Interesting that Labour's Lisa Nandy on Sky is having a go at Dominic Cummings for his "misogyny" in his attacking Carrie Johnson, and not using Cummings interview to have a go at the Tories. The only criticism she had for Boris Johnson was how on earth he allowed Cummings anywhere near power.
Interesting. Doesn't look like Cummings is winning any friends even on a "my enemies enemy is my friend" basis.
The interview got hardly any coverage and is not even on the front page of the BBC News website.
The Chief Minister of Gibraltar, Fabian Picardo , has assured that the proposal for a negotiating mandate on the future relationship with the Rock, approved in the last hours by the European Commission, " departs from the Framework Agreement agreed by the United Kingdom and Gibraltar with Spain on December 31 of last year, "known as the New Year's Agreement.
Furthermore, he has pointed out that the mandate may, unfortunately, not form the basis for negotiating a UK treaty agreement with the EU . However, he has assured that work will continue with the UK government "while we explore all the possibilities."
Likewise, it has indicated that work will also continue to be prepared in the event that there is no negotiated outcome with the EU and that Gibraltar does not enjoy a treaty relationship with the EU in the future.
" The draft of the EU mandate is a matter for them , of course, but I must say that, based on the current draft, there is no possibility that it constitutes the basis of an agreement, " said Picardo, adding that "we will work closely with the UK , especially with Foreign Minister Dominic Raab, to continue to seek the best possible outcomes for Gibraltar."
What was the EU's objection to the "Trusted Trader" scheme? It's not like M&S Sandwiches are difficult to identify....
The scheme wasn't designed to be a mass waiver so that all products from all suppliers get included. Which is what would have to happen for it to be the solution being touted.
If you are a supplier big enough with customer demand large enough to supply products by the full vehicle this is easy. Sadly few are - it is the mixed loads that are the problem, and almost all of the loads for supermarket goods are mixed.
By mixed I mean hundreds or thousands of different products. Each needing its own ream of paperwork at our government's insistence. If we were happy to accept the status quo - that our standards are their standards because we wrote their standards - then we could make all of this go away.
The whole point about Trusted Traders is it should be all products, from all suppliers.
The Trusted Trader should be self-declaring and paying what duties are due, just as we self-declare and pay all sorts of other taxes. If they are found to be committing fraud, they get a hefty fine and lose Trusted Trader status.
The EU doesn't work like that.
Which is the nature of the beast of making a compromise.
If you're only sticking to the rules that pre-existed that are how you normally work, then there is no compromise.
It takes two to tango and the EU are very much in the Ian Paisley school of No dancing and continually saying No, No, No.
Remember Boris agreed to this deal and the EU (are rightly in their eyes) ensuring we stick to our side of the deal.
The fact it doesn't work is also not their problem, as @RochdalePioneers has pointed out near direct transport routes from France to Ireland has sorted out the biggest issues so what is left is mainly an issue within Northern Ireland.
Chairman of M&S explaining that Brexit means lorries to the EU (or NI) now carry 700 pages of forms for inspection and delays of 24-48 hours at borders mean some perishable goods are being destroyed. The new paperwork is employing a team of 13 people.
I had a box of perishable goods turn up 2 months late. We assumed it had been confiscated by customs and then suddenly gets spat out for delivery. "There are customs fees and charges to pay" said the courier.
Erm no, because 1. The box needs to be destroyed now 2. The box was 1 of 2 in a consignment and 3. the other box got through without charge because the products inside are zero tariff and zero import VAT as shown on the paperwork
It is a lottery. Our customer has seen it take 4 attempts to get properly certified properly written up chilled products across the border in time to be edible. We're largely giving up on chilled as the supply chain just isn't reliable. Which is why for NI the supply route has quickly swung from UK to NI / ROI to France to ROI / NI much to the rage of the unionists.
Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.
The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:
Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.
However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%
Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:
For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.
Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:
Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.
You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.
Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.
Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:
SNP gains from SCon: Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland) Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)
SNP gains from SLD: Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross Edinburgh West North East Fife Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)
As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.
However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.
As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.
If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
I mean its your affair too as you’ll have to live with the consequence of the breakup of our country but I know your short-termism doesn't look that far ahead.
It would be disappointing of course but if Starmer gave in to the SNP because he needed their support to stay PM in a hung parliament and gave them a legal indyref2 and lost, even after offering Scots devomax then he would immediately lose power.
As soon as Scottish MPs left the Commons after a Scexit vote we Tories would return to power without an election as we would have a majority in England, Wales and NI alone. We would then shift to an English Nationalist agenda and take as hard a line as possible with the SNP in Scexit talks. We would also dominate English politics for a further generation.
Labour meanwhile having lost Scotland would be utterly screwed. Only 3 times since 1945 have Labour won a majority without Scottish MPs, in 1945, 1966, 1997, 2001 and 2005 and most of those were under Blair
Nah, wouldn’t happen. He’d pass a bill moving from FPTP to a more proportionate system in the hope of retaining power,and he’d dissolve parliament.
And it would be appropriate for Scottish MPs to vote on that?
What was the EU's objection to the "Trusted Trader" scheme? It's not like M&S Sandwiches are difficult to identify....
The scheme wasn't designed to be a mass waiver so that all products from all suppliers get included. Which is what would have to happen for it to be the solution being touted.
If you are a supplier big enough with customer demand large enough to supply products by the full vehicle this is easy. Sadly few are - it is the mixed loads that are the problem, and almost all of the loads for supermarket goods are mixed.
By mixed I mean hundreds or thousands of different products. Each needing its own ream of paperwork at our government's insistence. If we were happy to accept the status quo - that our standards are their standards because we wrote their standards - then we could make all of this go away.
The whole point about Trusted Traders is it should be all products, from all suppliers.
The Trusted Trader should be self-declaring and paying what duties are due, just as we self-declare and pay all sorts of other taxes. If they are found to be committing fraud, they get a hefty fine and lose Trusted Trader status.
The EU doesn't work like that.
Which is the nature of the beast of making a compromise.
If you're only sticking to the rules that pre-existed that are how you normally work, then there is no compromise.
It takes two to tango and the EU are very much in the Ian Paisley school of No dancing and continually saying No, No, No.
Remember Boris agreed to this deal and the EU (are rightly in their eyes) ensuring we stick to our side of the deal.
The fact it doesn't work is also not their problem, as @RochdalePioneers has pointed out near direct transport routes from France to Ireland has sorted out the biggest issues so what is left is mainly an issue within Northern Ireland.
Chairman of M&S explaining that Brexit means lorries to the EU (or NI) now carry 700 pages of forms for inspection and delays of 24-48 hours at borders mean some perishable goods are being destroyed. The new paperwork is employing a team of 13 people.
I had a box of perishable goods turn up 2 months late. We assumed it had been confiscated by customs and then suddenly gets spat out for delivery. "There are customs fees and charges to pay" said the courier.
Erm no, because 1. The box needs to be destroyed now 2. The box was 1 of 2 in a consignment and 3. the other box got through without charge because the products inside are zero tariff and zero import VAT as shown on the paperwork
It is a lottery. Our customer has seen it take 4 attempts to get properly certified properly written up chilled products across the border in time to be edible. We're largely giving up on chilled as the supply chain just isn't reliable. Which is why for NI the supply route has quickly swung from UK to NI / ROI to France to ROI / NI much to the rage of the unionists.
This is all because of BoJo's rubbish Brexit deal
Look.no further.. just blame Boris.
Well the nature of leadership is that you’re responsible for success and failure
The spectator are preaching to their audience, I would be surprised if anyone else even mentions it.
I see that some Luvvies and some Lefties are going for a pre-demonisation narrative an assumption that the "shit rag" (copyright Nick Kumar) "terrified" (Toby Earle) Spectator are 'going for' Rashford. Quite startling tweets here: https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2021/07/21/marcus-rashford-versus-spectator/
I wonder what the Spectator have? Any sense and it will be straight reporting.
On a previous occasion Rashford went for an MP after not checking the context of a tweet, and most media swallowed it.
Morning everyone. I wonder what fresh hell today will bring?
The crucial Wednesday Covid numbers.
Either "peak" delight confirmed or the depth of despair of ever increasing cases.
That delight will be pretty short lived. The true summer peak of cases will be double today's numbers. As I've said many times, there's no alternative options but I don't think there's any mileage in ignoring the current conditions that will lead to huge numbers in the next three to five weeks. All we can hope for is that the threat of vaccine passports has made 2m under 30s get their vaccines.
Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.
The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:
Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.
However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%
Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:
For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.
Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:
Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.
You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.
Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.
Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:
SNP gains from SCon: Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland) Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)
SNP gains from SLD: Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross Edinburgh West North East Fife Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)
As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.
However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.
As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.
If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
I mean its your affair too as you’ll have to live with the consequence of the breakup of our country but I know your short-termism doesn't look that far ahead.
It would be disappointing of course but if Starmer gave in to the SNP because he needed their support to stay PM in a hung parliament and gave them a legal indyref2 and lost, even after offering Scots devomax then he would immediately lose power.
As soon as Scottish MPs left the Commons after a Scexit vote we Tories would return to power without an election as we would still have a majority in England, Wales and NI alone. We would then shift to an English Nationalist agenda and take as hard a line as possible with the SNP in Scexit talks. We would also dominate English politics for a further generation.
Labour meanwhile having lost Scotland would be utterly screwed. Only 5 times since 1945 have Labour won a majority without Scottish MPs, in 1945, 1966, 1997, 2001 and 2005 and most of those were under Blair
I'm far from sure that such policies would be as enduringly popular as you blithely assume.
If there was an indyref2 and the Scottish Nationalists won then English voters would immediately demand as hard a negotiation line as possible with the SNP and Scottish government in Scexit talks and no concessions whatsoever to the SNP.
Exactly the same as European voters demanded the EU take as hard a line as possible with the Tories and UK government after the Brexit vote.
London would have to take as hard a line as possible with Edinburgh as Brussels took with London in the Brexit talks or be replaced by a government that would.
The voters of southern England will be ecstatic when their new “English Nationalist” (sic) government imposes the concrete silos with 260 nuclear warheads. HS2 will look like a walk in the park.
Interesting that Labour's Lisa Nandy on Sky is having a go at Dominic Cummings for his "misogyny" in his attacking Carrie Johnson, and not using Cummings interview to have a go at the Tories. The only criticism she had for Boris Johnson was how on earth he allowed Cummings anywhere near power.
Interesting. Doesn't look like Cummings is winning any friends even on a "my enemies enemy is my friend" basis.
Cummings only useful purpose - for both himself and the opposition - is to attack Johnson - and the "why did he let such a dingbat so close to the centre of government" is a perfectly appropriate one....
Not quite accurate, I hope . They did wear something else instead?
The current BBC obsession with sportswomen's lower clothing is a revealing reflection on the Olympics and culture, judging by the amount of headlines on the front page over the last week.
A few years ago it was all about the Olympics being a good pickup ground for body-type fetishists.
The spectator are preaching to their audience, I would be surprised if anyone else even mentions it.
It's interesting that some Luvvies and some Lefties are going for a pre-demonisation narrative an assumption that the "shit rag" (copyright Nick Kumar) "terrified" (Toby Earle) Spectator are 'going for' Rashford. Quite startling tweets here: https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2021/07/21/marcus-rashford-versus-spectator/
I wonder what the Spectator have? Any sense and it will be straight reporting.
