Schiphol. Massive queue for passport control. Of course the EU EEA CH gates are empty. How exactly have we managed to do Brexit so that we have the same status as Eritrea?
A competent airport flips the lights on the signs to balance things out. When I got into Malta a few months ago there were four non-eu queues and two eu-queues, all of about the same length.
(This doesn’t help if you happen to get stuck behind one person who takes ages to process of course.)
All the manned gates were manned. We can't use e-gates as we have to get a fucking stamp now.
A minor point, but an example. Last night's SL GF had an attendance around 45k. It usually sells out OT comfortably. Why? Well RL is the worst run sport in this country. But also, Catalans Dragons were in it for the first time. Almost none of their fans possess passports, as they are relentlessly proletarian and live on the border with Spain and nip across using their ID cards. So they couldn't get them in 2 weeks despite a huge rush. So. Manchester loses out on hotels and food, the fans who attended lose an atmosphere, those who couldn't lose, the UK loses, an already tottering RL loses. Airlines and airports, in not a great state, lose out. The passport requirements came in only this week I believe. As I said. Not vital in the great scheme, but how many Europeans without passports will choose to go elsewhere on holiday? And discretionary travel? I would factor it in.
Industry estimates are 200m in the EU who don't have a passport but use ID cards. I am amazed by that, but even if its half that estimate it is going to slow down the recovery of UK tourism fairly significantly over the next few years.
Schiphol. Massive queue for passport control. Of course the EU EEA CH gates are empty. How exactly have we managed to do Brexit so that we have the same status as Eritrea?
A competent airport flips the lights on the signs to balance things out. When I got into Malta a few months ago there were four non-eu queues and two eu-queues, all of about the same length.
(This doesn’t help if you happen to get stuck behind one person who takes ages to process of course.)
All the manned gates were manned. We can't use e-gates as we have to get a fucking stamp now.
Wait. We're out of the EU at our own request. We are a third country at our own request. And now you say the EU is treating us as a non-member third country?
Well whatever next.
Its rather small minded and parochial to only allow EEA citizens through e-gates. Why not Americans, or Canadians, or Kiwis, or Koreans or . . . oh wait, that's what we do already.
If they've chosen to be parochial, that's on them not us.
"up to" them.
And if you want to be a GrammarNazi then that's on you.
Schiphol. Massive queue for passport control. Of course the EU EEA CH gates are empty. How exactly have we managed to do Brexit so that we have the same status as Eritrea?
A competent airport flips the lights on the signs to balance things out. When I got into Malta a few months ago there were four non-eu queues and two eu-queues, all of about the same length.
(This doesn’t help if you happen to get stuck behind one person who takes ages to process of course.)
All the manned gates were manned. We can't use e-gates as we have to get a fucking stamp now.
A minor point, but an example. Last night's SL GF had an attendance around 45k. It usually sells out OT comfortably. Why? Well RL is the worst run sport in this country. But also, Catalans Dragons were in it for the first time. Almost none of their fans possess passports, as they are relentlessly proletarian and live on the border with Spain and nip across using their ID cards. So they couldn't get them in 2 weeks despite a huge rush. So. Manchester loses out on hotels and food, the fans who attended lose an atmosphere, those who couldn't lose, the UK loses, an already tottering RL loses. Airlines and airports, in not a great state, lose out. The passport requirements came in only this week I believe. As I said. Not vital in the great scheme, but how many Europeans without passports will choose to go elsewhere on holiday? And discretionary travel? I would factor it in.
Industry estimates are 200m in the EU who don't have a passport but use ID cards. I am amazed by that, but even if its half that estimate it is going to slow down the recovery of UK tourism fairly significantly over the next few years.
Use ID cards to cross a border, or simply have them? I suspect the latter, especially since many countries mandate them. Plenty of people never cross a border.
UK e-gates can be used by “a national of an EU country, Australia, Canada, Iceland, Japan, Liechtenstein, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, South Korea, Switzerland or the USA”.
A closed, parochial country compared with the EU. Obvs.
So the EU doing what we ask implementing the same rules for everyone as we demanded is their fault?
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight
I doubt we were involved in setting Schengen entry rules, not being part of Schengen.
Not Schengen gates. EU EEA CH gates. We can't use them because we demanded to be treated the same as Eritrea.
Schiphol. Massive queue for passport control. Of course the EU EEA CH gates are empty. How exactly have we managed to do Brexit so that we have the same status as Eritrea?
A competent airport flips the lights on the signs to balance things out. When I got into Malta a few months ago there were four non-eu queues and two eu-queues, all of about the same length.
(This doesn’t help if you happen to get stuck behind one person who takes ages to process of course.)
All the manned gates were manned. We can't use e-gates as we have to get a fucking stamp now.
Wait. We're out of the EU at our own request. We are a third country at our own request. And now you say the EU is treating us as a non-member third country?
Well whatever next.
