politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Viewpoint: Tribal Tim Farron attacks Corbyn and lets TMay off
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Viewpoint: Tribal Tim Farron attacks Corbyn and lets TMay off the hook.
The Lib Dem leader told Politics Home “In a really peculiar way I felt slightly proud of her when she became prime minister.” A very odd thing to say, isn’t it?
Comments
-
Fillion urges Merkel to bring Russia in from the cold.
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/fillon-urges-merkel-bring-russia-130939357.html0 -
More fantastic fantasy from Don Brind.0
-
The Liberal Democrats oppose The Tory plans for Brexit, no wiggle-room, no ifs & buts.
Labour plan to vote for Brexit, mostly.
Whos the "Soft Spot" there?0 -
OGH must have near enough choked on his cornflakes when this piece was passed to him, nevertheless one can never accuse pb.com of not putting forward a wide range of views...0
-
Maybe it would be for the best if Labour just died - and a new centre left party with both a brain and a heart emerged to replace it.0
-
Farron and Fallon seem to cause as much confusion as the Owens Smith & Jones. That aside this article is completely correct. The lib dems' opportunistic focusing of attacks on labour is breathtakingly cynical and makes a mockery of their claim to have moved on from the disastrous clegg years.0
-
Don Brind appears to live in his own world and I think we have learnt over the past few months to nor take him seriously.
Was in Stoke this morning, fog and all, Labour will win if they choose a local candidate, otherwise it will be the excellent local Lib Dem who wins.0 -
48% who voted *Remain*...
I'm sure a few others will greatly enjoy reposting the referendum result so well done for including them.0 -
Mr Brind is right. Farron is after Labour voters therefore he is going for what is
a) comfortable for Farron's politics and
b) probably the largest group of voters that are unhappy.
In the 1980s, the Liberals and SDP needed to supplant the Labour party and they failed to do that. Farron's biggest problem is the union money that still flows to Labour. Now if the Conservatives had changed the law on that, then Farron would have a chance.0 -
The lib dems are seriously deluded if they think their crimes have been forgotten and forgiven by more than a hardcore of wealthy handwringers.0
-
FPT
its 14.6% on just the employer I looked. The employee then contributes 5.5% or more depending on pay scale, item 7.6 in this pdfPulpstar said:
Are you sure the 14% contribution isn't employer + employee ?Pagan said:Frankly the problem will only be solved when we have an adult conversation about
1) what the state should do
2) what the individual should do
In addition we should stop all the preaching about healthy lifestyles, by all means put information on a website but stop with the national campaigns. Our problems are demographic.Lifetime healthcare costs, not to mention pension costs are greater for people who live healthily than those who smoke/drink/are obese.
It may sound harsh but we can have a health conscious long living population or an affordable one. Pick one.
Just cancelling all the healthy living campaigns would save a few million on its own.
We could also restrict councils and government to the same level of pension contribution per employee as the average private sector employee. Surrey pension scheme for example has an employer contribution of 14% if that was 5% that would be saving of two thirds ( for info in 2010 surrey council pension contributions amounted to 36 million so 24 million extra on the budget, at 2010 values the extra 15% they want would amount to around 80 million so already a third of the way there)
Any smart employer will have the Employer contributing the whole lot due to tax/NI implications (With salary sacrifice also baked in), at least this is the way it will be shown externally looking at it from the pension company's perspective.
Or do they get 14 + 14 ?
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjz292FqtjRAhWJL8AKHfd8DVgQFghTMAk&url=https://www.guildford.gov.uk/media/16031/Item-05---Pension-fund-valuationpdf/pdf/pdf214_1.pdf&usg=AFQjCNFdDSqXtYGGwq8Mq2K78mnEL2Rg6Q&sig2=JFy-hNw75teo_0C3HpurCQ&bvm=bv.144686652,d.ZGg0 -
It is Tim FARRON , the leader of the opposition not FALLON as mentioned more than once in the article . I suggest Mr Brind concentrates on the infighting inside the Labour party and leaves the Lib Dems to take the fight to May and the Conservatives both in the country and in Parliament .0
-
TBH Farron's comment about May makes me rather warm to him. At least he has the class to accept that political opponents can be decent people even if you disagree with their views. And how refreshing to see a male politician take pride in a woman achieving the highest office.
(Unlike some of the rather Trumpian and debasing remarks posted on here over the weekend by some who should have known better.)0 -
PB regulars TSE, David Herdson, Keiran Pedley and Don Brind all have different political standpoints to me. They are all good writers and have insights that add to the site.Pulpstar said:OGH must have near enough choked on his cornflakes when this piece was passed to him, nevertheless one can never accuse pb.com of not putting forward a wide range of views...
I know LAB has been unsettled by the recent Sunderland Council by-election that the Lib Dems took on a 30+% swing moving from 4.5% to 46% in the process. A similar campaign is likely to operate in Stoke
0 -
Of course the Lib Dems will target Labour. It makes absolute sense to go for the weaker of the two main parties: that's where there are votes to be won.
The thinking Don exhibits still seems to regard the Lib Dems as Labour's country cousins. They're not; they're opponents every bit as much as the Tories. You'd think they might have learned that from 2010.0 -
Its an lgpl scheme we are always being told they are fully funded. Doesnt change the fact that they are contributing 14.6 percent for every employee from council tax while a lot of those tax payers won't be able to afford to pay into a pension at allPulpstar said:@Pagan "Deficit" looks like they've got a defined benefit scheme still in place so they are having to fork out over and above what any DC scheme would have in place. Which shows how generous DB schemes are !
0 -
It's the Great Repeal Bill.
And what is this "battle" of which Don speaks? What do Labour want to do? Block it?
If they have positive ideas for what do with the acquis, once it's all in UK law, let's hear them.
So far it still seems that Labour is reacting to all the Government's moves and being dragged kicking and screaming down the Brexit road rather than offering their own alternative vision.0 -
I'm awaiting @FormerToryOrange magnum opus, he popped up after a prolonged period of lurking to have a pop at one of Meeks' articles.MikeSmithson said:
PB regulars TSE, David Herdson, Keiran Pedley and Don Brind all have different political standpoints to me. They are all good writers and have insights that add to the site.Pulpstar said:OGH must have near enough choked on his cornflakes when this piece was passed to him, nevertheless one can never accuse pb.com of not putting forward a wide range of views...
I know LAB has been unsettled by the recent Sunderland Council by-election that the Lib Dems took on a 30+% swing moving from 4.5% to 46% in the process. A similar campaign is likely to operate in Stoke0 -
"But let’s be clear that putting Corbyn and May in the same boat is divisive claptrap which has nothing to with fighting Brexit and everything to do with Lib Dem tribalism."david_herdson said:Of course the Lib Dems will target Labour. It makes absolute sense to go for the weaker of the two main parties: that's where there are votes to be won.
The thinking Don exhibits still seems to regard the Lib Dems as Labour's country cousins. They're not; they're opponents every bit as much as the Tories. You'd think they might have learned that from 2010.
Yes. Only Labour tribalism is allowed.0 -
There have been quite a few gender issues within the Lib Dem party in recent times and in all of them, to his credit, Farron has acted very wellCyclefree said:TBH Farron's comment about May makes me rather warm to him. At least he has the class to accept that political opponents can be decent people even if you disagree with their views. And how refreshing to see a male politician take pride in a woman achieving the highest office.
