politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The plan for a progressive alliance might have an itsy bitsy t
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The plan for a progressive alliance might have an itsy bitsy teenie weenie flaw with it
How the 2015 general election result would look like under different voting systems by The @electoralreform Societyhttps://t.co/Gyvm8kJbyt pic.twitter.com/DPwiWsYk99
0
Comments
-
First?0
-
That was a first for me! :-)
FPT:NeilVW said:
That's right: Electoral Calculus have the new Batley and Morley as having a notional 2015 Labour majority of almost 5,000 (9.5 percentage points).paulyork64 said:I'm sure political calculus had the replacement seat for morley and outwood going red again after the boundary changes. Think that was on GE2015 polling figures tho and corbyns probs affected those.
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/calcwork.py?seat=Batley and Morley
Adjusting for the current national polling average makes it much closer - Labour are predicted to win the new seat by one percentage point or about 500 votes. It would be Labour's 170th-safest seat according to their calculations.
http://tinyurl.com/glvrv9x0 -
Thank you! It's arrived!
No, not the AV thread - just the new thread: it wasn't showing up on my Vanilla index.
Good evening, everyone.0 -
AV it.
0 -
They don't have enough in common to make a 'progressive' alliance meaningful in any case. Not being Tory is not enough to sway everyone to vote Lab or LD or SNP in various seats even if they did not vote Tory or UKIP.0
-
We have no idea what we stand for - vote for us!
0 -
I suspect coming up with policies more popular with the public will be a more successful route to power than changing the voting system or coming up with electoral pacts
Crazy talk.
In all seriousness, there are obvious partisan benefits to people like the LDs and UKIP especially to changing the voting system, but that doesn't mean it is not also a good idea regardless, and they should not shy away from proposing it as part of more popular policies just because it will, correctly, also be noted they would do better under such a system, even if it would not mean an electoral pact even under such a system would be successful.0 -
NeilVW said:
That's right: Electoral Calculus have the new Batley and Morley as having a notional 2015 Labour majority of almost 5,000 (9.5 percentage points).paulyork64 said:I'm sure political calculus had the replacement seat for morley and outwood going red again after the boundary changes. Think that was on GE2015 polling figures tho and corbyns probs affected those.
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/calcwork.py?seat=Batley and Morley
Adjusting for the current national polling average makes it much closer - Labour are predicted to win the new seat by one percentage point or about 500 votes. It would be Labour's 170th-safest seat according to their calculations.
http://tinyurl.com/glvrv9x
Or Labour's sixth most marginal seat, to put it another way. Which would still be their most devastating defeat since 1935 (and as they gained a hundred seats in that election, arguably since 1931).
When was the last time a party had a net loss of seats at six successive general elections? Even the Liberals didn't have that long a losing streak.0 -
Agreed. It's quite possible that, having seen what a vote can do when each one counts, people in general will be more open to the idea of changing to a more proportional voting system.kle4 said:I suspect coming up with policies more popular with the public will be a more successful route to power than changing the voting system or coming up with electoral pacts
Crazy talk.
In all seriousness, there are obvious partisan benefits to people like the LDs and UKIP especially to changing the voting system, but that doesn't mean it is not also a good idea regardless, and they should not shy away from proposing it as part of more popular policies just because it will, correctly, also be noted they would do better under such a system, even if it would not mean an electoral pact even under such a system would be successful.
But I admit that I don't like any of the proportional systems I've seen proposed so far. I've said before on here, that it seems grotesque to rule out someone who's hugely second favourite just because s/he's no-one's first choice. That rejects someone everyone would be happy with in favour of someone nobody much wants.-1 -
Interesting that AV would have won the Lib Dems only one extra seat, according to the ERS/YouGov analysis.
0 -
Is this the much trailed Magnum Opus AV Thread, or the AV Paragraph?
FPTP is a much better electoral system for a Parliament - there is a higher chance of a majority and the government can be held to account on their manifesto, rather than negotiating most of it away in negotiations *after* the election.0 -
Just because you fail under FPTP does not mean that it should be changed. Perhaps spending more time developing policies which actual appeal to voters would be a good place to start.0
-
A parvum opusSandpit said:Is this the much trailed Magnum Opus AV Thread, or the AV Paragraph?