Its rather small minded and parochial to only allow EEA citizens through e-gates. Why not Americans, or Canadians, or Kiwis, or Koreans or . . . oh wait, that's what we do already.
If they've chosen to be parochial, that's on them not us.
Absolutely. I trust you are delighted with their rules based approach.
On the issue of entering the country, the cruise ship we were on was British passengers only (as far as we could see).
We were notified of the requirement to fill in the Passenger Location Form (PLF) about a week before we got back to Southampton. That caused a lot of stress and concern among some of the elderly passengers who were either unaware of or couldn't understand or didn't have the technology to complete the PLF online.
P&O had to provide staff over three days to help those who were struggling and I saw and heard a number who were very distressed and scared they would not be allowed back into the UK if they didn't get the form filled in properly.
Anecdotally, I heard another cruise line had completed the PLF details for all the passengers who had only to provide details of the Day 2 PCR test reference.
Anyway, we were first told all PLF details would be checked at Southampton, then it was a sampling exercise and of course at Southampton nothing happened at all.
A lot of unnecessary stress and time wasted in my view. If we have decided as a country we are going to "live with" the coronavirus, fine. We can't control or decide what bureaucracy or restrictions other countries might wish to improve - nor should we - but we should rapidly and completely end all of ours if the policy is as it says on the tin.
The travel restrictions this summer have mostly been a pointless fiasco, and not just here. For my September trip I had to complete a French declaration of honour, a German digital registration, an Italian online passenger locator form, a Uk passenger locator form, do an LFT and a PCR, and get certification that I was fully vaccinated, and carry this bulging file of paperwork around Europe with me. Not once was I asked to produce any of it, not once was there any evidence that any of it has been looked at or had any real world consequence whatsoever. Except of course for having to show the vaccination certificate regularly in Germany (but nowhere else).
Eurotunnel sent me several emails warning that I wouldn’t be allowed to travel unless I turned up with proof of my vaccination and negative test, but of course when I got there no-one asked to see either.
On the issue of entering the country, the cruise ship we were on was British passengers only (as far as we could see).
We were notified of the requirement to fill in the Passenger Location Form (PLF) about a week before we got back to Southampton. That caused a lot of stress and concern among some of the elderly passengers who were either unaware of or couldn't understand or didn't have the technology to complete the PLF online.
P&O had to provide staff over three days to help those who were struggling and I saw and heard a number who were very distressed and scared they would not be allowed back into the UK if they didn't get the form filled in properly.
Anecdotally, I heard another cruise line had completed the PLF details for all the passengers who had only to provide details of the Day 2 PCR test reference.
Anyway, we were first told all PLF details would be checked at Southampton, then it was a sampling exercise and of course at Southampton nothing happened at all.
A lot of unnecessary stress and time wasted in my view. If we have decided as a country we are going to "live with" the coronavirus, fine. We can't control or decide what bureaucracy or restrictions other countries might wish to improve - nor should we - but we should rapidly and completely end all of ours if the policy is as it says on the tin.
I will book my day 2 Covid test before I set off back and do the PLF with it. Still hope that it will be dropped as they're already not enforcing that you actually get a test. You just need a number for the form.
Surprised people aren't selling the codes on Ebay.
I love the idea that Scotland suffering fewer deaths per 100k than England is evidence that Sturgeon has under performed Boris.
This is an exciting new definition of success that I am unfamiliar with.
I did like the time when the PBTories collectively created the Great Central Scottish Desert in their desperation - raised happy thoughts of camel caravans from Bathgate Oasis to the incense port of Borrowstounness and the perfumed oils distilled by the craftsfolk at Grangemouth. And the pale-skinned natives shocked and indignant at being offered Buckfast by the merchants from the south.
The West Lothian Empty Quarter is littered with the bones of the foolhardy.
UK e-gates can be used by “a national of an EU country, Australia, Canada, Iceland, Japan, Liechtenstein, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, South Korea, Switzerland or the USA”.
A closed, parochial country compared with the EU. Obvs.
So the EU doing what we ask implementing the same rules for everyone as we demanded is their fault?
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight
I doubt we were involved in setting Schengen entry rules, not being part of Schengen.
Not Schengen gates. EU EEA CH gates. We can't use them because we demanded to be treated the same as Eritrea.
Considering we allow them (and Americans and others) through our gates, I find it hard to believe that was a UK demand.
Do you have a citation for that? Or is simply not being in the EEA "demanding to be treated the same as Eritrea" in your eyes now?
On Topic Man who has never voted Labour in his life thinks Labour leader that in 2017 produced the biggest increase in vote share since WW2 left a toxic legacy
His toxic divisive useless nonentity of a replacement is blame free
As I say man who knows nothing about what inspires people to vote Labour
You keep repeating this bollox, but bollox it is. Corbyn fought two general elections, and Labour recorded two of its lowest ever seat totals.*
* Explanatory Note: In the UK, parties can form governments if they win a majority of the seats. Corbyn’s Labour won 262 seats in 2017, and a lot fewer in 2019. At both elections the winning post was 326 seats.
