politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Just 16% tell ComRes that LAB-led JC likely to win GE compa

SeanT said:

MTimT said:

JonathanD said:

"The bosses of several of America’s biggest banks and corporations have warned Theresa May they will pre-emptively shift operations into Europe unless she can provide early clarity on the future shape of EU-UK relations.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/24/brexit-warning-us-bank-bosses-from-goldman-sachs-morgan-stanley/

Seems to me from this that the banks really, really don't want to set up European offices and are begging May to tell them they don't need to.

Of course May cannot tell them at this point whether they'll have to. Even is she was prepared to bend over backwards to protect passporting, it is not within her power to guarantee it. If I were on the executive team of one of those banks, I wouldn't be waiting for May to tell me what the negotiating position would be. I'd just open an office in the EU, but hold off on incurring larger costs of a move of certain operations until the situation clarified. Not sure what the problem is with that.

Unless getting information was never the banks' real reason for the meeting, but rather they were there to lobby May to guarantee passporting.

Walking back from Kew Gardens to Kew Station,

SeanT said:

IanB2 said:

AndyJS said:

IanB2 said:

AndyJS said:

williamglenn said:

SeanT said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.

Expand City airport. Demolish Canary Wharf - we won't need it after the financial industry decamps to the Eurozone.

Have you been to Canary Wharf recently? It's difficult to move due to the high volumes of people working there.

If they were working, they would all be closeted away at their desks tapping at their keyboards. The crowds are people shopping, not working!

It was the lunch hour IIRC.

Nevertheless docklands is very different from the windswept wasteland it was when the first flats went up (which during the 90s they couldn't sell, but which with hindsight would have been an amazing investment). There's a whole shopping centre under the main towers, lots of restaurants, cinema at west India quay. I know plenty of people who regularly go there for leisure (reduced a bit when Westfield opened, to be fair) who don't work anywhere near Canary Wharf.

Docklands is now a triumph of urbanism. Not flawless, and certainly not the finished article, but just incredible when you remember (as I can) when it was total wasteland. I lived in Wapping in a "hard-to-let" flat (ex-council, £1 a month, literally) when I was a student here in 1981. It was like one enormous bombsite, with the odd standing slum.

The 2 bed hovel near Garnet Street where I lived for one quid a month would now cost around £1 million. The cobbles in the road are the same.

surbiton said:

SeanT said:

IanB2 said:

AndyJS said:

IanB2 said:

AndyJS said:

williamglenn said:

SeanT said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.

Expand City airport. Demolish Canary Wharf - we won't need it after the financial industry decamps to the Eurozone.

Have you been to Canary Wharf recently? It's difficult to move due to the high volumes of people working there.

If they were working, they would all be closeted away at their desks tapping at their keyboards. The crowds are people shopping, not working!

It was the lunch hour IIRC.

Nevertheless docklands is very different from the windswept wasteland it was when the first flats went up (which during the 90s they couldn't sell, but which with hindsight would have been an amazing investment). There's a whole shopping centre under the main towers, lots of restaurants, cinema at west India quay. I know plenty of people who regularly go there for leisure (reduced a bit when Westfield opened, to be fair) who don't work anywhere near Canary Wharf.

Docklands is now a triumph of urbanism. Not flawless, and certainly not the finished article, but just incredible when you remember (as I can) when it was total wasteland. I lived in Wapping in a "hard-to-let" flat (ex-council, £1 a month, literally) when I was a student here in 1981. It was like one enormous bombsite, with the odd standing slum.

The 2 bed hovel near Garnet Street where I lived for one quid a month would now cost around £1 million. The cobbles in the road are the same.

I had a girlfriend who lived there. The Prospect of Whitby was nearby.

SeanT said:

Sandpit said:

SandyRentool said:

Outside of the south east, the UK is very happy with its existing global hub airport - Amsterdam Schiphol. And Manchester isn't doing too badly for global flights these days.

Yes, KLM's fleet of little Fokkers does a great job of connecting Britain's regional airports to a global hub across the Channel.

For the longer haul hub, Emirates are now flying the A380 into the recently extended Birmingham.

