politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Brexiteers, Juncker’s fifth columnists?
Comments
-
Ancient history isn't my strong point but did Dave build HR3 during the six years he was in No. 10?TheScreamingEagles said:I was right
The coalition worked better as a government than a small majority government.0 -
-
-
How crap do you have to be before Lucy Powell can legitimately mock you?
YOu also saying you prefer leadsom now?
That's a lot of wasted re-tweets, right there.0 -
Good ol General Wade finally sorted that....david_herdson said:
It has happened before (of a sort). TSE, being learned in classical stuff, might even have been thinking of it, though I suspect it's a little after his usual period:RoyalBlue said:TSE has well and truly lost his marbles. How many people in the Republic of Ireland wish to rejoin the UK, or Mongolia China?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groans_of_the_Britons0 -
The SNP support Heathrow and there is a large majority in the HOC for it. The problem for TM is that their are many conservative held London seats, her's included, that are vehemently against together with the London mayor and in these circumstances it is a difficult decision for her politically, the economic case is not the issueGardenwalker said:
Perhaps she is a Macavity coward.nunu said:
Oh for goodness sakes its never getting built is it. TMay is turning out to be a not very good PM.She dithers too much.Scott_P said:
Even though we all think Heathrow would pass with Labour's support, she's just not willing to risk a Commons defeat (yet).
On the face of it, this seems barking, and has wider implications at this particular febrile moment, than airport capacity alone.
Edit: perhaps she's waiting for post election when she has a proper majority.
God who knows. It's insane.0 -
Presumably Theresa May as MP for Maidstone has "significant constituency interest" in the Heathrow outcome and could derogate from publicly supporting her own policy on airport expansion. She has to apply for permission from the Prime Minister first however.0
-
Indeed. HUGE amount of silliness on here this afternoon...Richard_Nabavi said:So, Heathrow is NOT delayed. This is about as fast as it could be (which is very slow, admittedly).
0 -
No geriatric Lamborghinis...
@SkyNewsBreak: The Treasury has abandoned plans to allow millions of pensioners to cash in their annuities which had been due to come into force next year0 -
After two successive briefings over the past week that we were about to get a clear decision?
Who's doing their PR?
Is Seams Milne honeymooning?0 -
I blame TSE the TINOGIN1138 said:
Indeed. HUGE amount of silliness on here this afternoon...Richard_Nabavi said:So, Heathrow is NOT delayed. This is about as fast as it could be (which is very slow, admittedly).
0 -
Its like anything Osborne proposed is getting cancelled....Just sugar tax left.Scott_P said:No geriatric Lamborghinis...
@SkyNewsBreak: The Treasury has abandoned plans to allow millions of pensioners to cash in their annuities which had been due to come into force next year0 -
Which will make his triumphant return all the sweeter...FrancisUrquhart said:Its like anything Osborne proposed is getting cancelled....Just sugar tax left.
0 -
I'm increasingly of the view that the 1947 Town and Country Planning Act is the worst legacy of the Attlee government. We are still suffering the consequences today!0
-
Maidenhead NOT Maidstone!FF43 said:Presumably Theresa May as MP for Maidstone has "significant constituency interest" in the Heathrow outcome and could derogate from publicly supporting her own policy on airport expansion. She has to apply for permission from the Prime Minister first however.
0 -
I feel like the government is losing its ability to *do* anything. Small staters might like that of course.FrancisUrquhart said:
Its like anything Osborne proposed is getting cancelled....Just sugar tax left.Scott_P said:No geriatric Lamborghinis...
@SkyNewsBreak: The Treasury has abandoned plans to allow millions of pensioners to cash in their annuities which had been due to come into force next year0 -
Theresa Maybe could prove to be one of the worst PMs in the modern era.nunu said:
Oh for goodness sakes its never getting built is it. TMay is turning out to be a not very good PM.She dithers too much.Scott_P said:
The LHR3 wobble is utterly ridiculous, shambolic stuff.
And what's this garbage about UK visas? Where is she getting this guff from?0 -
She's facing the weakest Labour leader in generations, and has a majority government. No excuses.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The SNP support Heathrow and there is a large majority in the HOC for it. The problem for TM is that their are many conservative held London seats, her's included, that are vehemently against together with the London mayor and in these circumstances it is a difficult decision for her politically, the economic case is not the issueGardenwalker said:
Perhaps she is a Macavity coward.nunu said:
Oh for goodness sakes its never getting built is it. TMay is turning out to be a not very good PM.She dithers too much.Scott_P said:
Even though we all think Heathrow would pass with Labour's support, she's just not willing to risk a Commons defeat (yet).
On the face of it, this seems barking, and has wider implications at this particular febrile moment, than airport capacity alone.
Edit: perhaps she's waiting for post election when she has a proper majority.
God who knows. It's insane.0 -
Crap! Thanks for that.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Maidenhead NOT Maidstone!FF43 said:Presumably Theresa May as MP for Maidstone has "significant constituency interest" in the Heathrow outcome and could derogate from publicly supporting her own policy on airport expansion. She has to apply for permission from the Prime Minister first however.
0 -
May. Frit.Scott_P said:0 -
Theresa May is riding high in the polls.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The SNP support Heathrow and there is a large majority in the HOC for it. The problem for TM is that their are many conservative held London seats, her's included, that are vehemently against together with the London mayor and in these circumstances it is a difficult decision for her politically, the economic case is not the issueGardenwalker said:
Perhaps she is a Macavity coward.nunu said:
Oh for goodness sakes its never getting built is it. TMay is turning out to be a not very good PM.She dithers too much.Scott_P said:
Even though we all think Heathrow would pass with Labour's support, she's just not willing to risk a Commons defeat (yet).
On the face of it, this seems barking, and has wider implications at this particular febrile moment, than airport capacity alone.
Edit: perhaps she's waiting for post election when she has a proper majority.
God who knows. It's insane.