(Unlike some of the rather Trumpian and debasing remarks posted on here over the weekend by some who should have known better.)0 -
I assumed he meant the Henry VIII clauses/powers that Labour will block.Casino_Royale said:It's the Great Repeal Bill.
And what is this "battle" of which Don speaks? What do Labour want to do? Block it?
If they have positive ideas for what do with the acquis, once it's all in UK law, let's hear them.
So far it still seems that Labour is reacting to all the Government's moves and being dragged kicking and screaming down the Brexit road rather than offering their own alternative vision.
0 -
There are lots of smart people in the Commons and the Lords who will make parliamentary sovereignty.
Perhaps having made it we can turn it into an export industry.0 -
I hear different things about May.Cyclefree said:TBH Farron's comment about May makes me rather warm to him. At least he has the class to accept that political opponents can be decent people even if you disagree with their views. And how refreshing to see a male politician take pride in a woman achieving the highest office.
(Unlike some of the rather Trumpian and debasing remarks posted on here over the weekend by some who should have known better.)
I hear that she is friendless, ruthless, disliked amongst colleagues, and blames others for their mistakes rather than backing them.
Then I hear from some interviewers and people who've known her/worked closely with her that she's one of the nicest and most honest politicians they've ever known, and the public seem rather fond of her.0 -
I think Don was talking about their hypocrisy of expecting Labour to stand down at Richmond but they would not do so in Copeland where they lost their deposit.david_herdson said:Of course the Lib Dems will target Labour. It makes absolute sense to go for the weaker of the two main parties: that's where there are votes to be won.
The thinking Don exhibits still seems to regard the Lib Dems as Labour's country cousins. They're not; they're opponents every bit as much as the Tories. You'd think they might have learned that from 2010.
Of course, they should now stand in Copeland - next door to Farron's seat. But what about Stoke ?0 -
Afternoon all.
Don, there’s no point railing against Tim Farron, the Lib Dems are merely taking advantage of the void left by Labour’s poor leadership. They’re a different party btw, not your lap dogs.0 -
I hear the former from her opponents (more so within the Tory party than without)Casino_Royale said:
I hear different things about May.Cyclefree said:TBH Farron's comment about May makes me rather warm to him. At least he has the class to accept that political opponents can be decent people even if you disagree with their views. And how refreshing to see a male politician take pride in a woman achieving the highest office.
(Unlike some of the rather Trumpian and debasing remarks posted on here over the weekend by some who should have known better.)
I hear that she is friendless, ruthless, disliked amongst colleagues, and blames others for their mistakes rather than backing them.
Then I hear from some interviewers and people who've known her/worked closely with her that she's one of the nicest and most honest politicians they've ever known, and the public seem rather fond of her.
And the latter from less obviously biased sources.0 -
The complaint I hear most about Mrs May is that some of her staff are way too over top when dealing with criticism of Mrs May, that she needs to rein them in.Casino_Royale said:
I hear different things about May.Cyclefree said:TBH Farron's comment about May makes me rather warm to him. At least he has the class to accept that political opponents can be decent people even if you disagree with their views. And how refreshing to see a male politician take pride in a woman achieving the highest office.
(Unlike some of the rather Trumpian and debasing remarks posted on here over the weekend by some who should have known better.)
I hear that she is friendless, ruthless, disliked amongst colleagues, and blames others for their mistakes rather than backing them.
Then I hear from some interviewers and people who've known her/worked closely with her that she's one of the nicest and most honest politicians they've ever known, and the public seem rather fond of her.
Cf Fiona Hill and Nicky Morgan and the discussion of Mrs May's trousers.0 -
Farron said this just after May became PM not when she became the arch Brexiter, which she secretly always was. She wants to cleanse her failure at the Home Office where she could not control non-EU immigration.Cyclefree said:TBH Farron's comment about May makes me rather warm to him. At least he has the class to accept that political opponents can be decent people even if you disagree with their views. And how refreshing to see a male politician take pride in a woman achieving the highest office.
(Unlike some of the rather Trumpian and debasing remarks posted on here over the weekend by some who should have known better.)0 -
The first paragraph here is telling. That the idea of Tim Farron having some respect for Theresa May having campaigned alongside her 25 years ago is worthy of such derision, shows where the real tribalism is.0
-
Wow. Your insight into the secret thoughts of our PM must be very useful for betting purposes.surbiton said:
Farron said this just after May became PM not when she became the arch Brexiter, which she secretly always was. She wants to cleanse her failure at the Home Office where she could not control non-EU immigration.Cyclefree said:TBH Farron's comment about May makes me rather warm to him. At least he has the class to accept that political opponents can be decent people even if you disagree with their views. And how refreshing to see a male politician take pride in a woman achieving the highest office.
(Unlike some of the rather Trumpian and debasing remarks posted on here over the weekend by some who should have known better.)0 -
If the Lib Dems don't stand, Who will speak for England Stoke Remoanerssurbiton said:
I think Don was talking about their hypocrisy of expecting Labour to stand down at Richmond but they would not do so in Copeland where they lost their deposit.david_herdson said:Of course the Lib Dems will target Labour. It makes absolute sense to go for the weaker of the two main parties: that's where there are votes to be won.
The thinking Don exhibits still seems to regard the Lib Dems as Labour's country cousins. They're not; they're opponents every bit as much as the Tories. You'd think they might have learned that from 2010.
Of course, they should now stand in Copeland - next door to Farron's seat. But what about Stoke ?
? 0 -
Putin seems to be the person of the moment with such a poor hand. He must know something we do not know.williamglenn said:Fillion urges Merkel to bring Russia in from the cold.
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/fillon-urges-merkel-bring-russia-130939357.html0 -
MikeSmithson said:
There have been quite a few gender issues within the Lib Dem party in recent times and in all of them, to his credit, Farron has acted very wellCyclefree said:TBH Farron's comment about May makes me rather warm to him. At least he has the class to accept that political opponents can be decent people even if you disagree with their views. And how refreshing to see a male politician take pride in a woman achieving the highest office.
(Unlike some of the rather Trumpian and debasing remarks posted on here over the weekend by some who should have known better.)
0 -
Depending on the Labour candidate.Pulpstar said:
If the Lib Dems don't stand, Who will speak for England Stoke Remoanerssurbiton said:
I think Don was talking about their hypocrisy of expecting Labour to stand down at Richmond but they would not do so in Copeland where they lost their deposit.david_herdson said:Of course the Lib Dems will target Labour. It makes absolute sense to go for the weaker of the two main parties: that's where there are votes to be won.
The thinking Don exhibits still seems to regard the Lib Dems as Labour's country cousins. They're not; they're opponents every bit as much as the Tories. You'd think they might have learned that from 2010.
Of course, they should now stand in Copeland - next door to Farron's seat. But what about Stoke ? ?0 -
'That is why Jeremy Corbyn’s shift on the issue of immigration is regarded by many as a vital first step.'
Does anyone understand it, let alone think it is the vital first step?
0 -
He plays it well enough, mind.surbiton said:
Putin seems to be the person of the moment with such a poor hand. He must know something we do not know.williamglenn said:Fillion urges Merkel to bring Russia in from the cold.
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/fillon-urges-merkel-bring-russia-130939357.html0 -
Have you been chatting to Osborne?Casino_Royale said:
I hear different things about May.Cyclefree said:TBH Farron's comment about May makes me rather warm to him. At least he has the class to accept that political opponents can be decent people even if you disagree with their views. And how refreshing to see a male politician take pride in a woman achieving the highest office.
(Unlike some of the rather Trumpian and debasing remarks posted on here over the weekend by some who should have known better.)