It is amazing though, that even in the 2019 GE, Corbyn’s Labour got a better vote share than Miliband in 2015 and Brown in 2010.
If you ignore 2017, & look at the vote share changes from 2015 to 2019, all that seems to have happened is UKIP went Tory, and some Tory Remainers went Lib Dem, despite all the loud noise in between
Amazing, but irrelevant.
Why is it irrelevant? Vote shares mean something, and it’s worth knowing, or at least trying to figure out, where 12.6% of voters, whose party has more or less given up, from 2015 went.
If Tory 2019 is (Tory 2015 + UKIP 2015) - 4-5% to the LDs, where does that leave Labour?
Flat from 2010 to 2019. One can hardly blame Corbyn for UKIPs voters going Tory, when his Brexit plan was a second referendum and the Tories was getting it done
Corbynites continually cite their vote share and increase in its %, while completely ignoring what is actually required to win an election - and by which measure they fell lamentably short in 2017.
Never mind that, I am talking about the fact that 2010, 2015,and 2019 were very similar scores for Labour, with three different leaders. 2017 was a peculiar GE that can pretty much be written off, analytically. But the fact remains Corbyn (32.1%) bettered EdM (30.4%),and Gordo's (29%) efforts in his bad GE, and the reason the seat tally was so low was UKIP/BXP standing aside and the Tories gobbling up their vote
You go wrong when you start claiming Starmer's Remainerdom is a reason why he's struggling - it's the Covid blot out effect plus a lack of charisma cf Perfidious Posh - but I broadly agree with your take on this.
Both 17 and 19 were Brexit elections but were impacted in opposite fashion. In 17, Labour were a receptacle for Remainers to vote against the hard Brexit Mrs May seemed intent upon. They didn't want to give her the majority she said she needed to drive it through. Upshot - the result flattered Corbyn. By 19, a significant proportion of these voters were sick & tired of the Brexit wars and rather than prolonging the agony with another Referendum wanted it to be over. Thus the power of the Oven Ready Deal and Get Brexit Done. Upshot - the result flattered Johnson.
So what I'm saying is Jeremy Corbyn had less to do with Labour's good result at GE17 than his supporters like to make out, and he had less to do with their terrible result at GE19 than his detractors like to make out. Bias drives the analysis of both camps. The bigger and deeper reason for the overperformance in 17 and the underperformance in 19 is Brexit.
The interesting question now - indeed the million dollar question when it comes to punditing UK politics - is what impact will Brexit have on the next election?
But the reason Boris won such a majority in 2019, the reason the Tories floor seems to be 39/40 rather than 30/31 as it was in 2015, is UKIP voters have pretty much all gone Tory - and the reason for that is Labour demanded a second referendum in 2019... and their shadow Brexit Sec, who said Labour would be campaigning for Remain if they managed to swindle another go, was Sir Keir. So why would the deciding factor, the 2015 Kippers, go Labour now he is their leader?
Schiphol. Massive queue for passport control. Of course the EU EEA CH gates are empty. How exactly have we managed to do Brexit so that we have the same status as Eritrea?
A competent airport flips the lights on the signs to balance things out. When I got into Malta a few months ago there were four non-eu queues and two eu-queues, all of about the same length.
(This doesn’t help if you happen to get stuck behind one person who takes ages to process of course.)
All the manned gates were manned. We can't use e-gates as we have to get a fucking stamp now.
Wait. We're out of the EU at our own request. We are a third country at our own request. And now you say the EU is treating us as a non-member third country?
Well whatever next.
Its rather small minded and parochial to only allow EEA citizens through e-gates. Why not Americans, or Canadians, or Kiwis, or Koreans or . . . oh wait, that's what we do already.
If they've chosen to be parochial, that's on them not us.
Absolutely. I trust you are delighted with their rules based approach.
I couldn't care less, I'm not an EEA citizen. Whatever they choose is their choice.
The sensible thing to do surely would be to expand e-gates to all developed nations like we've done. But that's their country, their choice.
Schiphol. Massive queue for passport control. Of course the EU EEA CH gates are empty. How exactly have we managed to do Brexit so that we have the same status as Eritrea?
It must depend on the airport/country, in Greece we went through the EU gates. It specifically said UK in the list of allowed countries.
UK e-gates can be used by “a national of an EU country, Australia, Canada, Iceland, Japan, Liechtenstein, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, South Korea, Switzerland or the USA”.
A closed, parochial country compared with the EU. Obvs.
So the EU doing what we ask implementing the same rules for everyone as we demanded is their fault?
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight
You don’t think that the border policy of the EU is the responsibility of the EU and its members?
UK e-gates can be used by “a national of an EU country, Australia, Canada, Iceland, Japan, Liechtenstein, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, South Korea, Switzerland or the USA”.