On a previous occasion Rashford went for an MP after not checking the context of a tweet, and most media swallowed it.
*Awaits outcome with interest*
It's worth looking at the first tweet
Just heard @spectator are planning to run a story on me tomorrow about how I have benefitted commercially in the last 18 months…
So the claim will be that Marcus has made money from the companies who have signed up to support the work he's doing - and I suspect the issue is that "most, but not all the money" has been going to the good causes.
Which probably isn't surprising as I suspect Marcus now has a few people managing / operating his campaigns and they need to be paid... But you can see ways in which the Spectator can make that look very bad.
Chairman of M&S explaining that Brexit means lorries to the EU (or NI) now carry 700 pages of forms for inspection and delays of 24-48 hours at borders mean some perishable goods are being destroyed. The new paperwork is employing a team of 13 people.
I had a box of perishable goods turn up 2 months late. We assumed it had been confiscated by customs and then suddenly gets spat out for delivery. "There are customs fees and charges to pay" said the courier.
Erm no, because 1. The box needs to be destroyed now 2. The box was 1 of 2 in a consignment and 3. the other box got through without charge because the products inside are zero tariff and zero import VAT as shown on the paperwork
It is a lottery. Our customer has seen it take 4 attempts to get properly certified properly written up chilled products across the border in time to be edible. We're largely giving up on chilled as the supply chain just isn't reliable. Which is why for NI the supply route has quickly swung from UK to NI / ROI to France to ROI / NI much to the rage of the unionists.
This is all because of BoJo's rubbish Brexit deal
It's an interesting example of the limitations of Johnson's habit of deciding stuff on a wing and sorting out any problems later. That can work quite well in electoral with non-technical stuff. If they declare nightclubs open without restriction, then say nah, on reflection they need vaxports, everyone will be irritated and some people will die before they get round to sorting it, but in a few months everyone will have moved on, and if they're ruthless enough not to care about unnecessary deaths, the electoral consequences will be negligible.
But Northern Ireland is a technical problem, and you can't talk it away, any more than you can repair a machine by thetorical flourishes. There are only 3 choices that actually work:
1. Decide NI isn't part of the Customs Union after all. Problem: border trade collapses. 2. Decide NI isn't part of the UK for trading purposes. Problem: UK-NI trade collapses 3. Decide to accept continuation of common standards. Problem: we surrender the right to fall behind EU standards in the future.
Fudges - trusted traders, informal deals, delays, etc. simply won't work durably. There's a fundamental choice, and Johnson de facto chose 2 plus fudge.
I think the outcome may be 3 with the theoretical option to change in future which will in practice not be used.
Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.
The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:
Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.
However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%
Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:
For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.
Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:
Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.
You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.
Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.
Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:
SNP gains from SCon: Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland) Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)
SNP gains from SLD: Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross Edinburgh West North East Fife Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)
As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.
However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.
As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.
If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
I mean its your affair too as you’ll have to live with the consequence of the breakup of our country but I know your short-termism doesn't look that far ahead.
It would be disappointing of course but if Starmer gave in to the SNP because he needed their support to stay PM in a hung parliament and gave them a legal indyref2 and lost, even after offering Scots devomax then he would immediately lose power.
As soon as Scottish MPs left the Commons after a Scexit vote we Tories would return to power without an election as we would have a majority in England, Wales and NI alone. We would then shift to an English Nationalist agenda and take as hard a line as possible with the SNP in Scexit talks. We would also dominate English politics for a further generation.
Labour meanwhile having lost Scotland would be utterly screwed. Only 3 times since 1945 have Labour won a majority without Scottish MPs, in 1945, 1966, 1997, 2001 and 2005 and most of those were under Blair
Nah, wouldn’t happen. He’d pass a bill moving from FPTP to a more proportionate system in the hope of retaining power,and he’d dissolve parliament.
He couldn't pass it without SNP support and even if he managed to before they left the Commons even under PR we would likely see a repeat of the 2015 result and a Tory and UKIP/Farage combined majority on votes (the Tories and UKIP got 54% of the vote combined in England in 2015 and add in the DUP too) to screw the SNP and end all spending to Scotland as soon as possible as English voters turned English Nationalist.
There would then also be a hard border and customs posts from Berwick to Carlisle
What do you mean “as English voters turned English Nationalist”? They already have: it’s called Brexit.
Morning everyone. I wonder what fresh hell today will bring?
The crucial Wednesday Covid numbers.
Either "peak" delight confirmed or the depth of despair of ever increasing cases.
That delight will be pretty short lived. The true summer peak of cases will be double today's numbers. As I've said many times, there's no alternative options but I don't think there's any mileage in ignoring the current conditions that will lead to huge numbers in the next three to five weeks. All we can hope for is that the threat of vaccine passports has made 2m under 30s get their vaccines.
Anyway, having read up on the overnight refugees thread, it is simply the case that some posters and a chunk of voters don't care where these forrin go or whether they live or die as long as they are Somebody Else's Problem.
They're all sponging forrin, here to take all the jobs AND take benefits, so lets just send them somewhere else forrin. Anywhere else. Doesn't matter as they're never going to come here. And think about what a brilliant country we would have if the only people here and breeding were those who could show they were pure bred Anglo-Saxon - no migrant stock there at all...
Surely the solution is to build a wall in the channel? These boats won't be able to cross the channel if there's a ruddy great wall in it.
Don't be silly. Next to no people are coming out against Britain taking in genuine refugees.
What I and many other people have said is that the fair, humane and safe solution is to take in genuine refugees from refugee camps in places by the frontline of the crisis - like Turkey, Lesbos etc - and not simply turn our back on the world but say "if you can get here without drowning first" then we'll let people in.
Having a Darwinian survival of the fittest so primarily fit and healthy young men who are willing to pay people smugglers are the ones who get asylum, rather than perhaps more women or others in genuine need and fear who can't or won't get past the frontline, is neither humane nor safe nor legal.
What was the EU's objection to the "Trusted Trader" scheme? It's not like M&S Sandwiches are difficult to identify....
The scheme wasn't designed to be a mass waiver so that all products from all suppliers get included. Which is what would have to happen for it to be the solution being touted.
If you are a supplier big enough with customer demand large enough to supply products by the full vehicle this is easy. Sadly few are - it is the mixed loads that are the problem, and almost all of the loads for supermarket goods are mixed.
By mixed I mean hundreds or thousands of different products. Each needing its own ream of paperwork at our government's insistence. If we were happy to accept the status quo - that our standards are their standards because we wrote their standards - then we could make all of this go away.
The whole point about Trusted Traders is it should be all products, from all suppliers.
The Trusted Trader should be self-declaring and paying what duties are due, just as we self-declare and pay all sorts of other taxes. If they are found to be committing fraud, they get a hefty fine and lose Trusted Trader status.
The EU doesn't work like that.
Which is the nature of the beast of making a compromise.
If you're only sticking to the rules that pre-existed that are how you normally work, then there is no compromise.
It takes two to tango and the EU are very much in the Ian Paisley school of No dancing and continually saying No, No, No.
Remember Boris agreed to this deal and the EU (are rightly in their eyes) ensuring we stick to our side of the deal.
The fact it doesn't work is also not their problem, as @RochdalePioneers has pointed out near direct transport routes from France to Ireland has sorted out the biggest issues so what is left is mainly an issue within Northern Ireland.
Nah we still hold all the cards
Shame they are for completely different games to the game we are supposed to be playing.
Morning everyone. I wonder what fresh hell today will bring?
The crucial Wednesday Covid numbers.
Either "peak" delight confirmed or the depth of despair of ever increasing cases.
That delight will be pretty short lived. The true summer peak of cases will be double today's numbers. As I've said many times, there's no alternative options but I don't think there's any mileage in ignoring the current conditions that will lead to huge numbers in the next three to five weeks. All we can hope for is that the threat of vaccine passports has made 2m under 30s get their vaccines.
What is your current information on vaccine supplies?
Is there a summary, anywhere - especially about Pfizer? I do not have a current view.
The new Pfizer order has started deliveries, there's no supply issues.
Do we have any idea as to what the booster shots plan will be ?
Its already over six months since some were fully vaccinated.
I wondered if they would use the same vaccines as before or would try different ones to what people previously had for potentially extra protection.
If so then they might want at least one of Novavax, Valneva or Modified AZ available.
I expect the over 40s will all be offered a standard AZ dose as that's what we've got the most of piling up in fridges. It should start in August with 12m per month being done so that by mid November everyone over 40 has got their third dose plus three weeks.
For under 40s who knows whether those groups will even be eligible for a third dose. We should be, just to help prevent the spread of it in winter time. I expect that would be Pfizer.
I also expect that the decision in kids not being eligible will be overturned around September when the idiotic isolation bubbles start reappearing and the government has to offer the jab or destroy the education of millions of kids.
Looks like the EU is (once again?) intervening between a member state and the UK trying to find pragmatic solutions to tricky problems they imperfectly understand.
The EUCommission's draft mandate is a matter for them, but the mandate published today strays unhelpfully from the New Year's Eve Framework Agreement & cannot form the basis for the negotiation of an agreement of a UK treaty with the EU in relation to #Gibraltar.
Morning everyone. I wonder what fresh hell today will bring?
The crucial Wednesday Covid numbers.
Either "peak" delight confirmed or the depth of despair of ever increasing cases.
That delight will be pretty short lived. The true summer peak of cases will be double today's numbers. As I've said many times, there's no alternative options but I don't think there's any mileage in ignoring the current conditions that will lead to huge numbers in the next three to five weeks. All we can hope for is that the threat of vaccine passports has made 2m under 30s get their vaccines.
What was the EU's objection to the "Trusted Trader" scheme? It's not like M&S Sandwiches are difficult to identify....
The scheme wasn't designed to be a mass waiver so that all products from all suppliers get included. Which is what would have to happen for it to be the solution being touted.
If you are a supplier big enough with customer demand large enough to supply products by the full vehicle this is easy. Sadly few are - it is the mixed loads that are the problem, and almost all of the loads for supermarket goods are mixed.
By mixed I mean hundreds or thousands of different products. Each needing its own ream of paperwork at our government's insistence. If we were happy to accept the status quo - that our standards are their standards because we wrote their standards - then we could make all of this go away.
The whole point about Trusted Traders is it should be all products, from all suppliers.
The Trusted Trader should be self-declaring and paying what duties are due, just as we self-declare and pay all sorts of other taxes. If they are found to be committing fraud, they get a hefty fine and lose Trusted Trader status.
The EU doesn't work like that.
Which is the nature of the beast of making a compromise.
If you're only sticking to the rules that pre-existed that are how you normally work, then there is no compromise.
It takes two to tango and the EU are very much in the Ian Paisley school of No dancing and continually saying No, No, No.
Remember Boris agreed to this deal and the EU (are rightly in their eyes) ensuring we stick to our side of the deal.
The fact it doesn't work is also not their problem, as @RochdalePioneers has pointed out near direct transport routes from France to Ireland has sorted out the biggest issues so what is left is mainly an issue within Northern Ireland.
I agree with that.
Our solution needs to be to make it the EU's problem and not just our own, that was always the only way we'd ever get the EU to compromise.