I hear that she is friendless, ruthless, disliked amongst colleagues, and blames others for their mistakes rather than backing them.
0 -
I'd have thought most Labour voters in Stoke would be Brexiteers - so it'd make sense for them to go for someone who "won't oppose" Brexit...surbiton said:
Depending on the Labour candidate.Pulpstar said:
If the Lib Dems don't stand, Who will speak for England Stoke Remoanerssurbiton said:
I think Don was talking about their hypocrisy of expecting Labour to stand down at Richmond but they would not do so in Copeland where they lost their deposit.david_herdson said:Of course the Lib Dems will target Labour. It makes absolute sense to go for the weaker of the two main parties: that's where there are votes to be won.
The thinking Don exhibits still seems to regard the Lib Dems as Labour's country cousins. They're not; they're opponents every bit as much as the Tories. You'd think they might have learned that from 2010.
Of course, they should now stand in Copeland - next door to Farron's seat. But what about Stoke ? ?0 -
Another woman to lead a major party in this country
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/8235361870254080000 -
A very Farage-esque comment!Pulpstar said:
He plays it well enough, mind.surbiton said:
Putin seems to be the person of the moment with such a poor hand. He must know something we do not know.williamglenn said:Fillion urges Merkel to bring Russia in from the cold.
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/fillon-urges-merkel-bring-russia-130939357.html0 -
Why does Don write
“In a really peculiar way I felt slightly proud of her when she became prime minister.” A very odd thing to say, isn’t it?
When the article has it as
“But in a really peculiar way I felt slightly proud of her when she became prime minister. A very odd thing to say, isn’t it?”
?
i.e. Farron himself drew attention to the oddness of his own remark.0 -
From a Labour point of view I found this one of the most interesting pb articles for a long time. Despite many of us voting remain, I guess we have to accept the reality of brexit and it seems as if many in the parliamentary party are doing this. It really is a no win situation for Labour and yes I agree that any labour leader would find it difficult but with better communication from the top, the general public may just understand the stance we are being forced to take.
I also found the comments about May interesting. Did she really vote remain, did she know about Trident? Perhaps she is not as truthful as many think she is.0 -
Good afternoon, everyone.
F1: piece on Liberty and the changes they want to make:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/38679158
We'll see what happens.0 -
Ah. Is there a source for that?TheScreamingEagles said:
I assumed he meant the Henry VIII clauses/powers that Labour will block.Casino_Royale said:It's the Great Repeal Bill.
And what is this "battle" of which Don speaks? What do Labour want to do? Block it?
If they have positive ideas for what do with the acquis, once it's all in UK law, let's hear them.
So far it still seems that Labour is reacting to all the Government's moves and being dragged kicking and screaming down the Brexit road rather than offering their own alternative vision.0 -
Labour will not back a vital piece of Theresa May’s Brexit legislation if it contains sweeping powers allowing ministers to scrap vital workers’ rights, human rights and environmental provisions.Casino_Royale said:
Ah. Is there a source for that?TheScreamingEagles said:
I assumed he meant the Henry VIII clauses/powers that Labour will block.Casino_Royale said:It's the Great Repeal Bill.
And what is this "battle" of which Don speaks? What do Labour want to do? Block it?
If they have positive ideas for what do with the acquis, once it's all in UK law, let's hear them.
So far it still seems that Labour is reacting to all the Government's moves and being dragged kicking and screaming down the Brexit road rather than offering their own alternative vision.
Shadow Brexit Secretary Sir Keir Starmer vowed his party would fight Ms May “all the way” if she tried to use Brexit as an opportunity to adopt the so-called “Henry VIII powers”.
The expected move by the Government would render Parliament almost powerless to stop Tory ministers in post-Brexit Britain from dumping rights previously enshrined in EU law.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-labour-theresa-may-great-repeal-bill-rejection-a7538281.html0 -
-
It looks like there is a vacancy for an Opposition and probably not one for a Government.0
-
A senior Tory MP told HuffPost UK the party was not as well off as Labour “in pure resource terms”, so had to ration its cash.Scott_P said:Tories giving up on Stoke
Perhaps something to bear in mind when betting on an early election.0 -
Exert from header para 1
Since you’re asking, Tim – Yes it is a bit odd. Not only is she a Tory.
Don, it took you until the third line to highlight on major reason why Labour can not make any progress.
Until you (Labour) grasp the inherent stupidity, unattractiveness and unpopularity of the relentless imbecilic and childlike mantra of 'hate a Tory' with the mass of voters you have no hope. Sure it resonates with 10% of the voters, and they are concentrated in your heartlands. For the other 90% of tolerant and reasonable people, they scratch heads, look and think what an idiot view point that is.
The party one supports or the way anyone votes is no reason to 'hate' them. Until Labour expunge this malignant belief from their thoughts and vocabulary they are doomed.
0 -
Cheers.TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour will not back a vital piece of Theresa May’s Brexit legislation if it contains sweeping powers allowing ministers to scrap vital workers’ rights, human rights and environmental provisions.Casino_Royale said:
Ah. Is there a source for that?TheScreamingEagles said:
I assumed he meant the Henry VIII clauses/powers that Labour will block.Casino_Royale said:It's the Great Repeal Bill.
And what is this "battle" of which Don speaks? What do Labour want to do? Block it?
If they have positive ideas for what do with the acquis, once it's all in UK law, let's hear them.
So far it still seems that Labour is reacting to all the Government's moves and being dragged kicking and screaming down the Brexit road rather than offering their own alternative vision.
Shadow Brexit Secretary Sir Keir Starmer vowed his party would fight Ms May “all the way” if she tried to use Brexit as an opportunity to adopt the so-called “Henry VIII powers”.
The expected move by the Government would render Parliament almost powerless to stop Tory ministers in post-Brexit Britain from dumping rights previously enshrined in EU law.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-labour-theresa-may-great-repeal-bill-rejection-a7538281.html
0 -
All serious parties should stand everywhere except in the most exceptional circumstances. It's one test of whether a party really is serious. There was a case, for example, for the Tories not standing in Richmond Park (although there was also a good case to do so). But absolutely the Lib Dems should stand in Stoke. No-one else, starting in as good a position as they do, is going to put the strongly Remain case with the backing of their party.surbiton said:
I think Don was talking about their hypocrisy of expecting Labour to stand down at Richmond but they would not do so in Copeland where they lost their deposit.david_herdson said:Of course the Lib Dems will target Labour. It makes absolute sense to go for the weaker of the two main parties: that's where there are votes to be won.
The thinking Don exhibits still seems to regard the Lib Dems as Labour's country cousins. They're not; they're opponents every bit as much as the Tories. You'd think they might have learned that from 2010.
Of course, they should now stand in Copeland - next door to Farron's seat. But what about Stoke ?0 -
So Labour is basically saying 'we must continue to let the EU decide our Labour laws as UK independent governments and parliaments are not to be trusted'. Good luck with that.TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour will not back a vital piece of Theresa May’s Brexit legislation if it contains sweeping powers allowing ministers to scrap vital workers’ rights, human rights and environmental provisions.Casino_Royale said:
Ah. Is there a source for that?TheScreamingEagles said:
I assumed he meant the Henry VIII clauses/powers that Labour will block.Casino_Royale said:It's the Great Repeal Bill.
And what is this "battle" of which Don speaks? What do Labour want to do? Block it?
If they have positive ideas for what do with the acquis, once it's all in UK law, let's hear them.