FPTP is a much better electoral system for a Parliament - there is a higher chance of a majority and the government can be held to account on their manifesto, rather than negotiating most of it away in negotiations *after* the election.0 -
TheScreamingEagles said:
A parvum opusSandpit said:Is this the much trailed Magnum Opus AV Thread, or the AV Paragraph?
FPTP is a much better electoral system for a Parliament - there is a higher chance of a majority and the government can be held to account on their manifesto, rather than negotiating most of it away in negotiations *after* the election.
A flaccid AV thread.
0 -
Voted for Skelton, tiny winnings on Murray, slightly bigger on Brownlee, laying Farah (Both win & top 2)0
-
This is my definitive AV thread of 2016MarkHopkins said:TheScreamingEagles said:
A parvum opusSandpit said:Is this the much trailed Magnum Opus AV Thread, or the AV Paragraph?
FPTP is a much better electoral system for a Parliament - there is a higher chance of a majority and the government can be held to account on their manifesto, rather than negotiating most of it away in negotiations *after* the election.
A flaccid AV thread.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/06/17/the-euref-might-be-more-like-the-av-referendum-and-not-the-indyref/0 -
I say stick with FPTP but every second place candidate gets a seat in the replacement House or Lords. Which would be renamed House of Losers with similar powers to the current HoL. If a party scored a majority in the Commons there should be a counterbalancing Opposition majority in the other place.0
-
-
So the likes of Ed Balls who were rejected by the electorate could block the will of the people in the Lords?paulyork64 said:I say stick with FPTP but every second place candidate gets a seat in the replacement House or Lords. Which would be renamed House of Losers with similar powers to the current HoL. If a party scored a majority in the Commons there should be a counterbalancing Opposition majority in the other place.
No ta.0 -
Any "progressive alliance" that contains the SNP (without which such a thing is unlikely to command a Parliamentary majority anyway) will cause a large number of otherwise sympathetic English voters to run away screaming. It's a non-starter. Labour will have to learn how to win again under the current rules - or make way for another party that can.0
-
@Scott_P The SPECTRE reference was just for you.0
-
@seaningle: Tension in the SPOTY press room as every writer who has 'Murray wins' pieces ready to go sees Al Brownlee's odds creep in ...0
-
Threw three calls at Brownlee, Jason K and Skelton. Have Jason K and Vardy ew and Brownlee ftw but not expecting to collect.Pulpstar said:Voted for Skelton, tiny winnings on Murray, slightly bigger on Brownlee, laying Farah (Both win & top 2)
0 -
According to my totally unscientific twitter analysis (140 vs 90 mentions since last refresh) it'll be
1) Murray
2) Brownlee0 -
Have the pollsters got it wrong again?0
-
There are 3 doors.TheScreamingEagles said:@Scott_P The SPECTRE reference was just for you.
Behind 2 of them are the worst Bond movie ever made.
You bought a ticket for SPECTRE, but now you have the choice to swap it for any other Bond movie ever...0 -
Sports Awards - are they making reference to Murray being the winner last year and possibly the first person to win it three times? If so, might the voting TV audience think it's someone else's turn?
1.14ish might be worth a lay?
Edit: Betfair have suspended with Murray at 1.24/1.29, definitely no value in laying that!0 -
I love your new name: people would be proud of being Losers after all. But in a hung parliament situation both Houses would likely be hung, wouldn't they? Sounds like the country would be hung out to dry.paulyork64 said:I say stick with FPTP but every second place candidate gets a seat in the replacement House or Lords. Which would be renamed House of Losers with similar powers to the current HoL. If a party scored a majority in the Commons there should be a counterbalancing Opposition majority in the other place.
0 -
MURRAY!0
-
Bloody Jocks, denying a Yorkshireman the SPOTY
#YorkshireSecessionNow0 -
SPECTRE was a shocker, but then I seem to be alone in liking Quantum of Solace.Scott_P said:
There are 3 doors.TheScreamingEagles said:@Scott_P The SPECTRE reference was just for you.
Behind 2 of them are the worst Bond movie ever made.
You bought a ticket for SPECTRE, but now you have the choice to swap it for any other Bond movie ever...