A closed, parochial country compared with the EU. Obvs.
So the EU doing what we ask implementing the same rules for everyone as we demanded is their fault?
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight
I doubt we were involved in setting Schengen entry rules, not being part of Schengen.
Not Schengen gates. EU EEA CH gates. We can't use them because we demanded to be treated the same as Eritrea.
We have visa free entry into Schengen. Eritreans have to apply for a visa. Why did you choose Eritrea anyway? Are they bad people?
Schiphol. Massive queue for passport control. Of course the EU EEA CH gates are empty. How exactly have we managed to do Brexit so that we have the same status as Eritrea?
A competent airport flips the lights on the signs to balance things out. When I got into Malta a few months ago there were four non-eu queues and two eu-queues, all of about the same length.
(This doesn’t help if you happen to get stuck behind one person who takes ages to process of course.)
All the manned gates were manned. We can't use e-gates as we have to get a fucking stamp now.
A minor point, but an example. Last night's SL GF had an attendance around 45k. It usually sells out OT comfortably. Why? Well RL is the worst run sport in this country. But also, Catalans Dragons were in it for the first time. Almost none of their fans possess passports, as they are relentlessly proletarian and live on the border with Spain and nip across using their ID cards. So they couldn't get them in 2 weeks despite a huge rush. So. Manchester loses out on hotels and food, the fans who attended lose an atmosphere, those who couldn't lose, the UK loses, an already tottering RL loses. Airlines and airports, in not a great state, lose out. The passport requirements came in only this week I believe. As I said. Not vital in the great scheme, but how many Europeans without passports will choose to go elsewhere on holiday? And discretionary travel? I would factor it in.
Industry estimates are 200m in the EU who don't have a passport but use ID cards. I am amazed by that, but even if its half that estimate it is going to slow down the recovery of UK tourism fairly significantly over the next few years.
Use ID cards to cross a border, or simply have them? I suspect the latter, especially since many countries mandate them. Plenty of people never cross a border.
Obviously the ones who cross a border are most important, but even the ones who are not currently crossing borders include potential future tourists.
Stats on numbers of passport holders by country, let alone how much they travel, are not a quick find on google, so I don't know how many in each group. Even the ONS for the UK are saying check with the last census.
On Topic Man who has never voted Labour in his life thinks Labour leader that in 2017 produced the biggest increase in vote share since WW2 left a toxic legacy
His toxic divisive useless nonentity of a replacement is blame free
As I say man who knows nothing about what inspires people to vote Labour
You keep repeating this bollox, but bollox it is. Corbyn fought two general elections, and Labour recorded two of its lowest ever seat totals.*
* Explanatory Note: In the UK, parties can form governments if they win a majority of the seats. Corbyn’s Labour won 262 seats in 2017, and a lot fewer in 2019. At both elections the winning post was 326 seats.
It is amazing though, that even in the 2019 GE, Corbyn’s Labour got a better vote share than Miliband in 2015 and Brown in 2010.
If you ignore 2017, & look at the vote share changes from 2015 to 2019, all that seems to have happened is UKIP went Tory, and some Tory Remainers went Lib Dem, despite all the loud noise in between
Amazing, but irrelevant.
Why is it irrelevant? Vote shares mean something, and it’s worth knowing, or at least trying to figure out, where 12.6% of voters, whose party has more or less given up, from 2015 went.
If Tory 2019 is (Tory 2015 + UKIP 2015) - 4-5% to the LDs, where does that leave Labour?
Flat from 2010 to 2019. One can hardly blame Corbyn for UKIPs voters going Tory, when his Brexit plan was a second referendum and the Tories was getting it done
Corbynites continually cite their vote share and increase in its %, while completely ignoring what is actually required to win an election - and by which measure they fell lamentably short in 2017.
Never mind that, I am talking about the fact that 2010, 2015,and 2019 were very similar scores for Labour, with three different leaders. 2017 was a peculiar GE that can pretty much be written off, analytically. But the fact remains Corbyn (32.1%) bettered EdM (30.4%),and Gordo's (29%) efforts in his bad GE, and the reason the seat tally was so low was UKIP/BXP standing aside and the Tories gobbling up their vote
You go wrong when you start claiming Starmer's Remainerdom is a reason why he's struggling - it's the Covid blot out effect plus a lack of charisma cf Perfidious Posh - but I broadly agree with your take on this.
Both 17 and 19 were Brexit elections but were impacted in opposite fashion. In 17, Labour were a receptacle for Remainers to vote against the hard Brexit Mrs May seemed intent upon. They didn't want to give her the majority she said she needed to drive it through. Upshot - the result flattered Corbyn. By 19, a significant proportion of these voters were sick & tired of the Brexit wars and rather than prolonging the agony with another Referendum wanted it to be over. Thus the power of the Oven Ready Deal and Get Brexit Done. Upshot - the result flattered Johnson.
