has got overexcited by?
Although I feel sorry for Guernsey if their power was switched off as well due to a dispute between Jersey and France
Ps missed that the shellfish war has been resolved by reclassifying UK waters in line with EU environmental norms vs our own higher standards
Yes, by agreeing to follow EU rules, some of the barriers to trade imposed by Brexit can be circumvented. I expect more EU alignment to be quietly agreed in the future. Indeed that is the way to resolve the NI border issues, by following EU regulations on food and agriculture.
Not my understanding. We reviewed the classification and changed it from B to A. It always qualified as A but we called it B because we had higher standards. (The difference on trade between A and B didn’t matter while we were in the EEA).
We’ve not changed the rules one iota. Just the classification
Agreed to follow the EU classification and rules.
No. We are following the same rules as before.
As a worked example (made up numbers):
EU standard - 80+ points classes you as Category A and 60+ points classes as grade B.
UK historic score using the same measurement scale 85 points. But we call it class B because we draw the cut at 90. We therefore have a bunch of obligations on environmental improvement.
We have now reclassified as class A because we are above 80 points. We have not changed our scoring system or lifted any of the improvement requirements. We’ve just changed the grade on the front of the paper.
(As an aside this nonsense is only necessary because the EU promised that we could continue to import as before and then broke their promise)
If our waters meet the class A requirements then we are following EU rules.
We may need to reduce the amount of untreated sewage being discharged.
Before: Jersey authorities talk directly to Normandy authorities who talk to their fishermen.
Now: Normandy fishermen talk to Normandy authorities who relay info to French government, who tell the EU, who tell the UK, who then tell the Jersey authorities.
Is it any wonder its got cocked up? The issue appears to be that some Normandy fishermen haven't provided all the information the treaty requires them to do....and Jersey is sticking to the letter of the treaty....
I’m assuming that the whole electricity concept was a daft question from a backbencher that the Mail has got overexcited by?
Although I feel sorry for Guernsey if their power was switched off as well due to a dispute between Jersey and France
Ps missed that the shellfish war has been resolved by reclassifying UK waters in line with EU environmental norms vs our own higher standards
No. It's the French Maritime Minister. Been a Minister since 2014.
"The French government has warned it could cut electricity to Jersey amid an escalating row over post-Brexit fishing rights.
Maritime Minister Annick Girardin told the French parliament that new rules governing access to Channel Islands waters were unacceptable.
She said France was "ready to use... retaliatory measures" under the UK-EU post-Brexit trade deal.
"I am sorry it has come to this [but] we will do so if we have to," she said."
Remember that last week the French Minister for European Affairs Clément Beaune was threatening Financial Equivalence if the UK did not respect Brexit Fishing agreements ie do what we are doing.
Not under Starmer though. and I can't see under who else in the current PLP.
I don't think Starmer can *win* an election. However a Conservative leader could *lose* an election against Starmer.
There's a difference I think.
I don't think you can win in 2024. But LAB can/will win in 2029. No party has won six elections in a row.
Starmer can get LAB back into a 1992 position particularly if LAB come back in Scotland, which can happen if we have an independence referendum which Sturgeon loses and then people turn against SNP.
It all depends on the economy after the job retention scheme closes.
As a former student of economics I struggle not to see hard times ahead. However, there are plenty of jobs available now the Eastern Europeans have returned home, but do we have the workforce that wants to work hard and for not very much? The government will promote entrepreneurship, but how many barbers shops can any one high street sustain?
If I am wrong and the economy runs along nicely on cheap borrowing and house price inflation, the Conservative Party are in for as long as they want.
The people on benefits will not take a cut in money to go out and work in those jobs for certain.
This is the key point. Work does not pay. The Tories strategy is to cut welfare so that it is even more punative than taking these jobs. Which is fine as a slogan but means you have an underclass unable to keep the roof over their heads no matter how hard they work.
Work does pay. The minimum wage now is close to £10 per hour.
The problem isn't wages, the problem is the tax and benefit system.
For someone who spends all day and everyday fawning over a character who claims he cannot get by on less than £300k per year and then exclaims "the problem isn't wages", I think you are having a laugh, aren't you?
No I'm not. I don't fawn over Boris and anyone who thinks they can't get by on less than £300k has a problem with spending too much, not earning too little.
This is something I'm an ardent believer in, I believe in having low taxes to make work pay - the problem here is the tax and benefit system means that people trapped in the poverty trap lose up to 90% on marginal earnings.
Increasing somebodies wages from £10 per hour to £11 per hour for example only aids them by 10 pence per hour if they're on a real 90% marginal tax rate. It means that instead of taking £1 per hour home after real tax, they're taking £1.10 per hour home after real tax. If somebodies wages are £10 per hour and their marginal tax rate gets cut from eg 90% to eg 40% then that aids them by £5 per hour. It means instead of taking £1 per hour home after real tax, they're taking £6 per hour home after real tax.
Tell me please oh enlightened one - which of those two is a more serious and credible reform?
No it wouldn't, that Comres has shades of Survation 2017 with just a day to go until polling day and if true would see Sturgeon face May 2017 styie humiliation, not only failing to get an SNP majority but maybe even failing to get a majority for pro independence parties and seeing the SNP lose seats
Not under Starmer though. and I can't see under who else in the current PLP.
I don't think Starmer can *win* an election. However a Conservative leader could *lose* an election against Starmer.
There's a difference I think.
I don't think you can win in 2024. But LAB can/will win in 2029. No party has won six elections in a row.
Starmer can get LAB back into a 1992 position particularly if LAB come back in Scotland, which can happen if we have an independence referendum which Sturgeon loses and then people turn against SNP.
It all depends on the economy after the job retention scheme closes.
As a former student of economics I struggle not to see hard times ahead. However, there are plenty of jobs available now the Eastern Europeans have returned home, but do we have the workforce that wants to work hard and for not very much? The government will promote entrepreneurship, but how many barbers shops can any one high street sustain?
If I am wrong and the economy runs along nicely on cheap borrowing and house price inflation, the Conservative Party are in for as long as they want.
The people on benefits will not take a cut in money to go out and work in those jobs for certain.
This is the key point. Work does not pay. The Tories strategy is to cut welfare so that it is even more punative than taking these jobs. Which is fine as a slogan but means you have an underclass unable to keep the roof over their heads no matter how hard they work.
Work does pay. The minimum wage now is close to £10 per hour.
The problem isn't wages, the problem is the tax and benefit system.
Work doesn't pay. If it did then we wouldn't have such a massive problem of the working poor where regardless of how hard they work they have just enough money to be broke as fuck.
"One Labour adviser said: “Over the last two years, lots and lots of people have moved out of London. That will have been accelerated by Covid. We read a lot about the red wall. No one has gone to Wycombe to find out what is driving down Steve Baker’s majority.
“The next Labour party that wins a national election is not going to win back all of the red wall, it is not going to win back all of Scotland, or all the southern seats it could win, it will do a little bit of everything, and it will probably involve seats like Bournemouth and High Wycombe.”
Funny as @TheJezziah is, there is a serious point to make - the political antennae of Keir Starmer.
In the Pools by-election, IDStarmer decided that he wanted Dr Paul Williams to be the candidate and had the selection process cancelled and the candidate imposed. This is hardly a new thing in the party - and the Corbyn cult were just as bad at doing it as other past leaders.
The problem is that his choice of candidate was perhaps the worst one possible. Dr Paul is a genuinely great guy, dedicated to the people he represents, a medical leader, a pragmatist. But he was also the poster boy for the People's Vote campaign. And was inserted into a seat that was the most batshit of leave in the region with a long history of batshittery.
When I heard they had selected Paul I posted on here "Tory gain nailed on". I was astonished they would select him AND pull him from the PCC election he had a reasonable chance to win. That their pledge rate is down to 40% is a disaster beyond anything I could imagine - the people of Hartlepool are going to punish Labour for this misstep.
Jezziah might be droning on and on and on until he starts foaming at the mouth, but he is absolutely right to question Starmer's leadership. If he can personally intervene in Hartlepool and personally get the decision this decision so massively wrong, then what else is he getting wrong? Aside from the photo of him taking the knee...