If she's not wiling to spend a little capital in the best interests of the country now, she never will be.
This Heathrow ago-go is the aviation equivalent of the election-that-never-was.0 -
I'm not sure the whole visa plan will actually go ahead.Jobabob said:
Theresa Maybe could prove to be one of the worst PMs in the modern era.nunu said:
Oh for goodness sakes its never getting built is it. TMay is turning out to be a not very good PM.She dithers too much.Scott_P said:
The LHR3 wobble is utterly ridiculous, shambolic stuff.
And what's this garbage about UK visas? Where is she getting this guff from?
U-turned, delayed, long grassed, "grammared" etc etc0 -
On the collective responsibility point, the PM is trying hard to limit the opposition from those ministers who are against R3, but I think she'll have great difficulty holding that line. I'm not sure it's realistic to say 'you can oppose the decision but not in the House, and you can't campaign against it, and you can't criticise the process'. I don't think that will work.
To be fair to Theresa May, I don't think this circle can be squared. The issue is completely toxic politically, and the government has a tiny majority. I do think, though, that she should have gone for it in the first couple of weeks of her premiership, and I said this at the time. She has let political capital drain away to no purpose, and wasted some of it on the grammar-school nonsense.0 -
I get the sensitivities around Heathrow, but in the meantime why the hell not give Gatwick it's second runway anyway? It doesn't need any public money and they're pretty much ready to go now. Total madness!0
-
Scott_P said:
Unfortunate photograph0 -
There would be just as much opposition in the Gatwick area, if not more.AllyPally_Rob said:I get the sensitivities around Heathrow, but in the meantime why the hell not give Gatwick it's second runway anyway? It doesn't need any public money and they're pretty much ready to go now. Total madness!
0 -
The governments decision is clearly (to build the runway) but of course the government has to have a "consultation" as people will be having their homes knocked down to make way for the runway.Gardenwalker said:After two successive briefings over the past week that we were about to get a clear decision?
Who's doing their PR?
Is Seams Milne honeymooning?
If they tried to do it without consulting first it would be subject to all sorts of legal challenge,0 -
So why didn't the REMAINERs' heart-throb Dave do anything about Heathrow? He was PM for SIX YEARS! Wasn't he? Wasn't he?
Theresa has been PM for only three months!0 -
The area around Gatwick is less densely built up.Richard_Nabavi said:
There would be just as much opposition in the Gatwick area, if not more.AllyPally_Rob said:I get the sensitivities around Heathrow, but in the meantime why the hell not give Gatwick it's second runway anyway? It doesn't need any public money and they're pretty much ready to go now. Total madness!
0 -
Why? She's clearly waving with a significant bend at the elbow.Jobabob said:0 -
Plaid Cymru, boss.SeanT said:Who the F do I vote for now?
Tories are silly Hard Brexiteers but soft on Heathrow
Labour: Corbyn
Lib Dems: lol
SNP: lol
UKIP: lol
What a mess.
The Welsh government is skint as shit but with Plaid now in a coalition with Labour they've just decided to splurge a load of money on, erm, the Welsh language.
That worldwide language spoken only in rural Wales and Patagonia.
I'm Welsh. I love Wales. But why prioritise the Welsh language over cancer care?0 -
"the proposed new visa regime would force EU citizens to secure a skilled job in the U.K. before they were allowed in"
So are they allowed to attend the UK for interviews? Once they have got a job sorted they can stay forever right?0 -
We've had more bloody consultation than Sigmund Freud.GIN1138 said:
The governments decision is clearly (to build the runway) but of course the government has to have a "consultation" as people will be having their homes knocked down to make way for the runway.Gardenwalker said:After two successive briefings over the past week that we were about to get a clear decision?
Who's doing their PR?
Is Seams Milne honeymooning?
If they tried to do it without consulting first it would be subject to all sorts of legal challenge,
This is sloppy. The PR has been shambolic.
The City must be tearing it's hair out.
Ugh.0 -
For once, a neat analogy on PB!!Gardenwalker said:
Theresa May is riding high in the polls.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The SNP support Heathrow and there is a large majority in the HOC for it. The problem for TM is that their are many conservative held London seats, her's included, that are vehemently against together with the London mayor and in these circumstances it is a difficult decision for her politically, the economic case is not the issueGardenwalker said:
Perhaps she is a Macavity coward.nunu said:
Oh for goodness sakes its never getting built is it. TMay is turning out to be a not very good PM.She dithers too much.Scott_P said:
Even though we all think Heathrow would pass with Labour's support, she's just not willing to risk a Commons defeat (yet).
On the face of it, this seems barking, and has wider implications at this particular febrile moment, than airport capacity alone.
Edit: perhaps she's waiting for post election when she has a proper majority.
God who knows. It's insane.
If she's not wiling to spend a little capital in the best interests of the country now, she never will be.
This Heathrow ago-go is the aviation equivalent of the election-that-never-was.0 -
Philip_Thompson said:
Why? She's clearly waving with a significant bend at the elbow.Jobabob said:
Not waving but drowning?0 -
Anyone know what time the high court decision on a50 to be announced?0
-
Remember - everything that we impose on EU citizens will be reciprocated. I cannot see this happening. I wonder if the definition of immigrant might change.Jobabob said:"the proposed new visa regime would force EU citizens to secure a skilled job in the U.K. before they were allowed in"
So are they allowed to attend the UK for interviews? Once they have got a job sorted they can stay forever right?
0 -
Well of course we must think about the city but we must also consider the people that are going to be "moved" from their homes.Gardenwalker said:
We've had more bloody consultation that Sigmund Freud.GIN1138 said:
The governments decision is clearly (to build the runway) but of course the government has to have a "consultation" as people will be having their homes knocked down to make way for the runway.Gardenwalker said:After two successive briefings over the past week that we were about to get a clear decision?
Who's doing their PR?
Is Seams Milne honeymooning?