So far it still seems that Labour is reacting to all the Government's moves and being dragged kicking and screaming down the Brexit road rather than offering their own alternative vision.
Shadow Brexit Secretary Sir Keir Starmer vowed his party would fight Ms May “all the way” if she tried to use Brexit as an opportunity to adopt the so-called “Henry VIII powers”.
The expected move by the Government would render Parliament almost powerless to stop Tory ministers in post-Brexit Britain from dumping rights previously enshrined in EU law.
What they should be saying is: 'Let's leave the EU as we voted for but campaign to get elected on the back of a popular and right labour law policy'. Fat chance.
This is, of course, one reason why Remain lost. They don't like democracy or the fact that the people might elect governments whose policies they oppose. Shouting 'Vote Remain to protect labour laws' is tantamount to shouting 'Vote Remain becasue you know Labour will never form a government again and we can enact our policy through the back door'.0 -
If there's an early election, money will be found.williamglenn said:
A senior Tory MP told HuffPost UK the party was not as well off as Labour “in pure resource terms”, so had to ration its cash.Scott_P said:Tories giving up on Stoke
Perhaps something to bear in mind when betting on an early election.
But also worth considering that the Tories might be rationing money precisely because of the risk of a May election. (I have no inside knowledge here).0 -
She's my local MP; only met her a few times, but she seems like a decent person. Well-thought of, locally. Takes things seriously.Casino_Royale said:
I hear different things about May.Cyclefree said:TBH Farron's comment about May makes me rather warm to him. At least he has the class to accept that political opponents can be decent people even if you disagree with their views. And how refreshing to see a male politician take pride in a woman achieving the highest office.
(Unlike some of the rather Trumpian and debasing remarks posted on here over the weekend by some who should have known better.)
I hear that she is friendless, ruthless, disliked amongst colleagues, and blames others for their mistakes rather than backing them.
Then I hear from some interviewers and people who've known her/worked closely with her that she's one of the nicest and most honest politicians they've ever known, and the public seem rather fond of her.
Wouldn't call her charming; "nice"? probably not. But decent and (inasmuch as one can tell these things) seems principled enough.0 -
With the new info, Stoke Central feels like it's heading towards something like:
Labour: 33-35%
UKIP: 25-27%
LD: 18-19%
Con: 14-15%
Others: 6-7%
To me.0 -
Because he is upset someone on the Left said something vaguely nice about a Tory.Stark_Dawning said:Why does Don write
“In a really peculiar way I felt slightly proud of her when she became prime minister.” A very odd thing to say, isn’t it?
When the article has it as
“But in a really peculiar way I felt slightly proud of her when she became prime minister. A very odd thing to say, isn’t it?”
?
i.e. Farron himself drew attention to the oddness of his own remark.0 -
Or the more likely case, Patrick McLoughlin is no Andrew Feldman when it comes to raising money.david_herdson said:
If there's an early election, money will be found.williamglenn said:
A senior Tory MP told HuffPost UK the party was not as well off as Labour “in pure resource terms”, so had to ration its cash.Scott_P said:Tories giving up on Stoke
Perhaps something to bear in mind when betting on an early election.
But also worth considering that the Tories might be rationing money precisely because of the risk of a May election. (I have no inside knowledge here).0 -
Clearly you can't read. That's not what they are saying.Patrick said:
So Labour is basically saying 'we must continue to let the EU decide our Labour laws as UK independent governments and parliaments are not to be trusted'. Good luck with that.TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour will not back a vital piece of Theresa May’s Brexit legislation if it contains sweeping powers allowing ministers to scrap vital workers’ rights, human rights and environmental provisions.Casino_Royale said:
Ah. Is there a source for that?TheScreamingEagles said:
I assumed he meant the Henry VIII clauses/powers that Labour will block.Casino_Royale said:It's the Great Repeal Bill.
And what is this "battle" of which Don speaks? What do Labour want to do? Block it?
If they have positive ideas for what do with the acquis, once it's all in UK law, let's hear them.
So far it still seems that Labour is reacting to all the Government's moves and being dragged kicking and screaming down the Brexit road rather than offering their own alternative vision.
Shadow Brexit Secretary Sir Keir Starmer vowed his party would fight Ms May “all the way” if she tried to use Brexit as an opportunity to adopt the so-called “Henry VIII powers”.
The expected move by the Government would render Parliament almost powerless to stop Tory ministers in post-Brexit Britain from dumping rights previously enshrined in EU law.
What they should be saying is: 'Let's leave the EU as we voted for but campaign to get elected on the back of a popular and right labour law policy'. Fat chance.
This is, of course, one reason why Remain lost. They don't like democracy or the fact that the people might elect governments whose policies they oppose. Shouting 'Vote Remain to protect labour laws' is tantamount to shouting 'Vote Remain becasue you know Labour will never form a government again and we can enact our policy through the back door'.
It is Mrs May who is saying all EU employment laws and protections will be honoured post Brexit by her, and Labour are saying 'no, sorry, we don't trust you'0 -
I can understand Labour's position on this, and it might be a vote winner for them.Casino_Royale said:
Cheers.TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour will not back a vital piece of Theresa May’s Brexit legislation if it contains sweeping powers allowing ministers to scrap vital workers’ rights, human rights and environmental provisions.Casino_Royale said:
Ah. Is there a source for that?TheScreamingEagles said:
I assumed he meant the Henry VIII clauses/powers that Labour will block.Casino_Royale said:It's the Great Repeal Bill.
And what is this "battle" of which Don speaks? What do Labour want to do? Block it?
If they have positive ideas for what do with the acquis, once it's all in UK law, let's hear them.
So far it still seems that Labour is reacting to all the Government's moves and being dragged kicking and screaming down the Brexit road rather than offering their own alternative vision.
Shadow Brexit Secretary Sir Keir Starmer vowed his party would fight Ms May “all the way” if she tried to use Brexit as an opportunity to adopt the so-called “Henry VIII powers”.
The expected move by the Government would render Parliament almost powerless to stop Tory ministers in post-Brexit Britain from dumping rights previously enshrined in EU law.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-labour-theresa-may-great-repeal-bill-rejection-a7538281.html
Just imagine how uncomfortable you and I would have felt if Tony Blair or Gordon Brown had used Henry VII clauses on so much legislation, a Tory leader wouldn't have given them a free pass.0 -
The comment that struck me was:david_herdson said:
If there's an early election, money will be found.williamglenn said:
A senior Tory MP told HuffPost UK the party was not as well off as Labour “in pure resource terms”, so had to ration its cash.Scott_P said:Tories giving up on Stoke
Perhaps something to bear in mind when betting on an early election.
But also worth considering that the Tories might be rationing money precisely because of the risk of a May election. (I have no inside knowledge here).
That doesn't make any sense. Stoke is so far away from Copeland that it's hard to imagine anyone split between, and Stoke has great transport links from most of England. So what are they getting at?HuffPo said:The problem is getting people into the constituency to campaign. We can’t do both places”, a party source said."
0 -
I know I am a bit late with this comment but Diane Abbott yesterday - what a total shambles.
More like an A380 plunging into a mountainside than a car crash.