Yes, we need to take that business right back. Fuck Schiphol.

We don't have any choice now, after Brexit.

SeanT said:

MTimT said:

JonathanD said:

"The bosses of several of America’s biggest banks and corporations have warned Theresa May they will pre-emptively shift operations into Europe unless she can provide early clarity on the future shape of EU-UK relations.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/24/brexit-warning-us-bank-bosses-from-goldman-sachs-morgan-stanley/

Seems to me from this that the banks really, really don't want to set up European offices and are begging May to tell them they don't need to.

Of course May cannot tell them at this point whether they'll have to. Even is she was prepared to bend over backwards to protect passporting, it is not within her power to guarantee it. If I were on the executive team of one of those banks, I wouldn't be waiting for May to tell me what the negotiating position would be. I'd just open an office in the EU, but hold off on incurring larger costs of a move of certain operations until the situation clarified. Not sure what the problem is with that.

Unless getting information was never the banks' real reason for the meeting, but rather they were there to lobby May to guarantee passporting.

Walking back from Kew Gardens to Kew Station, this sweet early autumn evening, past the multimillion quid houses of the bankers (and lawyers and art dealers and software moguls and lucky inheritors) who live in lovely Kew, with its organic butchers and chattering wine bars and dinky little bookshops and beautiful Georgian houses, it struck me just how intensely desirable London is, IF YOU ARE RICH

No European city comes close. Frankfurt is a laughable comparison, Berlin is eerily provincial, Amsterdam is tiny, even Paris seems a bit stiff and dull and annoying. And French speaking. And which self respecting trillionaire would happily move to... Dublin?

Those London bankers REALLY don't want to move. They have glorious lifestyles in London. Of course they WILL move in the end, if needs be, and the money demands. But the UK govt has inertia on its side. An intriguing battle.

SeanT said:

surbiton said:

SeanT said:

IanB2 said:

AndyJS said:

IanB2 said:

AndyJS said:

williamglenn said:

SeanT said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

lol. it.

Expand City airport. Demolish Canary Wharf - we won't need it after the financial industry decamps to the Eurozone.

Have you been to Canary Wharf recently? It's difficult to move due to the high volumes of people working there.

If they were working, they would all be closeted away at their desks tapping at their keyboards. The crowds are people shopping, not working!

It was the lunch hour IIRC.

Never. There's a whole shopping centre under the main towers, lots of restaurants, cinema at west India quay. I know plenty of people who regularly go there for leisure (reduced a bit when Westfield opened, to be fair) who don't work anywhere near Canary Wharf.

Docklands is now a triumph of urbanism. Not flawless, and certainly not the finished article, but just incredible when you remember (as I can) when it was total wasteland. I lived in Wapping in a "hard-to-let" flat (ex-council, £1 a month, literally) when I was a student here in 1981. It was like one enormous bombsite, with the odd standing slum.

The 2 bed hovel near Garnet Street where I lived for one quid a month would now cost around £1 million. The cobbles in the road are the same.

I had a girlfriend who lived there. The Prospect of Whitby was nearby.

It's an astonishing transformation.

I can remember waking up in my horrible flat and literally walking through swirls of Dickensian river-mist, in total silence, through the deserted wharves, past the empty slums, to Wapping Station, which was a dim blue glow in the fog.

The only sound was my own footsteps, echoing in the wintry dullness. Not another soul.

I realise now it was one last glimpse of dying postwar London, the emptying city. The population began to grow again, under Thatcher in about 1985. And has never looked back.

AndyJS said:

SeanT said:

MTimT said:

JonathanD said:

"The bosses of several of America’s biggest banks and corporations have warned Theresa May they will pre-emptively shift operations into Europe unless she can provide early clarity on the future shape of EU-UK relations.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/24/brexit-warning-us-bank-bosses-from-goldman-sachs-morgan-stanley/

Seems to me from this that the banks really, really don't want to set up European offices and are begging May to tell them they don't need to.

