An admirably long sentence and wholly fitting for what was an appalling crime.
It is very sad that the poor man's family now feel compelled to leave Scotland. They should be given love and support and help not have to suffer twice over.
Mostly sensible points, and I concur with a lot of them.
I thought his point 10 was interesting re Article 50: "10. Brits need to understand that Article 50 negotiations only cover a small number of issues, such as who pays for the pensions of UK MEPs and other Brits working for the EU who will be dismissed, and the transfer of the European Medicines Agency and European Banking Authority from London. The other issues – devising a visa and work permit scheme, for example – will take many years of talks to conclude, and will only get under way once Article 50 talks are over and the UK plays no part in the EU. That could be 2019 at the earliest, before the start of the next Commission cycle 2019-2024. Spain has just signed a trade deal with China to export plums; it took eight years to conclude. There is no chance of a ‘quick Brexit’."
Not something i've given particular thought to, but it makes sense that Art 50 is about "divvying up of costs and assets" rather than "what arrangements does Britain have with Europe going forward". They are, when you think about it, two separate processes. But I think the smart option is still to get the framework of "the arrangements going forward" sorted before we start the trivia such as where the Banking Authority moves to.
''The politics and actual mechanics of Brexit are horrendously complicated.''
The arrangement you describe was clearly negotiated by people who never saw anything but ever closer union and a federal Europe with Britain as a full member.
Which only goes to show how monstrously we have been lied to for decades.
Now if UKIP can find a really impressive candidate (and that is a big if) then Burnham might yet prove to be another loser
UKIP will never win Manchester, it voted Remain in EUref
You don't know Greater Manchester do you?
It includes Trafford and Stockport which also voted Remain, yes some areas like Wigan and Bury voted Leave but Greater Manchester as a whole is not ideal UKIP territory
Thanks, Doc. I knew you would have some interesting points to make.
I note you say selection at 14. What if we made it at 13 and called it "common entrance"?
I said 14 because that is the official start date for GCSEs at the moment (although don't be terribly surprised if it is de facto extended backwards given the huge amount of content required for new GCSE programmes). That is also, in my experience, when the gap between the ablest and the least able widens to the point where it becomes wholly unbridgeable and the anti-intellectual bullying kicks in.
I am not particularly wedded to one date. However, I don't frankly see a lot of value in one year of non-GCSE tuition in a different school and then into exams. Better to have a proper middle school system for years 5-9 and go from there. But such a system would of course be expensive.
Mike: "I find it amusing that Greater Manchester will soon be headed by someone who doesn’t support on of its football teams."
Agree, and it's not just about football, it's about being a figurehead for the Manchester city region. As a resident and worker there, I'm not small-minded enough to think "it has to be a Manc", and I don;t believe most others who live here are either, but other than representing a seat in between Manchester and Liverpool, which is not really "Manchester" at all other than via a Whitehall pen-pusher's edict in the early 70s, what has Andy Burnham ever done for or got to offer Manchester?
If there was one obvious, popular, leading "anti Burnham" figure to take him on, I could see that person having a chance. The Tories need to find a popular, bipartisan figure (a la Boris) rather than putting up some non-entity of a Tory local councillor.
Yes I agree - also having some local knowledge I'd think Burnham is very beatable. But a party hack (of any party) would lose. If there's a high profile independent / Tory in all but name then they'd be able to pick up on the terrible national polling for Labour under Corbyn, Burnham's Liverpool affinity and his lack of real achievement in the city. To throw a name out there, if I was trying to find such a candidate I'd be speaking to people like Sir Peter Fahy.
Of course the one bloke for whom the role was made, Tony Wilson, "Mr Manchester" himself is sadly no longer with us.
Now if UKIP can find a really impressive candidate (and that is a big if) then Burnham might yet prove to be another loser
UKIP will never win Manchester, it voted Remain in EUref
You don't know Greater Manchester do you?
It includes Trafford and Stockport which also voted Remain, yes some areas like Wigan and Bury voted Leave but Greater Manchester as a whole is not ideal UKIP territory
It also includes a plethora of areas that voted Leave.
Shouldn't the leader of a regional or county authority be called something other than "mayor"? It seems like yet another politically-motivated stretching of the English language. People would think you were an idiot if you said you were the mayor of Hertfordshire.
Shouldn't the leader of a regional or county authority be called something other than "mayor"? It seems like yet another politically-motivated stretching of the English language. People would think you were an idiot if you said you were the mayor of Hertfordshire.
Now if UKIP can find a really impressive candidate (and that is a big if) then Burnham might yet prove to be another loser
UKIP will never win Manchester, it voted Remain in EUref
You don't know Greater Manchester do you?
