politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Mrs May must be hoping that the Tories do better in Thursday’s

Richard_Tyndall said:

JohnO said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sam Coates of The Times has done a story which he has tweeted the précis for those with out paywall access

Here are his tweets

Some tweets about the chances of a 2017 or 2018 election, based on conversations over last fortnight and this piece

From thinking a pre 2020 election was off the cards before we headed to Birmingham for Tory conference, now I think it can't be discounted.

TM may not want to call one from a position of strength. But I report here why she may end up having to from a position of weakness. Why...

This week just gone showed that the Commons has the potential to cause more trouble than expected.

And the Great Repeal Bill - the European Communities Bill (ECB) as known - could be a vehicle for rebellion

One Cabinet minister is reportedly saying that Theresa May is likely to lose the ECB in Commons or Lords & when this happens TM calls elec

Early numbers look ominious. Even with the DUP, the government's working majority is 34, meaning only 17 need to switch sides in a vote.

One informal view: around 5 Tory MPs publicly critical & up to 20 privately signalling they r prepared to vote against gvt for a soft Brexit

"It looks like we've swapped 20 hard Eurosceptics for a 20 strong group of Europhiles", said one member of the government.

A further 30 remain-supporters may cause trouble in future & there are even one or two Brexiteers unhappy with making migration the priority

Tory MPs may be brought into line with threats and turning key votes into confidence votes but Parliamentary defeats on Brexit very damaging

... And that's before the traditional right, who want Theresa May to contemplate WTO rules, find something to rebel on. Which they will.

Another group of Brexiteers say UK-EU deal bound to largely fail and cause significant pain. So have a "clean" break" to WTO then election

3rd suggestion is Theresa holds a quickie snap election straight after triggering Article 50, while Europe working on A50 response/elections

Meanwhile George Osborne is meeting groups of Tory MPs for drinks...

Please may that election be held in May along with those for the County Councils. Just sayin' like....

Surely Coates is missing the fact that the Great Repeal Bill cannot happen until after we have left the EU. I seriously doubt May is considering breaching the UK treaty obligations whilst we are still negotiating our exit. Which means the earliest it can come to a vote is summer 2019.

Can it not be passed but with a date for its implementation to be decided by Govt later? Much legislation is held back awaiting final publication.

nunu said:

Trump: I'm a vicitm.

Right.....

Well, Garrison Keillor feels for him...
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-donald-trump-losing-garrison-keillor-20160831-story.html

another_richard said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

From what I've heard, I wouldn't be surprised at a Lib Dem gain. Sir Patrick McLoughlin isn't impressing as Party Chairman.
Dave has been forced to do some more campaigning in the seat, he's really popular in the seat.
And the less said about the Lib Dem Edward MacMillan-Scott the better.

Yes Mcloughlin is a dud. Is 58 and looks 15 year older.
Noticeable that CCHQ have sent no emails to this member asking for help. Have any PB Conservative members been asked by CCHQ?

Has McLoughlin been impressive at any government job he's had ?

I may be being cynical but I rather suspect his backstory has been rather more useful in getting him positions than his abilities.

As transport secretary, he paused the MML and TPE electrification schemes when the cost of the Great Western electrificaton scheme went haywire and the timescales slipped. He asked Network Rail for revised plans and estimates given their experiences on the GW, and eventually accepted the new plans. The pause was the right thing to do, and he did not lose his cool despite a rather hysterical furore from the opposition.

This contrasts with Labour's West Coast upgrade scheme, which came in 8-10 times over budget, many years late, and did not deliver anything near what was promised. That too should have been paused once the problems became clear. But that would have been bad PR for the then government.

He was also chief whip for a couple of years, and chief opposition whip up to 2010. It's hard to think he would have remained in that position for so long if he did not have some qualities.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Lib Dems were to do well in Witney, but nor will I be convinced until they actually do it. The party is not what it once was, I think that the potential bleed of voters to it from both Con and Lab will be finite, and think it quite possible that Labour will hold on to second place.

On a broadly related topic, was thinking about the whole Marmitegate silliness and the more serious concerns about food price inflation. Is there anything at all, as soon as the country is out of the customs union, to stop the Government from declaring unilateral free trade in food with the whole world (except of course the EU, which would be subjected to tariffs equal to those they're probably preparing to slap on us?) Should cause food prices to come back down significantly, generate a lot of good will in Can, Aus, NZ, US and many emerging countries. The low proportion of the UK workforce employed in agriculture should mean that the Government can afford to keep the less competitive producers in this country on life support using environmental subsidies, which is already effectively priced into the state budget as CAP payments have (I believe) been guaranteed until 2020.

Cheaper food could be worth more to lower income earners than whatever tax cuts or credits that the Government might be able to afford, and at little or no additional cost to the Exchequer.

Black_Rook said:

I wouldn't be surprised if the Lib Dems were to do well in Witney, but nor will I be convinced until they actually do it. The party is not what it once was, I think that the potential bleed of voters to it from both Con and Lab will be finite, and think it quite possible that Labour will hold on to second place.

On a broadly related topic, was thinking about the whole Marmitegate silliness and the more serious concerns about food price inflation. Is there anything at all, as soon as the country is out of the customs union, to stop the Government from declaring unilateral free trade in food with the whole world (except of course the EU, which would be subjected to tariffs equal to those they're probably preparing to slap on us?) Should cause food prices to come back down significantly, generate a lot of good will in Can, Aus, NZ, US and many emerging countries. The low proportion of the UK workforce employed in agriculture should mean that the Government can afford to keep the less competitive producers in this country on life support using environmental subsidies, which is already effectively priced into the state budget as CAP payments have (I believe) been guaranteed until 2020.

Cheaper food could be worth more to lower income earners than whatever tax cuts or credits that the Government might be able to afford, and at little or no additional cost to the Exchequer.

