Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Meet the new boss – what TMay’s first 60 days tell us abou
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Meet the new boss – what TMay’s first 60 days tell us about how she’ll govern
Theresa May has now been Prime Minister for 60 days. It’s never too soon to start forming judgements. So what have we learned so far about our new Prime Minister? Actually, rather a lot says Alastair Meeks.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
https://twitter.com/rosschawkins/status/774150436399886336
On the dithering points, I suspect there is work going on behind the scenes on both. For the latter this was confirmed by the leaked document a commuter snapped on the train.
She deported Abu Hamza and didn't deport Gary McKinnon, two huge achievements given the backgrounds to their cases.
I like that she is fundamentally a practical person. She is in the mold of "the art of the possible", and I think that makes a pleasant change.
But I do not like her interventionism (Hinkley Point C is a 1970s solution to a early 2000s problem that will act as a tariff on all energy consuming British businesses), and I prefer the Cameron style of letting ministers get on with it.
She was right, I think, to lose Osborne and Gove. The new team does need to hang together, and that means loyalty is a virtue.
We will see how she does: currently I'd rate her as 6/10.
We have to do this again:
1) Real majority is 16 as Sinn Fein Abstain.
2) Ten Northern Ireland Unionists are solidly behind grammar schools and resist any attempt by Sinn Fein and SDLP to abolish them in NI. So Mayority 36 in NI
3) Labour MP Kate Hoey is strongly in favour of Grammar schools (and seemingly most other conservative social policies) and has just written an entire article in praise of them in the Mail on Sunday http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3783576/As-grammar-girl-despair-kneejerk-party-Labour-MP-KATE-HOEY-dismayed-ideological-opposition-Theresa-s-plans.html
So 38
4) Independent Unionist MP Lady Sylvia Hernons position is unknown but as the Belfast Telegraph Suggests, not supporting them would be political suicide due to local issues http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opinion/lady-sylvia-faces-a-lonely-walk-back-to-westminster-28525971.html
So 40
5) Douglas Carswell
So 42
6) Frank Field is an outspoken supporter of Grammar Schools http://www.economist.com/node/273766
So 44.
Margaret Thatchers 1979 majority was 44.
And that is before we consider that Scottish MPs will likely be barred from voting on the Issue (EVEL) http://schoolsweek.co.uk/scottish-mps-not-ruling-out-attempt-to-block-theresa-mays-grammar-schools-plan/
So if that happens Majority = 103
So Theresa could still win the vote even if 51 of her own MPs vote against it.
Mr Meeks - The political landscape is rather different now. A conservative majority of 12 now is a rather heathier majority than a majority of 22 was in 1992.
And as for the Lords blocking it. - They can't. The parliament act can be used. The bill can go to them in April, and if they reject it the Parliament act can be used in June after the Queen opens the new parliamentary session.
What better issue for Theresa to ruthlessly drive through and establish her authority with?
Clearly, the outcome will depend on what the final plans are.
I think she is unpolished and ill prepared for the top job, but considering how she got it this is surely understandable.
It will be interesting to see if and how she matures.
But as you say, it depends on how competently they handle the final plans
It essentially gives them a veto on-laws being imposed without their support, but it's a only blocking mechanism, it doesn't give them the ability to pass laws, as the bill still requires a vote in the full HoC at third reading.
She will do enough to assuage the UK electorate. I do not see her as a PM much past 2021 because she will have done enough by then.
Personally I'd rather a more radical approach but: Yes we won the Brexit referendum but we have to seek common-ground moving forward. Hence the need for pragmatism.
I think she will happily lose 10 NI supporters in return for 59 disbarred hostiles in Scotland though
We ought to pass a proper English Votes for English Laws but that hasn't happened, yet.
http://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1181a12016Election.pdf
Lots of really interesting stuff in here, but the key thing is in a 2 way race Clinton is above 50% and has a +8 lead over Trump.