Invoke Article 16 and make it clear we'll only withdraw the invocation once a mutually satisfactory compromise is resolved. Invoking Article 16, as they've already done, is exercising a part of the deal which is still sticking to the deal - its just not sticking to it the way they want us to do so.
Does Boris Johnson run the risk of breaking apart his Brexit coalition by continuously bringing the issue up again, when he specifically said Brexit would be "done" if people voted for him?
Another Brexit benefit for the Island of Ireland- Well done
Car dealers in Ireland say it now works out cheaper to import European cars from Japan, who like Ireland have right-hand drive vehicles, as they are not subject to the 20% VAT charge, unlike the British cars. https://twitter.com/OldBobCyprus/status/1417514163514056706
Interesting that Marcus uses his title. I'd have thought he wouldn't or at least he'd have taken advice and would decide to stay humble.
He's probably proud of it.....
I'm sure he is but the other well known and titled Mancunion footballer chooses not to wear his greatness on his sleeve
It's a twitter handle - it's the equivalent to the typed name at the bottom of the letter. It's not like Ben Kingsley who insisted for years on people using the Sir bit when talking to him.
Wow, £6bn increase in the debt interest bill compared to last year. Completely offsets the savings in the furlough scheme winding down. Without that additional interest bill the PSF figures actually don't look so bad. All of the numbers heading in the right direction at least, other than debt interest.
It looks as though we're on course for an annual deficit of around £130bn, maybe less if there's no autumn/winter disruption.
AIUI the normal threshold for concern about national debt is when interest is getting towards 4% of GDP.
The last number I saw for the UK was around 1.9% from pre-COVID iirc. AIUI much of our national debt is also much longer term than comparable countries.
So the immediate threat of heavy debt interest is not really a threat. Of course it still needs managing.
The spectator are preaching to their audience, I would be surprised if anyone else even mentions it.
It's interesting that some Luvvies and some Lefties are going for a pre-demonisation narrative an assumption that the "shit rag" (copyright Nick Kumar) "terrified" (Toby Earle) Spectator are 'going for' Rashford. Quite startling tweets here: https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2021/07/21/marcus-rashford-versus-spectator/
I wonder what the Spectator have? Any sense and it will be straight reporting.
On a previous occasion Rashford went for an MP after not checking the context of a tweet, and most media swallowed it.
*Awaits outcome with interest*
It's worth looking at the first tweet
Just heard @spectator are planning to run a story on me tomorrow about how I have benefitted commercially in the last 18 months…
So the claim will be that Marcus has made money from the companies who have signed up to support the work he's doing - and I suspect the issue is that "most, but not all the money" has been going to the good causes.
Which probably isn't surprising as I suspect Marcus now has a few people managing / operating things that need to be done... But you can see ways in which the Spectator can make that look very bad.
Leaving aside the Rashford story for the moment, one of my pet hates are 'charities' who have massive overheads, and only give a few pennies in the pound to good causes. Some overheads are valid and unavoidable, but I do think some charities - especially large ones - don't try to be quite as efficient as they could.
Chairman of M&S explaining that Brexit means lorries to the EU (or NI) now carry 700 pages of forms for inspection and delays of 24-48 hours at borders mean some perishable goods are being destroyed. The new paperwork is employing a team of 13 people.
I had a box of perishable goods turn up 2 months late. We assumed it had been confiscated by customs and then suddenly gets spat out for delivery. "There are customs fees and charges to pay" said the courier.
Erm no, because 1. The box needs to be destroyed now 2. The box was 1 of 2 in a consignment and 3. the other box got through without charge because the products inside are zero tariff and zero import VAT as shown on the paperwork
It is a lottery. Our customer has seen it take 4 attempts to get properly certified properly written up chilled products across the border in time to be edible. We're largely giving up on chilled as the supply chain just isn't reliable. Which is why for NI the supply route has quickly swung from UK to NI / ROI to France to ROI / NI much to the rage of the unionists.
This is all because of BoJo's rubbish Brexit deal
It's an interesting example of the limitations of Johnson's habit of deciding stuff on a wing and sorting out any problems later. That can work quite well in electoral with non-technical stuff. If they declare nightclubs open without restriction, then say nah, on reflection they need vaxports, everyone will be irritated and some people will die before they get round to sorting it, but in a few months everyone will have moved on, and if they're ruthless enough not to care about unnecessary deaths, the electoral consequences will be negligible.
But Northern Ireland is a technical problem, and you can't talk it away, any more than you can repair a machine by thetorical flourishes. There are only 3 choices that actually work:
1. Decide NI isn't part of the Customs Union after all. Problem: border trade collapses. 2. Decide NI isn't part of the UK for trading purposes. Problem: UK-NI trade collapses 3. Decide to accept continuation of common standards. Problem: we surrender the right to fall behind EU standards in the future.
Fudges - trusted traders, informal deals, delays, etc. simply won't work durably. There's a fundamental choice, and Johnson de facto chose 2 plus fudge.
I think the outcome may be 3 with the theoretical option to change in future which will in practice not be used.
1. Is already in effect. You cannot send goods from GB to NI without an export license and customs paperwork. 2. Is in progress. GB to NI trade is no longer economically viable (or possible at all in some cases) and is being replaced by ROI to NI. The UK used to be the hub for both Irish markets, increasingly it is supplying neither. 3. Is the status quo. Both sides insist standards will only increase so as a kick the can down the road solution it shouldn't even cause problems in the future. But we won't because sovvrinty.
The spectator are preaching to their audience, I would be surprised if anyone else even mentions it.
It's interesting that some Luvvies and some Lefties are going for a pre-demonisation narrative an assumption that the "shit rag" (copyright Nick Kumar) "terrified" (Toby Earle) Spectator are 'going for' Rashford. Quite startling tweets here: https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2021/07/21/marcus-rashford-versus-spectator/
I wonder what the Spectator have? Any sense and it will be straight reporting.
On a previous occasion Rashford went for an MP after not checking the context of a tweet, and most media swallowed it.
*Awaits outcome with interest*
It's worth looking at the first tweet
Just heard @spectator are planning to run a story on me tomorrow about how I have benefitted commercially in the last 18 months…
So the claim will be that Marcus has made money from the companies who have signed up to support the work he's doing - and I suspect the issue is that "most, but not all the money" has been going to the good causes.
Which probably isn't surprising as I suspect Marcus now has a few people managing / operating his campaigns and they need to be paid... But you can see ways in which the Spectator can make that look very bad.
As ever, the devil will be in the detail. If Marcus isn't happy with what's written, I'd advise him to take the Spectator to court.
Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.
The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:
Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.
However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%
Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:
For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.
Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:
Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.
You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.
Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.
Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:
SNP gains from SCon: Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland) Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)
SNP gains from SLD: Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross Edinburgh West North East Fife Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)
As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.
However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.
As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.
If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
I mean its your affair too as you’ll have to live with the consequence of the breakup of our country but I know your short-termism doesn't look that far ahead.
It would be disappointing of course but if Starmer gave in to the SNP because he needed their support to stay PM in a hung parliament and gave them a legal indyref2 and lost, even after offering Scots devomax then he would immediately lose power.
As soon as Scottish MPs left the Commons after a Scexit vote we Tories would return to power without an election as we would still have a majority in England, Wales and NI alone. We would then shift to an English Nationalist agenda and take as hard a line as possible with the SNP in Scexit talks. We would also dominate English politics for a further generation.
Labour meanwhile having lost Scotland would be utterly screwed. Only 5 times since 1945 have Labour won a majority without Scottish MPs, in 1945, 1966, 1997, 2001 and 2005 and most of those were under Blair
I'm far from sure that such policies would be as enduringly popular as you blithely assume.
If there was an indyref2 and the Scottish Nationalists won then English voters would immediately demand as hard a negotiation line as possible with the SNP and Scottish government in Scexit talks and no concessions whatsoever to the SNP.
Exactly the same as European voters demanded the EU take as hard a line as possible with the Tories and UK government after the Brexit vote.
London would have to take as hard a line as possible with Edinburgh as Brussels took with London in the Brexit talks or be replaced by a government that would.
The voters of southern England will be ecstatic when their new “English Nationalist” (sic) government imposes the concrete silos with 260 nuclear warheads. HS2 will look like a walk in the park.
No no no. We don't need silos darling, our nukes are sea launched. HYUFD will simply fire the missiles at the borders to create a physical border that will keep the dirty Scotch away from blessed Albion.
Does Boris Johnson run the risk of breaking apart his Brexit coalition by continuously bringing the issue up again, when he specifically said Brexit would be "done" if people voted for him?
Well he was not being honest, was he? "Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we utter to deceive".
He could say that "no one could have forseen... blah blah etc" except he was repeatedly and explictily warned so either he is a liar or a fool. Either way, its not a good look and the next 12 months are going to be a flaming that few Prime Ministers have had since the winter of discontent.
Incidentally, as well as revisiting my old friend Polybius, I'm currently on the fourth instalment (I think of six) in Phil Tucker's Chronicles of the Black Gate. I'm really rather enjoying the series. Fantasy set in a caste world whereby birth determines not only where you live but how high up in spiritual and power terms you are.
Worth checking the sample (there's a box set of the first three together so the sample's pretty large).
Interesting that Labour's Lisa Nandy on Sky is having a go at Dominic Cummings for his "misogyny" in his attacking Carrie Johnson, and not using Cummings interview to have a go at the Tories. The only criticism she had for Boris Johnson was how on earth he allowed Cummings anywhere near power.
Interesting. Doesn't look like Cummings is winning any friends even on a "my enemies enemy is my friend" basis.
The interview got hardly any coverage and is not even on the front page of the BBC News website.
Are you for real? Apart from Prince Harry's flirtation with Oprah I can't think of another recent interview that came close to that for publicity.
The interesting thing is that people on here think it was a question of picking sides. Or even scoring who won. To most people both came out looking equally ridiculous.
Obviously more damaging to the Prime Minister because people prefer their PM's to have some judgement and a blind man on a fast moving camel could see that he doesn't
Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.
The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:
Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.
However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%
Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:
For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.
Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:
Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.
You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.
Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.
Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:
SNP gains from SCon: Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland) Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)
SNP gains from SLD: Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross Edinburgh West North East Fife Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)
As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.
However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.
As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.
If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
I mean its your affair too as you’ll have to live with the consequence of the breakup of our country but I know your short-termism doesn't look that far ahead.
It would be disappointing of course but if Starmer gave in to the SNP because he needed their support to stay PM in a hung parliament and gave them a legal indyref2 and lost, even after offering Scots devomax then he would immediately lose power.
As soon as Scottish MPs left the Commons after a Scexit vote we Tories would return to power without an election as we would have a majority in England, Wales and NI alone. We would then shift to an English Nationalist agenda and take as hard a line as possible with the SNP in Scexit talks. We would also dominate English politics for a further generation.
Labour meanwhile having lost Scotland would be utterly screwed. Only 3 times since 1945 have Labour won a majority without Scottish MPs, in 1945, 1966, 1997, 2001 and 2005 and most of those were under Blair
Nah, wouldn’t happen. He’d pass a bill moving from FPTP to a more proportionate system in the hope of retaining power,and he’d dissolve parliament.