So what I'm saying is Jeremy Corbyn had less to do with Labour's good result at GE17 than his supporters like to make out, and he had less to do with their terrible result at GE19 than his detractors like to make out. Bias drives the analysis of both camps. The bigger and deeper reason for the overperformance in 17 and the underperformance in 19 is Brexit.
The interesting question now - indeed the million dollar question when it comes to punditing UK politics - is what impact will Brexit have on the next election?
But the reason Boris won such a majority in 2019, the reason the Tories floor seems to be 39/40 rather than 30/31 as it was in 2015, is UKIP voters have pretty much all gone Tory - and the reason for that is Labour demanded a second referendum in 2019... and their shadow Brexit Sec, who said Labour would be campaigning for Remain if they managed to swindle another go, was Sir Keir. So why would the deciding factor, the 2015 Kippers, go Labour now he is their leader?
Labour would have done better to have campaigned hard on going for a soft Brexit - the position the LibDems have now ended up in - from the outset. Not only would it have reassured those worried that with Labour they wouldn’t get Brexit, but it would have set them up very nicely now to be criticising the consequences of the Tories’ knuckle-headed approach to Brexit without being criticised for not wanting it at all.
UK e-gates can be used by “a national of an EU country, Australia, Canada, Iceland, Japan, Liechtenstein, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, South Korea, Switzerland or the USA”.
A closed, parochial country compared with the EU. Obvs.
So the EU doing what we ask implementing the same rules for everyone as we demanded is their fault?
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight
You don’t think that the border policy of the EU is the responsibility of the EU and its members?
I think it's a national competence. Greece are allowing UK citizens through the EU gates, I mean I literally just did it a few days ago. A friend went to Rome and said the same thing. My guess is that the more rational countries have decided that Brexit is done and they want to have a constructive relationship with the UK, others who are still bitter about it will try and make life difficult for UK citizens. The Netherlands is absolutely still extremely bitter about Brexit.
On Topic Man who has never voted Labour in his life thinks Labour leader that in 2017 produced the biggest increase in vote share since WW2 left a toxic legacy
His toxic divisive useless nonentity of a replacement is blame free
As I say man who knows nothing about what inspires people to vote Labour
You keep repeating this bollox, but bollox it is. Corbyn fought two general elections, and Labour recorded two of its lowest ever seat totals.*
* Explanatory Note: In the UK, parties can form governments if they win a majority of the seats. Corbyn’s Labour won 262 seats in 2017, and a lot fewer in 2019. At both elections the winning post was 326 seats.
It is amazing though, that even in the 2019 GE, Corbyn’s Labour got a better vote share than Miliband in 2015 and Brown in 2010.
If you ignore 2017, & look at the vote share changes from 2015 to 2019, all that seems to have happened is UKIP went Tory, and some Tory Remainers went Lib Dem, despite all the loud noise in between
Amazing, but irrelevant.
Why is it irrelevant? Vote shares mean something, and it’s worth knowing, or at least trying to figure out, where 12.6% of voters, whose party has more or less given up, from 2015 went.
If Tory 2019 is (Tory 2015 + UKIP 2015) - 4-5% to the LDs, where does that leave Labour?
Flat from 2010 to 2019. One can hardly blame Corbyn for UKIPs voters going Tory, when his Brexit plan was a second referendum and the Tories was getting it done
Corbynites continually cite their vote share and increase in its %, while completely ignoring what is actually required to win an election - and by which measure they fell lamentably short in 2017.
Never mind that, I am talking about the fact that 2010, 2015,and 2019 were very similar scores for Labour, with three different leaders. 2017 was a peculiar GE that can pretty much be written off, analytically. But the fact remains Corbyn (32.1%) bettered EdM (30.4%),and Gordo's (29%) efforts in his bad GE, and the reason the seat tally was so low was UKIP/BXP standing aside and the Tories gobbling up their vote
You go wrong when you start claiming Starmer's Remainerdom is a reason why he's struggling - it's the Covid blot out effect plus a lack of charisma cf Perfidious Posh - but I broadly agree with your take on this.
Both 17 and 19 were Brexit elections but were impacted in opposite fashion. In 17, Labour were a receptacle for Remainers to vote against the hard Brexit Mrs May seemed intent upon. They didn't want to give her the majority she said she needed to drive it through. Upshot - the result flattered Corbyn. By 19, a significant proportion of these voters were sick & tired of the Brexit wars and rather than prolonging the agony with another Referendum wanted it to be over. Thus the power of the Oven Ready Deal and Get Brexit Done. Upshot - the result flattered Johnson.
So what I'm saying is Jeremy Corbyn had less to do with Labour's good result at GE17 than his supporters like to make out, and he had less to do with their terrible result at GE19 than his detractors like to make out. Bias drives the analysis of both camps. The bigger and deeper reason for the overperformance in 17 and the underperformance in 19 is Brexit.
The interesting question now - indeed the million dollar question when it comes to punditing UK politics - is what impact will Brexit have on the next election?