Free trade takes two.

Nigelb said:

nunu said:

Trump: I'm a vicitm.

Right.....

Well, Garrison Keillor feels for him...
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-donald-trump-losing-garrison-keillor-20160831-story.html

Excellent.
I imagine (and hope) Keillor's pity will be like gall to Trump.

Mr. Eagles, that behaviour seems rather cold, even vindictive.

Black_Rook said:

.. snip ..

Is there anything at all, as soon as the country is out of the customs union, to stop the Government from declaring unilateral free trade in food with the whole world (except of course the EU, which would be subjected to tariffs equal to those they're probably preparing to slap on us?)

No. Indeed that has been Patrick Minford's proposal all along, and for everything, not just food. Unilateral free trade maximises welfare for consumers (i.e. everybody).

Nevada: Clinton +2

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, that behaviour seems rather cold, even vindictive.

The Lib Dem SPADs who were forced out in May 2015 said David Cameron and his government treated them with a lot more dignity, respect, and downright kindness when they had to go.

Mrs May's behaviour is the sort of thing that comes back and haunt you later on in life.

Can anyone closer than me to Witney (not difficult!) confirm how this letter is being distributed?

Surely if it's printed, rather than just a social media thing to keep the LD activists happy, then it has to have a footer saying who it is from - usually the name and address of the agent for the candidate? This rule being in place to control misleading leaflets such as the one in the header.

JonathanD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

JonathanD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

From what I've heard, I wouldn't be surprised at a Lib Dem gain. Sir Patrick McLoughlin isn't impressing as Party Chairman.
Dave has been forced to do some more campaigning in the seat, he's really popular in the seat.
And the less said about the Lib Dem Edward MacMillan-Scott the better.

Yes Mcloughlin is a dud. Is 58 and looks 15 year older.
Noticeable that CCHQ have sent no emails to this member asking for help. Have any PB Conservative members been asked by CCHQ?

The amusing thing is the Witney Tories have a very strong infrastructure, based on when Shaun Woodward defected, and they worked hard to make sure there were no surprises in 2001, and since 2005 their local MP ensured membership was high and events were always well attended.

Now CCHQ appears not be deploying those resources.

Did May not sack alot of CCHQ staff when she took over? Certainly CCHQ seem alot less active than they have in the past.

She did, and quite a lot of number 10 staff too, I posted about it here at the time.

She's quite the callous person, she took away their heart passes, without giving them the opportunity to collect their personal belongings that night.

Some were sacked without getting the opportunity to collect their mobiles, wallets, etc, which made getting back home that evening quite the challenge.

These were people who had served the Tory party long before David Cameron became leader.

As somebody put it to me at conference, Mrs May and her entourage seem to think the Tories won in 2015 in spite of David Cameron, not because of him.

Cheers, a good atmosphere to hold a by-election in then...

My wife has gone from being a fan of Mays when she first took over to worrying that she is too cold and hard. She despairs of Corbyn however which is about all that May has going for her.

Unless May goes early she should not count on being up against Jezza come the general election.

Black_Rook said:

I wouldn't be surprised if the Lib Dems were to do well in Witney, but nor will I be convinced until they actually do it. The party is not what it once was, I think that the potential bleed of voters to it from both Con and Lab will be finite, and think it quite possible that Labour will hold on to second place.

On a broadly related topic, was thinking about the whole Marmitegate silliness and the more serious concerns about food price inflation. Is there anything at all, as soon as the country is out of the customs union, to stop the Government from declaring unilateral free trade in food with the whole world (except of course the EU, which would be subjected to tariffs equal to those they're probably preparing to slap on us?) Should cause food prices to come back down significantly, generate a lot of good will in Can, Aus, NZ, US and many emerging countries. The low proportion of the UK workforce employed in agriculture should mean that the Government can afford to keep the less competitive producers in this country on life support using environmental subsidies, which is already effectively priced into the state budget as CAP payments have (I believe) been guaranteed until 2020.

Cheaper food could be worth more to lower income earners than whatever tax cuts or credits that the Government might be able to afford, and at little or no additional cost to the Exchequer.

Broadly speaking, yes. African farmers will be over the moon with Brexit, and food prices should fall substantially in the medium term. British farmers were also in favour of quitting the EU, as the CAP hasnt been fit for purpose for decades.

SouthamObserver said:

JonathanD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

JonathanD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

From what I've heard, I wouldn't be surprised at a Lib Dem gain. Sir Patrick McLoughlin isn't impressing as Party Chairman.
Dave has been forced to do some more campaigning in the seat, he's really popular in the seat.
And the less said about the Lib Dem Edward MacMillan-Scott the better.

Yes Mcloughlin is a dud. Is 58 and looks 15 year older.
Noticeable that CCHQ have sent no emails to this member asking for help. Have any PB Conservative members been asked by CCHQ?

The amusing thing is the Witney Tories have a very strong infrastructure, based on when Shaun Woodward defected, and they worked hard to make sure there were no surprises in 2001, and since 2005 their local MP ensured membership was high and events were always well attended.

Now CCHQ appears not be deploying those resources.

Did May not sack alot of CCHQ staff when she took over? Certainly CCHQ seem alot less active than they have in the past.

She did, and quite a lot of number 10 staff too, I posted about it here at the time.

She's quite the callous person, she took away their heart passes, without giving them the opportunity to collect their personal belongings that night.

Some were sacked without getting the opportunity to collect their mobiles, wallets, etc, which made getting back home that evening quite the challenge.

These were people who had served the Tory party long before David Cameron became leader.

As somebody put it to me at conference, Mrs May and her entourage seem to think the Tories won in 2015 in spite of David Cameron, not because of him.