Jezziah and BJO want the solution to be a return to Corbynism - that would be an even bigger disaster. So here we are Labour - what you were under Corbyn was a disaster, what you are under Starmer is a disaster. The way forward cannot be a return to x or to y, it needs to be something new.
And there is their big problem. The two sides are so busy fighting the opposing ferrets in their sack that they are unaware that the river they are adrift on is heading for the waterfall. A 3rd way is needed, neither side will agree it, so over they go. This much is self-evident, England is lost to the Tories and to the reactionary ideas of gammon, hence my move north of the wall.
Another part of the issue is that I don't think Hartlepool was in a position to pick a sane Labour candidate so someone did need to be imposed. The issue then came to who was the best suitable candidate and then the only real option was Dr Paul Williams.
The great unknown is did Dr Williams seek to be the Hartlepool candidate or did he switch because SKS asked him to.
Of its the former then Dr Williams is a fool and if it's the latter than Dr Williams is again a fool for not understanding what that consequences would be - as both you and me could see the end result from miles away.
"The issue then came to who was the best suitable candidate and then the only real option was Dr Paul Williams."
The "only real option" was someone who was obviously going to get pummelled for their ultra anti-Brexit stance? If so, Labour is in a far, far worse position than we imagine.
Labour needs to find a way of ending the Brexit Wars. They need to say they respect Brexit was a legitimate outcome - and they respect the people who voted for it. Even then, they are still years behind Boris on "implementing the will of the voters". Boris (on this at least) comes across as natural. Whenever Brexit is mentioned, Labour continue to look like you've dropped a scorpion down their pants.
The Tories are equally split on Brexit but have shut up about it bar using it as a stick to beat Labour with.
"One Labour adviser said: “Over the last two years, lots and lots of people have moved out of London. That will have been accelerated by Covid. We read a lot about the red wall. No one has gone to Wycombe to find out what is driving down Steve Baker’s majority.
“The next Labour party that wins a national election is not going to win back all of the red wall, it is not going to win back all of Scotland, or all the southern seats it could win, it will do a little bit of everything, and it will probably involve seats like Bournemouth and High Wycombe.”
Have they been reading my posts? This is the Joe Biden strategy, I am glad people in Labour at least have an idea of it.
Before: Jersey authorities talk directly to Normandy authorities who talk to their fishermen.
Now: Normandy fishermen talk to Normandy authorities who relay info to French government, who tell the EU, who tell the UK, who then tell the Jersey authorities.
Is it any wonder its got cocked up? The issue appears to be that some Normandy fishermen haven't provided all the information the treaty requires them to do....and Jersey is sticking to the letter of the treaty....
I’m assuming that the whole electricity concept was a daft question from a backbencher that the Mail has got overexcited by?
Although I feel sorry for Guernsey if their power was switched off as well due to a dispute between Jersey and France
Ps missed that the shellfish war has been resolved by reclassifying UK waters in line with EU environmental norms vs our own higher standards
Yes, by agreeing to follow EU rules, some of the barriers to trade imposed by Brexit can be circumvented. I expect more EU alignment to be quietly agreed in the future. Indeed that is the way to resolve the NI border issues, by following EU regulations on food and agriculture.
Not my understanding. We reviewed the classification and changed it from B to A. It always qualified as A but we called it B because we had higher standards. (The difference on trade between A and B didn’t matter while we were in the EEA).
We’ve not changed the rules one iota. Just the classification
Agreed to follow the EU classification and rules.
No. We are following the same rules as before.
As a worked example (made up numbers):
EU standard - 80+ points classes you as Category A and 60+ points classes as grade B.
UK historic score using the same measurement scale 85 points. But we call it class B because we draw the cut at 90. We therefore have a bunch of obligations on environmental improvement.
We have now reclassified as class A because we are above 80 points. We have not changed our scoring system or lifted any of the improvement requirements. We’ve just changed the grade on the front of the paper.
(As an aside this nonsense is only necessary because the EU promised that we could continue to import as before and then broke their promise)
If our waters meet the class A requirements then we are following EU rules.
We may need to reduce the amount of untreated sewage being discharged.
We are following the same rules that we have always followed…
Look at @theSNP roadmap to referendum. This is SNP’s official policy. See para 10 - one option is to declare that Scots parly has power to call referendum. Certainly not basecase & not preferred SNP route; advisory Ref would also not be implemented
It does not matter even if they did get a nationalist majority and call such a referendum, as Union matters are reserved to the UK government under the Scotland Act 1998 it would be non binding and the UK government would correctly ignore the result of any such referendum and tell Unionists to boycott it
Not under Starmer though. and I can't see under who else in the current PLP.
I don't think Starmer can *win* an election. However a Conservative leader could *lose* an election against Starmer.
There's a difference I think.
I don't think you can win in 2024. But LAB can/will win in 2029. No party has won six elections in a row.
Starmer can get LAB back into a 1992 position particularly if LAB come back in Scotland, which can happen if we have an independence referendum which Sturgeon loses and then people turn against SNP.
It all depends on the economy after the job retention scheme closes.
As a former student of economics I struggle not to see hard times ahead. However, there are plenty of jobs available now the Eastern Europeans have returned home, but do we have the workforce that wants to work hard and for not very much? The government will promote entrepreneurship, but how many barbers shops can any one high street sustain?
If I am wrong and the economy runs along nicely on cheap borrowing and house price inflation, the Conservative Party are in for as long as they want.
The people on benefits will not take a cut in money to go out and work in those jobs for certain.
This is the key point. Work does not pay. The Tories strategy is to cut welfare so that it is even more punative than taking these jobs. Which is fine as a slogan but means you have an underclass unable to keep the roof over their heads no matter how hard they work.
Work does pay. The minimum wage now is close to £10 per hour.
The problem isn't wages, the problem is the tax and benefit system.
Work doesn't pay. If it did then we wouldn't have such a massive problem of the working poor where regardless of how hard they work they have just enough money to be broke as fuck.
Again that's the fault of the tax and benefit system.
If you have a real tax rate of 90% of earnings then regardless of how hard people work they're like hamsters trying to run forwards on a wheel.
Before: Jersey authorities talk directly to Normandy authorities who talk to their fishermen.
Now: Normandy fishermen talk to Normandy authorities who relay info to French government, who tell the EU, who tell the UK, who then tell the Jersey authorities.
Is it any wonder its got cocked up? The issue appears to be that some Normandy fishermen haven't provided all the information the treaty requires them to do....and Jersey is sticking to the letter of the treaty....
I’m assuming that the whole electricity concept was a daft question from a backbencher that the Mail has got overexcited by?
Although I feel sorry for Guernsey if their power was switched off as well due to a dispute between Jersey and France
Ps missed that the shellfish war has been resolved by reclassifying UK waters in line with EU environmental norms vs our own higher standards
No. It's the French Maritime Minister. Been a Minister since 2014.
"The French government has warned it could cut electricity to Jersey amid an escalating row over post-Brexit fishing rights.
Maritime Minister Annick Girardin told the French parliament that new rules governing access to Channel Islands waters were unacceptable.
She said France was "ready to use... retaliatory measures" under the UK-EU post-Brexit trade deal.
"I am sorry it has come to this [but] we will do so if we have to," she said."
Remember that last week the French Minister for European Affairs Clément Beaune was threatening Financial Equivalence if the UK did not respect Brexit Fishing agreements ie do what we are doing.
Funny as @TheJezziah is, there is a serious point to make - the political antennae of Keir Starmer.
In the Pools by-election, IDStarmer decided that he wanted Dr Paul Williams to be the candidate and had the selection process cancelled and the candidate imposed. This is hardly a new thing in the party - and the Corbyn cult were just as bad at doing it as other past leaders.
The problem is that his choice of candidate was perhaps the worst one possible. Dr Paul is a genuinely great guy, dedicated to the people he represents, a medical leader, a pragmatist. But he was also the poster boy for the People's Vote campaign. And was inserted into a seat that was the most batshit of leave in the region with a long history of batshittery.