It includes Trafford and Stockport which also voted Remain, yes some areas like Wigan and Bury voted Leave but Greater Manchester as a whole is not ideal UKIP territory
It also includes a plethora of areas that voted Leave.
The country voted Leave, UKIP are presently polling 12%, to have a chance they would need the whole lot to have polled strongly Leave
Shouldn't the leader of a regional or county authority be called something other than "mayor"? It seems like yet another politically-motivated stretching of the English language. People would think you were an idiot if you said you were the mayor of Hertfordshire.
Shouldn't the leader of a regional or county authority be called something other than "mayor"? It seems like yet another politically-motivated stretching of the English language. People would think you were an idiot if you said you were the mayor of Hertfordshire.
What about the Mayor of London? That is a regional Mayor. The actual city of course is just the square mile.
And Sion Simon is the Labour candidate for West Midlands Mayor
That is the potentially the most interesting contest. A donkey with a red rosette would surely win a Corbyn-led election in Manchester, London, Bristol, Leeds, Liverpool or Newcastle. The university graduates and undergraduates who, heaven help them, think Corbyn is the Jezziah rather than a creepy and unpleasant weirdo with a long track of record of failure and dishonesty when allied to the tribal Labour vote should see them home comfortably.
However, if there is one major city which encapsulates the disaffection of Labour voters from the wealthy metropolitan virtue signallers, it is Birmingham. Although it has several universities, most of them are quite small and very few graduates live in it. There is a large ethnic minority population and a large, effectively disenfranchised working class. The city has a big UKIP presence and still has pockets where the Conservatives are strong.
On top of this, while there may be a weaker candidate than Sion Simon, it is hard to think who it could be. He has the intellectual capacity of a village idiot, the charisma of a weighing machine, the political acumen of a Donald Trump crossed with the bloke who came up with Hilary's email defence, the charm of a Thameslink official and the efficiency of an Easyjet baggage handler. He won two elections in Erdington more or less by default, and his journalistic career was famously marked by The Spectator describing his as a Telegraph columnist and The Daily Telegraph describing him as 'associate editor of The Spectator.'
A strong UKIP candidate or even a decent working-class Conservative could easily spring a surprise there. Of course, that does presuppose they can find such candidates. But I would say he's no more than about a 3-1 shot at the moment.
Indeed Birmingham was one of the few big cities which voted Leave
Only narrowly. We actually got the seat by seat totals - can dig out.
Anyway, the third paragraph made me laugh massively. Thanks.
Incidentally, I went to see Tristram Hunt talk at our uni and it came across as a bid for the mayoralty
And Sion Simon is the Labour candidate for West Midlands Mayor
That is the potentially the most interesting contest. A donkey with a red rosette would surely win a Corbyn-led election in Manchester, London, Bristol, Leeds, Liverpool or Newcastle. The university graduates and undergraduates who, heaven help them, think Corbyn is the Jezziah rather than a creepy and unpleasant weirdo with a long track of record of failure and dishonesty when allied to the tribal Labour vote should see them home comfortably.
However, if there is one major city which encapsulates the disaffection of Labour voters from the wealthy metropolitan virtue signallers, it is Birmingham. Although it has several universities, most of them are quite small and very few graduates live in it. There is a large ethnic minority population and a large, effectively disenfranchised working class. The city has a big UKIP presence and still has pockets where the Conservatives are strong.
On top of this, while there may be a weaker candidate than Sion Simon, it is hard to think who it could be. He has the intellectual capacity of a village idiot, the charisma of a weighing machine, the political acumen of a Donald Trump crossed with the bloke who came up with Hilary's email defence, the charm of a Thameslink official and the efficiency of an Easyjet baggage handler. He won two elections in Erdington more or less by default, and his journalistic career was famously marked by The Spectator describing his as a Telegraph columnist and The Daily Telegraph describing him as 'associate editor of The Spectator.'
A strong UKIP candidate or even a decent working-class Conservative could easily spring a surprise there. Of course, that does presuppose they can find such candidates. But I would say he's no more than about a 3-1 shot at the moment.
Indeed Birmingham was one of the few big cities which voted Leave
Only narrowly. We actually got the seat by seat totals - can dig out.
Anyway, the third paragraph made me laugh massively. Thanks.
Incidentally, I went to see Tristram Hunt talk at our uni and it came across as a bid for the mayoralty
Your welcome. Which uni was that? Presumably representing Stoke has raised Hunt's ambition to even greater heights!
He did so much good work on the Hillsborough disaster inquiry, when very few were interested.
Fair enough. A good piece of work there but badly let down by his subsequent performances, particularly as Health Secretary.