Boring, Murray wins again. Shouldn't have won it last year.0 -
Well, this is 2016.Scott_P said:@seaningle: Tension in the SPOTY press room as every writer who has 'Murray wins' pieces ready to go sees Al Brownlee's odds creep in ...
0 -
a progressive alliance is not going to happen. The left of centre parties are not all the same you know. Lib Dems and Labour are as different as UKIP and the Tories - except that hard core Labour hate the Lib Dems more than the Tories do UKIP, and that's saying something.
We may share some values (at least with some members of the Labour party - not sure what the party as a whole stands for any more, which is part of the reason why no progressive alliance) but function entirely differently and our outlook is also entirely different.
More likely that more parties will split than come together.0 -
Monksfield said:
SPECTRE was a shocker, but then I seem to be alone in liking Quantum of Solace.Scott_P said:
There are 3 doors.TheScreamingEagles said:@Scott_P The SPECTRE reference was just for you.
Behind 2 of them are the worst Bond movie ever made.
You bought a ticket for SPECTRE, but now you have the choice to swap it for any other Bond movie ever...
Boring, Murray wins again. Shouldn't have won it last year.
That's 3 wins now?
0 -
A Progressive Alliance (Lab, SNP, Plaid, Lib Dem, Green) vs a Con/UKIP alliance would give a gain of about 30 seats for the right.0
-
Yep..MarkHopkins said:Monksfield said:
SPECTRE was a shocker, but then I seem to be alone in liking Quantum of Solace.Scott_P said:
There are 3 doors.TheScreamingEagles said:@Scott_P The SPECTRE reference was just for you.
Behind 2 of them are the worst Bond movie ever made.
You bought a ticket for SPECTRE, but now you have the choice to swap it for any other Bond movie ever...
Boring, Murray wins again. Shouldn't have won it last year.
That's 3 wins now?0 -
Funny Murray joke.
Great for equitators that Skelton came third.0 -
The second least surprising election result of 2016.Sunil_Prasannan said:MURRAY!
There had to be one other time everyone was right.0 -
-
TSE - might Ed Balls have won his seat under AV and thus be able to block the will of the people from the HoC instead? I don't know the answer in that specific case but presumably the point of AV is that some candidates who come second on first preference votes win the seat after reallocations etc?0
-
-
FT BREXIT LEAD: Fear....Scott_P said:twitter.com/hendopolis/status/810592784239489025
0 -
Good spot, had miscounted. But that would still beat the Liberals 35, 45, 50, and 51.NeilVW said:@ydoethur
Technically a net loss of seats at five successive GEs? ('01, '05, '10, '15, '20?)
Mind you, if Labour continue like this I can see them making further losses in 2025 and even 2030. No party has a God-given right to exist but I've never come across a party with such a ferocious death wish before, not even the American Whigs.0 -
I say if we keep FPTP, retain an appointed HoL, but ban anyone who has held or stood for elected office within the last 15 years - so it is not stuffed with people who just lost or were unable to ever get elected. Nothing wrong with some elder statesman down the line, but some limitation seems reasonable.0
-
@MarkHopkins
Megabank won't go first because their top people will just move to Gigabank.
It will be all or none. I think we're well shy of that line.0 -
I'd have thought that assuming that people will vote the same way when the effects can be materially different is little more than garbage in, garbage out.
Is there a subtlety that I'm missing?0 -
Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?0
-
I'd have thought that assuming that people will vote the same way when the effects can be materially different is little more than garbage in, garbage out.
Is there a subtlety that I'm missing?
It's not perfect, admittedly. If we assume people generally vote the way they want regardless there will not be a significant difference from a new voting system. It at least comes from definitive proof people have voted this way before, and guessing it might change a bit will not be too extreme, rather than complete speculation that there is a huge groundswell that people will vote differently under a different voting system.
It could be true that people would vote differently, in fact most of us presume it would be to some extent, but is the likelihood it would be so much different that we cannot take a general guess?0 -
Just found I had Alistair Brownlee E/W at 100/1, 1/5 odds for top 3.
Nice!0 -
There was a discussion on BBC's wake up to money programme last week with a representative from Germany who confirmed they were attempting to poach banks from London but when it was pointed out that Frankfurt's red tape was burdensome, the lack of English, and importantly German corporation tax north of 30% he admitted that talks were only exploratoryScott_P said:
With UK corporation tax going down to 17% why would banks accept an increase in excess of 13% in their corporation tax.