When I heard they had selected Paul I posted on here "Tory gain nailed on". I was astonished they would select him AND pull him from the PCC election he had a reasonable chance to win. That their pledge rate is down to 40% is a disaster beyond anything I could imagine - the people of Hartlepool are going to punish Labour for this misstep.
Jezziah might be droning on and on and on until he starts foaming at the mouth, but he is absolutely right to question Starmer's leadership. If he can personally intervene in Hartlepool and personally get the decision this decision so massively wrong, then what else is he getting wrong? Aside from the photo of him taking the knee...
Jezziah and BJO want the solution to be a return to Corbynism - that would be an even bigger disaster. So here we are Labour - what you were under Corbyn was a disaster, what you are under Starmer is a disaster. The way forward cannot be a return to x or to y, it needs to be something new.
And there is their big problem. The two sides are so busy fighting the opposing ferrets in their sack that they are unaware that the river they are adrift on is heading for the waterfall. A 3rd way is needed, neither side will agree it, so over they go. This much is self-evident, England is lost to the Tories and to the reactionary ideas of gammon, hence my move north of the wall.
Another part of the issue is that I don't think Hartlepool was in a position to pick a sane Labour candidate so someone did need to be imposed. The issue then came to who was the best suitable candidate and then the only real option was Dr Paul Williams.
The great unknown is did Dr Williams seek to be the Hartlepool candidate or did he switch because SKS asked him to.
Of its the former then Dr Williams is a fool and if it's the latter than Dr Williams is again a fool for not understanding what that consequences would be - as both you and me could see the end result from miles away.
"The issue then came to who was the best suitable candidate and then the only real option was Dr Paul Williams."
The "only real option" was someone who was obviously going to get pummelled for their ultra anti-Brexit stance? If so, Labour is in a far, far worse position than we imagine.
Labour needs to find a way of ending the Brexit Wars. They need to say they respect Brexit was a legitimate outcome - and they respect the people who voted for it. Even then, they are still years behind Boris on "implementing the will of the voters". Boris (on this at least) comes across as natural. Whenever Brexit is mentioned, Labour continue to look like you've dropped a scorpion down their pants.
You have to take a step back and look at who the options actually were - the local party would chose the most left wing candidate (which you don't want) so you need to impose someone. And they need to be local(ish) candidate as you can't impose someone from outside the area and you also want someone who will be useful.
That meant there was roughly 4 options:-
Paul William (Stockton), Phil Wilson (Sedgefield) and possibly Jenny Chapman (Darlington) or Anna Turley (Redcar).
Of those three Phil Wilson isn't really an option, Anna Turley is why Labour in Redcar is still a mess and Jenny Chapman was made a Lord 2 days prior to the by-election being announced.
So SKS really only had 1 choice given the timing - and equally I suspect (heck I know) Jenny was bright enough not to go near it
Now of course, none of this would have been a problem was the local Labour Party in a fit state and capable of picking a decent candidate - but you only have to look at the local elections to see the true state of Hartlepool's Labour party and it's not a pretty state.
My only real concern here would be that Paul Williams Political career is now finished - but hey nowt is going to fix that, and Police Commissioner in Cleveland would have been an even worse end.
‘William is a biracial teenager in Nevada. He lives in transitional housing with his mother, Gabrielle, who is black and disabled. William works at a local fast food restaurant to support his mother and two siblings. His father died when he was young.’
‘Last year, William took a mandatory, yearlong class called Sociology of Change in which he was asked to reveal his race, gender, religious, and sexual identities and then attach derogatory labels to those identities.’
‘Students were then asked to “undo and unlearn” their “beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors that stem from oppression.” William was understandably reluctant to label himself as “privileged” or an “oppressor.” He refused and was failed.’
Do you get this antagonised by the American right's anti science stances?
You know the Covid denying and evolution denying beliefs.
I believe the Right's creationism stuff is wrong.
Will you condemn what is happening on the woke side in return?
I absolutely condemn it.
But - in Los Angeles public schools - it is invisible.
Which makes me think (perhaps wrongly) that's it's probably exaggerated.
The evidence is in. You’re wrong. Here’s a school in LA, private for sure, but I can give you plentiful proof this affects US state schools as well. The posh ones are just more newsworthy
‘In the year since Floyd’s murder, the atmosphere at this bucolic, super-exclusive, $38,000- to $45,000-a-year private LA school has only grown more poisonous, with some Brentwood alumni of color not only hurling accusations of racism but also demanding that the school completely scrap what they see as a biased curriculum. Meanwhile, parents, teachers, and administrators spent much of last summer and fall wrestling over the value of books like To Kill a Mockingbird—a civil rights classic to some; an outdated, problematic text to others—in what’s shaping up to be an epic battle over the hearts and minds of the children of America’s one percent.
To be sure, scenes like this are not occurring only at Brentwood. Similar skirmishes are breaking out at elite prep schools all over—at Harvard-Westlake, Marlborough, and Archer School for Girls in L.A. and in New York at Chapin and Dalton—making headlines across the country in publications as ideologically divergent as the New York Post and The Atlantic. But it’s worth focusing on what’s going on at this particular school off West Sunset. Because it’s here at Brentwood that all the forces arrayed in this conflict—woke alumni who want to tear the system down; teachers who’ve had a hard enough time getting through the year on Zoom, let alone dealing with paradigm shifts in educational priorities; and angry, frustrated moms and dads who just want their kids to get into good colleges—are most dramatically and publicly clashing, like those stranded boys battling each other on a deserted island in Lord of the Flies, one of the novels Brentwood struck from reading lists last year.’
‘Brentwood alerted parents that at least one day of school would be starting late so that faculty could spend a morning discussing chapters of White Fragility.’
lol
What’s on Earth is ‘white fragility’ ?
It's a term for white people who cannot discuss the concept of white privilege without having an emotional and intellectual meltdown.
This forum is awash with it. You don't even need to be paying attention to see this.
While I think that does have some truth to it, it also means people are not permitted to disagree with certain propositions without being accused of embodying the concept. Indeed, disagreement with some of these ideas is taken as proof of their veracity and acceptance of them required as an article of faith before dialogue can happen.
So it's a term that has some use but is wielded like a sledgehammer and can be misused to delegitimise disagreement. Someone angry at your position? Its their white fragility showing, couldn't be they disagree legitimately. Reminds me of dismissing concerns of women by calling them hysterical.
"One Labour adviser said: “Over the last two years, lots and lots of people have moved out of London. That will have been accelerated by Covid. We read a lot about the red wall. No one has gone to Wycombe to find out what is driving down Steve Baker’s majority.
“The next Labour party that wins a national election is not going to win back all of the red wall, it is not going to win back all of Scotland, or all the southern seats it could win, it will do a little bit of everything, and it will probably involve seats like Bournemouth and High Wycombe.”
Nope - because the policies Labour need to win Bournemouth and High Wycombe won't work up north.
A little bit of everything isn't going to solve the issue of making Labour electable as you need a coherent set of policies and once you start cherry picking you don't have that.
Funny as @TheJezziah is, there is a serious point to make - the political antennae of Keir Starmer.
In the Pools by-election, IDStarmer decided that he wanted Dr Paul Williams to be the candidate and had the selection process cancelled and the candidate imposed. This is hardly a new thing in the party - and the Corbyn cult were just as bad at doing it as other past leaders.
The problem is that his choice of candidate was perhaps the worst one possible. Dr Paul is a genuinely great guy, dedicated to the people he represents, a medical leader, a pragmatist. But he was also the poster boy for the People's Vote campaign. And was inserted into a seat that was the most batshit of leave in the region with a long history of batshittery.
When I heard they had selected Paul I posted on here "Tory gain nailed on". I was astonished they would select him AND pull him from the PCC election he had a reasonable chance to win. That their pledge rate is down to 40% is a disaster beyond anything I could imagine - the people of Hartlepool are going to punish Labour for this misstep.
Jezziah might be droning on and on and on until he starts foaming at the mouth, but he is absolutely right to question Starmer's leadership. If he can personally intervene in Hartlepool and personally get the decision this decision so massively wrong, then what else is he getting wrong? Aside from the photo of him taking the knee...