He couldn't pass it without SNP support and even if he managed to before they left the Commons even under PR we would likely see a repeat of the 2015 result and a Tory and UKIP/Farage combined majority on votes (the Tories and UKIP got 54% of the vote combined in England in 2015 and add in the DUP too) to screw the SNP and end all spending to Scotland as soon as possible as English voters turned English Nationalist.
There would then also be a hard border and customs posts from Berwick to Carlisle
What do you mean “as English voters turned English Nationalist”? They already have: it’s called Brexit.
For the whole UK, Wales also voted for Brexit as did much of NI
I didn’t watch the Cummings interview. I was watching some old episodes of Space1999 instead - love the first bloc - is it worth getting on catch up. Does it add to what we already knew ?
Not quite accurate, I hope . They did wear something else instead?
The current BBC obsession with sportswomen's lower clothing is a revealing reflection on the Olympics and culture, judging by the amount of headlines on the front page over the last week.
A few years ago it was all about the Olympics being a good pickup ground for body-type fetishists.
Handball isn't in the Olympics, but clearly, similar issues are. Gymnasts had an argument about it no?
The spectator are preaching to their audience, I would be surprised if anyone else even mentions it.
It's interesting that some Luvvies and some Lefties are going for a pre-demonisation narrative an assumption that the "shit rag" (copyright Nick Kumar) "terrified" (Toby Earle) Spectator are 'going for' Rashford. Quite startling tweets here: https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2021/07/21/marcus-rashford-versus-spectator/
I wonder what the Spectator have? Any sense and it will be straight reporting.
On a previous occasion Rashford went for an MP after not checking the context of a tweet, and most media swallowed it.
*Awaits outcome with interest*
It's worth looking at the first tweet
Just heard @spectator are planning to run a story on me tomorrow about how I have benefitted commercially in the last 18 months…
So the claim will be that Marcus has made money from the companies who have signed up to support the work he's doing - and I suspect the issue is that "most, but not all the money" has been going to the good causes.
Which probably isn't surprising as I suspect Marcus now has a few people managing / operating things that need to be done... But you can see ways in which the Spectator can make that look very bad.
Leaving aside the Rashford story for the moment, one of my pet hates are 'charities' who have massive overheads, and only give a few pennies in the pound to good causes. Some overheads are valid and unavoidable, but I do think some charities - especially large ones - don't try to be quite as efficient as they could.
one of my pet hates is the amount of money chuggers get paid for getting people to sign up for a direct debit donation - it's something like the first 12 months income.
What I find particularly annoying is that the people aren't legally required to disclose this information even when asked - so my current viewpoint is if you use them then I will never give that charity money.
At some point I really should find the time to set up a list of charities that use such firms and methods so that there is a reference list of charities to avoid.
What was the EU's objection to the "Trusted Trader" scheme? It's not like M&S Sandwiches are difficult to identify....
The scheme wasn't designed to be a mass waiver so that all products from all suppliers get included. Which is what would have to happen for it to be the solution being touted.
If you are a supplier big enough with customer demand large enough to supply products by the full vehicle this is easy. Sadly few are - it is the mixed loads that are the problem, and almost all of the loads for supermarket goods are mixed.
By mixed I mean hundreds or thousands of different products. Each needing its own ream of paperwork at our government's insistence. If we were happy to accept the status quo - that our standards are their standards because we wrote their standards - then we could make all of this go away.
The whole point about Trusted Traders is it should be all products, from all suppliers.
The Trusted Trader should be self-declaring and paying what duties are due, just as we self-declare and pay all sorts of other taxes. If they are found to be committing fraud, they get a hefty fine and lose Trusted Trader status.
The EU doesn't work like that.
Which is the nature of the beast of making a compromise.
If you're only sticking to the rules that pre-existed that are how you normally work, then there is no compromise.
Although it does highlight the fundamental difference in mindset between the English/Napoleonic legal systems
I didn’t watch the Cummings interview. I was watching some old episodes of Space1999 instead - love the first bloc - is it worth getting on catch up. Does it add to what we already knew ?
Given that you read the comments on PB - I somehow doubt it.
Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.
The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:
Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.
However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%
Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:
For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.
Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:
Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.
You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.
Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.
Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:
SNP gains from SCon: Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland) Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)
SNP gains from SLD: Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross Edinburgh West North East Fife Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)
As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.
However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.
As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.
If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
I mean its your affair too as you’ll have to live with the consequence of the breakup of our country but I know your short-termism doesn't look that far ahead.
It would be disappointing of course but if Starmer gave in to the SNP because he needed their support to stay PM in a hung parliament and gave them a legal indyref2 and lost, even after offering Scots devomax then he would immediately lose power.
As soon as Scottish MPs left the Commons after a Scexit vote we Tories would return to power without an election as we would still have a majority in England, Wales and NI alone. We would then shift to an English Nationalist agenda and take as hard a line as possible with the SNP in Scexit talks. We would also dominate English politics for a further generation.
Labour meanwhile having lost Scotland would be utterly screwed. Only 5 times since 1945 have Labour won a majority without Scottish MPs, in 1945, 1966, 1997, 2001 and 2005 and most of those were under Blair
I'm far from sure that such policies would be as enduringly popular as you blithely assume.
If there was an indyref2 and the Scottish Nationalists won then English voters would immediately demand as hard a negotiation line as possible with the SNP and Scottish government in Scexit talks and no concessions whatsoever to the SNP.
Exactly the same as European voters demanded the EU take as hard a line as possible with the Tories and UK government after the Brexit vote.
London would have to take as hard a line as possible with Edinburgh as Brussels took with London in the Brexit talks or be replaced by a government that would.
I’m an english voter and I wouldn’t
You are an English Labour voter so irrelevant, the Tories had a majority of 157 in England alone in 2019.
Scottish independence would not only end the Union but also the Conservative and Unionist Party, which would become the English Nationalist Party and dominate English politics as much as the SNP dominated Scottish politics.
Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.
The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:
Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.
However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%
Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:
For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.
Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:
Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.
You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.
Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.
Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:
SNP gains from SCon: Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland) Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)
SNP gains from SLD: Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross Edinburgh West North East Fife Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)
As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.
However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.
As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.
If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
I mean its your affair too as you’ll have to live with the consequence of the breakup of our country but I know your short-termism doesn't look that far ahead.
It would be disappointing of course but if Starmer gave in to the SNP because he needed their support to stay PM in a hung parliament and gave them a legal indyref2 and lost, even after offering Scots devomax then he would immediately lose power.
As soon as Scottish MPs left the Commons after a Scexit vote we Tories would return to power without an election as we would have a majority in England, Wales and NI alone. We would then shift to an English Nationalist agenda and take as hard a line as possible with the SNP in Scexit talks. We would also dominate English politics for a further generation.
Labour meanwhile having lost Scotland would be utterly screwed. Only 3 times since 1945 have Labour won a majority without Scottish MPs, in 1945, 1966, 1997, 2001 and 2005 and most of those were under Blair
Nah, wouldn’t happen. He’d pass a bill moving from FPTP to a more proportionate system in the hope of retaining power,and he’d dissolve parliament.
And it would be appropriate for Scottish MPs to vote on that?
Parliamentary sovereignty baby, your favourite
I suspect their rights would be restricted post a vote for independence.
There’s also an important distinction between “can do” and “should do”. It was the “should” that I was questioning
I didn’t watch the Cummings interview. I was watching some old episodes of Space1999 instead - love the first bloc - is it worth getting on catch up. Does it add to what we already knew ?
Given that you read the comments on PB - I somehow doubt it.
Yeah, the comments tend to be partisan. I was wondering, removing the partisan element, if it was worth watching. Can’t be worse then celebrity cook off which I had to endure when the wife came home.
The spectator are preaching to their audience, I would be surprised if anyone else even mentions it.
It's interesting that some Luvvies and some Lefties are going for a pre-demonisation narrative an assumption that the "shit rag" (copyright Nick Kumar) "terrified" (Toby Earle) Spectator are 'going for' Rashford. Quite startling tweets here: https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2021/07/21/marcus-rashford-versus-spectator/
I wonder what the Spectator have? Any sense and it will be straight reporting.
On a previous occasion Rashford went for an MP after not checking the context of a tweet, and most media swallowed it.
*Awaits outcome with interest*
It's worth looking at the first tweet
Just heard @spectator are planning to run a story on me tomorrow about how I have benefitted commercially in the last 18 months…
So the claim will be that Marcus has made money from the companies who have signed up to support the work he's doing - and I suspect the issue is that "most, but not all the money" has been going to the good causes.
Which probably isn't surprising as I suspect Marcus now has a few people managing / operating his campaigns and they need to be paid... But you can see ways in which the Spectator can make that look very bad.
As ever, the devil will be in the detail. If Marcus isn't happy with what's written, I'd advise him to take the Spectator to court.
Which is a problem when you can focus on part of the detail - say not all the money went on food so implying there is something dodgy when in reality the rest of the money went on transport and distribution.
That is one easy way of making someone look bad in a way that a libel court wouldn't worry about and allow you correct the story on page 74 in size 6 font the following week.
Not quite accurate, I hope . They did wear something else instead?
The current BBC obsession with sportswomen's lower clothing is a revealing reflection on the Olympics and culture, judging by the amount of headlines on the front page over the last week.
A few years ago it was all about the Olympics being a good pickup ground for body-type fetishists.
Handball isn't in the Olympics, but clearly, similar issues are. Gymnasts had an argument about it no?
Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.
The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:
Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.
However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%
Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:
For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.
Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:
Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.
You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.
Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.
Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:
SNP gains from SCon: Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland) Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)
SNP gains from SLD: Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross Edinburgh West North East Fife Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)
As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.
However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.
As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.
If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
I mean its your affair too as you’ll have to live with the consequence of the breakup of our country but I know your short-termism doesn't look that far ahead.
It would be disappointing of course but if Starmer gave in to the SNP because he needed their support to stay PM in a hung parliament and gave them a legal indyref2 and lost, even after offering Scots devomax then he would immediately lose power.
As soon as Scottish MPs left the Commons after a Scexit vote we Tories would return to power without an election as we would have a majority in England, Wales and NI alone. We would then shift to an English Nationalist agenda and take as hard a line as possible with the SNP in Scexit talks. We would also dominate English politics for a further generation.
Labour meanwhile having lost Scotland would be utterly screwed. Only 3 times since 1945 have Labour won a majority without Scottish MPs, in 1945, 1966, 1997, 2001 and 2005 and most of those were under Blair
Nah, wouldn’t happen. He’d pass a bill moving from FPTP to a more proportionate system in the hope of retaining power,and he’d dissolve parliament.
He couldn't pass it without SNP support and even if he managed to before they left the Commons even under PR we would likely see a repeat of the 2015 result and a Tory and UKIP/Farage combined majority on votes (the Tories and UKIP got 54% of the vote combined in England in 2015 and add in the DUP too) to screw the SNP and end all spending to Scotland as soon as possible as English voters turned English Nationalist.
There would then also be a hard border and customs posts from Berwick to Carlisle
What do you mean “as English voters turned English Nationalist”? They already have: it’s called Brexit.
For the whole UK, Wales also voted for Brexit as did much of NI
'as did much of NI'
Lol.
Just not as much as voted against Brexit. #HYUFDocracy
What was the EU's objection to the "Trusted Trader" scheme? It's not like M&S Sandwiches are difficult to identify....