Of course May cannot tell them at this point whether they'll have to. Even is she was prepared to bend over backwards to protect passporting, it is not within her power to guarantee it. If I were on the executive team of one of those banks, I wouldn't be waiting for May to tell me what the negotiating position would be. I'd just open an office in the EU, but hold off on incurring larger costs of a move of certain operations until the situation clarified. Not sure what the problem is with that.

Unless getting information was never the banks' real reason for the meeting, but rather they were there to lobby May to guarantee passporting.

Walking back from Kew Gardens to Kew Station, this sweet early autumn evening, past the multimillion quid houses of the bankers (and lawyers and art dealers and software moguls and lucky inheritors) who live in lovely Kew, with its organic butchers and chattering wine bars and dinky little bookshops and beautiful Georgian houses, it struck me just how intensely desirable London is, IF YOU ARE RICH

No European city comes close. Frankfurt is a laughable comparison, Berlin is eerily provincial, Amsterdam is tiny, even Paris seems a bit stiff and dull and annoying. And French speaking. And which self respecting trillionaire would happily move to... Dublin?

Those London bankers REALLY don't want to move. They have glorious lifestyles in London. Of course they WILL move in the end, if needs be, and the money demands. But the UK govt has inertia on its side. An intriguing battle.

I love this Telegraph article by David Thomas. He mentions how his father bought a detached house just outside Kew Gardens in 1964 for £8,000. That would be about £150,000 in today's money.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/10377807/Well-never-have-it-so-good-again.html

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/education/Pages/resources/inflationtools/calculator/flash/default.aspx

Sunil_Prasannan said:

MarqueeMark said:

surbiton said:

SeanT said:

Omnium said:

SeanT said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.

Boris island (or something similar) is the right long-term choice. Evacuated underground train lines are the right choice in the long term too. (And possibly if really good make the former redundant). Kent needs a boost, the area near Heathrow could be gentrified, and HS2's budget could be used for proper trains.

It we're going totally blue sky, then Luton is the right choice. By the M25, and M1. 15 minutes from St Pancras and the Eurostar (with a high speed train). Best side of London for 90% of the UK. Surrounded by poor people who want the jobs and won't complain

But to scale up Luton you have to level a couple of hills apparently. So it won't be Luton. It will be LHR if Theresa has any cullions.

Admittedly, whose idea it was 70 years ago, it was barmy. To build your major airport west of the most populous city where the prevailing winds are from the west was a mad decision.

Gatwick, Luton, Stansted in that sense are better locations.

Gatwick and Stansted are sadly in the wrong place. Luton could do it but a place that would be ideal would be somewhere between the M4 and M40, east of Oxford.

RAF Benson it is then.....

Not London Oxford Airport?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_Airport

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Barnesian said:

surbiton said:

SeanT said:

IanB2 said:

AndyJS said:

IanB2 said:

AndyJS said:

williamglenn said:

SeanT said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.

Expand City airport. Demolish Canary Wharf - we won't need it after the financial industry decamps to the Eurozone.

Have you been to Canary Wharf recently? It's difficult to move due to the high volumes of people working there.

If they were working, they would all be closeted away at their desks tapping at their keyboards. The crowds are people shopping, not working!

It was the lunch hour IIRC.

.

Docklands is now a triumph of urbanism. Not flawless, and certainly not the finished article, but just incredible when you remember (as I can) when it was total wasteland. I lived in Wapping in a "hard-to-let" flat (ex-council, £1 a month, literally) when I was a student here in 1981. It was like one enormous bombsite, with the odd standing slum.

The 2 bed hovel near Garnet Street where I lived for one quid a month would now cost around £1 million. The cobbles in the road are the same.

I had a girlfriend who lived there. The Prospect of Whitby was nearby.

When I last went to the Prospect of Whitby, I went in a 1947 Ford Pop and had to pay a couple of urchins six-pence to guard my car.

We had our works christmas lunch in there last year.

IanB2 said:

Omnium said:

SeanT said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.

Boris island (or something similar) is the right long-term choice. Evacuated underground train lines are the right choice in the long term too. (And possibly if really good make the former redundant). Kent needs a boost, the area near Heathrow could be gentrified, and HS2's budget could be used for proper trains.