If they tried to do it without consulting first it would be subject to all sorts of legal challenge,
This is sloppy. The PR has been shambolic.
The City must be tearing it's hair out.
Ugh.
The third runway is coming but (as always) when it comes to "planning" things run slowly in this country.0 -
The Gatwick area is a lot more rural than the area around Heathrow. It'd be the equivalent to when Manchester got a 2nd runway in terms of disruption/protests i'd guess.Richard_Nabavi said:
There would be just as much opposition in the Gatwick area, if not more.AllyPally_Rob said:I get the sensitivities around Heathrow, but in the meantime why the hell not give Gatwick it's second runway anyway? It doesn't need any public money and they're pretty much ready to go now. Total madness!
0 -
Surely we're at the stage where the government accepts LH3 and rejects the other options? I.e. move forward with the LH3 option and disregard the others.
Or are we still going to be in this mess where we don't know which option they're moving forward with?0 -
So can we all just stop REMOANING in that case?SeanT said:And more
Richard Westcott @BBCwestcott 3m3 minutes ago
Heathrow tell me "absolutely the expected process" to have vote in a year0 -
Are you been deliberately wally today? Pretty much all countries allow you to attend an interview, the difference is normally if you can visit and openly put yourself about for work eg USA you can't, Canada as a UK cizen you can.Jobabob said:"the proposed new visa regime would force EU citizens to secure a skilled job in the U.K. before they were allowed in"
So are they allowed to attend the UK for interviews? Once they have got a job sorted they can stay forever right?
In this day and age it is mostly irrevelant as you can do both via the internet.
0 -
Just short of time – the second was the one I was driving at really. Thanks.FrancisUrquhart said:
Are you been deliberately wally today? Pretty much all countries allow you to attend an interview, the difference is normally if you can visit and openly pimut yourself about for work eg USA you can't, Canada as a UK cizen you can.Jobabob said:"the proposed new visa regime would force EU citizens to secure a skilled job in the U.K. before they were allowed in"
So are they allowed to attend the UK for interviews? Once they have got a job sorted they can stay forever right?0 -
Remember the Olympic booing? Osborne's a loser.Scott_P said:
Which will make his triumphant return all the sweeter...FrancisUrquhart said:Its like anything Osborne proposed is getting cancelled....Just sugar tax left.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-would-make-a-better-prime-minister-than-george-osborne-public-now-believe-a6984436.html
0 -
"Heathrow is a stupid place to build an additional runway. Its far too close to London, its got limited and highly congested transport links, it blights the lives of all the people around it. But there doesn't seem to be a viable proposal for a replacement hub airport never mind the cost of new transport links and people would need to be able to commute there. So with few options Heathrow is the only place to build an additional runway."
Its no wonder this country fails to compete with other countries. We're terrified of infrastructure projects. Never mind the benefits to the economy of the construction phase, never mind the long term economic growth, it might upset the NIMBYs. So lets pretend all investment = subsidy, brand it hard left economics and not bother. Aftwer all there's more money to be made now flogging everything off to johnny foreigner and who cares about the peons.
Frit.0 -
I'd be interested to know what others think of the annuity change too.
Not a pensions expert, but given QE, doesn't this mean pensioners will have to live on £5.50 and a packet of crisps until they pop their clogs? Annuities ain't what they were.
On the face of it, this feels like another May clanger.0 -
An interesting article from TSE, which has clearly prompted the debate he was hoping for!
I think however there is a small mistake at the end - AV, whilst probably helping LibDems to come through the middle in a handful of seats, would actually have also helped whichever of the two large parties is the most popular. Most experts suggest it would in most elections have increased the chance of majority government on a minority vote, rather than the reverse. Reform of the voting system needs to be some fair/proportional system, or not worth doing.0 -
There were several proposals here, so I'd be interested to know the details.FrancisUrquhart said:
Its like anything Osborne proposed is getting cancelled....Just sugar tax left.Scott_P said:No geriatric Lamborghinis...
@SkyNewsBreak: The Treasury has abandoned plans to allow millions of pensioners to cash in their annuities which had been due to come into force next year0 -
I got my job in Colorado back in 2011 via a phone interview in late 2010.FrancisUrquhart said:
Are you been deliberately wally today? Pretty much all countries allow you to attend an interview, the difference is normally if you can visit and openly put yourself about for work eg USA you can't, Canada as a UK cizen you can.Jobabob said:"the proposed new visa regime would force EU citizens to secure a skilled job in the U.K. before they were allowed in"
So are they allowed to attend the UK for interviews? Once they have got a job sorted they can stay forever right?
In this day and age it is mostly irrevelant as you can do both via the internet.0 -
It's hard to see into the minds of Eurocrats, but I doubt that a narrow remain vote would have emboldened them. At the very least they'd be aware that they had to deliver Cameron's reforms (not necessarily easy) otherwise there'd be another referendum as the terms would have changed.ThreeQuidder said:Gardenwalker said:
Nope.ThreeQuidder said:I don't see this makes any sense. Had we voted to Remain we would have ended up forced "to sign up to things like the Euro, The EU Army, and the Schengen agreement, possibly all of them" with the referendum result taken as democratic backing for the Project.
The referendum would have seen the backing of the "deal" negotiated by Cameron.
This idea that we were being ineluctably drawn into a nefarious pit of domination is nonsense.
We were fence-sitting. Uncomfortably. But we'd been doing it successfully for many many years.
Both of you, I think, are making the mistake of thinking I'm referring to how it would have been seen in Britain. I'm not, I'm referring to how it would have been seen in Brussels. Had we voted to Remain, any British resistance to further integration would have been met with "you have to, your people voted to stay in".JosiasJessop said:
No. The referendum was clear on remain's side: it was for Cameron's renegotiation, which included none of the above.ThreeQuidder said:I don't see this makes any sense. Had we voted to Remain we would have ended up forced "to sign up to things like the Euro, The EU Army, and the Schengen agreement, possibly all of them" with the referendum result taken as democratic backing for the Project.