Cheers, a good atmosphere to hold a by-election in then...

My wife has gone from being a fan of Mays when she first took over to worrying that she is too cold and hard. She despairs of Corbyn however which is about all that May has going for her.

Unless May goes early she should not count on being up against Jezza come the general election.

Who is going to replace him and how?

Philip_Thompson said:

Black_Rook said:

I wouldn't be surprised if the Lib Dems were to do well in Witney, but nor will I be convinced until they actually do it. The party is not what it once was, I think that the potential bleed of voters to it from both Con and Lab will be finite, and think it quite possible that Labour will hold on to second place.

On a broadly related topic, was thinking about the whole Marmitegate silliness and the more serious concerns about food price inflation. Is there anything at all, as soon as the country is out of the customs union, to stop the Government from declaring unilateral free trade in food with the whole world (except of course the EU, which would be subjected to tariffs equal to those they're probably preparing to slap on us?) Should cause food prices to come back down significantly, generate a lot of good will in Can, Aus, NZ, US and many emerging countries. The low proportion of the UK workforce employed in agriculture should mean that the Government can afford to keep the less competitive producers in this country on life support using environmental subsidies, which is already effectively priced into the state budget as CAP payments have (I believe) been guaranteed until 2020.

Cheaper food could be worth more to lower income earners than whatever tax cuts or credits that the Government might be able to afford, and at little or no additional cost to the Exchequer.

Yes.

WTO MFN rules mean that selectively targeting a nation (or group) like that is illegal. We could unilaterally abolish all food tariffs (and I agree we should) but we would have to abolish tariffs for the EU too.

We don't have to join the WTO...

https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/787330626722619393

Philip_Thompson said:

Black_Rook said:

I wouldn't be surprised if the Lib Dems were to do well in Witney, but nor will I be convinced until they actually do it. The party is not what it once was, I think that the potential bleed of voters to it from both Con and Lab will be finite, and think it quite possible that Labour will hold on to second place.

On a broadly related topic, was thinking about the whole Marmitegate silliness and the more serious concerns about food price inflation. Is there anything at all, as soon as the country is out of the customs union, to stop the Government from declaring unilateral free trade in food with the whole world (except of course the EU, which would be subjected to tariffs equal to those they're probably preparing to slap on us?) Should cause food prices to come back down significantly, generate a lot of good will in Can, Aus, NZ, US and many emerging countries. The low proportion of the UK workforce employed in agriculture should mean that the Government can afford to keep the less competitive producers in this country on life support using environmental subsidies, which is already effectively priced into the state budget as CAP payments have (I believe) been guaranteed until 2020.

Cheaper food could be worth more to lower income earners than whatever tax cuts or credits that the Government might be able to afford, and at little or no additional cost to the Exchequer.

Yes.

WTO MFN rules mean that selectively targeting a nation (or group) like that is illegal. We could unilaterally abolish all food tariffs (and I agree we should) but we would have to abolish tariffs for the EU too.

But what's not to like about that? We'd be unambiguously better off. The only sound argument for tariffs is protection of domestic infant industry producers (i.e. those with declining long-run costs).

geoffw said:

Black_Rook said:

.. snip ..

Is there anything at all, as soon as the country is out of the customs union, to stop the Government from declaring unilateral free trade in food with the whole world (except of course the EU, which would be subjected to tariffs equal to those they're probably preparing to slap on us?)

No. Indeed that has been Patrick Minford's proposal all along, and for everything, not just food. Unilateral free trade maximises welfare for consumers (i.e. everybody).

I always thought that the main objection to complete unilateral free trade was that it would threaten to substantially destroy much of what is left of the industrial base (which, contrary to much received wisdom, is still significant) before there was a chance to take advantage of the benefits of lower import costs to build new industries to replace it. Hence the fact that this kind of policy has been used effectively in the city states of Singapore and Hong Kong, but not elsewhere.

I thought it might be wiser to initially restrict the concept to food imports, given that this would cause limited and manageable damage to domestic producers whilst benefitting all consumers substantially. Moreover, given that lower income families spend a much higher proportion of their incomes on food, the policy would disproportionately benefit the economically struggling - which would be a significant, clearly demonstrable benefit delivered in line with Theresa May's stated aims.

HurstLlama said:

SouthamObserver said:

JonathanD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

JonathanD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

From what I've heard, I wouldn't be surprised at a Lib Dem gain. Sir Patrick McLoughlin isn't impressing as Party Chairman.
Dave has been forced to do some more campaigning in the seat, he's really popular in the seat.
And the less said about the Lib Dem Edward MacMillan-Scott the better.

Yes Mcloughlin is a dud. Is 58 and looks 15 year older.
Noticeable that CCHQ have sent no emails to this member asking for help. Have any PB Conservative members been asked by CCHQ?

The amusing thing is the Witney Tories have a very strong infrastructure, based on when Shaun Woodward defected, and they worked hard to make sure there were no surprises in 2001, and since 2005 their local MP ensured membership was high and events were always well attended.

Now CCHQ appears not be deploying those resources.

Did May not sack alot of CCHQ staff when she took over? Certainly CCHQ seem alot less active than they have in the past.

She did, and quite a lot of number 10 staff too, I posted about it here at the time.

She's quite the callous person, she took away their heart passes, without giving them the opportunity to collect their personal belongings that night.

Some were sacked without getting the opportunity to collect their mobiles, wallets, etc, which made getting back home that evening quite the challenge.

These were people who had served the Tory party long before David Cameron became leader.

As somebody put it to me at conference, Mrs May and her entourage seem to think the Tories won in 2015 in spite of David Cameron, not because of him.

Cheers, a good atmosphere to hold a by-election in then...

My wife has gone from being a fan of Mays when she first took over to worrying that she is too cold and hard. She despairs of Corbyn however which is about all that May has going for her.