Furthermore the FT are avid remain and are just part of the continuing project fear0 -
The ERS commissioned a YouGov poll that asked people to imagine the voting system asked them to rank parties in order (so they could simulate AV and STV). Obviously not an exact science though.matt said:I'd have thought that assuming that people will vote the same way when the effects can be materially different is little more than garbage in, garbage out.
Is there a subtlety that I'm missing?0 -
Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for ussurbiton said:
Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.chestnut said:Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
0 -
Because many of them hardly pay any tax ?Big_G_NorthWales said:
There was a discussion on BBC's wake up to money programme last week with a representative from Germany who confirmed they were attempting to poach banks from London but when it was pointed out that Frankfurt's red tape was burdensome, the lack of English, and importantly German corporation tax north of 30% he admitted that talks were only exploratoryScott_P said:
With UK corporation tax going down to 17% why would banks accept an increase in excess of 13% in their corporation tax.
Furthermore the FT are avid remain and are just part of the continuing project fear0 -
It was. Better yet, I posted it here too...Sandpit said:Well done, that was a great bet!
http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/1265984/#Comment_12659840 -
Where does the City get its billions from thensurbiton said:
Because many of them hardly pay any tax ?Big_G_NorthWales said:
There was a discussion on BBC's wake up to money programme last week with a representative from Germany who confirmed they were attempting to poach banks from London but when it was pointed out that Frankfurt's red tape was burdensome, the lack of English, and importantly German corporation tax north of 30% he admitted that talks were only exploratoryScott_P said:
With UK corporation tax going down to 17% why would banks accept an increase in excess of 13% in their corporation tax.
Furthermore the FT are avid remain and are just part of the continuing project fear0 -
And the chances are we'll get a decent amount of free-trade access to the EU, in any case, as it's in their interests too.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for ussurbiton said:
Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.chestnut said:Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
The Australian High Commissioner made the point that in our case, we start from a position of free trade (albeit the single market in services has never been fully completed) and it would be the UK and EU deciding if we should erect new barriers.0 -
Good prog on R4 about farming post-Brexit.
Not sure I'd want to be a farmer right now with my fate in the hands of the three clowns.0 -
So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for ussurbiton said:
Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.chestnut said:Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
0 -
So we have Australia, Canada, the US, Argentina, India, South Korea etc etc now saying let's get on with it, and people are pining for Latvia?0
-
Because we will employ 300,000 people in a super-trade ministry to make deals with every country of the world.Monksfield said:
So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for ussurbiton said:
Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.chestnut said:Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
0 -
Double well done, especially to note the e/w option. I'm amazed that bookies continue to take e/w bets when there's a 1/10 favourite, all they ever do is complain at paying out of the clear second fav who gets placedScott_P said:
It was. Better yet, I posted it here too...Sandpit said:Well done, that was a great bet!
http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/1265984/#Comment_1265984 0 -
Lay Murray for 2017 - he can only go downhill from here.0
-
How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade dealsMonksfield said:
So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for ussurbiton said:
Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.chestnut said:Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
And we will still trade with the EU
Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us0 -
For multi-nationals through PAYE . But you were talking about corporation tax.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Where does the City get its billions from thensurbiton said:
Because many of them hardly pay any tax ?Big_G_NorthWales said:
There was a discussion on BBC's wake up to money programme last week with a representative from Germany who confirmed they were attempting to poach banks from London but when it was pointed out that Frankfurt's red tape was burdensome, the lack of English, and importantly German corporation tax north of 30% he admitted that talks were only exploratoryScott_P said:
With UK corporation tax going down to 17% why would banks accept an increase in excess of 13% in their corporation tax.
Furthermore the FT are avid remain and are just part of the continuing project fear0 -
I suspect that most of them will feel that after 45 years of being mucked about by the EU and CAP, almost anything is likely to be an improvement.TOPPING said:Good prog on R4 about farming post-Brexit.
Not sure I'd want to be a farmer right now with my fate in the hands of the three clowns.