There might have been gradual creep towards them over the years (and that was my biggest fear about remain), but there was no mandate from a remain win for them, especially with such a close vote as we got.
The problem we are faced with is that leave's meaning was unclear and inconsistent. As was pointed out at the time.0 -
I think that's what they call false consciousness.TheScreamingEagles said:I'm disappointed no one has discussed the AV/electoral reform angle in the thread header.
You people tell me you love AV threads.0 -
Other than the stupid media nanny state oldies will blow it all on sports cars stuff, I don't really remember any legitimate criticsm. Maybe there is some major downside? But this came from the lib dem expert in this field, Steve Webb.Gardenwalker said:I'd be interested to know what others think of the annuity change too.
Not a pensions expert, but given QE, doesn't this mean pensioners will have to live on £5.50 and a packet of crisps until they pop their clogs? Annuities ain't what they were.
On the face of it, this feels like another May clanger.0 -
Hopefully Jobabob should reocgnise the system being proposed as that in effect in the EU until 2002(ish)Sunil_Prasannan said:
I got my job in Colorado back in 2011 via a phone interview in late 2010.FrancisUrquhart said:
Are you been deliberately wally today? Pretty much all countries allow you to attend an interview, the difference is normally if you can visit and openly put yourself about for work eg USA you can't, Canada as a UK cizen you can.Jobabob said:"the proposed new visa regime would force EU citizens to secure a skilled job in the U.K. before they were allowed in"
So are they allowed to attend the UK for interviews? Once they have got a job sorted they can stay forever right?
In this day and age it is mostly irrevelant as you can do both via the internet.0 -
No, I think this refers to the proposal to allow existing annuities (i.e. ones already in payment) to be sold on a secondary market. It was a nice idea, but the industry wasn't terribly interested and it hasn't looked viable for some time. I'm not surprised it's collapsed.Gardenwalker said:I'd be interested to know what others think of the annuity change too.
Not a pensions expert, but given QE, doesn't this mean pensioners will have to live on £5.50 and a packet of crisps until they pop their clogs? Annuities ain't what they were.
On the face of it, this feels like another May clanger.0 -
As posted further down, we're a nation of NIMBY's because, since 1947, we've been stuck with the Town and Country Planning Act which means any major project (and even a lot of small scale local projects) have to jump through hoops to get anything done.RochdalePioneers said:"Heathrow is a stupid place to build an additional runway. Its far too close to London, its got limited and highly congested transport links, it blights the lives of all the people around it. But there doesn't seem to be a viable proposal for a replacement hub airport never mind the cost of new transport links and people would need to be able to commute there. So with few options Heathrow is the only place to build an additional runway."
Its no wonder this country fails to compete with other countries. We're terrified of infrastructure projects. Never mind the benefits to the economy of the construction phase, never mind the long term economic growth, it might upset the NIMBYs. So lets pretend all investment = subsidy, brand it hard left economics and not bother. Aftwer all there's more money to be made now flogging everything off to johnny foreigner and who cares about the peons.
Frit.
That said, if someone was planning to put a runway or a road or a railway line through your house I suppose you and your MP wouldn't be very happy...
0 -
In hindsight asking the market to focus both on more freedom as at the point in retirement *and* reform of the annuities market thereafter might have been a bridge too far.Richard_Nabavi said:
No, I think this refers to the proposal to allow existing annuities (i.e. ones already in payment) to be sold on a secondary market. It was a nice idea, but the industry wasn't terribly interested and it hasn't looked viable for some time. I'm not surprised it's collapsed.Gardenwalker said:I'd be interested to know what others think of the annuity change too.
Not a pensions expert, but given QE, doesn't this mean pensioners will have to live on £5.50 and a packet of crisps until they pop their clogs? Annuities ain't what they were.
On the face of it, this feels like another May clanger.0 -
2011 referendum:TheScreamingEagles said:I'm disappointed no one has discussed the AV/electoral reform angle in the thread header.
You people tell me you love AV threads.
NO to AV 68%
YES to AV 32%-1 -
GIN1138 said:
As posted further down, we're a nation of NIMBY's because, since 1947, we've been stuck with the Town and Country Planning Act which means any major project (and even a lot of small scale local projects) have to jump through hoops to get anything done.RochdalePioneers said:"Heathrow is a stupid place to build an additional runway. Its far too close to London, its got limited and highly congested transport links, it blights the lives of all the people around it. But there doesn't seem to be a viable proposal for a replacement hub airport never mind the cost of new transport links and people would need to be able to commute there. So with few options Heathrow is the only place to build an additional runway."
Its no wonder this country fails to compete with other countries. We're terrified of infrastructure projects. Never mind the benefits to the economy of the construction phase, never mind the long term economic growth, it might upset the NIMBYs. So lets pretend all investment = subsidy, brand it hard left economics and not bother. Aftwer all there's more money to be made now flogging everything off to johnny foreigner and who cares about the peons.
Frit.
That said, if someone was planning to put a runway or a road or a railway line through your house I suppose you and your MP wouldn't be very happy...
Mostly I think it's a compensation issue. If you paid a bonus to all those who lost their homes or were affected, it would go through much more easily.
0 -
There were a significant number of people advocating STV, or other form of PR, campaigning against AV in the AV referendum.IanB2 said:An interesting article from TSE, which has clearly prompted the debate he was hoping for!
I think however there is a small mistake at the end - AV, whilst probably helping LibDems to come through the middle in a handful of seats, would actually have also helped whichever of the two large parties is the most popular. Most experts suggest it would in most elections have increased the chance of majority government on a minority vote, rather than the reverse. Reform of the voting system needs to be some fair/proportional system, or not worth doing.0 -
It wasn't always like this, of course, as illustrated by the once dense network of canals, followed by the railways.RochdalePioneers said:We're terrified of infrastructure projects.