Unless May goes early she should not count on being up against Jezza come the general election.

Who is going to replace him and how?

Someone worse, and by the medium of Unite.

HurstLlama said:

SouthamObserver said:

JonathanD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

JonathanD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

From what I've heard, I wouldn't be surprised at a Lib Dem gain. Sir Patrick McLoughlin isn't impressing as Party Chairman.
Dave has been forced to do some more campaigning in the seat, he's really popular in the seat.
And the less said about the Lib Dem Edward MacMillan-Scott the better.

Yes Mcloughlin is a dud. Is 58 and looks 15 year older.
Noticeable that CCHQ have sent no emails to this member asking for help. Have any PB Conservative members been asked by CCHQ?

The amusing thing is the Witney Tories have a very strong infrastructure, based on when Shaun Woodward defected, and they worked hard to make sure there were no surprises in 2001, and since 2005 their local MP ensured membership was high and events were always well attended.

Now CCHQ appears not be deploying those resources.

Did May not sack alot of CCHQ staff when she took over? Certainly CCHQ seem alot less active than they have in the past.

She did, and quite a lot of number 10 staff too, I posted about it here at the time.

She's quite the callous person, she took away their heart passes, without giving them the opportunity to collect their personal belongings that night.

Some were sacked without getting the opportunity to collect their mobiles, wallets, etc, which made getting back home that evening quite the challenge.

These were people who had served the Tory party long before David Cameron became leader.

As somebody put it to me at conference, Mrs May and her entourage seem to think the Tories won in 2015 in spite of David Cameron, not because of him.

Cheers, a good atmosphere to hold a by-election in then...

My wife has gone from being a fan of Mays when she first took over to worrying that she is too cold and hard. She despairs of Corbyn however which is about all that May has going for her.

Unless May goes early she should not count on being up against Jezza come the general election.

Who is going to replace him and how?

Unless he starts delivering better electoral results he'll be engineered out in 2018. Given just how poor this government is all but the most die-hard Corbynistas will be sick of him by then. Owen Jones is an excellent weather vane and he is beginning to turn:
https://twitter.com/spajw/status/787203200575307776

geoffw said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Black_Rook said:

I wouldn't be surprised if the Lib Dems were to do well in Witney, but nor will I be convinced until they actually do it. The party is not what it once was, I think that the potential bleed of voters to it from both Con and Lab will be finite, and think it quite possible that Labour will hold on to second place.

On a broadly related topic, was thinking about the whole Marmitegate silliness and the more serious concerns about food price inflation. Is there anything at all, as soon as the country is out of the customs union, to stop the Government from declaring unilateral free trade in food with the whole world (except of course the EU, which would be subjected to tariffs equal to those they're probably preparing to slap on us?) Should cause food prices to come back down significantly, generate a lot of good will in Can, Aus, NZ, US and many emerging countries. The low proportion of the UK workforce employed in agriculture should mean that the Government can afford to keep the less competitive producers in this country on life support using environmental subsidies, which is already effectively priced into the state budget as CAP payments have (I believe) been guaranteed until 2020.

Cheaper food could be worth more to lower income earners than whatever tax cuts or credits that the Government might be able to afford, and at little or no additional cost to the Exchequer.

Yes.

WTO MFN rules mean that selectively targeting a nation (or group) like that is illegal. We could unilaterally abolish all food tariffs (and I agree we should) but we would have to abolish tariffs for the EU too.

But what's not to like about that? We'd be unambiguously better off. The only sound argument for tariffs is protection of domestic infant industry producers (i.e. those with declining long-run costs).

I'm not saying anything is not to like about that, I'd quite appreciate that. The question was if there was anything to stop us abolishing them except for the EU to which the answer is yes though, the WTO would stop that.

The only problem with unilaterally abolishing tariffs is that we lose a bargaining chip to get other nations to agree free trade deals with us as they'll be able to "have their cake and eat it" by exporting tariff-free to us while putting tariffs on our exports.

Philip_Thompson said:

williamglenn said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Black_Rook said:

I wouldn't be surprised if the Lib Dems were to do well in Witney, but nor will I be convinced until they actually do it. The party is not what it once was, I think that the potential bleed of voters to it from both Con and Lab will be finite, and think it quite possible that Labour will hold on to second place.

On a broadly related topic, was thinking about the whole Marmitegate silliness and the more serious concerns about food price inflation. Is there anything at all, as soon as the country is out of the customs union, to stop the Government from declaring unilateral free trade in food with the whole world (except of course the EU, which would be subjected to tariffs equal to those they're probably preparing to slap on us?) Should cause food prices to come back down significantly, generate a lot of good will in Can, Aus, NZ, US and many emerging countries. The low proportion of the UK workforce employed in agriculture should mean that the Government can afford to keep the less competitive producers in this country on life support using environmental subsidies, which is already effectively priced into the state budget as CAP payments have (I believe) been guaranteed until 2020.

Cheaper food could be worth more to lower income earners than whatever tax cuts or credits that the Government might be able to afford, and at little or no additional cost to the Exchequer.

Yes.

WTO MFN rules mean that selectively targeting a nation (or group) like that is illegal. We could unilaterally abolish all food tariffs (and I agree we should) but we would have to abolish tariffs for the EU too.

We don't have to join the WTO...

If we aren't in the WTO then the entire world can put punitive tariffs against us worse than their regular WTO MFN tariffs.

I've seen people say we should exit to WTO, I've not seen anyone seriously propose that we don't even join the WTO, that would be crazy ...

People are universally assuming that joining the WTO will be straightforward. That might not be a safe assumption.