The scheme wasn't designed to be a mass waiver so that all products from all suppliers get included. Which is what would have to happen for it to be the solution being touted.
If you are a supplier big enough with customer demand large enough to supply products by the full vehicle this is easy. Sadly few are - it is the mixed loads that are the problem, and almost all of the loads for supermarket goods are mixed.
By mixed I mean hundreds or thousands of different products. Each needing its own ream of paperwork at our government's insistence. If we were happy to accept the status quo - that our standards are their standards because we wrote their standards - then we could make all of this go away.
The whole point about Trusted Traders is it should be all products, from all suppliers.
The Trusted Trader should be self-declaring and paying what duties are due, just as we self-declare and pay all sorts of other taxes. If they are found to be committing fraud, they get a hefty fine and lose Trusted Trader status.
Should trusted travelers be self declaring too?
Oh gosh. I’m sorry, that’s so embarrassing.
I kind of just assumed you were a member of Global Entry.
Chairman of M&S explaining that Brexit means lorries to the EU (or NI) now carry 700 pages of forms for inspection and delays of 24-48 hours at borders mean some perishable goods are being destroyed. The new paperwork is employing a team of 13 people.
I had a box of perishable goods turn up 2 months late. We assumed it had been confiscated by customs and then suddenly gets spat out for delivery. "There are customs fees and charges to pay" said the courier.
Erm no, because 1. The box needs to be destroyed now 2. The box was 1 of 2 in a consignment and 3. the other box got through without charge because the products inside are zero tariff and zero import VAT as shown on the paperwork
It is a lottery. Our customer has seen it take 4 attempts to get properly certified properly written up chilled products across the border in time to be edible. We're largely giving up on chilled as the supply chain just isn't reliable. Which is why for NI the supply route has quickly swung from UK to NI / ROI to France to ROI / NI much to the rage of the unionists.
Not quite accurate, I hope . They did wear something else instead?
The current BBC obsession with sportswomen's lower clothing is a revealing reflection on the Olympics and culture, judging by the amount of headlines on the front page over the last week.
A few years ago it was all about the Olympics being a good pickup ground for body-type fetishists.
Handball isn't in the Olympics, but clearly, similar issues are. Gymnasts had an argument about it no?
Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.
The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:
Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.
However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%
Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:
For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.
Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:
Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.
You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.
Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.
Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:
SNP gains from SCon: Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland) Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)
SNP gains from SLD: Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross Edinburgh West North East Fife Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)
As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.
However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.
As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.
If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
I mean its your affair too as you’ll have to live with the consequence of the breakup of our country but I know your short-termism doesn't look that far ahead.
It would be disappointing of course but if Starmer gave in to the SNP because he needed their support to stay PM in a hung parliament and gave them a legal indyref2 and lost, even after offering Scots devomax then he would immediately lose power.
As soon as Scottish MPs left the Commons after a Scexit vote we Tories would return to power without an election as we would have a majority in England, Wales and NI alone. We would then shift to an English Nationalist agenda and take as hard a line as possible with the SNP in Scexit talks. We would also dominate English politics for a further generation.
Labour meanwhile having lost Scotland would be utterly screwed. Only 3 times since 1945 have Labour won a majority without Scottish MPs, in 1945, 1966, 1997, 2001 and 2005 and most of those were under Blair
Nah, wouldn’t happen. He’d pass a bill moving from FPTP to a more proportionate system in the hope of retaining power,and he’d dissolve parliament.
And it would be appropriate for Scottish MPs to vote on that?
Not really but you cannot stop them.
True. I can’t. I suspect the Speaker might have something to say about it.
Chairman of M&S explaining that Brexit means lorries to the EU (or NI) now carry 700 pages of forms for inspection and delays of 24-48 hours at borders mean some perishable goods are being destroyed. The new paperwork is employing a team of 13 people.
I had a box of perishable goods turn up 2 months late. We assumed it had been confiscated by customs and then suddenly gets spat out for delivery. "There are customs fees and charges to pay" said the courier.
Erm no, because 1. The box needs to be destroyed now 2. The box was 1 of 2 in a consignment and 3. the other box got through without charge because the products inside are zero tariff and zero import VAT as shown on the paperwork
It is a lottery. Our customer has seen it take 4 attempts to get properly certified properly written up chilled products across the border in time to be edible. We're largely giving up on chilled as the supply chain just isn't reliable. Which is why for NI the supply route has quickly swung from UK to NI / ROI to France to ROI / NI much to the rage of the unionists.
This is all because of BoJo's rubbish Brexit deal
Look.no further.. just blame Boris.
Well the nature of leadership is that you’re responsible for success and failure
Yes but it's the easy answer It's far more complex that blame Boris.. but It suits the narrative....
Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.
The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:
Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.
However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%
Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:
For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.
Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:
Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.
You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.
Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.
Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:
SNP gains from SCon: Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland) Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)
SNP gains from SLD: Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross Edinburgh West North East Fife Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)
As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.
However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.
As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.
If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
I mean its your affair too as you’ll have to live with the consequence of the breakup of our country but I know your short-termism doesn't look that far ahead.
It would be disappointing of course but if Starmer gave in to the SNP because he needed their support to stay PM in a hung parliament and gave them a legal indyref2 and lost, even after offering Scots devomax then he would immediately lose power.
As soon as Scottish MPs left the Commons after a Scexit vote we Tories would return to power without an election as we would have a majority in England, Wales and NI alone. We would then shift to an English Nationalist agenda and take as hard a line as possible with the SNP in Scexit talks. We would also dominate English politics for a further generation.
Labour meanwhile having lost Scotland would be utterly screwed. Only 3 times since 1945 have Labour won a majority without Scottish MPs, in 1945, 1966, 1997, 2001 and 2005 and most of those were under Blair
Nah, wouldn’t happen. He’d pass a bill moving from FPTP to a more proportionate system in the hope of retaining power,and he’d dissolve parliament.
And it would be appropriate for Scottish MPs to vote on that?
The spectator are preaching to their audience, I would be surprised if anyone else even mentions it.
It's interesting that some Luvvies and some Lefties are going for a pre-demonisation narrative an assumption that the "shit rag" (copyright Nick Kumar) "terrified" (Toby Earle) Spectator are 'going for' Rashford. Quite startling tweets here: https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2021/07/21/marcus-rashford-versus-spectator/
I wonder what the Spectator have? Any sense and it will be straight reporting.
On a previous occasion Rashford went for an MP after not checking the context of a tweet, and most media swallowed it.
*Awaits outcome with interest*
It's worth looking at the first tweet
Just heard @spectator are planning to run a story on me tomorrow about how I have benefitted commercially in the last 18 months…
So the claim will be that Marcus has made money from the companies who have signed up to support the work he's doing - and I suspect the issue is that "most, but not all the money" has been going to the good causes.
Which probably isn't surprising as I suspect Marcus now has a few people managing / operating his campaigns and they need to be paid... But you can see ways in which the Spectator can make that look very bad.
As ever, the devil will be in the detail. If Marcus isn't happy with what's written, I'd advise him to take the Spectator to court.
Why go to all that expense when you can drag them so very effectively on social media?
Reveals that the leadership of the sport/or of the Olympics/or both are not fit for the 21st century. They should be able to play in full body suits if they want. Ludicrous.
I didn’t watch the Cummings interview. I was watching some old episodes of Space1999 instead - love the first bloc - is it worth getting on catch up. Does it add to what we already knew ?
Given that you read the comments on PB - I somehow doubt it.
Yeah, the comments tend to be partisan. I was wondering, removing the partisan element, if it was worth watching. Can’t be worse then celebrity cook off which I had to endure when the wife came home.
The spectator are preaching to their audience, I would be surprised if anyone else even mentions it.
It's interesting that some Luvvies and some Lefties are going for a pre-demonisation narrative an assumption that the "shit rag" (copyright Nick Kumar) "terrified" (Toby Earle) Spectator are 'going for' Rashford. Quite startling tweets here: https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2021/07/21/marcus-rashford-versus-spectator/
I wonder what the Spectator have? Any sense and it will be straight reporting.
On a previous occasion Rashford went for an MP after not checking the context of a tweet, and most media swallowed it.
*Awaits outcome with interest*
It's worth looking at the first tweet
Just heard @spectator are planning to run a story on me tomorrow about how I have benefitted commercially in the last 18 months…
So the claim will be that Marcus has made money from the companies who have signed up to support the work he's doing - and I suspect the issue is that "most, but not all the money" has been going to the good causes.
Which probably isn't surprising as I suspect Marcus now has a few people managing / operating his campaigns and they need to be paid... But you can see ways in which the Spectator can make that look very bad.
Oh good, just signed up for 10 weeks spectators and a bottle of pimms all for £4.95.
What was the EU's objection to the "Trusted Trader" scheme? It's not like M&S Sandwiches are difficult to identify....
The scheme wasn't designed to be a mass waiver so that all products from all suppliers get included. Which is what would have to happen for it to be the solution being touted.
If you are a supplier big enough with customer demand large enough to supply products by the full vehicle this is easy. Sadly few are - it is the mixed loads that are the problem, and almost all of the loads for supermarket goods are mixed.
By mixed I mean hundreds or thousands of different products. Each needing its own ream of paperwork at our government's insistence. If we were happy to accept the status quo - that our standards are their standards because we wrote their standards - then we could make all of this go away.
The whole point about Trusted Traders is it should be all products, from all suppliers.
The Trusted Trader should be self-declaring and paying what duties are due, just as we self-declare and pay all sorts of other taxes. If they are found to be committing fraud, they get a hefty fine and lose Trusted Trader status.
The EU doesn't work like that.
Which is the nature of the beast of making a compromise.
If you're only sticking to the rules that pre-existed that are how you normally work, then there is no compromise.
Although it does highlight the fundamental difference in mindset between the English/Napoleonic legal systems
Indeed. It does rather re-emphasise why England was not a good fit for Europe, even though Rochdale interprets it as the opposite.
The Chief Minister of Gibraltar, Fabian Picardo , has assured that the proposal for a negotiating mandate on the future relationship with the Rock, approved in the last hours by the European Commission, " departs from the Framework Agreement agreed by the United Kingdom and Gibraltar with Spain on December 31 of last year, "known as the New Year's Agreement.
Furthermore, he has pointed out that the mandate may, unfortunately, not form the basis for negotiating a UK treaty agreement with the EU . However, he has assured that work will continue with the UK government "while we explore all the possibilities."
Likewise, it has indicated that work will also continue to be prepared in the event that there is no negotiated outcome with the EU and that Gibraltar does not enjoy a treaty relationship with the EU in the future.
" The draft of the EU mandate is a matter for them , of course, but I must say that, based on the current draft, there is no possibility that it constitutes the basis of an agreement, " said Picardo, adding that "we will work closely with the UK , especially with Foreign Minister Dominic Raab, to continue to seek the best possible outcomes for Gibraltar."
Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.
The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:
Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.
However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%
Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:
For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.
Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:
Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.
You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.
Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.
Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:
SNP gains from SCon: Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland) Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)
SNP gains from SLD: Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross Edinburgh West North East Fife Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)
As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.
However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.
As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.
If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
I mean its your affair too as you’ll have to live with the consequence of the breakup of our country but I know your short-termism doesn't look that far ahead.