Jezziah and BJO want the solution to be a return to Corbynism - that would be an even bigger disaster. So here we are Labour - what you were under Corbyn was a disaster, what you are under Starmer is a disaster. The way forward cannot be a return to x or to y, it needs to be something new.
And there is their big problem. The two sides are so busy fighting the opposing ferrets in their sack that they are unaware that the river they are adrift on is heading for the waterfall. A 3rd way is needed, neither side will agree it, so over they go. This much is self-evident, England is lost to the Tories and to the reactionary ideas of gammon, hence my move north of the wall.
Another part of the issue is that I don't think Hartlepool was in a position to pick a sane Labour candidate so someone did need to be imposed. The issue then came to who was the best suitable candidate and then the only real option was Dr Paul Williams.
The great unknown is did Dr Williams seek to be the Hartlepool candidate or did he switch because SKS asked him to.
Of its the former then Dr Williams is a fool and if it's the latter than Dr Williams is again a fool for not understanding what that consequences would be - as both you and me could see the end result from miles away.
Honestly not sure what happened. The candidate went dark for almost a week in the run-up to the decision being made. His own PCC campaign team couldn't get hold of him.
If I am being generous he has been told by Starmer that if he does this he will be given a genuinely safe seat if he loses - that being PCC wasn't his area of interest anyway.
If I am being ungenerous, that he was PCC candidate in the first place demonstrated some hubris...
Remember that foaming-dog-fever sufferers like Sultana are the kind of Labour MPs that BJO and Jezziah believe will inspire voters to finally elect a true socialist government.
New German poll has the CDU/CSU on just 23% and facing its worst election result since it was founded after World War 2 having picked Laschet over the more popular and charismatic Soder as its chancellor candidate and heading for opposition.
The Greens have a five point lead on 28% and will likely lead a government with the SPD on 14% and the FDP on 12% or Linke on 6%
"One Labour adviser said: “Over the last two years, lots and lots of people have moved out of London. That will have been accelerated by Covid. We read a lot about the red wall. No one has gone to Wycombe to find out what is driving down Steve Baker’s majority.
“The next Labour party that wins a national election is not going to win back all of the red wall, it is not going to win back all of Scotland, or all the southern seats it could win, it will do a little bit of everything, and it will probably involve seats like Bournemouth and High Wycombe.”
Have they been reading my posts? This is the Joe Biden strategy, I am glad people in Labour at least have an idea of it.
It was also the Lib Dem policy which works well when things are local but falls apart in a national campaign when you are caught telling two different constituencies completely different stories / policies.
Funny as @TheJezziah is, there is a serious point to make - the political antennae of Keir Starmer.
In the Pools by-election, IDStarmer decided that he wanted Dr Paul Williams to be the candidate and had the selection process cancelled and the candidate imposed. This is hardly a new thing in the party - and the Corbyn cult were just as bad at doing it as other past leaders.
The problem is that his choice of candidate was perhaps the worst one possible. Dr Paul is a genuinely great guy, dedicated to the people he represents, a medical leader, a pragmatist. But he was also the poster boy for the People's Vote campaign. And was inserted into a seat that was the most batshit of leave in the region with a long history of batshittery.
When I heard they had selected Paul I posted on here "Tory gain nailed on". I was astonished they would select him AND pull him from the PCC election he had a reasonable chance to win. That their pledge rate is down to 40% is a disaster beyond anything I could imagine - the people of Hartlepool are going to punish Labour for this misstep.
Jezziah might be droning on and on and on until he starts foaming at the mouth, but he is absolutely right to question Starmer's leadership. If he can personally intervene in Hartlepool and personally get the decision this decision so massively wrong, then what else is he getting wrong? Aside from the photo of him taking the knee...
Jezziah and BJO want the solution to be a return to Corbynism - that would be an even bigger disaster. So here we are Labour - what you were under Corbyn was a disaster, what you are under Starmer is a disaster. The way forward cannot be a return to x or to y, it needs to be something new.
And there is their big problem. The two sides are so busy fighting the opposing ferrets in their sack that they are unaware that the river they are adrift on is heading for the waterfall. A 3rd way is needed, neither side will agree it, so over they go. This much is self-evident, England is lost to the Tories and to the reactionary ideas of gammon, hence my move north of the wall.
Another part of the issue is that I don't think Hartlepool was in a position to pick a sane Labour candidate so someone did need to be imposed. The issue then came to who was the best suitable candidate and then the only real option was Dr Paul Williams.
The great unknown is did Dr Williams seek to be the Hartlepool candidate or did he switch because SKS asked him to.
Of its the former then Dr Williams is a fool and if it's the latter than Dr Williams is again a fool for not understanding what that consequences would be - as both you and me could see the end result from miles away.
"The issue then came to who was the best suitable candidate and then the only real option was Dr Paul Williams."
The "only real option" was someone who was obviously going to get pummelled for their ultra anti-Brexit stance? If so, Labour is in a far, far worse position than we imagine.
Labour needs to find a way of ending the Brexit Wars. They need to say they respect Brexit was a legitimate outcome - and they respect the people who voted for it. Even then, they are still years behind Boris on "implementing the will of the voters". Boris (on this at least) comes across as natural. Whenever Brexit is mentioned, Labour continue to look like you've dropped a scorpion down their pants.
The Tories are equally split on Brexit but have shut up about it bar using it as a stick to beat Labour with.
They really aren't, unless you consider 99:1 a split.....
Funny as @TheJezziah is, there is a serious point to make - the political antennae of Keir Starmer.
In the Pools by-election, IDStarmer decided that he wanted Dr Paul Williams to be the candidate and had the selection process cancelled and the candidate imposed. This is hardly a new thing in the party - and the Corbyn cult were just as bad at doing it as other past leaders.
The problem is that his choice of candidate was perhaps the worst one possible. Dr Paul is a genuinely great guy, dedicated to the people he represents, a medical leader, a pragmatist. But he was also the poster boy for the People's Vote campaign. And was inserted into a seat that was the most batshit of leave in the region with a long history of batshittery.
When I heard they had selected Paul I posted on here "Tory gain nailed on". I was astonished they would select him AND pull him from the PCC election he had a reasonable chance to win. That their pledge rate is down to 40% is a disaster beyond anything I could imagine - the people of Hartlepool are going to punish Labour for this misstep.
Jezziah might be droning on and on and on until he starts foaming at the mouth, but he is absolutely right to question Starmer's leadership. If he can personally intervene in Hartlepool and personally get the decision this decision so massively wrong, then what else is he getting wrong? Aside from the photo of him taking the knee...
Jezziah and BJO want the solution to be a return to Corbynism - that would be an even bigger disaster. So here we are Labour - what you were under Corbyn was a disaster, what you are under Starmer is a disaster. The way forward cannot be a return to x or to y, it needs to be something new.
And there is their big problem. The two sides are so busy fighting the opposing ferrets in their sack that they are unaware that the river they are adrift on is heading for the waterfall. A 3rd way is needed, neither side will agree it, so over they go. This much is self-evident, England is lost to the Tories and to the reactionary ideas of gammon, hence my move north of the wall.
Another part of the issue is that I don't think Hartlepool was in a position to pick a sane Labour candidate so someone did need to be imposed. The issue then came to who was the best suitable candidate and then the only real option was Dr Paul Williams.
The great unknown is did Dr Williams seek to be the Hartlepool candidate or did he switch because SKS asked him to.
Of its the former then Dr Williams is a fool and if it's the latter than Dr Williams is again a fool for not understanding what that consequences would be - as both you and me could see the end result from miles away.
"The issue then came to who was the best suitable candidate and then the only real option was Dr Paul Williams."
The "only real option" was someone who was obviously going to get pummelled for their ultra anti-Brexit stance? If so, Labour is in a far, far worse position than we imagine.
Labour needs to find a way of ending the Brexit Wars. They need to say they respect Brexit was a legitimate outcome - and they respect the people who voted for it. Even then, they are still years behind Boris on "implementing the will of the voters". Boris (on this at least) comes across as natural. Whenever Brexit is mentioned, Labour continue to look like you've dropped a scorpion down their pants.