Boris island is idiotic. Its only purpose was to give Boris something to argue for that didn't impact on west London. There is nothing there except birds. Birds and planes don't mix, at all. There is no workforce, and no housing for the huge workforce a new airport would need. And not too many passengers coming from south east of London. All the supporting industry and infrastructure (catering, engineering, postage, shipping, car hire, hotels, you name it) is in west London. And it would cost a fortune. As well as put half of west Londoners out of a job.

Barnesian said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Barnesian said:

surbiton said:

SeanT said:

IanB2 said:

AndyJS said:

IanB2 said:

AndyJS said:

williamglenn said:

SeanT said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.

Expand City airport. Demolish Canary Wharf - we won't need it after the financial industry decamps to the Eurozone.

Have you been to Canary Wharf recently? It's difficult to move due to the high volumes of people working there.

If they were working, they would all be closeted away at their desks tapping at their keyboards. The crowds are people shopping, not working!

It was the lunch hour IIRC.

.

Docklands is now a triumph of urbanism. Not flawless, and certainly not the finished article, but just incredible when you remember (as I can) when it was total wasteland. I lived in Wapping in a "hard-to-let" flat (ex-council, £1 a month, literally) when I was a student here in 1981. It was like one enormous bombsite, with the odd standing slum.

The 2 bed hovel near Garnet Street where I lived for one quid a month would now cost around £1 million. The cobbles in the road are the same.

I had a girlfriend who lived there. The Prospect of Whitby was nearby.

When I last went to the Prospect of Whitby, I went in a 1947 Ford Pop and had to pay a couple of urchins six-pence to guard my car.

We had our works christmas lunch in there last year.

My last visit was over fifty years ago. I got involved in a fight. I was a bit younger then.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

SeanT said:

IanB2 said:

AndyJS said:

SeanT said:

MTimT said:

JonathanD said:

"The bosses of several of America’s biggest banks and corporations have warned Theresa May they will pre-emptively shift operations into Europe unless she can provide early clarity on the future shape of EU-UK relations.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/24/brexit-warning-us-bank-bosses-from-goldman-sachs-morgan-stanley/

Seems to me from this that the banks really, really don't want to set up European offices and are begging May to tell them they don't need to.


Unless getting information was never the banks' real reason for the meeting, but rather they were there to lobby May to guarantee passporting.

Walking back from Kew Gardens to Kew Station, this sweet early autumn evening, past the multimilliriguing battle.

I love this Telegraph article by David Thomas. He mentions how his father bought a detached house just outside Kew

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/10377807/Well-never-have-it-so-good-again.html

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/education/Pages/resources/inflationtools/calculator/flash/default.aspx

hange; as well as its creaking infrastructure I guess terrorism might be one thing that puts people off, if it continues.

London most definitely does NOT have "creaking infrastructure". It positively GLEAMS. London probably has the best public transport system in the western hemisphere, perhaps the world, when you take into account its size and importance (i.e. small Dutch cities like Amsterdam might edge London, but you can't really compare).

The mayor of Toronto recently came to London

"“I wept a bit when I saw this,” he said, sharing a map of London’s underground network. The mayor was also pleased with the financial district’s futuristic efficiency, with DLR trains departing from Canary Wharf’s platform every minute. What an age to be alive!"

http://www.cityam.com/227255/toronto-mayor-john-tory-falls-in-love-with-londons-docklands-on-visit

[swaggering] Man, I've visited every single station marked on the London Oystercard network map:

http://content.tfl.gov.uk/london-rail-and-tube-services-map.pdf

SeanT said:

London most definitely does NOT have "creaking infrastructure". It positively GLEAMS.

TheScreamingEagles said:

ttps://twitter.com/suttonnick/status/779779700151517184

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/suttonnick/status/779779700151517184

Sandpit said:

Mr Eagles, as you're around, one from earlier today:
https://twitter.com/matthewlumby/status/779709544192704512

TheScreamingEagles said:

YellowSubmarine said:

An ultimatum from some bankers. ( Well at least a negotiating stance ) How is the ' Taking Back control ' going. http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-3803870/Stock-market-boss-warns-Brexit-cause-financial-bloodbath-London-100-000-City-jobs-risk.html

Who needs the employment and tax revenues of the banking and financial services when we've got sovereignty back?