But the reason Boris won such a majority in 2019, the reason the Tories floor seems to be 39/40 rather than 30/31 as it was in 2015, is UKIP voters have pretty much all gone Tory - and the reason for that is Labour demanded a second referendum in 2019... and their shadow Brexit Sec, who said Labour would be campaigning for Remain if they managed to swindle another go, was Sir Keir. So why would the deciding factor, the 2015 Kippers, go Labour now he is their leader?
Labour would have done better to have campaigned hard on going for a soft Brexit - the position the LibDems have now ended up in - from the outset. Not only would it have reassured those worried that with Labour they wouldn’t get Brexit, but it would have set them up very nicely now to be criticising the consequences of the Tories’ knuckle-headed approach to Brexit without being criticised for not wanting it at all.
That's what they did in 2017 wasn't it? When they got 40% and stopped the Tories getting a majority
On Topic Man who has never voted Labour in his life thinks Labour leader that in 2017 produced the biggest increase in vote share since WW2 left a toxic legacy
His toxic divisive useless nonentity of a replacement is blame free
As I say man who knows nothing about what inspires people to vote Labour
You keep repeating this bollox, but bollox it is. Corbyn fought two general elections, and Labour recorded two of its lowest ever seat totals.*
* Explanatory Note: In the UK, parties can form governments if they win a majority of the seats. Corbyn’s Labour won 262 seats in 2017, and a lot fewer in 2019. At both elections the winning post was 326 seats.
It is amazing though, that even in the 2019 GE, Corbyn’s Labour got a better vote share than Miliband in 2015 and Brown in 2010.
If you ignore 2017, & look at the vote share changes from 2015 to 2019, all that seems to have happened is UKIP went Tory, and some Tory Remainers went Lib Dem, despite all the loud noise in between
Amazing, but irrelevant.
Why is it irrelevant? Vote shares mean something, and it’s worth knowing, or at least trying to figure out, where 12.6% of voters, whose party has more or less given up, from 2015 went.
If Tory 2019 is (Tory 2015 + UKIP 2015) - 4-5% to the LDs, where does that leave Labour?
Flat from 2010 to 2019. One can hardly blame Corbyn for UKIPs voters going Tory, when his Brexit plan was a second referendum and the Tories was getting it done
Corbynites continually cite their vote share and increase in its %, while completely ignoring what is actually required to win an election - and by which measure they fell lamentably short in 2017.
Never mind that, I am talking about the fact that 2010, 2015,and 2019 were very similar scores for Labour, with three different leaders. 2017 was a peculiar GE that can pretty much be written off, analytically. But the fact remains Corbyn (32.1%) bettered EdM (30.4%),and Gordo's (29%) efforts in his bad GE, and the reason the seat tally was so low was UKIP/BXP standing aside and the Tories gobbling up their vote
You go wrong when you start claiming Starmer's Remainerdom is a reason why he's struggling - it's the Covid blot out effect plus a lack of charisma cf Perfidious Posh - but I broadly agree with your take on this.
Both 17 and 19 were Brexit elections but were impacted in opposite fashion. In 17, Labour were a receptacle for Remainers to vote against the hard Brexit Mrs May seemed intent upon. They didn't want to give her the majority she said she needed to drive it through. Upshot - the result flattered Corbyn. By 19, a significant proportion of these voters were sick & tired of the Brexit wars and rather than prolonging the agony with another Referendum wanted it to be over. Thus the power of the Oven Ready Deal and Get Brexit Done. Upshot - the result flattered Johnson.
So what I'm saying is Jeremy Corbyn had less to do with Labour's good result at GE17 than his supporters like to make out, and he had less to do with their terrible result at GE19 than his detractors like to make out. Bias drives the analysis of both camps. The bigger and deeper reason for the overperformance in 17 and the underperformance in 19 is Brexit.
The interesting question now - indeed the million dollar question when it comes to punditing UK politics - is what impact will Brexit have on the next election?
But the reason Boris won such a majority in 2019, the reason the Tories floor seems to be 39/40 rather than 30/31 as it was in 2015, is UKIP voters have pretty much all gone Tory - and the reason for that is Labour demanded a second referendum in 2019... and their shadow Brexit Sec, who said Labour would be campaigning for Remain if they managed to swindle another go, was Sir Keir. So why would the deciding factor, the 2015 Kippers, go Labour now he is their leader?
Ukip voters were all nationalistic hard leavers. They aren't in play for a progressive party of the left.
On Topic Man who has never voted Labour in his life thinks Labour leader that in 2017 produced the biggest increase in vote share since WW2 left a toxic legacy
His toxic divisive useless nonentity of a replacement is blame free
As I say man who knows nothing about what inspires people to vote Labour
You keep repeating this bollox, but bollox it is. Corbyn fought two general elections, and Labour recorded two of its lowest ever seat totals.*
* Explanatory Note: In the UK, parties can form governments if they win a majority of the seats. Corbyn’s Labour won 262 seats in 2017, and a lot fewer in 2019. At both elections the winning post was 326 seats.