0 -
Truth is, you can't make an omelette without making eggs. The Eurostar line went through an ancient graveyard in Islington. Pretty horrible for the relatives.GIN1138 said:
As posted further down, we're a nation of NIMBY's because, since 1947, we've been stuck with the Town and Country Planning Act which means any major project (and even a lot of small scale local projects) have to jump through hoops to get anything done.RochdalePioneers said:"Heathrow is a stupid place to build an additional runway. Its far too close to London, its got limited and highly congested transport links, it blights the lives of all the people around it. But there doesn't seem to be a viable proposal for a replacement hub airport never mind the cost of new transport links and people would need to be able to commute there. So with few options Heathrow is the only place to build an additional runway."
Its no wonder this country fails to compete with other countries. We're terrified of infrastructure projects. Never mind the benefits to the economy of the construction phase, never mind the long term economic growth, it might upset the NIMBYs. So lets pretend all investment = subsidy, brand it hard left economics and not bother. Aftwer all there's more money to be made now flogging everything off to johnny foreigner and who cares about the peons.
Frit.
That said, if someone was planning to put a runway or a road or a railway line through your house I suppose you and your MP wouldn't be very happy...
Why don't we adopt the French policy, which AIUI is that the railway/airport etc goes ahead, but homeowners automatically receive twice the market value for their house in a CPO? Okay, so some people still wouldn't move were that the offer, but it sure as hell sugars the pill... (and I believe it is far cheaper than endless consultation).0 -
I would have voted for STV had it been an option. I stuck with FPTP by default.logical_song said:
There were a significant number of people advocating STV, or other form of PR, campaigning against AV in the AV referendum.IanB2 said:An interesting article from TSE, which has clearly prompted the debate he was hoping for!
I think however there is a small mistake at the end - AV, whilst probably helping LibDems to come through the middle in a handful of seats, would actually have also helped whichever of the two large parties is the most popular. Most experts suggest it would in most elections have increased the chance of majority government on a minority vote, rather than the reverse. Reform of the voting system needs to be some fair/proportional system, or not worth doing.0 -
Keeping up her fine record as Home Secretary.Scott_P said:0 -
I keep pointing out that Maine is voting on AV on November 8, but you insist on focusing on some other irrelevant trivia due to be decided on the same day. You talk a good game of AV threads...TheScreamingEagles said:I'm disappointed no one has discussed the AV/electoral reform angle in the thread header.
You people tell me you love AV threads.0 -
No, never, not in a million years, not even in your dreams.FF43 said:
If the EU collapses, which is more than a REMOTE possibility, the UK will be in a good position. It's already out and can set the agenda on a new European order. If, as is more likely, the EU carries on, the UK will be in a very frustrating position. There will - literally - be no alternative to the EU. The UK will variously aim to ignore the EU, resist it, work around it, undermine it and co-opt it. These tactics will cancel each other out. The UK will find it difficult to ally with third countries because their more important relationship is with the EU too. Their relationship with the UK will be through the prism of their primary relationship with the EU.Gardenwalker said:There is another thing.
If we successfully Brexit, the old conflation that Europe = EU is broken. Gradually, we move into a world of Europes plural, in which a people can democratically decide how tight they want to couple with the German monetary beast.
I am not one predicting Nexit or Italexit or Frexit. The EU will stagger on. But longer term - a generation perhaps - our example could see a real loosening around the edges and a final nail in the coffin of the 1950s era "ever closer union".
We do need statesmen of imagination though. Not sure we've got that.
The EU is our biggest trade partner. And, if you were able to trace the EU's debt through the intricate maze that is the world's financial system, you would for a lot of it finish up in London. If the EU collapses we too are looking at a disastrous scenario, from which a few miles of water and a misguided Brexit will do nothing to save us. So we all hope the EU thrives, ok?
0 -
The owner of our rented stable wants HS2 to plough through his grounds as he's not spent a penny on it and the CPO will be good for him.GIN1138 said:
As posted further down, we're a nation of NIMBY's because, since 1947, we've been stuck with the Town and Country Planning Act which means any major project (and even a lot of small scale local projects) have to jump through hoops to get anything done.RochdalePioneers said:"Heathrow is a stupid place to build an additional runway. Its far too close to London, its got limited and highly congested transport links, it blights the lives of all the people around it. But there doesn't seem to be a viable proposal for a replacement hub airport never mind the cost of new transport links and people would need to be able to commute there. So with few options Heathrow is the only place to build an additional runway."
Its no wonder this country fails to compete with other countries. We're terrified of infrastructure projects. Never mind the benefits to the economy of the construction phase, never mind the long term economic growth, it might upset the NIMBYs. So lets pretend all investment = subsidy, brand it hard left economics and not bother. Aftwer all there's more money to be made now flogging everything off to johnny foreigner and who cares about the peons.
Frit.
That said, if someone was planning to put a runway or a road or a railway line through your house I suppose you and your MP wouldn't be very happy...
The route however might be changed to go very near his second property into which he's invested heavily..0 -
Worth noting that this announcement deals with cashing in existing annuities, rather than the much larger Osborne pension freedom proposalGardenwalker said:I'd be interested to know what others think of the annuity change too.
Not a pensions expert, but given QE, doesn't this mean pensioners will have to live on £5.50 and a packet of crisps until they pop their clogs? Annuities ain't what they were.
On the face of it, this feels like another May clanger.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/pensions/11468752/New-pension-rules-to-let-retired-savers-cash-in-annuities.html0 -
I can't imagine offering anyone a job without meeting them face to face at least once. It's very hard on the telephone to strike up a proper rapport, even with videoconferencing. I'd worry that a visa system would discourage EU talent from coming here and applying for jobs.Sunil_Prasannan said:
I got my job in Colorado back in 2011 via a phone interview in late 2010.FrancisUrquhart said:
Are you been deliberately wally today? Pretty much all countries allow you to attend an interview, the difference is normally if you can visit and openly put yourself about for work eg USA you can't, Canada as a UK cizen you can.Jobabob said:"the proposed new visa regime would force EU citizens to secure a skilled job in the U.K. before they were allowed in"
So are they allowed to attend the UK for interviews? Once they have got a job sorted they can stay forever right?