I just don't see any leadership capability in him. He's a natural 1st lieutenant.
Mr. Royale, Point of order, Sir.
The 1st Lieutenant's role has always been to deliver a working ship that the Captain can use. As such the 1st Lieutenant had, and still has to have, very good leadership skills as indeed do do all members of the wardroom and senior rates' mess decks.
The correct analogy for someone with no leadership skill is, wanker.
Is that a nautical term?
It has a special badge, an anchor superimposed by a W.
Now if UKIP can find a really impressive candidate (and that is a big if) then Burnham might yet prove to be another loser
UKIP will never win Manchester, it voted Remain in EUref
Greater Manchester didn't though, did it? (Not that UKIP would win anyway)
A strong UKIP showing could damage Burnham, for absolutely sure, but I'm sure the Tory candidate would be so far behind Burnham that he/she would have no chance of sneaking through. But then, when you look at the polls, and if St Theresa can continue to work some miracles on Tory fortunes....?
Ex Tory councillor Susan (now Baroness) Williams who led the opposition to Labour's barmpot congestion charging scheme in Gtr Manchester, who fought for and won the right to a referendum which rejected the scheme by a massive majority, might have been a good choice, had she not been given a peerage when she narrowly failed to win Bolton West in 2010 (she's now a junior Home Office Minister)
BBC Radio 4 a few minutes ago: Trump endorser Michael Scheuer, former CIA officer, says that the "real rub" for the 50 Republican national security experts who have called Trump unsuitable for the presidency because he would endanger national security is that they don't like him because he wants the US to stop fighting "Israel's wars".
Trump is an excellent speaker. I won't be surprised if he is got out of the race somehow before the first presidential debate on 26 Sep or at least within a week of it.
@PolhomeEditor: Labour MP: "Burnham got on the first lifeboat, whilst encouraging everyone else to stay on the Titanic with Corbyn."
A similar thought crossed my mind, however, rather than jumping ship voluntarily, I saw Burnham as being politely ushered towards the exit. A useful idiot no longer needed.
BBC Radio 4 a few minutes ago: Trump endorser Michael Scheuer, former CIA officer, says that the "real rub" for the 50 Republican national security experts who have called Trump unsuitable for the presidency because he would endanger national security is that they don't like him because he wants the US to stop fighting "Israel's wars".
Trump is an excellent speaker. I won't be surprised if he is got out of the race somehow before the first presidential debate on 26 Sep or at least within a week of it.
Shouldn't the leader of a regional or county authority be called something other than "mayor"? It seems like yet another politically-motivated stretching of the English language. People would think you were an idiot if you said you were the mayor of Hertfordshire.
BBC Radio 4 a few minutes ago: Trump endorser Michael Scheuer, former CIA officer, says that the "real rub" for the 50 Republican national security experts who have called Trump unsuitable for the presidency because he would endanger national security is that they don't like him because he wants the US to stop fighting "Israel's wars".
Trump is an excellent speaker. I won't be surprised if he is got out of the race somehow before the first presidential debate on 26 Sep or at least within a week of it.
Trump has said he is pro Israel and short of assassination as the official GOP nominee he cannot now be got out of the race unless he takes that decision himself
Ah, it's OK - it turns out we are not members of the EU anyway. From the comments under the ES David Allen Green article by someone called Cashbackliz:
We are not actually in the EU legally as the monarch who signed the country in was already disqualified under S 1 & 2 of the Act of Settlement 1701 . She is forbidden from reconciling with the Church of Rome and all things papist, Britain has an embassy at the Vatican amongst other things like the queen taking Holy Communion at Vespers ( Catholic Church service) in 2005 and she first met Pope John in 1962 at the Vatican all of which are forbidden on the legally binding law which is actually the British Constitution as long as there is a Protestant Church and the monarchy. All Citizens are exempt from all allegiances with such a monarch, and the Act deems her as not having any regal powers, - powers to pass laws, collect taxes all the things that a monarch does. This means that the law which had a royal assent to join the EU was not legally binding.
BBC Radio 4 a few minutes ago: Trump endorser Michael Scheuer, former CIA officer, says that the "real rub" for the 50 Republican national security experts who have called Trump unsuitable for the presidency because he would endanger national security is that they don't like him because he wants the US to stop fighting "Israel's wars".
Trump is an excellent speaker. I won't be surprised if he is got out of the race somehow before the first presidential debate on 26 Sep or at least within a week of it.
Trump has said he is pro Israel and short of assassination as the official GOP nominee he cannot now be got out of the race unless he takes that decision himself
He could be lawfully influenced to take that decision.
Any predictions for turnout in these mayoral elections? I'll go for 40%.