I mean sovereignty will put money in people's pockets.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

YellowSubmarine said:

An ultimatum from some bankers. ( Well at least a negotiating stance ) How is the ' Taking Back control ' going. http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-3803870/Stock-market-boss-warns-Brexit-cause-financial-bloodbath-London-100-000-City-jobs-risk.html

Who needs the employment and tax revenues of the banking and financial services when we've got sovereignty back?

I mean sovereignty will put money in people's pockets.

LEAVE 52%
REMAIN 48%

foxinsoxuk said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

YellowSubmarine said:

An ultimatum from some bankers. ( Well at least a negotiating stance ) How is the ' Taking Back control ' going. http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-3803870/Stock-market-boss-warns-Brexit-cause-financial-bloodbath-London-100-000-City-jobs-risk.html

Who needs the employment and tax revenues of the banking and financial services when we've got sovereignty back?

I mean sovereignty will put money in people's pockets.

We will need that new runway to help al these bankers fly out.

Chris said:

SeanT said:

London most definitely does NOT have "creaking infrastructure". It positively GLEAMS.

Ah - so that's why so many rail services are suspended at weekends! To give them more time to polish the infrastructure ...

perdix said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sandpit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

ttps://twitter.com/suttonnick/status/779779700151517184

Craig Oliver's written a book. That sounds like it might be worth buying!

It is, and it's Sir Craig Oliver.

Craig Oliver was a trusted lieutenant of Cameron. In the Coalition even the LibDems thought he was flaky. He's now trying to earn a buck by betraying his former boss. He should go back to la-la land.

MTimT said:

Chris said:

SeanT said:

London most definitely does NOT have "creaking infrastructure". It positively GLEAMS.

Ah - so that's why so many rail services are suspended at weekends! To give them more time to polish the infrastructure ...

Come and try Washington DC's Metro.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/fta-safety-blitz-uncovers-more-problems-with-metro-safety/2016/04/18/a2ad239e-05a6-11e6-a12f-ea5aed7958dc_story.html

Lots of cancelled service as they try to play catch up with essential maintenance.

Sandpit said:

MTimT said:

Chris said:

SeanT said:

London most definitely does NOT have "creaking infrastructure". It positively GLEAMS.

Ah - so that's why so many rail services are suspended at weekends! To give them more time to polish the infrastructure ...

Come and try Washington DC's Metro.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/fta-safety-blitz-uncovers-more-problems-with-metro-safety/2016/04/18/a2ad239e-05a6-11e6-a12f-ea5aed7958dc_story.html

Lots of cancelled service as they try to play catch up with essential maintenance.

That doesn't sound good. What happened, did they have problems with maintenance for years, or think that trains and tracks would last forever so not bother with looking after them?

MTimT said:

Come and try Washington DC's Metro.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/fta-safety-blitz-uncovers-more-problems-with-metro-safety/2016/04/18/a2ad239e-05a6-11e6-a12f-ea5aed7958dc_story.html

Lots of cancelled service as they try to play catch up with essential maintenance.

tlg86 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

tlg86 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

YellowSubmarine said:

An ultimatum from some bankers. ( Well at least a negotiating stance ) How is the ' Taking Back control ' going. http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-3803870/Stock-market-boss-warns-Brexit-cause-financial-bloodbath-London-100-000-City-jobs-risk.html

Who needs the employment and tax revenues of the banking and financial services when we've got sovereignty back?

I mean sovereignty will put money in people's pockets.

Yeah, 'cos they're the only ones paying tax. How's RBS getting on, are they going to leave?

I'm more concerned about the foreign owned ones, the ones that do contribute a lot to the Exchequer.

I'm sure we'll survive, I'm sure they'll enjoy Paris or whether it is they're going to foxtrot oscar to.

TheScreamingEagles said:

tlg86 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

tlg86 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

YellowSubmarine said:

An ultimatum from some bankers. ( Well at least a negotiating stance ) How is the ' Taking Back control ' going. http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-3803870/Stock-market-boss-warns-Brexit-cause-financial-bloodbath-London-100-000-City-jobs-risk.html

Who needs the employment and tax revenues of the banking and financial services when we've got sovereignty back?