HurstLlama said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Black_Rook said:

I wouldn't be surprised if the Lib Dems were to do well in Witney, but nor will I be convinced until they actually do it. The party is not what it once was, I think that the potential bleed of voters to it from both Con and Lab will be finite, and think it quite possible that Labour will hold on to second place.

On a broadly related topic, was thinking about the whole Marmitegate silliness and the more serious concerns about food price inflation. Is there anything at all, as soon as the country is out of the customs union, to stop the Government from declaring unilateral free trade in food with the whole world (except of course the EU, which would be subjected to tariffs equal to those they're probably preparing to slap on us?) Should cause food prices to come back down significantly, generate a lot of good will in Can, Aus, NZ, US and many emerging countries. The low proportion of the UK workforce employed in agriculture should mean that the Government can afford to keep the less competitive producers in this country on life support using environmental subsidies, which is already effectively priced into the state budget as CAP payments have (I believe) been guaranteed until 2020.

Cheaper food could be worth more to lower income earners than whatever tax cuts or credits that the Government might be able to afford, and at little or no additional cost to the Exchequer.

Yes.

WTO MFN rules mean that selectively targeting a nation (or group) like that is illegal. We could unilaterally abolish all food tariffs (and I agree we should) but we would have to abolish tariffs for the EU too.

So we are told on here. However, I struggle to square that with, for example, the USA smacking huge tariffs on Chinese steel.

If you're the USA, you can do as you please.

firstlight40 said:

Indeed, it is however quite a threat because Germany cannot under any circumstances afford DB to fail - it would be the end of the EU. 'you take us down, we take everything down'. So Germany will have to bail it out.

The real problem to the idea that May can threaten Germany is that DB will need to be bailed out anyway.

rcs1000 said:

firstlight40 said:

Depends on how she does in the EU

"Hello Chancellor, that's a nice looking €60Tn derivatives in Deutsche Bank, although the share price is looking a bit rocky - would be a shame for the euro if something happened to the bank and it had to be bailed out or resolved, good job we've got well controlled financial traders in the UK perhaps you'd like to talk soft-brexit now"

JohnO said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

JohnO said:

Not for the first time the King of the North and the Sage of the South are in full accord.

(Now about Mrs May.....)

Hah, I did a Populus poll at lunchtime, one of the questions was I was satisfied or dissatisfied with the way the unelected PM Mrs May was doing her job,.

This was my response.

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/787311343250571264

We are not amused. My office. Tomorrow. 8.00am. Interview. No coffee.

Ummm, giving our banks (especially Barclays) are probably among the largest counterparties to Deutsche Bank, I'm not sure that's going to be a terribly effective tactic.

Speeding up the process could make Merkel more impotent than she is in the Grand Coalition. Any further drop in the polls and the current two party grand coalition will no longer be viable - that would be a pretty chaotic end to 2017. I don't think she's declared that she will run again yet, this could guarantee she doesn't.

HurstLlama said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Black_Rook said:

I wouldn't be surprised if the Lib Dems were to do well in Witney, but nor will I be convinced until they actually do it. The party is not what it once was, I think that the potential bleed of voters to it from both Con and Lab will be finite, and think it quite possible that Labour will hold on to second place.

On a broadly related topic, was thinking about the whole Marmitegate silliness and the more serious concerns about food price inflation. Is there anything at all, as soon as the country is out of the customs union, to stop the Government from declaring unilateral free trade in food with the whole world (except of course the EU, which would be subjected to tariffs equal to those they're probably preparing to slap on us?) Should cause food prices to come back down significantly, generate a lot of good will in Can, Aus, NZ, US and many emerging countries. The low proportion of the UK workforce employed in agriculture should mean that the Government can afford to keep the less competitive producers in this country on life support using environmental subsidies, which is already effectively priced into the state budget as CAP payments have (I believe) been guaranteed until 2020.

Cheaper food could be worth more to lower income earners than whatever tax cuts or credits that the Government might be able to afford, and at little or no additional cost to the Exchequer.

Yes.

WTO MFN rules mean that selectively targeting a nation (or group) like that is illegal. We could unilaterally abolish all food tariffs (and I agree we should) but we would have to abolish tariffs for the EU too.

So we are told on here. However, I struggle to square that with, for example, the USA smacking huge tariffs on Chinese steel.

WTO rules have provisions against dumping of subsidised sub cost goods in other markets

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/anti-dumping-duty-to-protect-eu-businesses-against-cheap-imports

David A. Clarke, Jr. Verified account
‏@SheriffClarke

It's incredible that our institutions of gov, WH, Congress, DOJ, and big media are corrupt & all we do is bitch. Pitchforks and torches time

Sandpit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, that behaviour seems rather cold, even vindictive.

The Lib Dem SPADs who were forced out in May 2015 said David Cameron and his government treated them with a lot more dignity, respect, and downright kindness when they had to go.

Mrs May's behaviour is the sort of thing that comes back and haunt you later on in life.

Didn't they all have a couple of days' notice of the new PM taking office? If I was a political appointee of the old one I'd have been expecting the chop and planned accordingly, would have been a nice surprise to be invited to stay on. Slightly surprised that there didn't seem to be much protocol for the actual process though.

Initially the staff were expecting to be gone by mid September, as per the original timetable for the Tory leadership election, but on Monday 11th July when Andrea Leadsom pulled out, it was intimated to the staff staying that they'd be staying in some capacity as this wasn't a change of party, and their knowledge was needed in Brexit world, but that they'd be staying on until September at the very least.

Come Wednesday 13th of July,

6pm, Mrs May is in Downing Street,

6.30pm sack George Osborne

7.15pm sack all the staff.

Black_Rook said:

geoffw said:

Black_Rook said:

.. snip ..

Is there anything at all, as soon as the country is out of the customs union, to stop the Government from declaring unilateral free trade in food with the whole world (except of course the EU, which would be subjected to tariffs equal to those they're probably preparing to slap on us?)