In this day and age it is mostly irrevelant as you can do both via the internet.0 -
Bots for Trump
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-376844180 -
Argh, yet more delays for Heathrow?0
-
I wasn't an employer in those days so I don't – but I'm happy to take your word for it. I like the system as it is now but would extend FOM to some Commonwealth nations too. Aussie and New Zealanders are well-educated native English speakers yet we face admin hell trying to keep them after two years.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Hopefully Jobabob should reocgnise the system being proposed as that in effect in the EU until 2002(ish)Sunil_Prasannan said:
I got my job in Colorado back in 2011 via a phone interview in late 2010.FrancisUrquhart said:
Are you been deliberately wally today? Pretty much all countries allow you to attend an interview, the difference is normally if you can visit and openly put yourself about for work eg USA you can't, Canada as a UK cizen you can.Jobabob said:"the proposed new visa regime would force EU citizens to secure a skilled job in the U.K. before they were allowed in"
So are they allowed to attend the UK for interviews? Once they have got a job sorted they can stay forever right?
In this day and age it is mostly irrevelant as you can do both via the internet.0 -
Yeah but I've given you a thread on AV.RobD said:Argh, yet more delays for Heathrow?
0 -
Have we all seen that Paddy is paying out on Clinton win?0
-
Yes, no wonder our international peers laugh at us. Pathetic.RochdalePioneers said:"Heathrow is a stupid place to build an additional runway. Its far too close to London, its got limited and highly congested transport links, it blights the lives of all the people around it. But there doesn't seem to be a viable proposal for a replacement hub airport never mind the cost of new transport links and people would need to be able to commute there. So with few options Heathrow is the only place to build an additional runway."
Its no wonder this country fails to compete with other countries. We're terrified of infrastructure projects. Never mind the benefits to the economy of the construction phase, never mind the long term economic growth, it might upset the NIMBYs. So lets pretend all investment = subsidy, brand it hard left economics and not bother. Aftwer all there's more money to be made now flogging everything off to johnny foreigner and who cares about the peons.
Frit.0 -
Yep - but I wouldn't read too much into it, they may have to pay out on Trump too...rottenborough said:Have we all seen that Paddy is paying out on Clinton win?
0 -
How about non-EU talent?Jobabob said:
I can't imagine offering anyone a job without meeting them face to face at least once. It's very hard on the telephone to strike up a proper rapport, even with videoconferencing. I'd worry that a visa system would discourage EU talent from coming here and applying for jobs.Sunil_Prasannan said:
I got my job in Colorado back in 2011 via a phone interview in late 2010.FrancisUrquhart said:
Are you been deliberately wally today? Pretty much all countries allow you to attend an interview, the difference is normally if you can visit and openly put yourself about for work eg USA you can't, Canada as a UK cizen you can.Jobabob said:"the proposed new visa regime would force EU citizens to secure a skilled job in the U.K. before they were allowed in"
So are they allowed to attend the UK for interviews? Once they have got a job sorted they can stay forever right?
In this day and age it is mostly irrevelant as you can do both via the internet.
0 -
So when will Zac trigger his by-election?
Next week or after the vote in the Commons next year?0 -
It's a normal gimmick from them – have they ever got it wrong?Pulpstar said:
Yep - but I wouldn't read too much into it, they may have to pay out on Trump too...rottenborough said:Have we all seen that Paddy is paying out on Clinton win?
0 -
Talking of delays....
A proposed eight-team Twenty20 competition in English cricket may not start until 2020.0 -
They are already overly discouraged IMO!Sunil_Prasannan said:
How about non-EU talent?Jobabob said:
I can't imagine offering anyone a job without meeting them face to face at least once. It's very hard on the telephone to strike up a proper rapport, even with videoconferencing. I'd worry that a visa system would discourage EU talent from coming here and applying for jobs.Sunil_Prasannan said:
I got my job in Colorado back in 2011 via a phone interview in late 2010.FrancisUrquhart said:
Are you been deliberately wally today? Pretty much all countries allow you to attend an interview, the difference is normally if you can visit and openly put yourself about for work eg USA you can't, Canada as a UK cizen you can.Jobabob said:"the proposed new visa regime would force EU citizens to secure a skilled job in the U.K. before they were allowed in"
So are they allowed to attend the UK for interviews? Once they have got a job sorted they can stay forever right?
In this day and age it is mostly irrevelant as you can do both via the internet.0 -
There's an interesting (to me at least) story related to that at St Pancras. When the Midland built their line to the new St Pancras terminus, it passed through the graveyard of St Pancras Old church.Jobabob said:
Truth is, you can't make an omelette without making eggs. The Eurostar line went through an ancient graveyard in Islington. Pretty horrible for the relatives.GIN1138 said:
As posted further down, we're a nation of NIMBY's because, since 1947, we've been stuck with the Town and Country Planning Act which means any major project (and even a lot of small scale local projects) have to jump through hoops to get anything done.RochdalePioneers said:"Heathrow is a stupid place to build an additional runway. Its far too close to London, its got limited and highly congested transport links, it blights the lives of all the people around it. But there doesn't seem to be a viable proposal for a replacement hub airport never mind the cost of new transport links and people would need to be able to commute there. So with few options Heathrow is the only place to build an additional runway."
Its no wonder this country fails to compete with other countries. We're terrified of infrastructure projects. Never mind the benefits to the economy of the construction phase, never mind the long term economic growth, it might upset the NIMBYs. So lets pretend all investment = subsidy, brand it hard left economics and not bother. Aftwer all there's more money to be made now flogging everything off to johnny foreigner and who cares about the peons.