It would be disappointing of course but if Starmer gave in to the SNP because he needed their support to stay PM in a hung parliament and gave them a legal indyref2 and lost, even after offering Scots devomax then he would immediately lose power.
As soon as Scottish MPs left the Commons after a Scexit vote we Tories would return to power without an election as we would have a majority in England, Wales and NI alone. We would then shift to an English Nationalist agenda and take as hard a line as possible with the SNP in Scexit talks. We would also dominate English politics for a further generation.
Labour meanwhile having lost Scotland would be utterly screwed. Only 3 times since 1945 have Labour won a majority without Scottish MPs, in 1945, 1966, 1997, 2001 and 2005 and most of those were under Blair
Nah, wouldn’t happen. He’d pass a bill moving from FPTP to a more proportionate system in the hope of retaining power,and he’d dissolve parliament.
And it would be appropriate for Scottish MPs to vote on that?
Not really but you cannot stop them.
True. I can’t. I suspect the Speaker might have something to say about it.
True, but he can huff and puff but can’t stop them. They aren’t likely to care and they will regard a progressive alliance govt to be far more,kind to them than a Tory one.
Chairman of M&S explaining that Brexit means lorries to the EU (or NI) now carry 700 pages of forms for inspection and delays of 24-48 hours at borders mean some perishable goods are being destroyed. The new paperwork is employing a team of 13 people.
Don't know what Archie Norman's point is. Brexit is his party's policy. Deal with it.
And as chaiman of M&S it is up to people in his company to manage the rules as they are and/or lobby for possible change - eg a Swiss style veterinary agreement is available now if the UK government didn't have such an irredentist view of sovereignty. Publicly moaning about regulation being ridiculous isn't useful in either getting rid of them or managing them.
At least M&S has the resources. Smaller businesses are Brexit red-taped out of the market.
The spectator are preaching to their audience, I would be surprised if anyone else even mentions it.
It's interesting that some Luvvies and some Lefties are going for a pre-demonisation narrative an assumption that the "shit rag" (copyright Nick Kumar) "terrified" (Toby Earle) Spectator are 'going for' Rashford. Quite startling tweets here: https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2021/07/21/marcus-rashford-versus-spectator/
I wonder what the Spectator have? Any sense and it will be straight reporting.
On a previous occasion Rashford went for an MP after not checking the context of a tweet, and most media swallowed it.
*Awaits outcome with interest*
It's worth looking at the first tweet
Just heard @spectator are planning to run a story on me tomorrow about how I have benefitted commercially in the last 18 months…
So the claim will be that Marcus has made money from the companies who have signed up to support the work he's doing - and I suspect the issue is that "most, but not all the money" has been going to the good causes.
Which probably isn't surprising as I suspect Marcus now has a few people managing / operating his campaigns and they need to be paid... But you can see ways in which the Spectator can make that look very bad.
My family funds the operating costs of our partnership activity out of our own pockets so that 100% of our partners’ money goes to good causes. Admittedly we only have 6 staff plus a portion of CEO/CFO and overhead.
So about 2 weeks (gross) wages for Marcus Rashford…
Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.
The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:
Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.
However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%
Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:
For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.
Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:
Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.
You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.
Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.
Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:
SNP gains from SCon: Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland) Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)
SNP gains from SLD: Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross Edinburgh West North East Fife Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)
As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.
However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.
As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.
If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
I mean its your affair too as you’ll have to live with the consequence of the breakup of our country but I know your short-termism doesn't look that far ahead.
It would be disappointing of course but if Starmer gave in to the SNP because he needed their support to stay PM in a hung parliament and gave them a legal indyref2 and lost, even after offering Scots devomax then he would immediately lose power.
As soon as Scottish MPs left the Commons after a Scexit vote we Tories would return to power without an election as we would have a majority in England, Wales and NI alone. We would then shift to an English Nationalist agenda and take as hard a line as possible with the SNP in Scexit talks. We would also dominate English politics for a further generation.
Labour meanwhile having lost Scotland would be utterly screwed. Only 3 times since 1945 have Labour won a majority without Scottish MPs, in 1945, 1966, 1997, 2001 and 2005 and most of those were under Blair
Nah, wouldn’t happen. He’d pass a bill moving from FPTP to a more proportionate system in the hope of retaining power,and he’d dissolve parliament.
And it would be appropriate for Scottish MPs to vote on that?
Parliamentary sovereignty baby, your favourite
They don’t like it up em.
It would be like UK MEPs determining the voting system for the EU after the Brexit vote but before the UK left.
Though as I said the Tories and UKIP got 54% combined of the vote in England in 2015 and over 50% in England, Wales and NI alone too and even PR would likely see a similar result on a surge of English nationalism to take as hard a line as possible with the SNP after any Scexit vote
Chairman of M&S explaining that Brexit means lorries to the EU (or NI) now carry 700 pages of forms for inspection and delays of 24-48 hours at borders mean some perishable goods are being destroyed. The new paperwork is employing a team of 13 people.
Don't know what Archie Norman's point is. Brexit is his party's policy. Deal with it.
And as chaiman of M&S it is up to people in his company to manage the rules as they are and/or lobby for possible change - eg a Swiss style veterinary agreement is available now if the UK government didn't have such an irredentist view of sovereignty. Publicly moaning about regulation being ridiculous isn't useful in either getting rid of them or managing them.
At least M&S has the resources. Smaller businesses are Brexit red-taped out of the market.
His point is simple - M&S are about to up sticks and leave Northern Ireland and the RoI and are preparing the news for that forthcoming announcement.
Chairman of M&S explaining that Brexit means lorries to the EU (or NI) now carry 700 pages of forms for inspection and delays of 24-48 hours at borders mean some perishable goods are being destroyed. The new paperwork is employing a team of 13 people.
I had a box of perishable goods turn up 2 months late. We assumed it had been confiscated by customs and then suddenly gets spat out for delivery. "There are customs fees and charges to pay" said the courier.
Erm no, because 1. The box needs to be destroyed now 2. The box was 1 of 2 in a consignment and 3. the other box got through without charge because the products inside are zero tariff and zero import VAT as shown on the paperwork
It is a lottery. Our customer has seen it take 4 attempts to get properly certified properly written up chilled products across the border in time to be edible. We're largely giving up on chilled as the supply chain just isn't reliable. Which is why for NI the supply route has quickly swung from UK to NI / ROI to France to ROI / NI much to the rage of the unionists.
This is all because of BoJo's rubbish Brexit deal
It's an interesting example of the limitations of Johnson's habit of deciding stuff on a wing and sorting out any problems later. That can work quite well in electoral with non-technical stuff. If they declare nightclubs open without restriction, then say nah, on reflection they need vaxports, everyone will be irritated and some people will die before they get round to sorting it, but in a few months everyone will have moved on, and if they're ruthless enough not to care about unnecessary deaths, the electoral consequences will be negligible.
But Northern Ireland is a technical problem, and you can't talk it away, any more than you can repair a machine by thetorical flourishes. There are only 3 choices that actually work:
1. Decide NI isn't part of the Customs Union after all. Problem: border trade collapses. 2. Decide NI isn't part of the UK for trading purposes. Problem: UK-NI trade collapses 3. Decide to accept continuation of common standards. Problem: we surrender the right to fall behind EU standards in the future.
Fudges - trusted traders, informal deals, delays, etc. simply won't work durably. There's a fundamental choice, and Johnson de facto chose 2 plus fudge.
I think the outcome may be 3 with the theoretical option to change in future which will in practice not be used.
Fundamentally trusted trader schemes are the only way to square this particular circle
Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.
The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:
Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.
However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%
Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:
For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.
Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:
Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.
You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.
Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.
Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:
SNP gains from SCon: Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland) Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)
SNP gains from SLD: Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross Edinburgh West North East Fife Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)
As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.
However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.
As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.
If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
I mean its your affair too as you’ll have to live with the consequence of the breakup of our country but I know your short-termism doesn't look that far ahead.
It would be disappointing of course but if Starmer gave in to the SNP because he needed their support to stay PM in a hung parliament and gave them a legal indyref2 and lost, even after offering Scots devomax then he would immediately lose power.
As soon as Scottish MPs left the Commons after a Scexit vote we Tories would return to power without an election as we would have a majority in England, Wales and NI alone. We would then shift to an English Nationalist agenda and take as hard a line as possible with the SNP in Scexit talks. We would also dominate English politics for a further generation.
Labour meanwhile having lost Scotland would be utterly screwed. Only 3 times since 1945 have Labour won a majority without Scottish MPs, in 1945, 1966, 1997, 2001 and 2005 and most of those were under Blair
Nah, wouldn’t happen. He’d pass a bill moving from FPTP to a more proportionate system in the hope of retaining power,and he’d dissolve parliament.
He couldn't pass it without SNP support and even if he managed to before they left the Commons even under PR we would likely see a repeat of the 2015 result and a Tory and UKIP/Farage combined majority on votes (the Tories and UKIP got 54% of the vote combined in England in 2015 and add in the DUP too) to screw the SNP and end all spending to Scotland as soon as possible as English voters turned English Nationalist.
There would then also be a hard border and customs posts from Berwick to Carlisle
What do you mean “as English voters turned English Nationalist”? They already have: it’s called Brexit.
For the whole UK, Wales also voted for Brexit as did much of NI
If you're going for the "much of NI voted Leave" line I will throw in "much of England voted Remain". (England 47% Remain vs NI 44% Leave).
Chairman of M&S explaining that Brexit means lorries to the EU (or NI) now carry 700 pages of forms for inspection and delays of 24-48 hours at borders mean some perishable goods are being destroyed. The new paperwork is employing a team of 13 people.
Don't know what Archie Norman's point is. Brexit is his party's policy. Deal with it.
And as chaiman of M&S it is up to people in his company to manage the rules as they are and/or lobby for possible change - eg a Swiss style veterinary agreement is available now if the UK government didn't have such an irredentist view of sovereignty. Publicly moaning about regulation being ridiculous isn't useful in either getting rid of them or managing them.
At least M&S has the resources. Smaller businesses are Brexit red-taped out of the market.
His point is simple - M&S are about to up sticks and leave Northern Ireland and the RoI and are preparing the news for that forthcoming announcement.
The spectator are preaching to their audience, I would be surprised if anyone else even mentions it.
It's interesting that some Luvvies and some Lefties are going for a pre-demonisation narrative an assumption that the "shit rag" (copyright Nick Kumar) "terrified" (Toby Earle) Spectator are 'going for' Rashford. Quite startling tweets here: https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2021/07/21/marcus-rashford-versus-spectator/
I wonder what the Spectator have? Any sense and it will be straight reporting.
On a previous occasion Rashford went for an MP after not checking the context of a tweet, and most media swallowed it.
*Awaits outcome with interest*
It's worth looking at the first tweet
Just heard @spectator are planning to run a story on me tomorrow about how I have benefitted commercially in the last 18 months…
So the claim will be that Marcus has made money from the companies who have signed up to support the work he's doing - and I suspect the issue is that "most, but not all the money" has been going to the good causes.
Which probably isn't surprising as I suspect Marcus now has a few people managing / operating his campaigns and they need to be paid... But you can see ways in which the Spectator can make that look very bad.
Oh good, just signed up for 10 weeks spectators and a bottle of pimms all for £4.95.