On a more cheerful note - typo of the day: Someone meant to write "Sorry to bother you again" but for some reason 'bother' was replaced with 'bottom'.0 -
It's silly anyway as the Tories managed to self-censure themselves on liberalisation of employment law in the last parliament, and didn't make it a priority of the renegotiation either. But, it should be subject to the democratic vote as everything else. Just as it was before 1973, when we achieved plenty of reform just by ourselves.Patrick said:
So Labour is basically saying 'we must continue to let the EU decide our Labour laws as UK independent governments and parliaments are not to be trusted'. Good luck with that.TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour will not back a vital piece of Theresa May’s Brexit legislation if it contains sweeping powers allowing ministers to scrap vital workers’ rights, human rights and environmental provisions.Casino_Royale said:
Ah. Is there a source for that?TheScreamingEagles said:
I assumed he meant the Henry VIII clauses/powers that Labour will block.Casino_Royale said:It's the Great Repeal Bill.
And what is this "battle" of which Don speaks? What do Labour want to do? Block it?
If they have positive ideas for what do with the acquis, once it's all in UK law, let's hear them.
So far it still seems that Labour is reacting to all the Government's moves and being dragged kicking and screaming down the Brexit road rather than offering their own alternative vision.
Shadow Brexit Secretary Sir Keir Starmer vowed his party would fight Ms May “all the way” if she tried to use Brexit as an opportunity to adopt the so-called “Henry VIII powers”.
The expected move by the Government would render Parliament almost powerless to stop Tory ministers in post-Brexit Britain from dumping rights previously enshrined in EU law.
What they should be saying is: 'Let's leave the EU as we voted for but campaign to get elected on the back of a popular and right labour law policy'. Fat chance.
This is, of course, one reason why Remain lost. They don't like democracy or the fact that the people might elect governments whose policies they oppose. Shouting 'Vote Remain to protect labour laws' is tantamount to shouting 'Vote Remain becasue you know Labour will never form a government again and we can enact our policy through the back door'.
I'd argue moves to strengthen the acquis or liberalise it, post Brexit, should be subjects of major interest in the GE2020 election manifestos.
Or they would be if Labour wasn't led by an idiot.0 -
Clearly you can't read. That's not what they are saying.
It is Mrs May who is saying all EU employment laws and protections will be honoured post Brexit by her, and Labour are saying 'no, sorry, we don't trust you'
Are we not agreeing then? I believe I can read:
Labour will not back a vital piece of Theresa May’s Brexit legislation if it contains sweeping powers allowing ministers to scrap vital workers’ rights
so...Labour want to remove a UK government's ability to change an existing set of laws (which we'll adopt wholesale on exit). They don't believe in the sovereignty of Parliament. The whole point of Brexit is that Parliament gets to decide for good or bad (and not Brussels).
Labour is playing a very TACTICAL game here, trying to block a short term outcome, whilst completely flunking a STRATEGIC point, that parliaments are sovereign. Insane. I refer you back to the Battle of Britain thread a few days ago on the same.0 -
"The fact is that it will be Labour parliamentarians who do the heavy lifting in countering the worst extremes of Brexit."
Well, that gave me a good laugh to relieve the tedium of my afternoon.
On a related matter:
[14:12] Naeem Aslam, chief market analyst at Think Markets UK, said:
"Ahead of tomorrow’s Supreme Court’s decision, both FTSE and sterling are the major focus for investors. If the Supreme court provides a decision which is against the government’s unilateral power (triggering the article 50), we could see sterling moving higher. The reason will be that parliament will have much more to say in triggering Article 50 and most importantly, it fades the chances of Scotland prompting another referendum. Scotland can no longer play the card that the Brexit is against their will if the vote comes to the parliament. As for the FTSE, higher sterling could take some more wind out of the index.
On the flip side, if the Supreme court says that Theresa May does have a unilateral decision in activating article 50, we could see the sterling falling. Traders will perceive that Theresa May is going to achieve her “clean” Brexit without major hurdles. "
https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2017/jan/23/pound-hits-five-week-high-as-trump-fears-weaken-dollar-business-live
Mr. Aslam is almost certainly right about how the market will react, but this just goes to show how completely out with the fairies the markets are about the politics of Article 50. A 'clean Brexit without major hurdles' is unquestionably the best possible outcome for the economy. A confused situation, with the PM having attempt extremely difficult negotiations whilst fighting off partisan rearguard wrecking operations from grand-standing MPs would, if she couldn't brush them off, guarantee a chaotic Brexit and a worse deal for the UK, with the EU trying to drive a wedge between the government and parliament.
As for the idea that a Westminster vote would mean that the Scots would no longer play the card that the Brexit is against their will, words fail me!0 -
Reading between the lines to me it looks like they want Nuttall to win and don't want to split the right/Leave vote.tpfkar said:
The comment that struck me was:david_herdson said:
If there's an early election, money will be found.williamglenn said:
A senior Tory MP told HuffPost UK the party was not as well off as Labour “in pure resource terms”, so had to ration its cash.Scott_P said:Tories giving up on Stoke
Perhaps something to bear in mind when betting on an early election.
But also worth considering that the Tories might be rationing money precisely because of the risk of a May election. (I have no inside knowledge here).
That doesn't make any sense. Stoke is so far away from Copeland that it's hard to imagine anyone split between, and Stoke has great transport links from most of England. So what are they getting at?HuffPo said:The problem is getting people into the constituency to campaign. We can’t do both places”, a party source said."
0 -
Cross constituency tactical voting pact between Kippers and Tories?
Labour to be nutmegged by the nutcrackers.0 -
Henry VII? Sound. He may have been a dirty Tudor usurper and a bit of a centralising tyrant, but a least he led some useful administrative reforms of the Crown and established the pound avoirdupois as our standard systems of weights and measures.TheScreamingEagles said:
I can understand Labour's position on this, and it might be a vote winner for them.Casino_Royale said:
Cheers.TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour will not back a vital piece of Theresa May’s Brexit legislation if it contains sweeping powers allowing ministers to scrap vital workers’ rights, human rights and environmental provisions.Casino_Royale said:
Ah. Is there a source for that?TheScreamingEagles said:
I assumed he meant the Henry VIII clauses/powers that Labour will block.Casino_Royale said:It's the Great Repeal Bill.
And what is this "battle" of which Don speaks? What do Labour want to do? Block it?
If they have positive ideas for what do with the acquis, once it's all in UK law, let's hear them.
So far it still seems that Labour is reacting to all the Government's moves and being dragged kicking and screaming down the Brexit road rather than offering their own alternative vision.
Shadow Brexit Secretary Sir Keir Starmer vowed his party would fight Ms May “all the way” if she tried to use Brexit as an opportunity to adopt the so-called “Henry VIII powers”.
The expected move by the Government would render Parliament almost powerless to stop Tory ministers in post-Brexit Britain from dumping rights previously enshrined in EU law.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-labour-theresa-may-great-repeal-bill-rejection-a7538281.html
Just imagine how uncomfortable you and I would have felt if Tony Blair or Gordon Brown had used Henry VII clauses on so much legislation, a Tory leader wouldn't have given them a free pass.0 -
All I can remember about you from the last few days is you turning into such a snowflake over a benign cartoon.Patrick said:
Clearly you can't read. That's not what they are saying.
It is Mrs May who is saying all EU employment laws and protections will be honoured post Brexit by her, and Labour are saying 'no, sorry, we don't trust you'
Are we not agreeing then? I believe I can read:
Labour will not back a vital piece of Theresa May’s Brexit legislation if it contains sweeping powers allowing ministers to scrap vital workers’ rights
so...Labour want to remove a UK government's ability to change an existing set of laws (which we'll adopt wholesale on exit). They don't believe in the sovereignty of Parliament. The whole point of Brexit is that Parliament gets to decide for good or bad (and not Brussels).