In this they are of course probably wrong, as most of CAP's dismal failures in this country were caused by the extraordinary incompetence of first MAFF and later DEFRA (for example TB, RPA, Milk Marque etc). The BSE crisis being a notable exception where the EU were deliberately responsible for maliciously damaging British farming, hugely assisted by the incompetence of the Ministry of Health and the hysteria of Harriet Harman.0 -
Do you know the amount of corporation tax paid by the City as a matter of interestsurbiton said:
For multi-nationals through PAYE . But you were talking about corporation tax.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Where does the City get its billions from thensurbiton said:
Because many of them hardly pay any tax ?Big_G_NorthWales said:
There was a discussion on BBC's wake up to money programme last week with a representative from Germany who confirmed they were attempting to poach banks from London but when it was pointed out that Frankfurt's red tape was burdensome, the lack of English, and importantly German corporation tax north of 30% he admitted that talks were only exploratoryScott_P said:
With UK corporation tax going down to 17% why would banks accept an increase in excess of 13% in their corporation tax.
Furthermore the FT are avid remain and are just part of the continuing project fear0 -
We all know trade deals take years. And given the rest of the world will perceive our desperation, it's a fair call that at least in the short to medium term any deals we do strike will be less advantageous than what we have now. All I hear from leavers is head in the sand Pollyanna, pollyanna, pollyanna.Big_G_NorthWales said:
How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade dealsMonksfield said:
So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for ussurbiton said:
Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.chestnut said:Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
And we will still trade with the EU
Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
0 -
Remind me - do we have a trade balance with the EU if so how much is itMonksfield said:
We all know trade deals take years. And given the rest of the world will perceive our desperation, it's a fair call that at least in the short to medium term any deals we do strike will be less advantageous than what we have now. All I hear from leavers is head in the sand Pollyanna, pollyanna, pollyanna.Big_G_NorthWales said:
How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade dealsMonksfield said:
So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for ussurbiton said:
Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.chestnut said:Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
And we will still trade with the EU
Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us0 -
Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.Monksfield said:
We all know trade deals take years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade dealsMonksfield said:
So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for ussurbiton said:
Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.chestnut said:Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
And we will still trade with the EU
Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
"Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.
0 -
Trump has already stated he is coming out of NAFTA and wants it to be converted to a trade deal with Canada and for the UK to join on our exit from the EUchestnut said:
Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.Monksfield said:
We all know trade deals take years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade dealsMonksfield said:
So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for ussurbiton said:
Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.chestnut said:Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
And we will still trade with the EU
Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
"Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.0 -
Depends on the terms doesn't it? Don't expect the Aussies to bend over for us just because they were once our client state. The harder the bargain, the longer it'll take. We'll need it more than they do, and they know that.chestnut said:
Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.Monksfield said:
We all know trade deals take years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade dealsMonksfield said:
So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for ussurbiton said:
Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.chestnut said:Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
And we will still trade with the EU
Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
"Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.0 -
How many trade deals has the Australian High Commissioner negotiated?chestnut said:
Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.Monksfield said:
We all know trade deals take years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade dealsMonksfield said:
So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for ussurbiton said:
Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.chestnut said:Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
And we will still trade with the EU
Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
"Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.0 -
For those of you betting on Sports Personality, here are the results from Number Cruncher Sports...
https://twitter.com/NCSpo/status/810601787652710400
https://twitter.com/NCSpo/status/810601976664887296
https://twitter.com/NCSpo/status/8106021298115051540 -
0
-
Golfers don't vote in SPOTY, it seems. Equestrians do though.numbercruncher said:For those of you betting on Sports Personality, here are the results from Number Cruncher Sports...