It is amazing though, that even in the 2019 GE, Corbyn’s Labour got a better vote share than Miliband in 2015 and Brown in 2010.
If you ignore 2017, & look at the vote share changes from 2015 to 2019, all that seems to have happened is UKIP went Tory, and some Tory Remainers went Lib Dem, despite all the loud noise in between
Amazing, but irrelevant.
Why is it irrelevant? Vote shares mean something, and it’s worth knowing, or at least trying to figure out, where 12.6% of voters, whose party has more or less given up, from 2015 went.
If Tory 2019 is (Tory 2015 + UKIP 2015) - 4-5% to the LDs, where does that leave Labour?
Flat from 2010 to 2019. One can hardly blame Corbyn for UKIPs voters going Tory, when his Brexit plan was a second referendum and the Tories was getting it done
Corbynites continually cite their vote share and increase in its %, while completely ignoring what is actually required to win an election - and by which measure they fell lamentably short in 2017.
Never mind that, I am talking about the fact that 2010, 2015,and 2019 were very similar scores for Labour, with three different leaders. 2017 was a peculiar GE that can pretty much be written off, analytically. But the fact remains Corbyn (32.1%) bettered EdM (30.4%),and Gordo's (29%) efforts in his bad GE, and the reason the seat tally was so low was UKIP/BXP standing aside and the Tories gobbling up their vote
You go wrong when you start claiming Starmer's Remainerdom is a reason why he's struggling - it's the Covid blot out effect plus a lack of charisma cf Perfidious Posh - but I broadly agree with your take on this.
Both 17 and 19 were Brexit elections but were impacted in opposite fashion. In 17, Labour were a receptacle for Remainers to vote against the hard Brexit Mrs May seemed intent upon. They didn't want to give her the majority she said she needed to drive it through. Upshot - the result flattered Corbyn. By 19, a significant proportion of these voters were sick & tired of the Brexit wars and rather than prolonging the agony with another Referendum wanted it to be over. Thus the power of the Oven Ready Deal and Get Brexit Done. Upshot - the result flattered Johnson.
So what I'm saying is Jeremy Corbyn had less to do with Labour's good result at GE17 than his supporters like to make out, and he had less to do with their terrible result at GE19 than his detractors like to make out. Bias drives the analysis of both camps. The bigger and deeper reason for the overperformance in 17 and the underperformance in 19 is Brexit.
The interesting question now - indeed the million dollar question when it comes to punditing UK politics - is what impact will Brexit have on the next election?
But the reason Boris won such a majority in 2019, the reason the Tories floor seems to be 39/40 rather than 30/31 as it was in 2015, is UKIP voters have pretty much all gone Tory - and the reason for that is Labour demanded a second referendum in 2019... and their shadow Brexit Sec, who said Labour would be campaigning for Remain if they managed to swindle another go, was Sir Keir. So why would the deciding factor, the 2015 Kippers, go Labour now he is their leader?
Ukip voters were all nationalistic hard leavers. They aren't in play for a progressive party of the left.
Economic protectionism for low paid workers should be the left's core policy. But Labour have given it to the Conservatives.
Schiphol. Massive queue for passport control. Of course the EU EEA CH gates are empty. How exactly have we managed to do Brexit so that we have the same status as Eritrea?
A competent airport flips the lights on the signs to balance things out. When I got into Malta a few months ago there were four non-eu queues and two eu-queues, all of about the same length.
(This doesn’t help if you happen to get stuck behind one person who takes ages to process of course.)
All the manned gates were manned. We can't use e-gates as we have to get a fucking stamp now.
Wait. We're out of the EU at our own request. We are a third country at our own request. And now you say the EU is treating us as a non-member third country?
Well whatever next.
Its rather small minded and parochial to only allow EEA citizens through e-gates. Why not Americans, or Canadians, or Kiwis, or Koreans or . . . oh wait, that's what we do already.
If they've chosen to be parochial, that's on them not us.
"up to" them.
And if you want to be a GrammarNazi then that's on you.
Ha, very good. But it's not grammar nazidom I'm doing here, with trying to stamp on this "on them" habit of yours, it's tone policing. It just has an unpleasant chippy air about it. Told you this before a few times.
On Topic Man who has never voted Labour in his life thinks Labour leader that in 2017 produced the biggest increase in vote share since WW2 left a toxic legacy
His toxic divisive useless nonentity of a replacement is blame free
As I say man who knows nothing about what inspires people to vote Labour
You keep repeating this bollox, but bollox it is. Corbyn fought two general elections, and Labour recorded two of its lowest ever seat totals.*
* Explanatory Note: In the UK, parties can form governments if they win a majority of the seats. Corbyn’s Labour won 262 seats in 2017, and a lot fewer in 2019. At both elections the winning post was 326 seats.