No. Indeed that has been Patrick Minford's proposal all along, and for everything, not just food. Unilateral free trade maximises welfare for consumers (i.e. everybody).

I always thought that the main objection to complete unilateral free trade was that it would threaten to substantially destroy much of what is left of the industrial base (which, contrary to much received wisdom, is still significant) before there was a chance to take advantage of the benefits of lower import costs to build new industries to replace it. Hence the fact that this kind of policy has been used effectively in the city states of Singapore and Hong Kong, but not elsewhere.

I thought it might be wiser to initially restrict the concept to food imports, given that this would cause limited and manageable damage to domestic producers whilst benefitting all consumers substantially. Moreover, given that lower income families spend a much higher proportion of their incomes on food, the policy would disproportionately benefit the economically struggling - which would be a significant, clearly demonstrable benefit delivered in line with Theresa May's stated aims.

See my earlier post, 5:45pm passim. If there are lower cost producers elsewhere then we should leave it to them and switch resources to areas of our own comparative advantage, at least in the long term. There might be a social case for limited temporary protection of high cost domestic producers in the transition.

IanB2 said:

nielh said:

Sean_F said:

nielh said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Here are his tweets

Some tweets about the chances of a 2017 or 2018 election, based on conversations over last fortnight and this piece

From thinking a pre 2020 election was off the cards before we headed to Birmingham for Tory conference, now I think it can't be discounted.

TM may not want to call one from a position of strength. But I report here why she may end up having to from a position of weakness. Why......
Meanwhile George Osborne is meeting groups of Tory MPs for drinks...

Is any of this really suprising?
May is backing down all over the place. foreign workers. debating eu plans in parliament. Its a very weak government. The performance up till now 'brexit means brexit' etc was all a massive bluff. buying time. kicking cans down the road.

the biggest joke is the 'great repeal bill which has almost nothing to do with the main issues involved in Brexit which is our economic relationship with the EU post departure and immigration control. It is basically an administrative issue.

I had a look and there are no options to bet on the next general election date, I think Ladbrokes are on evens for the next general election before 2020. Meanwhile the odds that art 50 wont be triggered until after May 2017 are shortening to around 2/1

This government is in a massive crisis. In my view this is caused by the underlying fact that 52% is not the absolute definitive mandate for 'hard brexit' that May claims. the political gravity will move against the status quo as it always does, and will be exacerbated orimarily by the problems with inflation due to the low pound.

In some respects, they should have just triggered article 50 in late June and to hell with the pain because the longer time goes by, the more difficult it becomes.

You aren't in a crisis when you're 15% ahead of your main opponent.

The lack of an opposition exacerbates the crisis.
A lot can change, back in june/july lab were 1 point behind tories

Deep v wide, discuss.

Lest we forget, a Jeremy Corbyn led Labour party were ahead of the Tories in a few polls this years when the Tories were tearing themselves over the EU.

IanB2 said:

Sandpit said:

Can anyone closer than me to Witney (not difficult!) confirm how this letter is being distributed?

Surely if it's printed, rather than just a social media thing to keep the LD activists happy, then it has to have a footer saying who it is from - usually the name and address of the agent for the candidate? This rule being in place to control misleading leaflets such as the one in the header.

I expect the LibDems will use their 'Connect' online database (based on Obama's 'Van') to generate physical letters, aimed at a targeted audience (I don't know who that would be, but canvassed soft Tory voters would be logical), enveloped stuffed and hand delivered by volunteers and, yes, of course carrying the required imprint of the LibDem campaign.

Thanks for that!

Not sure how anyone can accurately call the Presidential race if this is what the voters think.

https://twitter.com/theJeremyVine/status/787337963231383552

Philip_Thompson said:

geoffw said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Black_Rook said:

I wouldn't be surprised if the Lib Dems were to do well in Witney, but nor will I be convinced until they actually do it. The party is not what it once was, I think that the potential bleed of voters to it from both Con and Lab will be finite, and think it quite possible that Labour will hold on to second place.

On a broadly related topic, was thinking about the whole Marmitegate silliness and the more serious concerns about food price inflation. Is there anything at all, as soon as the country is out of the customs union, to stop the Government from declaring unilateral free trade in food with the whole world (except of course the EU, which would be subjected to tariffs equal to those they're probably preparing to slap on us?) Should cause food prices to come back down significantly, generate a lot of good will in Can, Aus, NZ, US and many emerging countries. The low proportion of the UK workforce employed in agriculture should mean that the Government can afford to keep the less competitive producers in this country on life support using environmental subsidies, which is already effectively priced into the state budget as CAP payments have (I believe) been guaranteed until 2020.

Cheaper food could be worth more to lower income earners than whatever tax cuts or credits that the Government might be able to afford, and at little or no additional cost to the Exchequer.

Yes.

WTO MFN rules mean that selectively targeting a nation (or group) like that is illegal. We could unilaterally abolish all food tariffs (and I agree we should) but we would have to abolish tariffs for the EU too.

But what's not to like about that? We'd be unambiguously better off. The only sound argument for tariffs is protection of domestic infant industry producers (i.e. those with declining long-run costs).

I'm not saying anything is not to like about that, I'd quite appreciate that. The question was if there was anything to stop us abolishing them except for the EU to which the answer is yes though, the WTO would stop that.

The only problem with unilaterally abolishing tariffs is that we lose a bargaining chip to get other nations to agree free trade deals with us as they'll be able to "have their cake and eat it" by exporting tariff-free to us while putting tariffs on our exports.

I'm mainly agreeing with you, except that you miss the point that we are better off (in the long run of course) abolishing our tariffs whatever anyone else does.
If we want our consumers to pay for propping up our less efficient industries then, yes your argument about bargaining chips applies.