I reckon 30% and I think Burnham will lose. If an independent Mancunian candidate with a decent profile comes along with some press backing I think they'd have an outstanding chance. A Tony Wilson type so to speak! The outer leave areas won't vote Burnham in numbers or with conviction and remember how poorly Lucy Powell did in her by-election in central Manchester.
There is definitely a chance for an upset given the way many will see Burnham being foisted upon them by Westminster Labour and given Burnham's reputation as an opportunist jumping up the career ladder.
And Sion Simon is the Labour candidate for West Midlands Mayor
That is the potentially the most interesting contest. A donkey with a red rosette would surely win a Corbyn-led election in Manchester, London, Bristol, Leeds, Liverpool or Newcastle. The university graduates and undergraduates who, heaven help them, think Corbyn is the Jezziah rather than a creepy and unpleasant weirdo with a long track of record of failure and dishonesty when allied to the tribal Labour vote should see them home comfortably.
However, if there is one major city which encapsulates the disaffection of Labour voters from the wealthy metropolitan virtue signallers, it is Birmingham. Although it has several universities, most of them are quite small and very few graduates live in it. There is a large ethnic minority population and a large, effectively disenfranchised working class. The city has a big UKIP presence and still has pockets where the Conservatives are strong.
On top of this, while there may be a weaker candidate than Sion Simon, it is hard to think who it could be. He has the intellectual capacity of a village idiot, the charisma of a weighing machine, the political acumen of a Donald Trump crossed with the bloke who came up with Hilary's email defence, the charm of a Thameslink official and the efficiency of an Easyjet baggage handler. He won two elections in Erdington more or less by default, and his journalistic career was famously marked by The Spectator describing his as a Telegraph columnist and The Daily Telegraph describing him as 'associate editor of The Spectator.'
A strong UKIP candidate or even a decent working-class Conservative could easily spring a surprise there. Of course, that does presuppose they can find such candidates. But I would say he's no more than about a 3-1 shot at the moment.
Indeed Birmingham was one of the few big cities which voted Leave
Only narrowly. We actually got the seat by seat totals - can dig out.
Anyway, the third paragraph made me laugh massively. Thanks.
Incidentally, I went to see Tristram Hunt talk at our uni and it came across as a bid for the mayoralty
Your welcome. Which uni was that? Presumably representing Stoke has raised Hunt's ambition to even greater heights!
Aston, hence the reply to a post about Birmingham's mayor.
For some reason, the odds of Bernie Sanders winning the November election, in which he is not a candidate, have shortened a lot at Betfair. He can be backed at 70 now and laid at 80.
Of the Republican non-candidates who can be both backed and laid, Paul Ryan is at 120-140 and Michael Kasich 660-880.
@PolhomeEditor: New Labour NEC member Rhea Wolfson says there needs to be "a conversation" about mandatory reselection of MPs. Fancy that ...
LOL! The question is how long will it take the MPs to realise that the deselections are actually going to happen?
They'll wait until one actually happens.
That'll be way too late, by the time one actually happens there will be dozens more lined up. Maybe Corbyn's enthusiastic support for the boundary review will be the trigger they need?
In an interesting example of this crassness, Steven Moffat, the rather unpleasant dogmatist famous for writing bad TV dramas, also once said that it was a scandal the school he formerly taught in was providing extra resources for able students 'because it meant the most education went to those who need it the least' - a rather terrifying arse-about-face attitude from an English teacher who clearly doesn't understand the basic principles of education.
Presumably the principle is that everyone emerges equally educated?
We ought to be directing more education at the brightest. The tangle in this debate generally arises from the complicated interplay between wealth and "intelligence" - with people on both sides unwilling to question their own shibboleths.
Well he is gunning for them in all fairness. Will anyone dare deselect him in West Brom ?
Can see horse's heads turning up on Corbynites doorsteps..
I hesitate to suggest that the Labour party needs to spend more time with its lawyers. But some of the activities of Momentum and other Jeremy Corbyn support groups appear, prima facie, to breach various provisions of the Companies Acts and the Data Protection Act. Some Labour leaning lawyer might want to advise the party.
Now if UKIP can find a really impressive candidate (and that is a big if) then Burnham might yet prove to be another loser
UKIP will never win Manchester, it voted Remain in EUref
Greater Manchester didn't though, did it? (Not that UKIP would win anyway)
A strong UKIP showing could damage Burnham, for absolutely sure, but I'm sure the Tory candidate would be so far behind Burnham that he/she would have no chance of sneaking through. But then, when you look at the polls, and if St Theresa can continue to work some miracles on Tory fortunes....?