It is amazing though, that even in the 2019 GE, Corbyn’s Labour got a better vote share than Miliband in 2015 and Brown in 2010.
If you ignore 2017, & look at the vote share changes from 2015 to 2019, all that seems to have happened is UKIP went Tory, and some Tory Remainers went Lib Dem, despite all the loud noise in between
Amazing, but irrelevant.
Why is it irrelevant? Vote shares mean something, and it’s worth knowing, or at least trying to figure out, where 12.6% of voters, whose party has more or less given up, from 2015 went.
If Tory 2019 is (Tory 2015 + UKIP 2015) - 4-5% to the LDs, where does that leave Labour?
Flat from 2010 to 2019. One can hardly blame Corbyn for UKIPs voters going Tory, when his Brexit plan was a second referendum and the Tories was getting it done
Corbynites continually cite their vote share and increase in its %, while completely ignoring what is actually required to win an election - and by which measure they fell lamentably short in 2017.
Never mind that, I am talking about the fact that 2010, 2015,and 2019 were very similar scores for Labour, with three different leaders. 2017 was a peculiar GE that can pretty much be written off, analytically. But the fact remains Corbyn (32.1%) bettered EdM (30.4%),and Gordo's (29%) efforts in his bad GE, and the reason the seat tally was so low was UKIP/BXP standing aside and the Tories gobbling up their vote
You go wrong when you start claiming Starmer's Remainerdom is a reason why he's struggling - it's the Covid blot out effect plus a lack of charisma cf Perfidious Posh - but I broadly agree with your take on this.
Both 17 and 19 were Brexit elections but were impacted in opposite fashion. In 17, Labour were a receptacle for Remainers to vote against the hard Brexit Mrs May seemed intent upon. They didn't want to give her the majority she said she needed to drive it through. Upshot - the result flattered Corbyn. By 19, a significant proportion of these voters were sick & tired of the Brexit wars and rather than prolonging the agony with another Referendum wanted it to be over. Thus the power of the Oven Ready Deal and Get Brexit Done. Upshot - the result flattered Johnson.
So what I'm saying is Jeremy Corbyn had less to do with Labour's good result at GE17 than his supporters like to make out, and he had less to do with their terrible result at GE19 than his detractors like to make out. Bias drives the analysis of both camps. The bigger and deeper reason for the overperformance in 17 and the underperformance in 19 is Brexit.
The interesting question now - indeed the million dollar question when it comes to punditing UK politics - is what impact will Brexit have on the next election?
But the reason Boris won such a majority in 2019, the reason the Tories floor seems to be 39/40 rather than 30/31 as it was in 2015, is UKIP voters have pretty much all gone Tory - and the reason for that is Labour demanded a second referendum in 2019... and their shadow Brexit Sec, who said Labour would be campaigning for Remain if they managed to swindle another go, was Sir Keir. So why would the deciding factor, the 2015 Kippers, go Labour now he is their leader?
Ukip voters were all nationalistic hard leavers. They aren't in play for a progressive party of the left.
"Get some more cheap migrants to keep the wages down".
It might be viewed as 'progressive' in Hampstead and Holborn less so in Bolsover and Burnley.
UK e-gates can be used by “a national of an EU country, Australia, Canada, Iceland, Japan, Liechtenstein, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, South Korea, Switzerland or the USA”.
A closed, parochial country compared with the EU. Obvs.
So the EU doing what we ask implementing the same rules for everyone as we demanded is their fault?
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight
You don’t think that the border policy of the EU is the responsibility of the EU and its members?
I think it's a national competence. Greece are allowing UK citizens through the EU gates, I mean I literally just did it a few days ago. A friend went to Rome and said the same thing. My guess is that the more rational countries have decided that Brexit is done and they want to have a constructive relationship with the UK, others who are still bitter about it will try and make life difficult for UK citizens. The Netherlands is absolutely still extremely bitter about Brexit.
I get the impression that the Netherlands was happy for the UK to do all the complaining and vetoing while in the EU while they freeloaded.
Comments
That's probably too much for them ...
Eurotunnel sent me several emails warning that I wouldn’t be allowed to travel unless I turned up with proof of my vaccination and negative test, but of course when I got there no-one asked to see either.
Surprised people aren't selling the codes on Ebay.
Do you have a citation for that? Or is simply not being in the EEA "demanding to be treated the same as Eritrea" in your eyes now?
The sensible thing to do surely would be to expand e-gates to all developed nations like we've done. But that's their country, their choice.
Stats on numbers of passport holders by country, let alone how much they travel, are not a quick find on google, so I don't know how many in each group. Even the ONS for the UK are saying check with the last census.
NEW THREAD
It might be viewed as 'progressive' in Hampstead and Holborn less so in Bolsover and Burnley.
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2021/oct/10/bobby-gillespie-irvine-welsh-memoirs-tenement-kid