One of my biggest problems with Starmer is his total capitulation over Brexit
Brexit should be called out every day of the week for the out of plain-sight fiasco it has become.
I am more inclined towards the LDs because in their heart of hearts they have not given up on the EU dream in the way Labour have, to pander to their xenophobic former base.
"One Labour adviser said: “Over the last two years, lots and lots of people have moved out of London. That will have been accelerated by Covid. We read a lot about the red wall. No one has gone to Wycombe to find out what is driving down Steve Baker’s majority.
“The next Labour party that wins a national election is not going to win back all of the red wall, it is not going to win back all of Scotland, or all the southern seats it could win, it will do a little bit of everything, and it will probably involve seats like Bournemouth and High Wycombe.”
Nope - because the policies Labour need to win Bournemouth and High Wycombe won't work up north.
A little bit of everything isn't going to solve the issue of making Labour electable as you need a coherent set of policies and once you start cherry picking you don't have that.
I would suggest what will work in High Wycombe won't work in Bournemouth....
Before: Jersey authorities talk directly to Normandy authorities who talk to their fishermen.
Now: Normandy fishermen talk to Normandy authorities who relay info to French government, who tell the EU, who tell the UK, who then tell the Jersey authorities.
Is it any wonder its got cocked up? The issue appears to be that some Normandy fishermen haven't provided all the information the treaty requires them to do....and Jersey is sticking to the letter of the treaty....
I’m assuming that the whole electricity concept was a daft question from a backbencher that the Mail has got overexcited by?
Although I feel sorry for Guernsey if their power was switched off as well due to a dispute between Jersey and France
Ps missed that the shellfish war has been resolved by reclassifying UK waters in line with EU environmental norms vs our own higher standards
No. It's the French Maritime Minister. Been a Minister since 2014.
"The French government has warned it could cut electricity to Jersey amid an escalating row over post-Brexit fishing rights.
Maritime Minister Annick Girardin told the French parliament that new rules governing access to Channel Islands waters were unacceptable.
She said France was "ready to use... retaliatory measures" under the UK-EU post-Brexit trade deal.
"I am sorry it has come to this [but] we will do so if we have to," she said."
Remember that last week the French Minister for European Affairs Clément Beaune was threatening Financial Equivalence if the UK did not respect Brexit Fishing agreements ie do what we are doing.
On social care. Exclusive in Telegraph this morning:
"multiple Whitehall insiders claim the Prime Minister is leaning towards proposals first put forward a decade ago by Sir Andrew Dilnot, a social care expert, which recommended capping lifetime care costs for individuals"
FFS. Ten years on and still arguing internally whether to do Dilnot.
Funny as @TheJezziah is, there is a serious point to make - the political antennae of Keir Starmer.
In the Pools by-election, IDStarmer decided that he wanted Dr Paul Williams to be the candidate and had the selection process cancelled and the candidate imposed. This is hardly a new thing in the party - and the Corbyn cult were just as bad at doing it as other past leaders.
The problem is that his choice of candidate was perhaps the worst one possible. Dr Paul is a genuinely great guy, dedicated to the people he represents, a medical leader, a pragmatist. But he was also the poster boy for the People's Vote campaign. And was inserted into a seat that was the most batshit of leave in the region with a long history of batshittery.
When I heard they had selected Paul I posted on here "Tory gain nailed on". I was astonished they would select him AND pull him from the PCC election he had a reasonable chance to win. That their pledge rate is down to 40% is a disaster beyond anything I could imagine - the people of Hartlepool are going to punish Labour for this misstep.
Jezziah might be droning on and on and on until he starts foaming at the mouth, but he is absolutely right to question Starmer's leadership. If he can personally intervene in Hartlepool and personally get the decision this decision so massively wrong, then what else is he getting wrong? Aside from the photo of him taking the knee...
Jezziah and BJO want the solution to be a return to Corbynism - that would be an even bigger disaster. So here we are Labour - what you were under Corbyn was a disaster, what you are under Starmer is a disaster. The way forward cannot be a return to x or to y, it needs to be something new.
And there is their big problem. The two sides are so busy fighting the opposing ferrets in their sack that they are unaware that the river they are adrift on is heading for the waterfall. A 3rd way is needed, neither side will agree it, so over they go. This much is self-evident, England is lost to the Tories and to the reactionary ideas of gammon, hence my move north of the wall.
Another part of the issue is that I don't think Hartlepool was in a position to pick a sane Labour candidate so someone did need to be imposed. The issue then came to who was the best suitable candidate and then the only real option was Dr Paul Williams.
The great unknown is did Dr Williams seek to be the Hartlepool candidate or did he switch because SKS asked him to.
Of its the former then Dr Williams is a fool and if it's the latter than Dr Williams is again a fool for not understanding what that consequences would be - as both you and me could see the end result from miles away.
"The issue then came to who was the best suitable candidate and then the only real option was Dr Paul Williams."
The "only real option" was someone who was obviously going to get pummelled for their ultra anti-Brexit stance? If so, Labour is in a far, far worse position than we imagine.
Labour needs to find a way of ending the Brexit Wars. They need to say they respect Brexit was a legitimate outcome - and they respect the people who voted for it. Even then, they are still years behind Boris on "implementing the will of the voters". Boris (on this at least) comes across as natural. Whenever Brexit is mentioned, Labour continue to look like you've dropped a scorpion down their pants.
The Tories are equally split on Brexit but have shut up about it bar using it as a stick to beat Labour with.
They really aren't, unless you consider 99:1 a split.....
Funny as @TheJezziah is, there is a serious point to make - the political antennae of Keir Starmer.
In the Pools by-election, IDStarmer decided that he wanted Dr Paul Williams to be the candidate and had the selection process cancelled and the candidate imposed. This is hardly a new thing in the party - and the Corbyn cult were just as bad at doing it as other past leaders.
The problem is that his choice of candidate was perhaps the worst one possible. Dr Paul is a genuinely great guy, dedicated to the people he represents, a medical leader, a pragmatist. But he was also the poster boy for the People's Vote campaign. And was inserted into a seat that was the most batshit of leave in the region with a long history of batshittery.
When I heard they had selected Paul I posted on here "Tory gain nailed on". I was astonished they would select him AND pull him from the PCC election he had a reasonable chance to win. That their pledge rate is down to 40% is a disaster beyond anything I could imagine - the people of Hartlepool are going to punish Labour for this misstep.
Jezziah might be droning on and on and on until he starts foaming at the mouth, but he is absolutely right to question Starmer's leadership. If he can personally intervene in Hartlepool and personally get the decision this decision so massively wrong, then what else is he getting wrong? Aside from the photo of him taking the knee...
Jezziah and BJO want the solution to be a return to Corbynism - that would be an even bigger disaster. So here we are Labour - what you were under Corbyn was a disaster, what you are under Starmer is a disaster. The way forward cannot be a return to x or to y, it needs to be something new.
And there is their big problem. The two sides are so busy fighting the opposing ferrets in their sack that they are unaware that the river they are adrift on is heading for the waterfall. A 3rd way is needed, neither side will agree it, so over they go. This much is self-evident, England is lost to the Tories and to the reactionary ideas of gammon, hence my move north of the wall.
Another part of the issue is that I don't think Hartlepool was in a position to pick a sane Labour candidate so someone did need to be imposed. The issue then came to who was the best suitable candidate and then the only real option was Dr Paul Williams.
The great unknown is did Dr Williams seek to be the Hartlepool candidate or did he switch because SKS asked him to.
Of its the former then Dr Williams is a fool and if it's the latter than Dr Williams is again a fool for not understanding what that consequences would be - as both you and me could see the end result from miles away.
"The issue then came to who was the best suitable candidate and then the only real option was Dr Paul Williams."
The "only real option" was someone who was obviously going to get pummelled for their ultra anti-Brexit stance? If so, Labour is in a far, far worse position than we imagine.
Labour needs to find a way of ending the Brexit Wars. They need to say they respect Brexit was a legitimate outcome - and they respect the people who voted for it. Even then, they are still years behind Boris on "implementing the will of the voters". Boris (on this at least) comes across as natural. Whenever Brexit is mentioned, Labour continue to look like you've dropped a scorpion down their pants.