Ishmael_X said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sandpit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, that behaviour seems rather cold, even vindictive.

The Lib Dem SPADs who were forced out in May 2015 said David Cameron and his government treated them with a lot more dignity, respect, and downright kindness when they had to go.

Mrs May's behaviour is the sort of thing that comes back and haunt you later on in life.

Didn't they all have a couple of days' notice of the new PM taking office? If I was a political appointee of the old one I'd have been expecting the chop and planned accordingly, would have been a nice surprise to be invited to stay on. Slightly surprised that there didn't seem to be much protocol for the actual process though.

Initially the staff were expecting to be gone by mid September, as per the original timetable for the Tory leadership election, but on Monday 11th July when Andrea Leadsom pulled out, it was intimated to the staff staying that they'd be staying in some capacity as this wasn't a change of party, and their knowledge was needed in Brexit world, but that they'd be staying on until September at the very least.

Come Wednesday 13th of July,

6pm, Mrs May is in Downing Street,

6.30pm sack George Osborne

7.15pm sack all the staff.

One can both despise Osborne, and be appalled at May's treatment of him. That is how politics works in Liberia, not in civilised countries, and the fact that it was pretty much her first act speaks volumes about her. Probably same applies to the staff, but I don't know enough to comment.

These are people who have served several Tory leaders with distinction, to get rid of them en masse with out any class speaks volumes about Mrs May.

JonathanD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

From what I've heard, I wouldn't be surprised at a Lib Dem gain. Sir Patrick McLoughlin isn't impressing as Party Chairman.
Dave has been forced to do some more campaigning in the seat, he's really popular in the seat.

Noticeable that CCHQ have sent no emails to this member asking for help. Have any PB Conservative members been asked by CCHQ?

The amusing thing is the Witney Tories have a very strong infrastructure, based on when Shaun Woodward defected, and they worked hard to make sure there were no surprises in 2001, and since 2005 their local MP ensured membership was high and events were always well attended.
Now CCHQ appears not be deploying those resources.

Did May not sack alot of CCHQ staff when she took over? Certainly CCHQ seem alot less active than they have in the past.

Mrs May does a first class job of appointing total duffers to key positions. You must have noticed.

TheScreamingEagles said:

IanB2 said:

nielh said:

Sean_F said:

nielh said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Here are his tweets

Some tweets about the chances of a 2017 or 2018 election, based on conversations over last fortnight and this piece

From thinking a pre 2020 election was off the cards before we headed to Birmingham for Tory conference, now I think it can't be discounted.

TM may not want to call one from a position of strength. But I report here why she may end up having to from a position of weakness. Why......
Meanwhile George Osborne is meeting groups of Tory MPs for drinks...

Is any of this really suprising?
May is backing down all over the place. foreign workers. debating eu plans in parliament. Its a very weak government. The performance up till now 'brexit means brexit' etc was all a massive bluff. buying time. kicking cans down the road.

the biggest joke is the 'great repeal bill which has almost nothing to do with the main issues involved in Brexit which is our economic relationship with the EU post departure and immigration control. It is basically an administrative issue.

I had a look and there are no options to bet on the next general election date, I think Ladbrokes are on evens for the next general election before 2020. Meanwhile the odds that art 50 wont be triggered until after May 2017 are shortening to around 2/1

This government is in a massive crisis. In my view this is caused by the underlying fact that 52% is not the absolute definitive mandate for 'hard brexit' that May claims. the political gravity will move against the status quo as it always does, and will be exacerbated orimarily by the problems with inflation due to the low pound.

In some respects, they should have just triggered article 50 in late June and to hell with the pain because the longer time goes by, the more difficult it becomes.

You aren't in a crisis when you're 15% ahead of your main opponent.

The lack of an opposition exacerbates the crisis.
A lot can change, back in june/july lab were 1 point behind tories

Deep v wide, discuss.

Lest we forget, a Jeremy Corbyn led Labour party were ahead of the Tories in a few polls this years when the Tories were tearing themselves over the EU.

Exactly. May is in her honeymoon, and all of the opposition parties (outside Scotland) are beset with troubles, hence Conservative is the default answer, for many, when the pollsters come calling. But the jury is out as far as a Brexit is concerned, and if things start to turn sour, I am convinced that the Tory tide could recede just as quickly. What is less obvious is where the water would go.

Theuniondivvie said:

By his commendations shall ye know him.

"Iain Duncan Smith describes Donald Trump as 'a very decent man'"

http://tinyurl.com/jc3psyb

Having met Mr Smith I can vouch for the fact that he isn't particularly thoughtful, or particularly bright.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2016/10/15/donald-trump-warnings-conspiracy-rig-election-are-stoking-anger-among-his-followers/LcCY6e0QOcfH8VdeK9UdsM/story.html

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/787339573005258752

Don't Knows breaking for Jezza after seeing TMay's conference performance.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sandpit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, that behaviour seems rather cold, even vindictive.

The Lib Dem SPADs who were forced out in May 2015 said David Cameron and his government treated them with a lot more dignity, respect, and downright kindness when they had to go.

Mrs May's behaviour is the sort of thing that comes back and haunt you later on in life.

Didn't they all have a couple of days' notice of the new PM taking office? If I was a political appointee of the old one I'd have been expecting the chop and planned accordingly, would have been a nice surprise to be invited to stay on. Slightly surprised that there didn't seem to be much protocol for the actual process though.

Initially the staff were expecting to be gone by mid September, as per the original timetable for the Tory leadership election, but on Monday 11th July when Andrea Leadsom pulled out, it was intimated to the staff staying that they'd be staying in some capacity as this wasn't a change of party, and their knowledge was needed in Brexit world, but that they'd be staying on until September at the very least. Come Wednesday 13th of July, 6pm, Mrs May is in Downing Street, 6.30pm sack George Osborne 7.15pm sack all the staff.