I am sure that all of the potential candidates were preparing/scheming what they would do if Dave had to go in the event of a no vote/fell under a bus so to speak.. its in the nature of the beast that is politics.
She has a good instinct for who she needs to appeal to (unlike David Cameron, who saw modernisation and moderation as one and the same thing). So far she seems less sure footed about what policies for this base will be successful.
Brown's start was initially perceived as less awkward as the Labour publicity machine was trying to polish a turd, and it soon all fell apart.
How you are initially perceived largely depends on the state of the nation when you take the reins of power.
It will be fascinating to see how she matures.
So if you don't want Hinkley Point and don't want her to intervene stopping it, what do you want?
On Paul from Beds' calculations, as others have said the SNP will be able to vote against, and I wouldn't count on Field and Hoey doing more than abstaining, so the true majority on this isd probably around 30. I'd expect some fudges to be needed, especially if it goes into the tedious business of Parliament Acts, which give cover to people who don't like the policy and can oppose it as "not in the manifesto". Been there, got the T-shirt (Hunting Act).
It may be interventionist, but on this occasion the right decision?
http://thaddeuswhite.weebly.com/writing-blog/sir-edric-and-the-wig
Plus of course Europe divisions, the bastards, 18 years of Tory one party rule, Tony Blair and a boundary review all had an influence in the 165 seats too.
That said, if he adopts a die-in-a-ditch position, losing a Foreign Secretary early on would be significant.
It's argueable that we might be in a very different EU environment had it not been for Maastricht.
Oh dear.
Heath failed because he was on the wrong side of the argument about the EU.
Thatcher ultimately failed in part because she was on the wrong side of the argument about the EU.
Major failed because he was on the wrong side of the argument about the EU.
Cameron failed because he was on the wrong side of the argument about the EU.
May seems to have read the famous Einstein quote about the definition of insanity and realises that there is a right side and a wrong side on matters relating to the EU. Brexit means Brexit. At last a Tory PM who is not being turned insane by the Grimer Wormtongues of her party.
If this is confirmed by Dell (and they will have to give a statement at some point) then it has the potential of giving Trump a massive helping hand for November as it looks very, very bad to fire domestic workers and replace them with cheaper foreign labour.
You would think, wouldn;t you, that any person wanting the position of Prime Minister would have a Brexit strategy.....????
but apparently not. Theresa is 'driving' according to Rudd. And she has firmly decided so far to take us precisely nowhere.
We're having a hard Brexit with a soft centre. Or a soft Brexit that has distinctly hard characteristics.
May is a vacillating fudger. As I have said on here many times, the candidate UKIP would have chosen to keep them in business.
They may be offshoring jobs, but that's a different debate.
Heck, she was not an eu fanatic but supported remaining, isn't that worse than someone who at least adored the eu? I jest, but even as a leaver praising her simply knowing g Brexit means Brexit feels like praising a toddler for not drawing on the walls. She was the best choice and has enough positives to be great, but some are putting the bar a bit low I think.
Then again, the EU is an organisation that is soon to grant visa free travel to islamist Turkey, whilst at the same time imposing visas on free, democratic western Nato cornerstone Britain.
How is that sustainable? how is it logical? how is it defensible? how is it anything other that complete lunacy?
The whole Establishment position was that a Brexit vote would cause a recession and we would enter negotiations with the EU in a weak position desperate for a deal, any deal, to get us out of the mess.
I think May has more confidence in our nation and is deliberately buying time doing absolutely nothing. If August's data starts a trend we are not only doing OK but potentially entering a Brexit Boom.
If that continues then May will enter negotiations with the EU from a position of much greater strength.
The art of negotiation is to let the other side think you are prepared to walk away without a deal if necessary. I suspect May wants to stay in the Single Market outside the EU and with some form of border controls. The EU does not want to give us that. If we enter negotiations weak they will not give us that.
Paradoxically the best chance then to stay in the Single Market is to be able and prepared to leave it.