Frit.
That said, if someone was planning to put a runway or a road or a railway line through your house I suppose you and your MP wouldn't be very happy...
(Snip)
There was controversy over that, so a young architect was put in charge of the disinterment. His name? Thomas Hardy. Some claim that the sombre tone of his books and poems was in some way set by the experience.
St Pancras church itself, as SeanT reminds us occasionally, might be one of the oldest churches in the country. Though I still prefer the ancient timber church at Greensted and the Roman barn-church of St Peter-in-the-Wall in Essex.0 -
It's hardly a thread on AV if it's mentioned only at the end of the post script... still, better than nothingTheScreamingEagles said:
Yeah but I've given you a thread on AV.RobD said:Argh, yet more delays for Heathrow?
0 -
Greek referendum.Jobabob said:
It's a normal gimmick from them – have they ever got it wrong?Pulpstar said:
Yep - but I wouldn't read too much into it, they may have to pay out on Trump too...rottenborough said:Have we all seen that Paddy is paying out on Clinton win?
However it is worth it from a marketing perspective.
And Louis Van Gaal next out ! (I benefited from that one
) 0 -
Was it paddy power or another bookmaker that called Tory majority really really early on night on GE 2015? One company definitely did a video within an hour or two of the exit poll & said no ontwon't be largest party, it will be will be Tory majority.Jobabob said:
It's a normal gimmick from them – have they ever got it wrong?Pulpstar said:
Yep - but I wouldn't read too much into it, they may have to pay out on Trump too...rottenborough said:Have we all seen that Paddy is paying out on Clinton win?
0 -
I have never visited it.JosiasJessop said:
There's an interesting (to me at least) story related to that at St Pancras. When the Midland built their line to the new St Pancras terminus, it passed through the graveyard of St Pancras Old church.Jobabob said:
Truth is, you can't make an omelette without making eggs. The Eurostar line went through an ancient graveyard in Islington. Pretty horrible for the relatives.GIN1138 said:
As posted further down, we're a nation of NIMBY's because, since 1947, we've been stuck with the Town and Country Planning Act which means any major project (and even a lot of small scale local projects) have to jump through hoops to get anything done.RochdalePioneers said:"Heathrow is a stupid place to build an additional runway. Its far too close to London, its got limited and highly congested transport links, it blights the lives of all the people around it. But there doesn't seem to be a viable proposal for a replacement hub airport never mind the cost of new transport links and people would need to be able to commute there. So with few options Heathrow is the only place to build an additional runway."
Its no wonder this country fails to compete with other countries. We're terrified of infrastructure projects. Never mind the benefits to the economy of the construction phase, never mind the long term economic growth, it might upset the NIMBYs. So lets pretend all investment = subsidy, brand it hard left economics and not bother. Aftwer all there's more money to be made now flogging everything off to johnny foreigner and who cares about the peons.
Frit.
That said, if someone was planning to put a runway or a road or a railway line through your house I suppose you and your MP wouldn't be very happy...
(Snip)
There was controversy over that, so a young architect was put in charge of the disinterment. His name? Thomas Hardy. Some claim that the sombre tone of his books and poems was in some way set by the experience.
St Pancras church itself, as SeanT reminds us occasionally, might be one of the oldest churches in the country. Though I still prefer the ancient timber church at Greensted and the Roman barn-church of St Peter-in-the-Wall in Essex.
Now I shall.0 -
2011 referendum:RobD said:
It's hardly a thread on AV if it's mentioned only at the end of the post script... still, better than nothingTheScreamingEagles said:
Yeah but I've given you a thread on AV.RobD said:Argh, yet more delays for Heathrow?
NO to AV 68%
YES to AV 32%
-1 -
They do, at least for CPO. The argument is that it's not enough - ISTR up to 10%. Also, nowadays planning blight is taken into account when deciding the price - a welcome change.MarkHopkins said:GIN1138 said:
As posted further down, we're a nation of NIMBY's because, since 1947, we've been stuck with the Town and Country Planning Act which means any major project (and even a lot of small scale local projects) have to jump through hoops to get anything done.RochdalePioneers said:"Heathrow is a stupid place to build an additional runway. Its far too close to London, its got limited and highly congested transport links, it blights the lives of all the people around it. But there doesn't seem to be a viable proposal for a replacement hub airport never mind the cost of new transport links and people would need to be able to commute there. So with few options Heathrow is the only place to build an additional runway."
Its no wonder this country fails to compete with other countries. We're terrified of infrastructure projects. Never mind the benefits to the economy of the construction phase, never mind the long term economic growth, it might upset the NIMBYs. So lets pretend all investment = subsidy, brand it hard left economics and not bother. Aftwer all there's more money to be made now flogging everything off to johnny foreigner and who cares about the peons.
Frit.
That said, if someone was planning to put a runway or a road or a railway line through your house I suppose you and your MP wouldn't be very happy...
Mostly I think it's a compensation issue. If you paid a bonus to all those who lost their homes or were affected, it would go through much more easily.0 -
68% of PBers voted for no more AV threads? Heresy!!Sunil_Prasannan said:
2011 referendum:RobD said:
It's hardly a thread on AV if it's mentioned only at the end of the post script... still, better than nothingTheScreamingEagles said:
Yeah but I've given you a thread on AV.RobD said:Argh, yet more delays for Heathrow?
NO to AV 68%
YES to AV 32%0 -
AV is theRobD said:
68% of PBers voted for no more AV threads? Heresy!!Sunil_Prasannan said:
2011 referendum:RobD said:
It's hardly a thread on AV if it's mentioned only at the end of the post script... still, better than nothingTheScreamingEagles said:
Yeah but I've given you a thread on AV.RobD said:Argh, yet more delays for Heathrow?