Ex Tory councillor Susan (now Baroness) Williams who led the opposition to Labour's barmpot congestion charging scheme in Gtr Manchester, who fought for and won the right to a referendum which rejected the scheme by a massive majority, might have been a good choice, had she not been given a peerage when she narrowly failed to win Bolton West in 2010 (she's now a junior Home Office Minister)
Tony Lloyd won the 2012 Gtr Manchester PCC election with more than half the vote and a lead of about 35%. Even given the swing in polling since then, a higher turnout and - in my opinion but clearly not that of the Labour members - a weaker candidate, I'd be very surprised if Burnham were to take less than 40% in the first round.
For some reason, the odds of Bernie Sanders winning the November election, in which he is not a candidate, have shortened a lot at Betfair. He can be backed at 70 now and laid at 80.
Of the Republican non-candidates who can be both backed and laid, Paul Ryan is at 120-140 and Michael Kasich 660-880.
If the election was tommorow I'd have my whole bank laying Bernie. Doubt he'll be 70-80 at the start of November though.
For some reason, the odds of Bernie Sanders winning the November election, in which he is not a candidate, have shortened a lot at Betfair. He can be backed at 70 now and laid at 80.
Of the Republican non-candidates who can be both backed and laid, Paul Ryan is at 120-140 and Michael Kasich 660-880.
If the election was tommorow I'd have my whole bank laying Bernie. Doubt he'll be 70-80 at the start of November though.
@PolhomeEditor: New Labour NEC member Rhea Wolfson says there needs to be "a conversation" about mandatory reselection of MPs. Fancy that ...
After Jimbo Murphy tried to have her candidacy for the NEC blocked, I don't suppose she feels terribly well disposed to that wing of the party. What's sauce for the chicken coopers etc.
Shouldn't the leader of a regional or county authority be called something other than "mayor"? It seems like yet another politically-motivated stretching of the English language. People would think you were an idiot if you said you were the mayor of Hertfordshire.
Shouldn't the leader of a regional or county authority be called something other than "mayor"? It seems like yet another politically-motivated stretching of the English language. People would think you were an idiot if you said you were the mayor of Hertfordshire.
Shouldn't the leader of a regional or county authority be called something other than "mayor"? It seems like yet another politically-motivated stretching of the English language. People would think you were an idiot if you said you were the mayor of Hertfordshire.
Perhaps Jezza will try to have the last laugh on all of this. Promise to abolish these new UberMayors and thus send Burnham out of office and with no hope of a return to mainstream politics..
For some reason, the odds of Bernie Sanders winning the November election, in which he is not a candidate, have shortened a lot at Betfair. He can be backed at 70 now and laid at 80.
Of the Republican non-candidates who can be both backed and laid, Paul Ryan is at 120-140 and Michael Kasich 660-880.
If the election was tommorow I'd have my whole bank laying Bernie. Doubt he'll be 70-80 at the start of November though.
Given how much we speculated here about the chances of either Trump or Clinton somehow not being nominated, what do we think are chances that either of them might be forced out before November?
There's already been plenty of crap thrown over both of them, and no doubt a load more of that to come between now and the election, as well as health rumours and the possibility of something tragic happening.
If we think it's more than a couple of percent chance, is it not therefore better to lay candidates rather than back their opponent, which would also cover the possibility of some unknown third person winning?
For some reason, the odds of Bernie Sanders winning the November election, in which he is not a candidate, have shortened a lot at Betfair. He can be backed at 70 now and laid at 80.
Of the Republican non-candidates who can be both backed and laid, Paul Ryan is at 120-140 and Michael Kasich 660-880.
If the election was tommorow I'd have my whole bank laying Bernie. Doubt he'll be 70-80 at the start of November though.
Ah, it's OK - it turns out we are not members of the EU anyway. From the comments under the ES David Allen Green article by someone called Cashbackliz:
We are not actually in the EU legally as the monarch who signed the country in was already disqualified under S 1 & 2 of the Act of Settlement 1701 . She is forbidden from reconciling with the Church of Rome and all things papist, Britain has an embassy at the Vatican amongst other things like the queen taking Holy Communion at Vespers ( Catholic Church service) in 2005 and she first met Pope John in 1962 at the Vatican all of which are forbidden on the legally binding law which is actually the British Constitution as long as there is a Protestant Church and the monarchy. All Citizens are exempt from all allegiances with such a monarch, and the Act deems her as not having any regal powers, - powers to pass laws, collect taxes all the things that a monarch does. This means that the law which had a royal assent to join the EU was not legally binding.
Blimey, that makes my submission this morning look good.