https://twitter.com/NCSpo/status/810601787652710400
https://twitter.com/NCSpo/status/810601976664887296
https://twitter.com/NCSpo/status/8106021298115051540 -
Years is something we have. We need to make long term arrangements for the future and not just now-now-now.Monksfield said:
We all know trade deals take years. And given the rest of the world will perceive our desperation, it's a fair call that at least in the short to medium term any deals we do strike will be less advantageous than what we have now. All I hear from leavers is head in the sand Pollyanna, pollyanna, pollyanna.Big_G_NorthWales said:
How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade dealsMonksfield said:
So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for ussurbiton said:
Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.chestnut said:Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
And we will still trade with the EU
Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us0 -
-
Well he happened to be the minister in charge of foreign affairs and trade from 1996 to 2007, so he would have overseen the US-Oz trade deal he mentioned which took about 15 months IIRC. So at least one, and quite a biggie.williamglenn said:
How many trade deals has the Australian High Commissioner negotiated?chestnut said:
Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.Monksfield said:
We all know trade deals take years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade dealsMonksfield said:
So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for ussurbiton said:
Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.chestnut said:Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
And we will still trade with the EU
Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
"Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.0 -
LOL! Something tells me not the answer William was expecting when he wrote that.NeilVW said:
Well he happened to be the minister in charge of foreign affairs and trade from 1996 to 2007, so he would have overseen the US-Oz trade deal he mentioned which took about 15 months IIRC. So at least one, and quite a biggie.williamglenn said:
How many trade deals has the Australian High Commissioner negotiated?chestnut said:
Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.Monksfield said:
We all know trade deals take years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade dealsMonksfield said:
So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for ussurbiton said:
Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.chestnut said:Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
And we will still trade with the EU
Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
"Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.0 -
Ha ha, so he does know a little about trade deals then!NeilVW said:
Well he happened to be the minister in charge of foreign affairs and trade from 1996 to 2007, so he would have overseen the US-Oz trade deal he mentioned which took about 15 months IIRC. So at least one, and quite a biggie.williamglenn said:
How many trade deals has the Australian High Commissioner negotiated?chestnut said:
Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.Monksfield said:
We all know trade deals take years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade dealsMonksfield said:
So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for ussurbiton said:
Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.chestnut said:Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
And we will still trade with the EU
Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
"Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.0 -
Worth a donation to Wikipedia, I reckon. ;-)Sandpit said:
Ha ha, so he does know a little about trade deals then!NeilVW said:
Well he happened to be the minister in charge of foreign affairs and trade from 1996 to 2007, so he would have overseen the US-Oz trade deal he mentioned which took about 15 months IIRC. So at least one, and quite a biggie.williamglenn said:
How many trade deals has the Australian High Commissioner negotiated?chestnut said:
Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.Monksfield said:
We all know trade deals take years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade dealsMonksfield said:
So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for ussurbiton said:
Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.chestnut said:Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
And we will still trade with the EU
Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
"Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.0 -
On topic, STV is a pretty good system, and the Scottish style top up system also effective.
It is noticeable that the populist discontent with the established order is particularly evident where FPTP shuts out minority views: UK, USA and France,
In practice a "Progressive Alliance" in the UK works by tactical voting rather than by explicit pacts. I can see that already happening again.0 -
It happens to be a lie. The Minister For Trade is a different position which has never been held by Alexander Downer - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minister_for_Trade,_Tourism_and_InvestmentNeilVW said:
Worth a donation to Wikipedia, I reckon. ;-)Sandpit said:
Ha ha, so he does know a little about trade deals then!NeilVW said:
Well he happened to be the minister in charge of foreign affairs and trade from 1996 to 2007, so he would have overseen the US-Oz trade deal he mentioned which took about 15 months IIRC. So at least one, and quite a biggie.williamglenn said:
How many trade deals has the Australian High Commissioner negotiated?chestnut said:
Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.Monksfield said:
We all know trade deals take years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade dealsMonksfield said:
So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for ussurbiton said:
Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.chestnut said:Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
And we will still trade with the EU
Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
"Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.
The Australians have been mocking Mr Downer's enthusiasm for Brexit - http://www.smh.com.au/world/alexander-downers-bizarre-bbc-video-urging-britain-to-get-on-with-leaving-the-eu-20161218-gtdrq7.html0 -
Read the article more closely:williamglenn said:
It happens to be a lie. The Minister For Trade is a different position which has never been held by Alexander Downer - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minister_for_Trade,_Tourism_and_InvestmentNeilVW said:
Worth a donation to Wikipedia, I reckon. ;-)Sandpit said:
Ha ha, so he does know a little about trade deals then!NeilVW said:
Well he happened to be the minister in charge of foreign affairs and trade from 1996 to 2007, so he would have overseen the US-Oz trade deal he mentioned which took about 15 months IIRC. So at least one, and quite a biggie.williamglenn said:
How many trade deals has the Australian High Commissioner negotiated?chestnut said:
Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.Monksfield said:
We all know trade deals take years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade dealsMonksfield said:
So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for ussurbiton said:
Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.chestnut said:Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
And we will still trade with the EU
Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
"Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.