I mean sovereignty will put money in people's pockets.

Yeah, 'cos they're the only ones paying tax. How's RBS getting on, are they going to leave?

I'm more concerned about the foreign owned ones, the ones that do contribute a lot to the Exchequer.

I'm sure we'll survive, I'm sure they'll enjoy Paris or whether it is they're going to foxtrot oscar to.

Well it's only £15 to 60 billion pounds worth of taxes directly.

MP_SE said:

Trump on top form. Flowers was one of Bill's many mistresses.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/779729180334387200

tlg86 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

tlg86 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

*Checks PB Fantasy Football League table*

Oh my

Liverpool for the title? Is 11/2 value?

Not with our defence, we're very reminiscent of Keegan's Newcastle (1995/96 version)

They still should have won the title, though. I'm not brave enough, but I think City are a lay at 4/6.

Jonathan said:

London was gleaming this weekend, but no-one would say that its infrastructure gleams if they had been near a Southern train. They creak both literally and figuratively.

YellowSubmarine said:

HYUFD said:

YellowSubmarine said:

Today's dead tree Mail more or less sums up British politics. Flickers of modernity stands. A charming retired Gay couple have won it's ' Garden of the Year ' competition. The associated Blue Plaque featured in the otherwise conservative photos of the couple's Italian themed garden. All else from cover to cover is the Soft/Hard Brexit civil war. No other political topic matters and it's happening as an entirely intra Conservative fight. There is no greater hegemony than for a party to be able to *safely* function as opposition and government at the same time. And so conservativism triumphs. Assimilate in the end counter culture like gays who can't be stopped. Shape ruthlessly and utterly all else.

The last time we were in anything like this situation was when 2002-03 when New Labour was dominant and the Tories were led by IDS and the only topic of political conversation was the Iraq War when Blair faced more opposition from his own benches and the likes of Claire Short and Robin Cook than the official opposition

Yes. It's the TV/GBies all over again. And despite the utter dysfunction they won three elections.

stodge said:

YellowSubmarine said:

Today's dead tree Mail more or less sums up British politics. Flickers of modernity stands. A charming retired Gay couple have won it's ' Garden of the Year ' competition. The associated Blue Plaque featured in the otherwise conservative photos of the couple's Italian themed garden. All else from cover to cover is the Soft/Hard Brexit civil war. No other political topic matters and it's happening as an entirely intra Conservative fight. There is no greater hegemony than for a party to be able to *safely* function as opposition and government at the same time. And so conservativism triumphs. Assimilate in the end counter culture like gays who can't be stopped. Shape ruthlessly and utterly all else.

If you're going to get all your political analysis and comment from the Mail, it's no surprise. It's a Conservative newspaper for Conservative-inclined voters and in Theresa May it has its own demographic leading the country. The editorial rips into George Osborne but the refrain that a Conservative Government has to govern in a Conservative (i.e: like Margaret Thatcher) way has been a constant refrain of the rag since the 1990s.

It will turn even on May if she isn't suitably Conservative for them.

The Brexit process is vital but to call it an entirely Government issue is misleading. It affects the entire body politic and as we've seen tonight, well beyond.

The irony of huge City job losses decimating the Conservative heartland under a Conservative Government - as is often said here, you'd have to have a heart of stone...

MyBurningEars said:

HYUFD said:

MyBurningEars said:

surbiton said:

MarqueeMark said:

Their own rulebook, maybe. But they seem utterly clueless about the rules the voters will follow....

I really don't think even they believe they could win in 2020. d.

As David Herdson keeps pointing out - it is a battle over the structures and the succession, for now.

Think of Corbyn as the John the Baptist figure for them. He has preached in the wilderness and ultimately prepared the ground. Then it is a matter of holding on to it long enough for the Messiah to come...

FWIW if there is one - some left-wing version of Tony Blair, a British and more socialist-leaning version of Trudeau Jr or one of the Kennedies - then it'd probably be next but one. Imagine whoever is anointed next, say Lisa Nandy, seems more likely in the gameplan to be a "steadying the ship" candidate until The One comes along.