Clearly judged the staff as appointed by chumocracy and not meritocracy. Of course unfair for all to be judged in that way and a bad way to take over. Only done in corporate life if existing people judged disloyal or incompetent/expensive or when the incoming team have their own chumocracy. Staff need to ask themselves why they individually were not trusted by the incoming team. Were they too partisan for D & G and not for the party?

Interesting WWII fact (no. 1): The German army employed more than 100 different types of truck, all made by different factories with different parts. The US Army has one standard army truck made by factories all across the States.

SandyRentool said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/787339573005258752

Don't Knows breaking for Jezza after seeing TMay's conference performance.

A 34% lead is still massive.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Ishmael_X said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sandpit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, that behaviour seems rather cold, even vindictive.

The Lib Dem SPADs who were forced out in May 2015 said David Cameron and his government treated them with a lot more dignity, respect, and downright kindness when they had to go.

Mrs May's behaviour is the sort of thing that comes back and haunt you later on in life.

Didn't they all have a couple of days' notice of the new PM taking office? If I was a political appointee of the old one I'd have been expecting the chop and planned accordingly, would have been a nice surprise to be invited to stay on. Slightly surprised that there didn't seem to be much protocol for the actual process though.

Initially the staff were expecting to be gone by mid September, as per the original timetable for the Tory leadership election, but on Monday 11th July when Andrea Leadsom pulled out, it was intimated to the staff staying that they'd be staying in some capacity as this wasn't a change of party, and their knowledge was needed in Brexit world, but that they'd be staying on until September at the very least.

Come Wednesday 13th of July,

6pm, Mrs May is in Downing Street,

6.30pm sack George Osborne

7.15pm sack all the staff.

One can both despise Osborne, and be appalled at May's treatment of him. That is how politics works in Liberia, not in civilised countries, and the fact that it was pretty much her first act speaks volumes about her. Probably same applies to the staff, but I don't know enough to comment.

These are people who have served several Tory leaders with distinction, to get rid of them en masse with out any class speaks volumes about Mrs May.

Or volumes about the people telling the tale?

How many of these people were Osborne's creatures?

You aren't in a crisis when you're 15% ahead of your main opponent.

The lack of an opposition exacerbates the crisis.
A lot can change, back in june/july lab were 1 point behind tories



Deep v wide, discuss.


Think about the position of business. There's going to be lots of money going around and certainly not in to the coffers of the hard brexit tory party.
Lab have got their act together over brexit.
The 'leave means leave' anguish may well reinvigorate UKIP.
There is no certainty to me that the conservative party can actually survive a decision that results in the break up of the UK and departure from the single market.
The 'progressive alliance' idea may have legs.

@SouthamObserver

"Unless he starts delivering better electoral results he'll [Corbyn] be engineered out in 2018..."

Full respect, Mr. Observer, but I think that post was written more in hope than expectation. He has already lost the PLP but been voted back in by a very solid majority of the membership. You have already told us, umpteen times, that the Corbynite wing of the Labour Party are not interested in winning parliamentary power.

How you get from where we are today to your new position of of Corbyn being "engineered out" in two years time is beyond me. Who is going to do the engineering and how and in favour of whom?

Come on, old chap, admit it: your original post in this little discussion was sparked by a moment's frustration and wishful thinking. Both perfectly understandable, given where we are, but a nonsense nonetheless.

SandyRentool said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/787339573005258752

Don't Knows breaking for Jezza after seeing TMay's conference performance.

TMay's lead collapses from +39 to +34.....

I've taken bets on both a GE next year, and in 2019. The latter you can get for 20/1 with Corals.

I can see arguments for both. But, it is too late for one this year, and there is no reason to hold one in 2018 in the middle of the negotiations.

SandyRentool said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/787339573005258752

Don't Knows breaking for Jezza after seeing TMay's conference performance.

The more voters see of Mrs May, the more they break for Jeremy Corbyn.

Alarming for Tories everywhere.

I might do the morning thread on this.

You cannot hide your leader during a general election campaign.

SandyRentool said:

IanB2 said:

Interesting WWII fact (no. 1): The German army employed more than 100 different types of truck, all made by different factories with different parts. The US Army has one standard army truck made by factories all across the States.

That’s the beauty of a command economy.

Oh, sorry, I thought it said Soviet army.

Excellent insight Mr R - for the Soviet army too, had just one type of truck.

Although - interesting fact (no 2) - 75% of all the equipment used by the Allies (including the USSR) during WWII was manufactured in the USA.

IanB2 said:

SandyRentool said:

IanB2 said:

Interesting WWII fact (no. 1): The German army employed more than 100 different types of truck, all made by different factories with different parts. The US Army has one standard army truck made by factories all across the States.

That’s the beauty of a command economy.

Oh, sorry, I thought it said Soviet army.

Excellent insight Mr R - for the Soviet army too, had just one type of truck.

Although - interesting fact (no 2) - 75% of all the equipment used by the Allies (including the USSR) during WWII was manufactured in the USA.

Source please, Mr. B2.

HurstLlama said:

IanB2 said:

SandyRentool said:

IanB2 said:

Interesting WWII fact (no. 1): The German army employed more than 100 different types of truck, all made by different factories with different parts. The US Army has one standard army truck made by factories all across the States.

That’s the beauty of a command economy.

Oh, sorry, I thought it said Soviet army.

Excellent insight Mr R - for the Soviet army too, had just one type of truck.

Although - interesting fact (no 2) - 75% of all the equipment used by the Allies (including the USSR) during WWII was manufactured in the USA.

Source please, Mr. B2.

The overy book i referenced this morning. "Why the Allies won". Highly recommended