Labour is playing a very TACTICAL game here, trying to block a short term outcome, whilst completely flunking a STRATEGIC point, that parliaments are sovereign. Insane. I refer you back to the Battle of Britain thread a few days ago on the same.
This is what you should pay attention to
Sir Keir gave Ms May credit for saying that workplace rights would be protected as the UK takes on existing EU law.0 -
There’s some sort of tech meeting in Milan this week.Morris_Dancer said:Good afternoon, everyone.
F1: piece on Liberty and the changes they want to make:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/38679158
We'll see what happens.0 -
He was also the last British monarch to die in credit.Casino_Royale said:
Henry VII? Sound. He may have been a dirty Tudor usurper and a bit of a centralising tyrant, but a least he led some useful administrative reforms of the Crown and established the pound avoirdupois as our standard systems of weights and measures.TheScreamingEagles said:
I can understand Labour's position on this, and it might be a vote winner for them.Casino_Royale said:
Cheers.TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour will not back a vital piece of Theresa May’s Brexit legislation if it contains sweeping powers allowing ministers to scrap vital workers’ rights, human rights and environmental provisions.Casino_Royale said:
Ah. Is there a source for that?TheScreamingEagles said:
I assumed he meant the Henry VIII clauses/powers that Labour will block.Casino_Royale said:It's the Great Repeal Bill.
And what is this "battle" of which Don speaks? What do Labour want to do? Block it?
If they have positive ideas for what do with the acquis, once it's all in UK law, let's hear them.
So far it still seems that Labour is reacting to all the Government's moves and being dragged kicking and screaming down the Brexit road rather than offering their own alternative vision.
Shadow Brexit Secretary Sir Keir Starmer vowed his party would fight Ms May “all the way” if she tried to use Brexit as an opportunity to adopt the so-called “Henry VIII powers”.
The expected move by the Government would render Parliament almost powerless to stop Tory ministers in post-Brexit Britain from dumping rights previously enshrined in EU law.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-labour-theresa-may-great-repeal-bill-rejection-a7538281.html
Just imagine how uncomfortable you and I would have felt if Tony Blair or Gordon Brown had used Henry VII clauses on so much legislation, a Tory leader wouldn't have given them a free pass.0 -
Henry VII a filthy Lancastrian usurper though he did have the sense to marry someone from Yorkshire.Casino_Royale said:
Henry VII? Sound. He may have been a dirty Tudor usurper and a bit of a centralising tyrant, but a least he led some useful administrative reforms of the Crown and established the pound avoirdupois as our standard systems of weights and measures.TheScreamingEagles said:
I can understand Labour's position on this, and it might be a vote winner for them.Casino_Royale said:
Cheers.TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour will not back a vital piece of Theresa May’s Brexit legislation if it contains sweeping powers allowing ministers to scrap vital workers’ rights, human rights and environmental provisions.Casino_Royale said:
Ah. Is there a source for that?TheScreamingEagles said:
I assumed he meant the Henry VIII clauses/powers that Labour will block.Casino_Royale said:It's the Great Repeal Bill.
And what is this "battle" of which Don speaks? What do Labour want to do? Block it?
If they have positive ideas for what do with the acquis, once it's all in UK law, let's hear them.
So far it still seems that Labour is reacting to all the Government's moves and being dragged kicking and screaming down the Brexit road rather than offering their own alternative vision.
Shadow Brexit Secretary Sir Keir Starmer vowed his party would fight Ms May “all the way” if she tried to use Brexit as an opportunity to adopt the so-called “Henry VIII powers”.
The expected move by the Government would render Parliament almost powerless to stop Tory ministers in post-Brexit Britain from dumping rights previously enshrined in EU law.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-labour-theresa-may-great-repeal-bill-rejection-a7538281.html
Just imagine how uncomfortable you and I would have felt if Tony Blair or Gordon Brown had used Henry VII clauses on so much legislation, a Tory leader wouldn't have given them a free pass.0 -
Nuttall has the raw material to work with to win. He takes a Commons seat, and Carswell becomes Speaker, usefully usurping Farage's legacy and causing a mass panic to Labour in the North. Job done.Philip_Thompson said:
Reading between the lines to me it looks like they want Nuttall to win and don't want to split the right/Leave vote.tpfkar said:
The comment that struck me was:david_herdson said:
If there's an early election, money will be found.williamglenn said:
A senior Tory MP told HuffPost UK the party was not as well off as Labour “in pure resource terms”, so had to ration its cash.Scott_P said:Tories giving up on Stoke
Perhaps something to bear in mind when betting on an early election.
But also worth considering that the Tories might be rationing money precisely because of the risk of a May election. (I have no inside knowledge here).
That doesn't make any sense. Stoke is so far away from Copeland that it's hard to imagine anyone split between, and Stoke has great transport links from most of England. So what are they getting at?HuffPo said:The problem is getting people into the constituency to campaign. We can’t do both places”, a party source said."
But I don't think UKIP have a scooby how to work a seat. Nor why Stokies should be particularly animated to voter for him.0 -
Carswell 16/1 next speaker... great tip @TheScreamingEagles this could skint Ladbrokes!!Casino_Royale said:
Nuttall has the raw material to work with to win. He takes a Commons seat, and Carswell becomes Speaker, usefully usurping Farage's legacy and causing a mass panic to Labour in the North. Job done.Philip_Thompson said:
Reading between the lines to me it looks like they want Nuttall to win and don't want to split the right/Leave vote.tpfkar said:
The comment that struck me was:david_herdson said:
If there's an early election, money will be found.williamglenn said:
A senior Tory MP told HuffPost UK the party was not as well off as Labour “in pure resource terms”, so had to ration its cash.Scott_P said:Tories giving up on Stoke
Perhaps something to bear in mind when betting on an early election.
But also worth considering that the Tories might be rationing money precisely because of the risk of a May election. (I have no inside knowledge here).
That doesn't make any sense. Stoke is so far away from Copeland that it's hard to imagine anyone split between, and Stoke has great transport links from most of England. So what are they getting at?HuffPo said:The problem is getting people into the constituency to campaign. We can’t do both places”, a party source said."
But I don't think UKIP have a scooby how to work a seat. Nor why Stokies should be particularly animated to voter for him.
https://sports.ladbrokes.com/en-af/betting/politics/british/next-speaker/next-house-of-commons-speaker/223185105/0 -
Ms Cyclefree,
"TBH Farron's comment about May makes me rather warm to him. At least he has the class to accept that political opponents can be decent people even if you disagree with their views."
Exactly. That's why I have doubts about Burnham. The "I've never kissed a Tory" t-shirt story made me doubt his sanity. If a gorgeous women came up to me when I was young and single and said "Let's have mad, passionate sex. But I voted Tory at the last election," guess what I would have done.
It's worrying that Burnham wasn't laughed out of the Labour Party.0 -
You mean as an individual or as representative of the nation?Carolus_Rex said:
He was also the last British monarch to die in credit.Casino_Royale said:
Henry VII? Sound. He may have been a dirty Tudor usurper and a bit of a centralising tyrant, but a least he led some useful administrative reforms of the Crown and established the pound avoirdupois as our standard systems of weights and measures.TheScreamingEagles said:
I can understand Labour's position on this, and it might be a vote winner for them.Casino_Royale said:
Cheers.TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour will not back a vital piece of Theresa May’s Brexit legislation if it contains sweeping powers allowing ministers to scrap vital workers’ rights, human rights and environmental provisions.Casino_Royale said:
Ah. Is there a source for that?TheScreamingEagles said:
I assumed he meant the Henry VIII clauses/powers that Labour will block.Casino_Royale said:It's the Great Repeal Bill.