"In the Government of Australia, the Minister administers the portfolio through the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade jointly with the Minister for Foreign Affairs, although prior to 1987 there was a separate Department of Trade. "0 -
The department is shared but the ministers have different responsibilities - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_of_Foreign_Affairs_and_Trade_(Australia)NeilVW said:
Read the article more closely:williamglenn said:
It happens to be a lie. The Minister For Trade is a different position which has never been held by Alexander Downer - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minister_for_Trade,_Tourism_and_InvestmentNeilVW said:
Worth a donation to Wikipedia, I reckon. ;-)Sandpit said:
Ha ha, so he does know a little about trade deals then!NeilVW said:
Well he happened to be the minister in charge of foreign affairs and trade from 1996 to 2007, so he would have overseen the US-Oz trade deal he mentioned which took about 15 months IIRC. So at least one, and quite a biggie.williamglenn said:
How many trade deals has the Australian High Commissioner negotiated?chestnut said:
Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.Monksfield said:
We all know trade deals take years.Big_G_NorthWales said:
How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade dealsMonksfield said:
So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for ussurbiton said:
Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.chestnut said:Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
And we will still trade with the EU
Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
"Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.
"In the Government of Australia, the Minister administers the portfolio through the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade jointly with the Minister for Foreign Affairs, although prior to 1987 there was a separate Department of Trade. "
Downer was not responsible for trade.0 -
Ok fair enough, but in the same Department and pretty close to the action at the relevant time.0
-
There's nothing to be gained in arguing with hairsplitters.NeilVW said:Ok fair enough, but in the same Department and pretty close to the action at the relevant time.
I'd suggest that Downer has more locus standi than an anonymous permaposter on the internet.0 -
One thing Downer says is pretty damning of the UK:matt said:
There's nothing to be gained in arguing with hairsplitters.NeilVW said:Ok fair enough, but in the same Department and pretty close to the action at the relevant time.
I'd suggest that Downer has more locus standi than an anonymous permaposter on the internet.
"I was the Australian foreign minister for nearly 12 years. Not once in that period did a British foreign secretary visit Australia."
We should do much more to nurture bilateral relations with Australia. Leaving the EU was never a necessary condition to making a start. If anything it was the delusion of the 'special relationship' with the US which made us forget our much closer ties with the Commonwealth.0 -
0
-
0
-
Seems like the posting button is still AWOl0
-
For the love of god, give it a rest.williamglenn said:
One thing Downer says is pretty damning of the UK:matt said:
There's nothing to be gained in arguing with hairsplitters.NeilVW said:Ok fair enough, but in the same Department and pretty close to the action at the relevant time.
I'd suggest that Downer has more locus standi than an anonymous permaposter on the internet.
"I was the Australian foreign minister for nearly 12 years. Not once in that period did a British foreign secretary visit Australia."
We should do much more to nurture bilateral relations with Australia. Leaving the EU was never a necessary condition to making a start. If anything it was the delusion of the 'special relationship' with the US which made us forget our much closer ties with the Commonwealth.0 -
Miss Gabor, how many husbands have you had?Scott_P said:
What do you mean dahlink? My own, or other people's?0 -
Eleven of them with a Labour government in the UK......williamglenn said:
One thing Downer says is pretty damning of the UK:matt said:
There's nothing to be gained in arguing with hairsplitters.NeilVW said:Ok fair enough, but in the same Department and pretty close to the action at the relevant time.
I'd suggest that Downer has more locus standi than an anonymous permaposter on the internet.
"I was the Australian foreign minister for nearly 12 years. Not once in that period did a British foreign secretary visit Australia."0 -
For people younger than perhaps 80 she falls into 2 categories:CarlottaVance said:
Miss Gabor, how many husbands have you had?Scott_P said:
What do you mean dahlink? My own, or other people's?
A. Wasn't she dead already; and
B. What was she famous for in the first place?0 -
Also free trade agreements are currently a political toxin in Australia and the Liberals don't have control of the Senate. If the ALP oppose (which they would at the behest of their beetle browed and tattooed paymasters in the unions) then it can't happen.surbiton said:
Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.chestnut said:Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
0
This discussion has been closed.