The 'One' seems to be Clive Lewis, Lisa Nandy of course backed Owen Smith and so is really a Tory! A more likely 'steadying the ship' candidate is John McDonnell. However Trudeau Jr and the Kennedies, Obama and Blair were all reasonably centrist, not full on socialist like Corbyn and his acolytes. For Corbynism to win we would need something like the 25% unemployment rate Greece had when Syriza won in January 2015 rather than the 5% unemployment rate we have now

Not sure if Clive Lewis is The One, or even whether The One is in parliament yet.

And yes, I meant someone with persona and popularity like a leftier Blair or Trudeau or Kennedy - but not with the same politics. Against a split Tory party and with an inspirational and credible leader, I don't think it would take 20% unemployment and an economic collapse for someone with the politics of Foot or Benn or Corbyn to be competitive in a GE. It's the "only need to be lucky once" strategy, you have to give the stars a chance to align first. That's why control of structures and succession matter.

Not sure I'd write Nandy off - she's not a Corbynite but whoever follows Corbyn won't be be a mere continuation. She's of the Left, to the extent that without Corbyn and to some extent Ed M nailing down the coffin of New Labour, she wouldn't be seen as a viable future leader. She isn't a Corbyn fan, but she likes winning and likes competence which may be handy traits in a leader. Only if the Lab selectorate forgive her for her resignation though... Lewis might be more likely. McDonnell might be getting on a bit to be the replacement, but in terms of steady hands and political skills I imagine that some on Labour's parliamentary Left wish that Buggin's Turn to be "no-hope token left-wing candidate" in the 2015 contest had fallen the other way.

MyBurningEars said:

HYUFD said:

MyBurningEars said:

surbiton said:

MarqueeMark said:

Their own rulebook, maybe. But they seem utterly clueless about the rules the voters will follow....

I really don't think even they believe they could win blockquote>

As David Herdson keeps pointing out - it is a battle over the structures and the succession, for now.

.

The 'One' seems to be Clive Lewis, Lisa Nandy of course backed Owen Smith and so is really a Tory! A

Not sure if Clive Lewis is The One, or even whether The One is in parliament yet.

And yes, I meant someone wi.

Not sure I'd write Nandy off - she's not a Corbynite but whoever follows Corbyn won't be be a mere continuation. She's of the Left, to the extent that without Corbyn and to some extent Ed M nailing down the coffin of New Labour, she wouldn't be seen as a viable future leader. She isn't a Corbyn fan, but she likes winning and likes competence which may be handy traits in a leader. Only if the Lab selectorate forgive her for her resignation though... Lewis might be more likely. McDonnell might be getting on a bit to be the replacement, but in terms of steady hands and political skills I imagine that some on Labour's parliamentary Left wish that Buggin's Turn to be "no-hope token left-wing candidate" in the 2015 contest had fallen the other way.

The 'One' if Labour ever come to their senses is probably Chuka Umunna but he will not even be considered until after a general election defeat and maybe not even then if the left maintain their stranglehold. If they do then 'The One' most probably would be Lewis but even with a split Tory Party it almost certainly would take an economic collapse or massive unemployment for a Labour Party under his leadership to be competitive, the UK just does not do socialism, apart from once in 1945 and even then that took a world war, the aftermath of the depression and the relatively mild and moderate Clement Attlee to bring about.

Nandy can now be written off, no Corbynista worth their salt will consider someone who resigned from the shadow cabinet and backed Owen Smith as she did. She is of the centre left of the party but that is not left enough for the hard left who now have the party in their grip. If there is a replacement before 2020 it will almost certainly be McDonnell

IanB2 said:

MyBurningEars said:

HYUFD said:

MyBurningEars said:

surbiton said:

MarqueeMark said:

Their own rulebook, maybe. But they seem utterly clueless about the rules the voters will follow....

I really don't think even they believe they could win in 2020. d.