For some reason, the odds of Bernie Sanders winning the November election, in which he is not a candidate, have shortened a lot at Betfair. He can be backed at 70 now and laid at 80.
Of the Republican non-candidates who can be both backed and laid, Paul Ryan is at 120-140 and Michael Kasich 660-880.
If the election was tommorow I'd have my whole bank laying Bernie. Doubt he'll be 70-80 at the start of November though.
@OliverCooper: Lord Mitchell, one of 3 Barons of Hampstead, has written in the Times that he'd quit Labour if Corbyn is re-elected. https://t.co/7aHdRvUeIS
@OliverCooper: Lord Mitchell, one of 3 Barons of Hampstead, has written in the Times that he'd quit Labour if Corbyn is re-elected. https://t.co/7aHdRvUeIS
For some reason, the odds of Bernie Sanders winning the November election, in which he is not a candidate, have shortened a lot at Betfair. He can be backed at 70 now and laid at 80.
Of the Republican non-candidates who can be both backed and laid, Paul Ryan is at 120-140 and Michael Kasich 660-880.
If the election was tommorow I'd have my whole bank laying Bernie. Doubt he'll be 70-80 at the start of November though.
Given how much we speculated here about the chances of either Trump or Clinton somehow not being nominated, what do we think are chances that either of them might be forced out before November?
There's already been plenty of crap thrown over both of them, and no doubt a load more of that to come between now and the election, as well as health rumours and the possibility of something tragic happening.
If we think it's more than a couple of percent chance, is it not therefore better to lay candidates rather than back their opponent, which would also cover the possibility of some unknown third person winning?
Much less than one percent I would say. There's always the chance of the American pastime of assassination but that's the only way. Clinton appears physically fit despite the ravings of the far right conspiracy theorists and Trump can still string words together (even if they don't make any sense) so he's mentally capable enough to fight an election (again, despite the conspiracy theorists).
For some reason, the odds of Bernie Sanders winning the November election, in which he is not a candidate, have shortened a lot at Betfair. He can be backed at 70 now and laid at 80.
Of the Republican non-candidates who can be both backed and laid, Paul Ryan is at 120-140 and Michael Kasich 660-880.
If the election was tommorow I'd have my whole bank laying Bernie. Doubt he'll be 70-80 at the start of November though.
Given how much we speculated here about the chances of either Trump or Clinton somehow not being nominated, what do we think are chances that either of them might be forced out before November?
There's already been plenty of crap thrown over both of them, and no doubt a load more of that to come between now and the election, as well as health rumours and the possibility of something tragic happening.
If we think it's more than a couple of percent chance, is it not therefore better to lay candidates rather than back their opponent, which would also cover the possibility of some unknown third person winning?
Much less than one percent I would say. There's always the chance of the American pastime of assassination but that's the only way. Clinton appears physically fit despite the ravings of the far right conspiracy theorists and Trump can still string words together (even if they don't make any sense) so he's mentally capable enough to fight an election (again, despite the conspiracy theorists).
Yeah, I'm just paranoid I'm going to mess this up to some random event between now and Election Day!
Ah, it's OK - it turns out we are not members of the EU anyway. From the comments under the ES David Allen Green article by someone called Cashbackliz:
We are not actually in the EU legally as the monarch who signed the country in was already disqualified under S 1 & 2 of the Act of Settlement 1701 . She is forbidden from reconciling with the Church of Rome and all things papist, Britain has an embassy at the Vatican amongst other things like the queen taking Holy Communion at Vespers ( Catholic Church service) in 2005 and she first met Pope John in 1962 at the Vatican all of which are forbidden on the legally binding law which is actually the British Constitution as long as there is a Protestant Church and the monarchy. All Citizens are exempt from all allegiances with such a monarch, and the Act deems her as not having any regal powers, - powers to pass laws, collect taxes all the things that a monarch does. This means that the law which had a royal assent to join the EU was not legally binding.
Sounds like the EU is the least of our concerns. We don't have to obey any laws enacted since 1962 or pay tax.
You know, it's like the old story about the boiled frog. We're now so accustomed to the strangeness of Labour's internal politics, we've become inured to it.
One of the great political movements of this country is having some kind of bastard love-child of a nervous breakdown, a mid-life crisis and a religious revival. What the actual fuck.
@JeremyCliffe: Labour's leader, deputy, shadow chancellor, London & Bristol mayors and mayoral candidates for Manc, W Midlands and (prob) Liv: all men.
Yeah, but there are few ladies who can match Andy Burnham's eyelashes.
Late Autumn/Spring next year is when it'll start to get fruity, with a burst of activity after the French/German elections.
Yes, this is very much the phoney war period.