Not a problem provided you remember to cancel before the 10 weeks is up.
Chairman of M&S explaining that Brexit means lorries to the EU (or NI) now carry 700 pages of forms for inspection and delays of 24-48 hours at borders mean some perishable goods are being destroyed. The new paperwork is employing a team of 13 people.
I had a box of perishable goods turn up 2 months late. We assumed it had been confiscated by customs and then suddenly gets spat out for delivery. "There are customs fees and charges to pay" said the courier.
Erm no, because 1. The box needs to be destroyed now 2. The box was 1 of 2 in a consignment and 3. the other box got through without charge because the products inside are zero tariff and zero import VAT as shown on the paperwork
It is a lottery. Our customer has seen it take 4 attempts to get properly certified properly written up chilled products across the border in time to be edible. We're largely giving up on chilled as the supply chain just isn't reliable. Which is why for NI the supply route has quickly swung from UK to NI / ROI to France to ROI / NI much to the rage of the unionists.
This is all because of BoJo's rubbish Brexit deal
It's an interesting example of the limitations of Johnson's habit of deciding stuff on a wing and sorting out any problems later. That can work quite well in electoral with non-technical stuff. If they declare nightclubs open without restriction, then say nah, on reflection they need vaxports, everyone will be irritated and some people will die before they get round to sorting it, but in a few months everyone will have moved on, and if they're ruthless enough not to care about unnecessary deaths, the electoral consequences will be negligible.
But Northern Ireland is a technical problem, and you can't talk it away, any more than you can repair a machine by thetorical flourishes. There are only 3 choices that actually work:
1. Decide NI isn't part of the Customs Union after all. Problem: border trade collapses. 2. Decide NI isn't part of the UK for trading purposes. Problem: UK-NI trade collapses 3. Decide to accept continuation of common standards. Problem: we surrender the right to fall behind EU standards in the future.
Fudges - trusted traders, informal deals, delays, etc. simply won't work durably. There's a fundamental choice, and Johnson de facto chose 2 plus fudge.
I think the outcome may be 3 with the theoretical option to change in future which will in practice not be used.
Fundamentally trusted trader schemes are the only way to square this particular circle
Trusted trader = barriers to entry, oligopoly and higher prices.
We should take our fair share. Obviously we cannot take 10 million but 80 - 100K is feasible.
Remember Labour thought only about 130,000 eastern Europeans would arrive in total. But over 6 million applied for the settled scheme status.
We have also given asylum status to 3 million Hong Kongers and take-up of that offer is brisk.
So we're already looking at nearly 10 million people seeking asylum from the EU's poor economy (the eastern europeans) and from China (the Hong Kongers).
If you open the door to new migrants from France, it won't stick to the 100k you envisage - it will be four to five million.
Also - the boat people seem to originate from Syria, Albania and Iran - these are not countries that Britain has ever had responsibility for. Syria used to be a French colony, Albania was Ottoman and Iran was independent. Not sure why Britain should be responsible for them.
With the Covid heat map how spreading Norf of the River will Bojo Hold his nervo.
It's only Tower Hamlets and Hackney so far but Islington is heating up rapidly too.
You clearly haven't looked further north. The North East is not so not heating up as dying of heat exhaustion.
Previous lockdowns have been based entirely on what is happening in London. Thus the first lockdown was released too early as Covid was still clearly circulating freely in the North of England and the second lockdown applied too late as Covid hadn't fully bitten London yet,
Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.
The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:
Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.
However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%
Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:
For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.
Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:
Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.
You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.
Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.
Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:
SNP gains from SCon: Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland) Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)
SNP gains from SLD: Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross Edinburgh West North East Fife Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)
As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.
However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.
As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.
If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
I mean its your affair too as you’ll have to live with the consequence of the breakup of our country but I know your short-termism doesn't look that far ahead.
It would be disappointing of course but if Starmer gave in to the SNP because he needed their support to stay PM in a hung parliament and gave them a legal indyref2 and lost, even after offering Scots devomax then he would immediately lose power.
As soon as Scottish MPs left the Commons after a Scexit vote we Tories would return to power without an election as we would still have a majority in England, Wales and NI alone. We would then shift to an English Nationalist agenda and take as hard a line as possible with the SNP in Scexit talks. We would also dominate English politics for a further generation.
Labour meanwhile having lost Scotland would be utterly screwed. Only 5 times since 1945 have Labour won a majority without Scottish MPs, in 1945, 1966, 1997, 2001 and 2005 and most of those were under Blair
I'm far from sure that such policies would be as enduringly popular as you blithely assume.
If there was an indyref2 and the Scottish Nationalists won then English voters would immediately demand as hard a negotiation line as possible with the SNP and Scottish government in Scexit talks and no concessions whatsoever to the SNP.
Exactly the same as European voters demanded the EU take as hard a line as possible with the Tories and UK government after the Brexit vote.
London would have to take as hard a line as possible with Edinburgh as Brussels took with London in the Brexit talks or be replaced by a government that would.
The voters of southern England will be ecstatic when their new “English Nationalist” (sic) government imposes the concrete silos with 260 nuclear warheads. HS2 will look like a walk in the park.
No no no. We don't need silos darling, our nukes are sea launched. HYUFD will simply fire the missiles at the borders to create a physical border that will keep the dirty Scotch away from blessed Albion.
Do a bit of research into Coulport. Go and visit the area and drive around. Look at the fuzzed out areas on Google Maps. Those are immense concrete silos in them thar hills. Housing most of the nuclear warheads. Only a few are ever out at sea at any one time.
Now, ask yourself, which southern English national park is going to be the new home for those concrete silos?
Morning everyone. I wonder what fresh hell today will bring?
The crucial Wednesday Covid numbers.
Either "peak" delight confirmed or the depth of despair of ever increasing cases.
Why would increasing cases cause "despair"?
I for one forecast continuing increase in cases this week. In England the Schools were still open last week so plague monkeys will have been spreading germs around at school, as they tend to do.
Ah, so you are abandoning your old forecast that "the country is simply running out of people who can get sick and die from infection faster than the virus can spread." then? From back in early June when everyone was calling peak Covid.
Chairman of M&S explaining that Brexit means lorries to the EU (or NI) now carry 700 pages of forms for inspection and delays of 24-48 hours at borders mean some perishable goods are being destroyed. The new paperwork is employing a team of 13 people.
Don't know what Archie Norman's point is. Brexit is his party's policy. Deal with it.
And as chaiman of M&S it is up to people in his company to manage the rules as they are and/or lobby for possible change - eg a Swiss style veterinary agreement is available now if the UK government didn't have such an irredentist view of sovereignty. Publicly moaning about regulation being ridiculous isn't useful in either getting rid of them or managing them.
At least M&S has the resources. Smaller businesses are Brexit red-taped out of the market.
The leadership of M&S raise Brexit everytime they have to face investors as they know it'll get the headline rather than their continued poor performance.
We should take our fair share. Obviously we cannot take 10 million but 80 - 100K is feasible.
Remember Labour thought only about 130,000 eastern Europeans would arrive in total. But over 6 million applied for the settled scheme status.
We have also given asylum status to 3 million Hong Kongers and take-up of that offer is brisk.
So we're already looking at nearly 10 million people seeking asylum from the EU's poor economy (the eastern europeans) and from China (the Hong Kongers).
If you open the door to new migrants from France, it won't stick to the 100k you envisage - it will be four to five million.
Also - the boat people seem to originate from Syria, Albania and Iran - these are not countries that Britain has ever had responsibility for. Syria used to be a French colony, Albania was Ottoman and Iran was independent. Not sure why Britain should be responsible for them.
The international language of trade is English - and we are the only accessible country where English is the default language.
Other parts of Europe use fluency of local language as an employment filter in a way we cannot...
The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
WE'VE HAD A REPORT OF A KAYAK!
He actually said that. #accidentalpartridge
NF says the only solution is tow backs and that the government doesn't have the backbone to do it. He's right on both points.
Because you legally can't - the French would be perfectly within their rights to refuse to accept them.
The RAN didn't tow boats back into Indonesian territorial waters. They dispensed them into lifeboats with just enough fuel to reach Indonesia and dropped them off just outside the Indonesian 12 mile limit in international waters. The RN could do the same but they'd have to tow them as far west as Brest to make it work.
Chairman of M&S explaining that Brexit means lorries to the EU (or NI) now carry 700 pages of forms for inspection and delays of 24-48 hours at borders mean some perishable goods are being destroyed. The new paperwork is employing a team of 13 people.
I had a box of perishable goods turn up 2 months late. We assumed it had been confiscated by customs and then suddenly gets spat out for delivery. "There are customs fees and charges to pay" said the courier.
Erm no, because 1. The box needs to be destroyed now 2. The box was 1 of 2 in a consignment and 3. the other box got through without charge because the products inside are zero tariff and zero import VAT as shown on the paperwork
It is a lottery. Our customer has seen it take 4 attempts to get properly certified properly written up chilled products across the border in time to be edible. We're largely giving up on chilled as the supply chain just isn't reliable. Which is why for NI the supply route has quickly swung from UK to NI / ROI to France to ROI / NI much to the rage of the unionists.
This is all because of BoJo's rubbish Brexit deal
It's an interesting example of the limitations of Johnson's habit of deciding stuff on a wing and sorting out any problems later. That can work quite well in electoral with non-technical stuff. If they declare nightclubs open without restriction, then say nah, on reflection they need vaxports, everyone will be irritated and some people will die before they get round to sorting it, but in a few months everyone will have moved on, and if they're ruthless enough not to care about unnecessary deaths, the electoral consequences will be negligible.
But Northern Ireland is a technical problem, and you can't talk it away, any more than you can repair a machine by thetorical flourishes. There are only 3 choices that actually work:
1. Decide NI isn't part of the Customs Union after all. Problem: border trade collapses. 2. Decide NI isn't part of the UK for trading purposes. Problem: UK-NI trade collapses 3. Decide to accept continuation of common standards. Problem: we surrender the right to fall behind EU standards in the future.
Fudges - trusted traders, informal deals, delays, etc. simply won't work durably. There's a fundamental choice, and Johnson de facto chose 2 plus fudge.
I think the outcome may be 3 with the theoretical option to change in future which will in practice not be used.
Fundamentally trusted trader schemes are the only way to square this particular circle
Trusted trader = barriers to entry, oligopoly and higher prices.
Not if you are joining the trusted trader scheme as it begins - those barriers are usually created afterwards as the existing members vote to protect their own self interests.
We should take our fair share. Obviously we cannot take 10 million but 80 - 100K is feasible.
Remember Labour thought only about 130,000 eastern Europeans would arrive in total. But over 6 million applied for the settled scheme status.
We have also given asylum status to 3 million Hong Kongers and take-up of that offer is brisk.
So we're already looking at nearly 10 million people seeking asylum from the EU's poor economy (the eastern europeans) and from China (the Hong Kongers).
If you open the door to new migrants from France, it won't stick to the 100k you envisage - it will be four to five million.
Also - the boat people seem to originate from Syria, Albania and Iran - these are not countries that Britain has ever had responsibility for. Syria used to be a French colony, Albania was Ottoman and Iran was independent. Not sure why Britain should be responsible for them.