And what is this "battle" of which Don speaks? What do Labour want to do? Block it?
If they have positive ideas for what do with the acquis, once it's all in UK law, let's hear them.
So far it still seems that Labour is reacting to all the Government's moves and being dragged kicking and screaming down the Brexit road rather than offering their own alternative vision.
Shadow Brexit Secretary Sir Keir Starmer vowed his party would fight Ms May “all the way” if she tried to use Brexit as an opportunity to adopt the so-called “Henry VIII powers”.
The expected move by the Government would render Parliament almost powerless to stop Tory ministers in post-Brexit Britain from dumping rights previously enshrined in EU law.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-labour-theresa-may-great-repeal-bill-rejection-a7538281.html
Just imagine how uncomfortable you and I would have felt if Tony Blair or Gordon Brown had used Henry VII clauses on so much legislation, a Tory leader wouldn't have given them a free pass.0 -
The fact bthat they lose pretty well every seat, at whatever level, they defend (Clacton aside) speaks volumes.Casino_Royale said:
Nuttall has the raw material to work with to win. He takes a Commons seat, and Carswell becomes Speaker, usefully usurping Farage's legacy and causing a mass panic to Labour in the North. Job done.Philip_Thompson said:
Reading between the lines to me it looks like they want Nuttall to win and don't want to split the right/Leave vote.tpfkar said:
The comment that struck me was:david_herdson said:
If there's an early election, money will be found.williamglenn said:
A senior Tory MP told HuffPost UK the party was not as well off as Labour “in pure resource terms”, so had to ration its cash.Scott_P said:Tories giving up on Stoke
Perhaps something to bear in mind when betting on an early election.
But also worth considering that the Tories might be rationing money precisely because of the risk of a May election. (I have no inside knowledge here).
That doesn't make any sense. Stoke is so far away from Copeland that it's hard to imagine anyone split between, and Stoke has great transport links from most of England. So what are they getting at?HuffPo said:The problem is getting people into the constituency to campaign. We can’t do both places”, a party source said."
But I don't think UKIP have a scooby how to work a seat. Nor why Stokies should be particularly animated to voter for him.0 -
I wish I'd met such women.CD13 said:Ms Cyclefree,
"TBH Farron's comment about May makes me rather warm to him. At least he has the class to accept that political opponents can be decent people even if you disagree with their views."
Exactly. That's why I have doubts about Burnham. The "I've never kissed a Tory" t-shirt story made me doubt his sanity. If a gorgeous women came up to me when I was young and single and said "Let's have mad, passionate sex. But I voted Tory at the last election," guess what I would have done.
It's worrying that Burnham wasn't laughed out of the Labour Party.0 -
Wasn't he Welsh?TheScreamingEagles said:
Henry VII a filthy Lancastrian usurper though he did have the sense to marry someone from Yorkshire.Casino_Royale said:
Henry VII? Sound. He may have been a dirty Tudor usurper and a bit of a centralising tyrant, but a least he led some useful administrative reforms of the Crown and established the pound avoirdupois as our standard systems of weights and measures.TheScreamingEagles said:
I can understand Labour's position on this, and it might be a vote winner for them.Casino_Royale said:
Cheers.TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour will not back a vital piece of Theresa May’s Brexit legislation if it contains sweeping powers allowing ministers to scrap vital workers’ rights, human rights and environmental provisions.Casino_Royale said:
Ah. Is there a source for that?TheScreamingEagles said:
I assumed he meant the Henry VIII clauses/powers that Labour will block.Casino_Royale said:It's the Great Repeal Bill.
And what is this "battle" of which Don speaks? What do Labour want to do? Block it?
If they have positive ideas for what do with the acquis, once it's all in UK law, let's hear them.
So far it still seems that Labour is reacting to all the Government's moves and being dragged kicking and screaming down the Brexit road rather than offering their own alternative vision.
Shadow Brexit Secretary Sir Keir Starmer vowed his party would fight Ms May “all the way” if she tried to use Brexit as an opportunity to adopt the so-called “Henry VIII powers”.
The expected move by the Government would render Parliament almost powerless to stop Tory ministers in post-Brexit Britain from dumping rights previously enshrined in EU law.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-labour-theresa-may-great-repeal-bill-rejection-a7538281.html
Just imagine how uncomfortable you and I would have felt if Tony Blair or Gordon Brown had used Henry VII clauses on so much legislation, a Tory leader wouldn't have given them a free pass.0 -
Mr Royale,
"I wish I'd met such women."
We can all dream. In fact, she could have been wearing a Pol Pot t-shirt or one with a Nazi swastika. Fashion sense or politics isn't all that important.0 -
No distinction in those days.OldKingCole said:
You mean as an individual or as representative of the nation?Carolus_Rex said:
He was also the last British monarch to die in credit.Casino_Royale said:
Henry VII? Sound. He may have been a dirty Tudor usurper and a bit of a centralising tyrant, but a least he led some useful administrative reforms of the Crown and established the pound avoirdupois as our standard systems of weights and measures.TheScreamingEagles said:
I can understand Labour's position on this, and it might be a vote winner for them.Casino_Royale said:
Cheers.TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour will not back a vital piece of Theresa May’s Brexit legislation if it contains sweeping powers allowing ministers to scrap vital workers’ rights, human rights and environmental provisions.Casino_Royale said:
Ah. Is there a source for that?TheScreamingEagles said:
I assumed he meant the Henry VIII clauses/powers that Labour will block.Casino_Royale said:It's the Great Repeal Bill.
And what is this "battle" of which Don speaks? What do Labour want to do? Block it?
If they have positive ideas for what do with the acquis, once it's all in UK law, let's hear them.
So far it still seems that Labour is reacting to all the Government's moves and being dragged kicking and screaming down the Brexit road rather than offering their own alternative vision.
Shadow Brexit Secretary Sir Keir Starmer vowed his party would fight Ms May “all the way” if she tried to use Brexit as an opportunity to adopt the so-called “Henry VIII powers”.
The expected move by the Government would render Parliament almost powerless to stop Tory ministers in post-Brexit Britain from dumping rights previously enshrined in EU law.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-labour-theresa-may-great-repeal-bill-rejection-a7538281.html
Just imagine how uncomfortable you and I would have felt if Tony Blair or Gordon Brown had used Henry VII clauses on so much legislation, a Tory leader wouldn't have given them a free pass.0 -
Marion Le Pen?CD13 said:Mr Royale,
"I wish I'd met such women."
We can all dream. In fact, she could have been wearing a Pol Pot t-shirt or one with a Nazi swastika. Fashion sense or politics isn't all that important.
You would.0 -
He helped win the War of the Roses for the red team, makes him a filthy Lancastrian usurper in my book.david_herdson said:
Wasn't he Welsh?TheScreamingEagles said:
Henry VII a filthy Lancastrian usurper though he did have the sense to marry someone from Yorkshire.Casino_Royale said:
Henry VII? Sound. He may have been a dirty Tudor usurper and a bit of a centralising tyrant, but a least he led some useful administrative reforms of the Crown and established the pound avoirdupois as our standard systems of weights and measures.TheScreamingEagles said:
I can understand Labour's position on this, and it might be a vote winner for them.Casino_Royale said:
Cheers.TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour will not back a vital piece of Theresa May’s Brexit legislation if it contains sweeping powers allowing ministers to scrap vital workers’ rights, human rights and environmental provisions.Casino_Royale said:
Ah. Is there a source for that?TheScreamingEagles said:
I assumed he meant the Henry VIII clauses/powers that Labour will block.Casino_Royale said:It's the Great Repeal Bill.