The politics and actual mechanics of Brexit are horrendously complicated. What I hadn't fully appreciated until now is that, never mind negotiating with our 27 EU friends, we'll also need to negotiate a new status within the WTO - an organisation necessarily so sclerotic because of its 170 members that it makes the EU look like a model of quick decisiveness. The problem is that, although we are members of the WTO in our own right, all of the tariff schedules and other WTO arrangements we are currently signed up to will have to be re-negotiated because they exist only as part of our EU membership - and that's just to maintain the current trading position with non-EU countries. That includes negotiating with countries like Argentina which are not well-disposed towards us.
That is of course separate from the challenge of trying to do new trade deals, but interacts with it. For example, the EU-Korea trade deal contains a clause saying Korea can't grant more favourable terms to anyone else.
Overall, as the dust has settled after the referendum the challenge looks no easier than it did before. If anything, it looks worse as attention has belatedly begun to be given to what should actually happen.
I was looking at rebalancing my portfolio back towards the UK to take advantage of some of the price drops of UK-focused companies, which I'd thought were overdone. But, having looked a bit more at the detail, I've decided to do the opposite; the prospects for the UK over the next few years look pretty dire to me.
You aren't very good on EU predictions though, are you Richard?
Ah, it's OK - it turns out we are not members of the EU anyway. From the comments under the ES David Allen Green article by someone called Cashbackliz:
We are not actually in the EU legally as the monarch who signed the country in was already disqualified under S 1 & 2 of the Act of Settlement 1701 . She is forbidden from reconciling with the Church of Rome and all things papist, Britain has an embassy at the Vatican amongst other things like the queen taking Holy Communion at Vespers ( Catholic Church service) in 2005 and she first met Pope John in 1962 at the Vatican all of which are forbidden on the legally binding law which is actually the British Constitution as long as there is a Protestant Church and the monarchy. All Citizens are exempt from all allegiances with such a monarch, and the Act deems her as not having any regal powers, - powers to pass laws, collect taxes all the things that a monarch does. This means that the law which had a royal assent to join the EU was not legally binding.
Sounds like the EU is the least of our concerns. We don't have to obey any laws enacted since 1962 or pay tax.
In the 60’s & 70’s there were, in my constituency anyway, a number of elderly Nonconformist ladies who were very concerned at the prospect of signing up to the Treaty of Rome. We also had a candidate who worked for the EEC and they were also concerned that he might be a Catholic ...... working for Rome. He was in fact a Quaker!
I did think all those people had died by now, except in places like N Ireland!
Late Autumn/Spring next year is when it'll start to get fruity, with a burst of activity after the French/German elections.
Yes, this is very much the phoney war period.
The politics and actual mechanics of Brexit are horrendously complicated. What I hadn't fully appreciated until now is that, never mind negotiating with our 27 EU friends, we'll also need to negotiate a new status within the WTO - an organisation necessarily so sclerotic because of its 170 members that it makes the EU look like a model of quick decisiveness. The problem is that, although we are members of the WTO in our own right, all of the tariff schedules and other WTO arrangements we are currently signed up to will have to be re-negotiated because they exist only as part of our EU membership - and that's just to maintain the current trading position with non-EU countries. That includes negotiating with countries like Argentina which are not well-disposed towards us.
That is of course separate from the challenge of trying to do new trade deals, but interacts with it. For example, the EU-Korea trade deal contains a clause saying Korea can't grant more favourable terms to anyone else.
Overall, as the dust has settled after the referendum the challenge looks no easier than it did before. If anything, it looks worse as attention has belatedly begun to be given to what should actually happen.
I was looking at rebalancing my portfolio back towards the UK to take advantage of some of the price drops of UK-focused companies, which I'd thought were overdone. But, having looked a bit more at the detail, I've decided to do the opposite; the prospects for the UK over the next few years look pretty dire to me.
You aren't very good on EU predictions though, are you Richard? 70:30 REMAIN?
Has he ever acknowledged this? Whatever happened to humble pie?
Comments
An admirably long sentence and wholly fitting for what was an appalling crime.
It is very sad that the poor man's family now feel compelled to leave Scotland. They should be given love and support and help not have to suffer twice over.
I thought his point 10 was interesting re Article 50: "10. Brits need to understand that Article 50 negotiations only cover a small number of issues, such as who pays for the pensions of UK MEPs and other Brits working for the EU who will be dismissed, and the transfer of the European Medicines Agency and European Banking Authority from London. The other issues – devising a visa and work permit scheme, for example – will take many years of talks to conclude, and will only get under way once Article 50 talks are over and the UK plays no part in the EU. That could be 2019 at the earliest, before the start of the next Commission cycle 2019-2024. Spain has just signed a trade deal with China to export plums; it took eight years to conclude. There is no chance of a ‘quick Brexit’."