The Tories are equally split on Brexit but have shut up about it bar using it as a stick to beat Labour with.
They really aren't, unless you consider 99:1 a split.....
"One Labour adviser said: “Over the last two years, lots and lots of people have moved out of London. That will have been accelerated by Covid. We read a lot about the red wall. No one has gone to Wycombe to find out what is driving down Steve Baker’s majority.
“The next Labour party that wins a national election is not going to win back all of the red wall, it is not going to win back all of Scotland, or all the southern seats it could win, it will do a little bit of everything, and it will probably involve seats like Bournemouth and High Wycombe.”
Nope - because the policies Labour need to win Bournemouth and High Wycombe won't work up north.
A little bit of everything isn't going to solve the issue of making Labour electable as you need a coherent set of policies and once you start cherry picking you don't have that.
Labour need to find a set of big ideas and policies that can speak across these boundaries, these policies will exist. Labour just needs to actually do a bit of thinking.
Nobody is talking about really big, bold, new ideas. Labour needs to get on with it.
Funny as @TheJezziah is, there is a serious point to make - the political antennae of Keir Starmer.
In the Pools by-election, IDStarmer decided that he wanted Dr Paul Williams to be the candidate and had the selection process cancelled and the candidate imposed. This is hardly a new thing in the party - and the Corbyn cult were just as bad at doing it as other past leaders.
The problem is that his choice of candidate was perhaps the worst one possible. Dr Paul is a genuinely great guy, dedicated to the people he represents, a medical leader, a pragmatist. But he was also the poster boy for the People's Vote campaign. And was inserted into a seat that was the most batshit of leave in the region with a long history of batshittery.
When I heard they had selected Paul I posted on here "Tory gain nailed on". I was astonished they would select him AND pull him from the PCC election he had a reasonable chance to win. That their pledge rate is down to 40% is a disaster beyond anything I could imagine - the people of Hartlepool are going to punish Labour for this misstep.
Jezziah might be droning on and on and on until he starts foaming at the mouth, but he is absolutely right to question Starmer's leadership. If he can personally intervene in Hartlepool and personally get the decision this decision so massively wrong, then what else is he getting wrong? Aside from the photo of him taking the knee...
Jezziah and BJO want the solution to be a return to Corbynism - that would be an even bigger disaster. So here we are Labour - what you were under Corbyn was a disaster, what you are under Starmer is a disaster. The way forward cannot be a return to x or to y, it needs to be something new.
And there is their big problem. The two sides are so busy fighting the opposing ferrets in their sack that they are unaware that the river they are adrift on is heading for the waterfall. A 3rd way is needed, neither side will agree it, so over they go. This much is self-evident, England is lost to the Tories and to the reactionary ideas of gammon, hence my move north of the wall.
Another part of the issue is that I don't think Hartlepool was in a position to pick a sane Labour candidate so someone did need to be imposed. The issue then came to who was the best suitable candidate and then the only real option was Dr Paul Williams.
The great unknown is did Dr Williams seek to be the Hartlepool candidate or did he switch because SKS asked him to.
Of its the former then Dr Williams is a fool and if it's the latter than Dr Williams is again a fool for not understanding what that consequences would be - as both you and me could see the end result from miles away.
Honestly not sure what happened. The candidate went dark for almost a week in the run-up to the decision being made. His own PCC campaign team couldn't get hold of him.
If I am being generous he has been told by Starmer that if he does this he will be given a genuinely safe seat if he loses - that being PCC wasn't his area of interest anyway.
If I am being ungenerous, that he was PCC candidate in the first place demonstrated some hubris...
I would love to know what a safe labour seats looks like nowadays - outside of city centres I can't imagine many genuinely safe seats exist.
Not under Starmer though. and I can't see under who else in the current PLP.
I don't think Starmer can *win* an election. However a Conservative leader could *lose* an election against Starmer.
There's a difference I think.
I don't think you can win in 2024. But LAB can/will win in 2029. No party has won six elections in a row.
Starmer can get LAB back into a 1992 position particularly if LAB come back in Scotland, which can happen if we have an independence referendum which Sturgeon loses and then people turn against SNP.
Bear in mind that I am not "Labour". I'm not a member anymore and to be honest I was only ever a member to ensure RLB did not get elected leader.
I have voted Lib Dems in more elections than I have Labour.
So you made sure Starmer was in position but have no intention of voting for him?
Are you a centrist are some kind of far left accelerationist? or maybe a Tory?
I mean lumbering Labour with a completely unelectable leader seems like madness from anything but a left wing accelerationist or right wing pro Tory point of view?!
If we are not Corbynites, are we not Tories? I thought we were.
The people we called Trots called us Tories, isn't that mean....
I am sorry if your feelings were hurt, as the saying goes, if you ain't big enough to take it then don't dish it out... I mean something like that anyway.
If the reaction to enthusiastic young people joining Labour is to label them all trots because it suits your political purposes then acting hurt when you get called Tories in response is not only completely hypocritical but beyond the sensitivity levels any grown adult should display.
What the Labour Right view as "the Trots" were more the older generation who rejoined under Corbyn, I think. The younger group are indeed much more varied.
TBH they just labelled them all as Trots, the idea was to discredit the person they are voting for. Some of the more 'generous' ones would point out they are actually centrists who are stupid and were tricked by Trots..
It's a fair point, though name calling the belittle opponents is as old as political parties themselves.
Gates has said ip rights should not be waived so developing countries can produce more Covid vaccines and is also buying up farmland all over the world to get more control over the world's food supply.
"One Labour adviser said: “Over the last two years, lots and lots of people have moved out of London. That will have been accelerated by Covid. We read a lot about the red wall. No one has gone to Wycombe to find out what is driving down Steve Baker’s majority.
“The next Labour party that wins a national election is not going to win back all of the red wall, it is not going to win back all of Scotland, or all the southern seats it could win, it will do a little bit of everything, and it will probably involve seats like Bournemouth and High Wycombe.”
Nope - because the policies Labour need to win Bournemouth and High Wycombe won't work up north.
A little bit of everything isn't going to solve the issue of making Labour electable as you need a coherent set of policies and once you start cherry picking you don't have that.
Labour need to find a set of big ideas and policies that can speak across these boundaries, these policies will exist. Labour just needs to actually do a bit of thinking.
Nobody is talking about really big, bold, new ideas. Labour needs to get on with it.
You seem to be advocating that the LP pretends to be something that it isn't in order to maximise potential support.
Better to be honest and promote collectivism with heartfelt enthusiasm and, alongside, make clear its opposition to liberalism and conservatism?
"One Labour adviser said: “Over the last two years, lots and lots of people have moved out of London. That will have been accelerated by Covid. We read a lot about the red wall. No one has gone to Wycombe to find out what is driving down Steve Baker’s majority.
“The next Labour party that wins a national election is not going to win back all of the red wall, it is not going to win back all of Scotland, or all the southern seats it could win, it will do a little bit of everything, and it will probably involve seats like Bournemouth and High Wycombe.”
This was a message from a few on the left after 2019. To basically abandon the working class. Labour really is moving away from it’s roots and I expect Thursday to solidify this. The labour votes are going somewhere.
"One Labour adviser said: “Over the last two years, lots and lots of people have moved out of London. That will have been accelerated by Covid. We read a lot about the red wall. No one has gone to Wycombe to find out what is driving down Steve Baker’s majority.
“The next Labour party that wins a national election is not going to win back all of the red wall, it is not going to win back all of Scotland, or all the southern seats it could win, it will do a little bit of everything, and it will probably involve seats like Bournemouth and High Wycombe.”
Nope - because the policies Labour need to win Bournemouth and High Wycombe won't work up north.
A little bit of everything isn't going to solve the issue of making Labour electable as you need a coherent set of policies and once you start cherry picking you don't have that.
Labour need to find a set of big ideas and policies that can speak across these boundaries, these policies will exist. Labour just needs to actually do a bit of thinking.
Nobody is talking about really big, bold, new ideas. Labour needs to get on with it.