As David

FWIW if there is one - some left-wing version of Tony Blair, a British and more socialist-leaning version of Trudeau Jr or one of the Kennedies - then it'd probably be next but one. Imagine whoever is anointed next, say Lisa Nandy, seems more likely in the gameplan to be a "steadying the ship" candidate until The One comes along.

The 'One' seems to be Clive Lewis, Lisa Nandy of course backed Owen Smith and so is really a Tory! A more likely 'steadying the ship' candidate is John McDonnell. However Trudeau Jr and the Kennedies, Obama and Blair were all reasonably centrist, not full on socialist like Corbyn and his acolytes. For Corbynism to win we would need something like the 25% unemployment rate Greece had when Syriza won in January 2015 rather than the 5% unemployment rate we have now

Not sure if Clive Lewis is The One, or even whether The One is in parliament yet.

And yes, I meant someone with persona and popularity like a leftier Blair or Trudeau or Kennedy - but not with the same politics. Against a split Tory party and with an inspirational and credible leader, I don't think it would take 20% unemployment and an economic collapse for someone with the politics of Foot or Benn or Corbyn to be competitive in a GE. It's the "only need to be lucky once" strategy, you have to give the stars a chance to align first. That's why control of structures and succession matter.

Not sure I'd write Nandy off - she's not a Corbynite but whoever follows Corbyn won't be be a mere continuation. She's of the Left, to the extent that without Corbyn and to some extent Ed M nailing down the coffin of New Labour, she wouldn't be seen as a viable future leader. She isn't a Corbyn fan, but she likes winning and likes competence which may be handy traits in a leader. Only if the Lab selectorate forgive her for her resignation though... Lewis might be more likely. McDonnell might be getting on a bit to be the replacement, but in terms of steady hands and political skills I imagine that some on Labour's parliamentary Left wish that Buggin's Turn to be "no-hope token left-wing candidate" in the 2015 contest had fallen the other way.

Stella.

HYUFD said:

IanB2 said:

MyBurningEars said:

HYUFD said:

MyBurningEars said:

surbiton said:

MarqueeMark said:

Their own rulebook, maybe. But they seem utterly clueless about the rules the voters will follow....

I really don't think even they believe they could win in 2020. d.

As David

FWIW if there is one - some left-wing version of Tony Blair, a British and more socialist-leaning version of Trudeau Jr or one of the Kennedies - then it'd probably be next but one. Imagine whoever is anointed next, say Lisa Nandy, seems more likely in the gameplan to be a "steadying the ship" candidate until The One comes along.

The 'One' seems to be Clive Lewis, Lisa Nandy of course backed Owen Smith and so is really a Tory! A more likely 'steadying the ship' candidate is John McDonnell. However Trudeau Jr and the Kennedies, Obama and Blair were all reasonably centrist, not full on socialist like Corbyn and his acolytes. For Corbynism to win we would need something like the 25% unemployment rate Greece had when Syriza won in January 2015 rather than the 5% unemployment rate we have now

Not sure if Clive Lewis is The One, or even whether The One is in parliament yet.

And yes, I meant someone with persona and popularity like a leftier Blair or Trudeau or Kennedy - but not with the same politics. Against a split Tory party and with an inspirational and credible leader, I don't think it would take 20% unemployment and an economic collapse for someone with the politics of Foot or Benn or Corbyn to be competitive in a GE. It's the "only need to be lucky once" strategy, you have to give the stars a chance to align first. That's why control of structures and succession matter.

Not sure I'd write Nandy off - she's not a Corbynite but whoever follows Corbyn won't be be a mere continuation. She's of the Left, to the extent that without Corbyn and to some extent Ed M nailing down the coffin of New Labour, she wouldn't be seen as a viable future leader. She isn't a Corbyn fan, but she likes winning and likes competence which may be handy traits in a leader. Only if the Lab selectorate forgive her for her resignation though... Lewis might be more likely. McDonnell might be getting on a bit to be the replacement, but in terms of steady hands and political skills I imagine that some on Labour's parliamentary Left wish that Buggin's Turn to be "no-hope token left-wing candidate" in the 2015 contest had fallen the other way.

Stella.

Stella Creasy? Owen Smith backing Tory