Not something i've given particular thought to, but it makes sense that Art 50 is about "divvying up of costs and assets" rather than "what arrangements does Britain have with Europe going forward". They are, when you think about it, two separate processes. But I think the smart option is still to get the framework of "the arrangements going forward" sorted before we start the trivia such as where the Banking Authority moves to.
The arrangement you describe was clearly negotiated by people who never saw anything but ever closer union and a federal Europe with Britain as a full member.
Which only goes to show how monstrously we have been lied to for decades.
I am not particularly wedded to one date. However, I don't frankly see a lot of value in one year of non-GCSE tuition in a different school and then into exams. Better to have a proper middle school system for years 5-9 and go from there. But such a system would of course be expensive.
Anyway, the third paragraph made me laugh massively. Thanks.
Incidentally, I went to see Tristram Hunt talk at our uni and it came across as a bid for the mayoralty
http://www.w-anchor
.co.uk/
Ex Tory councillor Susan (now Baroness) Williams who led the opposition to Labour's barmpot congestion charging scheme in Gtr Manchester, who fought for and won the right to a referendum which rejected the scheme by a massive majority, might have been a good choice, had she not been given a peerage when she narrowly failed to win Bolton West in 2010 (she's now a junior Home Office Minister)
Sion Simon 2,718 votes
Bedser 1,099 votes
Trump is an excellent speaker. I won't be surprised if he is got out of the race somehow before the first presidential debate on 26 Sep or at least within a week of it.
...and many of them are Labour MPs...
We are not actually in the EU legally as the monarch who signed the country in was already disqualified under S 1 & 2 of the Act of Settlement 1701 . She is forbidden from reconciling with the Church of Rome and all things papist, Britain has an embassy at the Vatican amongst other things like the queen taking Holy Communion at Vespers ( Catholic Church service) in 2005 and she first met Pope John in 1962 at the Vatican all of which are forbidden on the legally binding law which is actually the British Constitution as long as there is a Protestant Church and the monarchy. All Citizens are exempt from all allegiances with such a monarch, and the Act deems her as not having any regal powers, - powers to pass laws, collect taxes all the things that a monarch does. This means that the law which had a royal assent to join the EU was not legally binding.
Can see horse's heads turning up on Corbynites doorsteps..
There is definitely a chance for an upset given the way many will see Burnham being foisted upon them by Westminster Labour and given Burnham's reputation as an opportunist jumping up the career ladder.
@danbloom1: Andy Burnham hits out at threats of mandatory reselection of MPs. "I don't think it's helpful to fuel a climate of distrust" #wato
Of the Republican non-candidates who can be both backed and laid, Paul Ryan is at 120-140 and Michael Kasich 660-880.
http://uk.businessinsider.com/bristol-labour-jeremy-corbyn-momentum-james-schneider-2016-8
Someone isn't a Corbyn fan.
Labour dodged a bullet there...
We ought to be directing more education at the brightest. The tangle in this debate generally arises from the complicated interplay between wealth and "intelligence" - with people on both sides unwilling to question their own shibboleths.
For all his faults, Tom Watson IS the labour party. For me, he embodies it. If he leaves, it ain't the labour party no more.
I didn't get further than the bar chart
Even I might vote for that!
There's already been plenty of crap thrown over both of them, and no doubt a load more of that to come between now and the election, as well as health rumours and the possibility of something tragic happening.
If we think it's more than a couple of percent chance, is it not therefore better to lay candidates rather than back their opponent, which would also cover the possibility of some unknown third person winning?
I initially read that as
Tom Watson....IS....the labour party.....
In answer to the idea that if Pence takes over the Republican nomination he'll lose lots of Trump supporters: his popularity ratings are exceeding Trump's.
Have taken a fiver of each anyway.
I think in actuarial terms the bets make sense anyway.
We don't have to obey any laws enacted since 1962 or pay tax.
One of the great political movements of this country is having some kind of bastard love-child of a nervous breakdown, a mid-life crisis and a religious revival. What the actual fuck.
70:30 REMAIN?
He was in fact a Quaker!
I did think all those people had died by now, except in places like N Ireland!
https://twitter.com/JeremyCorbyn4PM/status/763012107063275521
9-2 is certainly too short.
Ah, Miliband. I'm sure he's a nice chap, but I'd only trust him to walk my dog because Meg would be there to keep an eye on him.
By 49 point margin NC voters say they're less likely to vote for candidate perceived to be preferred by Russia: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2016/08/clinton-leads-in-nc-for-first-time-since-march.html