You seem to be advocating that the LP pretends to be something that it isn't in order to maximise potential support.
Better to be honest and promote collectivism with heartfelt enthusiasm and, alongside, make clear its opposition to liberalism and conservatism?
On social care. Exclusive in Telegraph this morning:
"multiple Whitehall insiders claim the Prime Minister is leaning towards proposals first put forward a decade ago by Sir Andrew Dilnot, a social care expert, which recommended capping lifetime care costs for individuals"
FFS. Ten years on and still arguing internally whether to do Dilnot.
"One Labour adviser said: “Over the last two years, lots and lots of people have moved out of London. That will have been accelerated by Covid. We read a lot about the red wall. No one has gone to Wycombe to find out what is driving down Steve Baker’s majority.
“The next Labour party that wins a national election is not going to win back all of the red wall, it is not going to win back all of Scotland, or all the southern seats it could win, it will do a little bit of everything, and it will probably involve seats like Bournemouth and High Wycombe.”
Nope - because the policies Labour need to win Bournemouth and High Wycombe won't work up north.
A little bit of everything isn't going to solve the issue of making Labour electable as you need a coherent set of policies and once you start cherry picking you don't have that.
Labour need to find a set of big ideas and policies that can speak across these boundaries, these policies will exist. Labour just needs to actually do a bit of thinking.
Nobody is talking about really big, bold, new ideas. Labour needs to get on with it.
You seem to be advocating that the LP pretends to be something that it isn't in order to maximise potential support.
Better to be honest and promote collectivism with heartfelt enthusiasm and, alongside, make clear its opposition to liberalism and conservatism?
You mean like the Conservative Party does?
Yes, indeed, in some respects. Personally, I think ideology gets a bad rap.
"One Labour adviser said: “Over the last two years, lots and lots of people have moved out of London. That will have been accelerated by Covid. We read a lot about the red wall. No one has gone to Wycombe to find out what is driving down Steve Baker’s majority.
“The next Labour party that wins a national election is not going to win back all of the red wall, it is not going to win back all of Scotland, or all the southern seats it could win, it will do a little bit of everything, and it will probably involve seats like Bournemouth and High Wycombe.”
This was a message from a few on the left after 2019. To basically abandon the working class. Labour really is moving away from it’s roots and I expect Thursday to solidify this. The labour votes are going somewhere.
Labour doesn't need to abandon the working class - that isn't their problem.
The problem is a combination of the Labour party being perceived to have abandoned the working class and the Tory party doing a lot better job of targeting them.
Comments
If she tries to bottle it again she will not last long , she is in the last chance saloon.
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/2191954/scottish-election-polling-survey/?utm_source=twitter
Though interesting that SNP vote seems to be going up, pro Indy numbers going back.
Of course the Nasty Party may well return via Priti, or harsh austerity, or both, but in the meantime it is difficult for Labour to outspending Johnson, and arguing for financial sanity doesn't fit either.
Even so, despite a boring leader and few eye-catching policies, depending on which poll you choose, Labour is only a few percent short of the Tory vote share. It wouldn't take much of a surge for Labour to be ahead, with either a more charismatic campaigner as leader (Rayner) or some eye catching policies (abolition of student fees ala 2017).
Before: Jersey authorities talk directly to Normandy authorities who talk to their fishermen.
Now: Normandy fishermen talk to Normandy authorities who relay info to French government, who tell the EU, who tell the UK, who then tell the Jersey authorities.
Is it any wonder its got cocked up? The issue appears to be that some Normandy fishermen haven't provided all the information the treaty requires them to do....and Jersey is sticking to the letter of the treaty....
She did not say if she doesn't get a Section 30 order she will not hold a referendum. She said she would not hold an illegal referendum.
But if you remember the plan the SNP published the idea is to pass the legislation to hold the referendum then get the UK Government to sue to prove its illegality.
If the UK gov don't sue the it is de facto legal. If they do sue it goes to the courts.
The EU Commission has recommended that the EU does not give consent for the UK to join the Lugano Convention, an international legal pact.
https://www.cityam.com/brussels-recommends-member-states-block-uk-from-lugano-convention/
Scottish parliament voting intention:
Constituency:
SNP: 42% (-3)
CON: 25% (+2)
LAB: 22% (-1)
LDEM: 8% (+1)
List:
SNP: 34% (-2)
CON: 23% (+1)
LAB: 19% (-)
LDEM: 6% (+1)
GRN: 9% (-1)
via @SavantaComRes, 30 Apr - 04 May
Chgs. w/ 27 Apr
I really don’t get it anymore- seems a huge variance
...'and they send us back both the Pfizer vaccine and of course other vaccines. It's much better to work together on this stuff than to allow some of these operational challenges to become confrontational.'
https://twitter.com/nickgutteridge/status/1389830366119215106?s=20
Am I correct that the CIs have a right to the same 200 miles EEZ as everyone else. But that it would be implemented via the UK Government via a process initiated by the CIs or with consent from the 3 CI Parliaments?
I think though that the fate of Mr Ewell is seen as justice in the book when the reality is injustice. It is OK to kill as long as you kill people who are unwanted, and you are middle class.
The enemy the benches behind you.
Although I feel sorry for Guernsey if their power was switched off as well due to a dispute between Jersey and France
Ps missed that the shellfish war has been resolved by reclassifying UK waters in line with EU environmental norms vs our own higher standards
TBH It will take some years before the UK can change its direction of travel. Several other agreements will be lapsing soon and this will only add to the difficulties for UK exports. When that becomes clear I think there will be some concerted moves towards greater cooperation, but who knows how long it will take? Many UK companies are already setting up inside the single market, so UK tax revenues are set to fall too.
Uk government just ignores it.
In the Pools by-election, IDStarmer decided that he wanted Dr Paul Williams to be the candidate and had the selection process cancelled and the candidate imposed. This is hardly a new thing in the party - and the Corbyn cult were just as bad at doing it as other past leaders.
The problem is that his choice of candidate was perhaps the worst one possible. Dr Paul is a genuinely great guy, dedicated to the people he represents, a medical leader, a pragmatist. But he was also the poster boy for the People's Vote campaign. And was inserted into a seat that was the most batshit of leave in the region with a long history of batshittery.
When I heard they had selected Paul I posted on here "Tory gain nailed on". I was astonished they would select him AND pull him from the PCC election he had a reasonable chance to win. That their pledge rate is down to 40% is a disaster beyond anything I could imagine - the people of Hartlepool are going to punish Labour for this misstep.
Jezziah might be droning on and on and on until he starts foaming at the mouth, but he is absolutely right to question Starmer's leadership. If he can personally intervene in Hartlepool and personally get the decision this decision so massively wrong, then what else is he getting wrong? Aside from the photo of him taking the knee...
Jezziah and BJO want the solution to be a return to Corbynism - that would be an even bigger disaster. So here we are Labour - what you were under Corbyn was a disaster, what you are under Starmer is a disaster. The way forward cannot be a return to x or to y, it needs to be something new.
And there is their big problem. The two sides are so busy fighting the opposing ferrets in their sack that they are unaware that the river they are adrift on is heading for the waterfall. A 3rd way is needed, neither side will agree it, so over they go. This much is self-evident, England is lost to the Tories and to the reactionary ideas of gammon, hence my move north of the wall.
If however she can avoid the referendum occurring that another grievance that will allow her to both remain in power and use as a distraction anything doesn't work out correctly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_England_and_Wales_police_and_crime_commissioner_elections
No Supreme Court filing, then the Scottish legislation is by definition legal. If there is a Supreme Court filing, then the Supreme Court determines if its legal or illegal.
The problem isn't wages, the problem is the tax and benefit system.
7 of the 10 Westminster constituencies covered are Con held.
When Johnson wins Hartlepool on Friday, he will interpret that getting Brexit done and his error-free, inch-perfect pandemic performance (what other assessment can he make?) has delivered for him. He will not give a jot for Scotland or Northern Ireland, he will be more interested in his vanquishing of spurious stories of wallpaper, corrupt procurement and lies about bodies piling high. He will read Hartlepool as a sign of his invincibility, and who can argue with that. He has captured the zeitgeist.