NO to AV 68%
YES to AV 32%TSEGordon Brown of voting systems
0 -
Awful decision and / or media management on Heathrow. I'm not sure which is worse.0
-
Good.Jobabob said:
I have never visited it.JosiasJessop said:
There's an interesting (to me at least) story related to that at St Pancras. When the Midland built their line to the new St Pancras terminus, it passed through the graveyard of St Pancras Old church.Jobabob said:
Truth is, you can't make an omelette without making eggs. The Eurostar line went through an ancient graveyard in Islington. Pretty horrible for the relatives.GIN1138 said:
As posted further down, we're a nation of NIMBY's because, since 1947, we've been stuck with the Town and Country Planning Act which means any major project (and even a lot of small scale local projects) have to jump through hoops to get anything done.RochdalePioneers said:"Heathrow is a stupid place to build an additional runway. Its far too close to London, its got limited and highly congested transport links, it blights the lives of all the people around it. But there doesn't seem to be a viable proposal for a replacement hub airport never mind the cost of new transport links and people would need to be able to commute there. So with few options Heathrow is the only place to build an additional runway."
Its no wonder this country fails to compete with other countries. We're terrified of infrastructure projects. Never mind the benefits to the economy of the construction phase, never mind the long term economic growth, it might upset the NIMBYs. So lets pretend all investment = subsidy, brand it hard left economics and not bother. Aftwer all there's more money to be made now flogging everything off to johnny foreigner and who cares about the peons.
Frit.
That said, if someone was planning to put a runway or a road or a railway line through your house I suppose you and your MP wouldn't be very happy...
(Snip)
There was controversy over that, so a young architect was put in charge of the disinterment. His name? Thomas Hardy. Some claim that the sombre tone of his books and poems was in some way set by the experience.
St Pancras church itself, as SeanT reminds us occasionally, might be one of the oldest churches in the country. Though I still prefer the ancient timber church at Greensted and the Roman barn-church of St Peter-in-the-Wall in Essex.
Now I shall.
Make sure you see the Hardy Tree:
http://www.uncoveringlondon.co.uk/the-hardy-tree.htm0 -
Stansted:Pulpstar said:Scott_P said:@JohnRentoul: Observations:
1. "Official Sensitive" means "on Twitter".
2. Option of "no expansion" ruled out.
3. Heathrow 3rd runway will never be built.
Nabavi vs Rentoul...Richard_Nabavi said:So, Heathrow is NOT delayed. This is about as fast as it could be (which is very slow, admittedly).
Interesting.
How long does an airport runway normally take to get built ?
First proposed - 1963 (not shortlisted)
Proposed again - 1973
Recommended - 1984
Opened - 1991
0 -
Is Stansted that new? Wow.IanB2 said:
Stansted:Pulpstar said:Scott_P said:@JohnRentoul: Observations:
1. "Official Sensitive" means "on Twitter".
2. Option of "no expansion" ruled out.
3. Heathrow 3rd runway will never be built.
Nabavi vs Rentoul...Richard_Nabavi said:So, Heathrow is NOT delayed. This is about as fast as it could be (which is very slow, admittedly).
Interesting.
How long does an airport runway normally take to get built ?
First proposed - 1963 (not shortlisted)
Proposed again - 1973
Recommended - 1984
Opened - 19910 -
This is very confusing about Heathrow. Has a decision been made and now its going to consultation as that's a legally required next step, or has this been kicked into the long grass AGAIN?
I don't understand how we've gone about a decade discussing this already under three Prime Ministers and with a major report if there hasn't been a consultation yet. Surely that should have been done by now already and should have fed into the Airports Commission's recommendation?0 -
Stansted's original terminal building opened in.... 1969!IanB2 said:
Stansted:Pulpstar said:Scott_P said:@JohnRentoul: Observations:
1. "Official Sensitive" means "on Twitter".
2. Option of "no expansion" ruled out.
3. Heathrow 3rd runway will never be built.
Nabavi vs Rentoul...Richard_Nabavi said:So, Heathrow is NOT delayed. This is about as fast as it could be (which is very slow, admittedly).
Interesting.
How long does an airport runway normally take to get built ?
First proposed - 1963 (not shortlisted)
Proposed again - 1973
Recommended - 1984
Opened - 19910 -
Nope, its original terminal building opened as long ago as 1969!JosiasJessop said:
Is Stansted that new? Wow.IanB2 said:
Stansted:Pulpstar said:Scott_P said:@JohnRentoul: Observations:
1. "Official Sensitive" means "on Twitter".
2. Option of "no expansion" ruled out.
3. Heathrow 3rd runway will never be built.
Nabavi vs Rentoul...Richard_Nabavi said:So, Heathrow is NOT delayed. This is about as fast as it could be (which is very slow, admittedly).
Interesting.
How long does an airport runway normally take to get built ?
First proposed - 1963 (not shortlisted)
Proposed again - 1973
Recommended - 1984
Opened - 19910 -
A decision has been made (the government is going to announce it's in favour of the third runway next week) and it's going out for consultation as the next week.Philip_Thompson said:This is very confusing about Heathrow. Has a decision been made and now its going to consultation as that's a legally required next step, or has this been kicked into the long grass AGAIN?
I don't understand how we've gone about a decade discussing this already under three Prime Ministers and with a major report if there hasn't been a consultation yet. Surely that should have been done by now already and should have fed into the Airports Commission's recommendation?
Of course, it could be "halted" at consultation of a variety of reasons...0 -
Didn't they just have a big consultation exercise?GIN1138 said:
A decision has been made (the government is going to announce it's in favour of the third runway next week) and it's going out for consultation as the next week.Philip_Thompson said:This is very confusing about Heathrow. Has a decision been made and now its going to consultation as that's a legally required next step, or has this been kicked into the long grass AGAIN?
I don't understand how we've gone about a decade discussing this already under three Prime Ministers and with a major report if there hasn't been a consultation yet. Surely that should have been done by now already and should have fed into the Airports Commission's recommendation?
Of course, it could be "halted" at consultation of a variety of reasons...0