The international language of trade is English - and we are the only accessible country where English is the default language.
Other parts of Europe use fluency of local language as an employment filter in a way we cannot...
Which just means we need much tougher border controls. Do what the Greeks do, push the boats back out to sea until they stop coming. It's highly effective.
Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.
The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:
Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.
However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%
Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:
For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.
Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:
Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.
You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.
Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.
Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:
SNP gains from SCon: Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland) Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)
SNP gains from SLD: Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross Edinburgh West North East Fife Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)
As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.
However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.
As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.
If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
I mean its your affair too as you’ll have to live with the consequence of the breakup of our country but I know your short-termism doesn't look that far ahead.
It would be disappointing of course but if Starmer gave in to the SNP because he needed their support to stay PM in a hung parliament and gave them a legal indyref2 and lost, even after offering Scots devomax then he would immediately lose power.
As soon as Scottish MPs left the Commons after a Scexit vote we Tories would return to power without an election as we would have a majority in England, Wales and NI alone. We would then shift to an English Nationalist agenda and take as hard a line as possible with the SNP in Scexit talks. We would also dominate English politics for a further generation.
Labour meanwhile having lost Scotland would be utterly screwed. Only 3 times since 1945 have Labour won a majority without Scottish MPs, in 1945, 1966, 1997, 2001 and 2005 and most of those were under Blair
Nah, wouldn’t happen. He’d pass a bill moving from FPTP to a more proportionate system in the hope of retaining power,and he’d dissolve parliament.
And it would be appropriate for Scottish MPs to vote on that?
Not really but you cannot stop them.
True. I can’t. I suspect the Speaker might have something to say about it.
True, but he can huff and puff but can’t stop them. They aren’t likely to care and they will regard a progressive alliance govt to be far more,kind to them than a Tory one.
I don’t know without checking but I suspect he can stop them. Can he designate something as a piece of English law, fir example? (Although I think the government is abandoning EVEL)
Comments
Furthermore, he has pointed out that the mandate may, unfortunately, not form the basis for negotiating a UK treaty agreement with the EU . However, he has assured that work will continue with the UK government "while we explore all the possibilities."
Likewise, it has indicated that work will also continue to be prepared in the event that there is no negotiated outcome with the EU and that Gibraltar does not enjoy a treaty relationship with the EU in the future.
" The draft of the EU mandate is a matter for them , of course, but I must say that, based on the current draft, there is no possibility that it constitutes the basis of an agreement, " said Picardo, adding that "we will work closely with the UK , especially with Foreign Minister Dominic Raab, to continue to seek the best possible outcomes for Gibraltar."
https://cadenaser.com/emisora/2021/07/21/radio_algeciras/1626846618_003911.html
Remember Boris agreed to this deal and the EU (are rightly in their eyes) ensuring we stick to our side of the deal.
The fact it doesn't work is also not their problem, as @RochdalePioneers has pointed out near direct transport routes from France to Ireland has sorted out the biggest issues so what is left is mainly an issue within Northern Ireland.
https://www.euronews.com/2021/07/20/norway-fined-for-not-wearing-bikini-bottoms-at-european-beach-handball-competition
https://twitter.com/MarcusRashford/status/1417560602374021121
most of any fee I would receive contributes to that.
https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2021/07/21/marcus-rashford-versus-spectator/
I wonder what the Spectator have? Any sense and it will be straight reporting.
On a previous occasion Rashford went for an MP after not checking the context of a tweet, and most media swallowed it.
*Awaits outcome with interest*
Its already over six months since some were fully vaccinated.
I wondered if they would use the same vaccines as before or would try different ones to what people previously had for potentially extra protection.
If so then they might want at least one of Novavax, Valneva or Modified AZ available.
The current BBC obsession with sportswomen's lower clothing is a revealing reflection on the Olympics and culture, judging by the amount of headlines on the front page over the last week.
A few years ago it was all about the Olympics being a good pickup ground for body-type fetishists.
Just heard
@spectator
are planning to run a story on me tomorrow about how I have benefitted commercially in the last 18 months…
So the claim will be that Marcus has made money from the companies who have signed up to support the work he's doing - and I suspect the issue is that "most, but not all the money" has been going to the good causes.
Which probably isn't surprising as I suspect Marcus now has a few people managing / operating his campaigns and they need to be paid... But you can see ways in which the Spectator can make that look very bad.
But Northern Ireland is a technical problem, and you can't talk it away, any more than you can repair a machine by thetorical flourishes. There are only 3 choices that actually work:
1. Decide NI isn't part of the Customs Union after all. Problem: border trade collapses.
2. Decide NI isn't part of the UK for trading purposes. Problem: UK-NI trade collapses
3. Decide to accept continuation of common standards. Problem: we surrender the right to fall behind EU standards in the future.
Fudges - trusted traders, informal deals, delays, etc. simply won't work durably. There's a fundamental choice, and Johnson de facto chose 2 plus fudge.
I think the outcome may be 3 with the theoretical option to change in future which will in practice not be used.
What I and many other people have said is that the fair, humane and safe solution is to take in genuine refugees from refugee camps in places by the frontline of the crisis - like Turkey, Lesbos etc - and not simply turn our back on the world but say "if you can get here without drowning first" then we'll let people in.
Having a Darwinian survival of the fittest so primarily fit and healthy young men who are willing to pay people smugglers are the ones who get asylum, rather than perhaps more women or others in genuine need and fear who can't or won't get past the frontline, is neither humane nor safe nor legal.
For under 40s who knows whether those groups will even be eligible for a third dose. We should be, just to help prevent the spread of it in winter time. I expect that would be Pfizer.
I also expect that the decision in kids not being eligible will be overturned around September when the idiotic isolation bubbles start reappearing and the government has to offer the jab or destroy the education of millions of kids.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/07/20/analysis-dominic-cummings-started-resemble-crazed-cult-leader/
The EUCommission's draft mandate is a matter for them, but the mandate published today strays unhelpfully from the New Year's Eve Framework Agreement & cannot form the basis for the negotiation of an agreement of a UK treaty with the EU in relation to #Gibraltar.
https://twitter.com/FabianPicardo/status/1417527798516813824?s=20
Our solution needs to be to make it the EU's problem and not just our own, that was always the only way we'd ever get the EU to compromise.
Invoke Article 16 and make it clear we'll only withdraw the invocation once a mutually satisfactory compromise is resolved. Invoking Article 16, as they've already done, is exercising a part of the deal which is still sticking to the deal - its just not sticking to it the way they want us to do so.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-deal-northern-ireland-marks-spencer-lord-frost-b1887733.html
Car dealers in Ireland say it now works out cheaper to import European cars from Japan, who like Ireland have right-hand drive vehicles, as they are not subject to the 20% VAT charge, unlike the British cars.
https://twitter.com/OldBobCyprus/status/1417514163514056706
AIUI the normal threshold for concern about national debt is when interest is getting towards 4% of GDP.
The last number I saw for the UK was around 1.9% from pre-COVID iirc. AIUI much of our national debt is also much longer term than comparable countries.
So the immediate threat of heavy debt interest is not really a threat. Of course it still needs managing.
2. Is in progress. GB to NI trade is no longer economically viable (or possible at all in some cases) and is being replaced by ROI to NI. The UK used to be the hub for both Irish markets, increasingly it is supplying neither.
3. Is the status quo. Both sides insist standards will only increase so as a kick the can down the road solution it shouldn't even cause problems in the future. But we won't because sovvrinty.
He could say that "no one could have forseen... blah blah etc" except he was repeatedly and explictily warned so either he is a liar or a fool. Either way, its not a good look and the next 12 months are going to be a flaming that few Prime Ministers have had since the winter of discontent.
Ouch. 😂
Ministers will urge people to “keep life moving” this summer despite mounting confusion over isolation advice.
https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1417722528898949120?s=20
Worth checking the sample (there's a box set of the first three together so the sample's pretty large).
The interesting thing is that people on here think it was a question of picking sides. Or even scoring who won. To most people both came out looking equally ridiculous.
Obviously more damaging to the Prime Minister because people prefer their PM's to have some judgement and a blind man on a fast moving camel could see that he doesn't
Bazil Pennells
@Bazilnova10
Best take down of a Spectator from a United forward since Eric Cantona visited Selhurst Park on January 25th ‘95
What I find particularly annoying is that the people aren't legally required to disclose this information even when asked - so my current viewpoint is if you use them then I will never give that charity money.
At some point I really should find the time to set up a list of charities that use such firms and methods so that there is a reference list of charities to avoid.
It's only Tower Hamlets and Hackney so far but Islington is heating up rapidly too.
Scottish independence would not only end the Union but also the Conservative and Unionist Party, which would become the English Nationalist Party and dominate English politics as much as the SNP dominated Scottish politics.
There’s also an important distinction between “can do” and “should do”. It was the “should” that I was questioning
That is one easy way of making someone look bad in a way that a libel court wouldn't worry about and allow you correct the story on page 74 in size 6 font the following week.
https://olympics.com/tokyo-2020/olympic-games/en/results/handball/olympic-schedule-and-results.htm
(Unless I missed something and it has been dropped)
Lol.
Just not as much as voted against Brexit.
#HYUFDocracy
I kind of just assumed you were a member of Global Entry.
.
Rishi Sunak on the down
It's far more complex that blame Boris.. but It suits the narrative....
Ignoring the fact this is already in UK law, exactly what did Guto Harri do that resulted in him being suspended by GB News...
BBC News - Cross-border City of Culture bid is launched
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-south-scotland-57901216
WE'VE HAD A REPORT OF A KAYAK!
He actually said that. #accidentalpartridge
NF says the only solution is tow backs and that the government doesn't have the backbone to do it. He's right on both points.
And as chaiman of M&S it is up to people in his company to manage the rules as they are and/or lobby for possible change - eg a Swiss style veterinary agreement is available now if the UK government didn't have such an irredentist view of sovereignty. Publicly moaning about regulation being ridiculous isn't useful in either getting rid of them or managing them.
At least M&S has the resources. Smaller businesses are Brexit red-taped out of the market.
So about 2 weeks (gross) wages for Marcus Rashford…
Though as I said the Tories and UKIP got 54% combined of the vote in England in 2015 and over 50% in England, Wales and NI alone too and even PR would likely see a similar result on a surge of English nationalism to take as hard a line as possible with the SNP after any Scexit vote
Can believe Andrew Neil will want to be involved too much longer.
We could make a union of European countries and we could enforce it as one of the conditions
We have also given asylum status to 3 million Hong Kongers and take-up of that offer is brisk.
So we're already looking at nearly 10 million people seeking asylum from the EU's poor economy (the eastern europeans) and from China (the Hong Kongers).
If you open the door to new migrants from France, it won't stick to the 100k you envisage - it will be four to five million.
Also - the boat people seem to originate from Syria, Albania and Iran - these are not countries that Britain has ever had responsibility for. Syria used to be a French colony, Albania was Ottoman and Iran was independent. Not sure why Britain should be responsible for them.
Thus the first lockdown was released too early as Covid was still clearly circulating freely in the North of England and the second lockdown applied too late as Covid hadn't fully bitten London yet,
Now, ask yourself, which southern English national park is going to be the new home for those concrete silos?
Other parts of Europe use fluency of local language as an employment filter in a way we cannot...