Sixteen years since the last Labour GE win? Bring on the next 16.years of the imperious World King .
We’ve not changed the rules one iota. Just the classification
Or got the standards running in parallel?
TheCityUK CEO Miles Celic said it was “hard to understand” the recommendation.
“All of the non-EU parties to Lugano: Iceland, Norway and Switzerland, have indicated their support for the UK’s application and a relationship with the Single Market is not listed as a requirement of membership of the Convention,” he continued.
“We now hope that EU Member States will vote to support the UK’s application, as doing so has clear benefits for the citizens of all signatories to the treaty. However, other mechanisms exist which mean UK court judgments will continue to be enforceable throughout EU and EFTA.”
(We’d called it B so we had a lever to increase environmental standards. I guess we’ll need to introduce an A* grade next)
It’s just an administrative change
The great unknown is did Dr Williams seek to be the Hartlepool candidate or did he switch because SKS asked him to.
Of its the former then Dr Williams is a fool and if it's the latter than Dr Williams is again a fool for not understanding what that consequences would be - as both you and me could see the end result from miles away.
This puts pro-independence parties combined on just 45% of the vote, which would not be any kind of mandate for #indyref2
What evidence we have of Keir’s strategic nous so far is not good.
Some of the whipped votes have been iffy.
There’s been a reluctance to reach out to tactical allies either in the LDs or even on the Tory backbenches.
He needs to deliver a good reshuffle after these results, sadly including his shadow Chancellor (I say sadly, because she was just promoted too early and inauspicious circs).
Edit: there is evidence enough of decent cut through from Nandy, Rayner, Lammy etc to assemble a decent front bench.
Use the threat of a referendum to keep chiselling baubles and increased bits of autonomy, but don't actually call one. It worked for the Catalan nationalists for decades.
SIndy, like the Culture War and the Brexit War, is much more useful as a war that continues forever than as a war that's ever won.
As a worked example (made up numbers):
EU standard - 80+ points classes you as Category A and 60+ points classes as grade B.
UK historic score using the same measurement scale 85 points. But we call it class B because we draw the cut at 90. We therefore have a bunch of obligations on environmental improvement.
We have now reclassified as class A because we are above 80 points. We have not changed our scoring system or lifted any of the improvement requirements. We’ve just changed the grade on the front of the paper.
(As an aside this nonsense is only necessary because the EU promised that we could continue to import as before and then broke their promise)
The "only real option" was someone who was obviously going to get pummelled for their ultra anti-Brexit stance? If so, Labour is in a far, far worse position than we imagine.
Labour needs to find a way of ending the Brexit Wars. They need to say they respect Brexit was a legitimate outcome - and they respect the people who voted for it. Even then, they are still years behind Boris on "implementing the will of the voters". Boris (on this at least) comes across as natural. Whenever Brexit is mentioned, Labour continue to look like you've dropped a scorpion down their pants.
https://twitter.com/Mij_Europe/status/1389844647330172931?s=20
We may need to reduce the amount of untreated sewage being discharged.
"The French government has warned it could cut electricity to Jersey amid an escalating row over post-Brexit fishing rights.
Maritime Minister Annick Girardin told the French parliament that new rules governing access to Channel Islands waters were unacceptable.
She said France was "ready to use... retaliatory measures" under the UK-EU post-Brexit trade deal.
"I am sorry it has come to this [but] we will do so if we have to," she said."
Remember that last week the French Minister for European Affairs Clément Beaune was threatening Financial Equivalence if the UK did not respect Brexit Fishing agreements ie do what we are doing.
https://www.thelocal.fr/20210427/france-threatens-reprisals-over-brexit-fishing-deal/
Not the organ grinder, however.
People famously vote conservative because they want a more left wing Labour Party
https://twitter.com/francesweetman/status/1389836904812761089?s=20
This is something I'm an ardent believer in, I believe in having low taxes to make work pay - the problem here is the tax and benefit system means that people trapped in the poverty trap lose up to 90% on marginal earnings.
Increasing somebodies wages from £10 per hour to £11 per hour for example only aids them by 10 pence per hour if they're on a real 90% marginal tax rate. It means that instead of taking £1 per hour home after real tax, they're taking £1.10 per hour home after real tax.
If somebodies wages are £10 per hour and their marginal tax rate gets cut from eg 90% to eg 40% then that aids them by £5 per hour. It means instead of taking £1 per hour home after real tax, they're taking £6 per hour home after real tax.
Tell me please oh enlightened one - which of those two is a more serious and credible reform?
"One Labour adviser said: “Over the last two years, lots and lots of people have moved out of London. That will have been accelerated by Covid. We read a lot about the red wall. No one has gone to Wycombe to find out what is driving down Steve Baker’s majority.
“The next Labour party that wins a national election is not going to win back all of the red wall, it is not going to win back all of Scotland, or all the southern seats it could win, it will do a little bit of everything, and it will probably involve seats like Bournemouth and High Wycombe.”
If you have a real tax rate of 90% of earnings then regardless of how hard people work they're like hamsters trying to run forwards on a wheel.
BB - “are you going to consider doing X”.
Minister - “Nothing is off the table”
Mail - “France threatens X”
https://www.thejakartapost.com/seasia/2021/05/05/singapore-steps-up-virus-curbs-as-infection-clusters-grow-.html
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/australias-largest-state-reports-first-covid-19-case-more-than-month-2021-05-05/
That meant there was roughly 4 options:-
Paul William (Stockton), Phil Wilson (Sedgefield) and possibly Jenny Chapman (Darlington) or Anna Turley (Redcar).
Of those three Phil Wilson isn't really an option, Anna Turley is why Labour in Redcar is still a mess and Jenny Chapman was made a Lord 2 days prior to the by-election being announced.
So SKS really only had 1 choice given the timing - and equally I suspect (heck I know) Jenny was bright enough not to go near it
Now of course, none of this would have been a problem was the local Labour Party in a fit state and capable of picking a decent candidate - but you only have to look at the local elections to see the true state of Hartlepool's Labour party and it's not a pretty state.
My only real concern here would be that Paul Williams Political career is now finished - but hey nowt is going to fix that, and Police Commissioner in Cleveland would have been an even worse end.
So it's a term that has some use but is wielded like a sledgehammer and can be misused to delegitimise disagreement. Someone angry at your position? Its their white fragility showing, couldn't be they disagree legitimately. Reminds me of dismissing concerns of women by calling them hysterical.
A little bit of everything isn't going to solve the issue of making Labour electable as you need a coherent set of policies and once you start cherry picking you don't have that.
If I am being generous he has been told by Starmer that if he does this he will be given a genuinely safe seat if he loses - that being PCC wasn't his area of interest anyway.
If I am being ungenerous, that he was PCC candidate in the first place demonstrated some hubris...
https://twitter.com/zarahsultana/status/1389340752304648196
The Greens have a five point lead on 28% and will likely lead a government with the SPD on 14% and the FDP on 12% or Linke on 6%
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1389846659744555013?s=20
Brexit should be called out every day of the week for the out of plain-sight fiasco it has become.
I am more inclined towards the LDs because in their heart of hearts they have not given up on the EU dream in the way Labour have, to pander to their xenophobic former base.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56984886
It was a statement to the National Assembly, so not Daily Mail fishing.
https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/france-threatens-to-disconnect-power-to-jersey-island/2229694
But she seems confused between the UK and Jersey.
"multiple Whitehall insiders claim the Prime Minister is leaning towards proposals first put forward a decade ago by Sir Andrew Dilnot, a social care expert, which recommended capping lifetime care costs for individuals"
FFS. Ten years on and still arguing internally whether to do Dilnot.
Just get on with it.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/05/04/exclusive-pms-preferred-social-care-reforms-would-disproportionately/
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1389848601254367233?s=20
Nobody is talking about really big, bold, new ideas. Labour needs to get on with it.
He is getting far too powerful
Better to be honest and promote collectivism with heartfelt enthusiasm and, alongside, make clear its opposition to liberalism and conservatism?
The problem is a combination of the Labour party being perceived to have abandoned the working class and the Tory party doing a lot better job of targeting them.