And what is this "battle" of which Don speaks? What do Labour want to do? Block it?
If they have positive ideas for what do with the acquis, once it's all in UK law, let's hear them.
So far it still seems that Labour is reacting to all the Government's moves and being dragged kicking and screaming down the Brexit road rather than offering their own alternative vision.
Shadow Brexit Secretary Sir Keir Starmer vowed his party would fight Ms May “all the way” if she tried to use Brexit as an opportunity to adopt the so-called “Henry VIII powers”.
The expected move by the Government would render Parliament almost powerless to stop Tory ministers in post-Brexit Britain from dumping rights previously enshrined in EU law.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-labour-theresa-may-great-repeal-bill-rejection-a7538281.html
Just imagine how uncomfortable you and I would have felt if Tony Blair or Gordon Brown had used Henry VII clauses on so much legislation, a Tory leader wouldn't have given them a free pass.0 -
Actually, I've just been asked in the last few minutes to help out in Copeland for a day. It's 3 hours to Egremont for me; it's only 1 hr 45 mins to Stoke (according to AA routefinder). I won't be going to Stoke under any circumstances but Copeland would at least be a nice day out.tpfkar said:
The comment that struck me was:david_herdson said:
If there's an early election, money will be found.williamglenn said:
A senior Tory MP told HuffPost UK the party was not as well off as Labour “in pure resource terms”, so had to ration its cash.Scott_P said:Tories giving up on Stoke
Perhaps something to bear in mind when betting on an early election.
But also worth considering that the Tories might be rationing money precisely because of the risk of a May election. (I have no inside knowledge here).
That doesn't make any sense. Stoke is so far away from Copeland that it's hard to imagine anyone split between, and Stoke has great transport links from most of England. So what are they getting at?HuffPo said:The problem is getting people into the constituency to campaign. We can’t do both places”, a party source said."
0 -
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/23/wales-access-to-single-market-brexit-carwyn-jones-leanne-wood
Wales unhappy with May's plans.0 -
Not only is she a Tory.
Tribal, much?
As ever, the right think the left are good people with bad ideas
The left think the right are bad people
Farron's comment does him credit.
Brind's article does himself none.0 -
I've corrected it for you....williamglenn said:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/23/wales-access-to-single-market-brexit-carwyn-jones-leanne-wood
Welsh Remainers unhappy with May's plans.
0 -
I've just started rewatching Big Bang Theory from the start on Netflix.Casino_Royale said:
I wish I'd met such women.CD13 said:Ms Cyclefree,
"TBH Farron's comment about May makes me rather warm to him. At least he has the class to accept that political opponents can be decent people even if you disagree with their views."
Exactly. That's why I have doubts about Burnham. The "I've never kissed a Tory" t-shirt story made me doubt his sanity. If a gorgeous women came up to me when I was young and single and said "Let's have mad, passionate sex. But I voted Tory at the last election," guess what I would have done.
It's worrying that Burnham wasn't laughed out of the Labour Party.
I instantly thought of Raj and Penny
0 -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38723040
GCHQ director resigns "to spend more time with his family"
An explanation that seems so obviously bullshit that it's probably true.
I'll go;
1/2 true, or mostly true.
2/1 been blackmailed/phished, or some other scandal which may or may not emerge.0 -
From the FT: "Trump: US to impose very major border tax
US president Donald Trump has said that America will impose a very major border tax, echoing his protectionist campaign promises, according to wire reports."0 -
Frothing pottymouth rather than snowflake - but point taken. :-)TheScreamingEagles said:
All I can remember about you from the last few days is you turning into such a snowflake over a benign cartoon.Patrick said:
Clearly you can't read. That's not what they are saying.
It is Mrs May who is saying all EU employment laws and protections will be honoured post Brexit by her, and Labour are saying 'no, sorry, we don't trust you'
Are we not agreeing then? I believe I can read:
Labour will not back a vital piece of Theresa May’s Brexit legislation if it contains sweeping powers allowing ministers to scrap vital workers’ rights
so...Labour want to remove a UK government's ability to change an existing set of laws (which we'll adopt wholesale on exit). They don't believe in the sovereignty of Parliament. The whole point of Brexit is that Parliament gets to decide for good or bad (and not Brussels).
Labour is playing a very TACTICAL game here, trying to block a short term outcome, whilst completely flunking a STRATEGIC point, that parliaments are sovereign. Insane. I refer you back to the Battle of Britain thread a few days ago on the same.
This is what you should pay attention to
Sir Keir gave Ms May credit for saying that workplace rights would be protected as the UK takes on existing EU law.
I'm still right about Labour and this law. Credit for protecting rights upon assuming the acquis, but teddy in corner if a future parliament votes to change the law. Hmmm....0 -
Hannigan gone? Hoo-fucking-rah.Pong said:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38723040
GCHQ director resigns "to spend more time with his family"
An explanation that seems so obviously bullshit that it's probably true.0 -
7hr 30mins for me. If I got up at 5am in Hampshire on a Sat, I could be there by 1.30pm.david_herdson said:
Actually, I've just been asked in the last few minutes to help out in Copeland for a day. It's 3 hours to Egremont for me; it's only 1 hr 45 mins to Stoke (according to AA routefinder). I won't be going to Stoke under any circumstances but Copeland would at least be a nice day out.tpfkar said:
The comment that struck me was:david_herdson said:
If there's an early election, money will be found.williamglenn said:
A senior Tory MP told HuffPost UK the party was not as well off as Labour “in pure resource terms”, so had to ration its cash.Scott_P said:Tories giving up on Stoke
Perhaps something to bear in mind when betting on an early election.
But also worth considering that the Tories might be rationing money precisely because of the risk of a May election. (I have no inside knowledge here).
That doesn't make any sense. Stoke is so far away from Copeland that it's hard to imagine anyone split between, and Stoke has great transport links from most of England. So what are they getting at?HuffPo said:The problem is getting people into the constituency to campaign. We can’t do both places”, a party source said."
It would be earlier (i.e. just by midday) except the train service from Carlisle is simply diabolical.0 -
lol. I'm not in the loop.John_M said:
Hannigan gone? Hoo-fucking-rah.Pong said:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38723040
GCHQ director resigns "to spend more time with his family"
An explanation that seems so obviously bullshit that it's probably true.
Who did he piss off?0 -
Not a fan?John_M said:
Hannigan gone? Hoo-fucking-rah.Pong said:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38723040
GCHQ director resigns "to spend more time with his family"
An explanation that seems so obviously bullshit that it's probably true.0 -
Obviously wasn't subtle enoughCarlottaVance said:
Not a fan?John_M said:
Hannigan gone? Hoo-fucking-rah.Pong said:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38723040
GCHQ director resigns "to spend more time with his family"
An explanation that seems so obviously bullshit that it's probably true.
. 0 -
Ms Plato,
I used to be quite left wing in my youth, and at University I was a member of the Socialist Society. but I probably misread some of the male members who professed to be 'feminists'. I assumed it was a pathetic but transparent attempt to get into the women's knickers. But looking back, I guess that many actually believed what they were saying.
It still seems incredible, even after all these years.0
![[Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/d2ea526b1b06ed109333f390c7ae956b_100.png)
