The red flag of Brexit. All those right-wing souverainistes agitating to implement Tony Benn and Michael Foot's agenda should face a terrible reckoning.
I think that the very worst argument against Brexit is that the EU keeps the voters at bay. I don't like socialism, but if that's what people vote for, I'll have to suck it up.
The UK was an entity in terminal political decline before we joined the EEC, and we're now back on the fast track to historical oblivion.
I expect that's why the Nationalists in Scotland had the worst result of any party in the recent GE......
Their second best ever GE and an absolute majority of Scottish seats?
The trend is not their friend....
FWIW the Daily Record haven't published Scottish voting figures from last week's Survation poll. However, Survation used the data and forecasted 6 SNP gains !
With so many seats so tight, a butterfly flapping its wings in the Amazon could set in motion a chain of events where the SNP won six seats.
The red flag of Brexit. All those right-wing souverainistes agitating to implement Tony Benn and Michael Foot's agenda should face a terrible reckoning.
I think that the very worst argument against Brexit is that the EU keeps the voters at bay. I don't like socialism, but if that's what people vote for, I'll have to suck it up.
The UK was an entity in terminal political decline before we joined the EEC, and we're now back on the fast track to historical oblivion.
I expect that's why the Nationalists in Scotland had the worst result of any party in the recent GE......
Their second best ever GE and an absolute majority of Scottish seats?
Yoon arithmetic:
In 2018 Celtic win the Scottish premier league by only 15 points, half the margin that they managed this year, 'The' Rangers (coincidentally the standard bearer for so many Yoon hopes & dreams) are second after coming third in 2017.
'Celtic have had the worst result of any team in this year's league, The Rangers are the real winners, Pedro is a genius etc, etc'
Yep, I do agree Labour made a very bad call politically. Whether it was a bad one economically is much more open to question.
If - as is being reported - Grenfell (and many other blocks in London and elsewhere) were being illegally sublet to multiple occupancy, then maybe Labour takes some of the blame, for that obvious bad economic consequence on the housing market? But I don't expect anyone in Labour to be putting their hands up to that one...
Where's the bad economic consequence on the housing market? The problem with the housing market is not enough supply to meet demand (because of the mad anti-construction Mary-Whitehouse-Meets-Brezhnev British planning system), so more people squeezing themselves into smaller places is helpful, no?
Perhaps the UK should get a handle on immigration both legal and otherwise first? If people are sleeping 10 to a flat, it's highly likely they have no right to be here in the first place. Why on earth should we be concreting over the Green Belt to accommodate them.
It's not just non-UK immigrants living in shitty flat-share situations in London right now. People from all over the UK want to live there, and ambitious young people don't have any better options.
Letting the market build new housing when the population grows isn't a mysteriously difficult problem. If you're really bothered about the green belt then you can let people build upwards as well; This is one of the big differences with Tokyo, which has also got a growing population, but it isn't resulting in silly rents.
Britain simply has too much government involvement in deciding who is allowed to build what where, and it's having all the same obvious, predictable consequences that excessive government control has on the Venezuelan toilet paper market.
The government needs to invest in development away from London. Whether the government builds new towns or refurbishes existing stock or even brings back the northern powerhouse guy, it needs to do something to address regional economic imbalances.
Mr. Borough, an alarming finding. I'm not sure the people of Venezuela would agree.
It would be interesting to ask the 43% which country they think most closely matches their idea of a 'genuinely socialist' government.
Agreed. It's a meaningless question unless you ask people what they understand by the term "genuinely socialist". I bet it's not Cuba or the former Soviet Union.
I imagine that people would have in mind a government like that of Clement Attlee, not Fidel Castro.
I hope not, the Attlee government was an unmitigated disaster in terms of economics and industrial policy (nationalisation of road transport, for heaven's sake!). Indeed we are still very badly affected by it, in the unwieldy structure of the NHS.
Nonsense.The changes that Attlee made formed the basis of consensual politics, shared by both Tory and Labour,that continued up until Margaret Thatcher declared class war in 1979.Have you forgotten the generations of people not having any money to pay for a doctor?
Yep, I do agree Labour made a very bad call politically. Whether it was a bad one economically is much more open to question.
If - as is being reported - Grenfell (and many other blocks in London and elsewhere) were being illegally sublet to multiple occupancy, then maybe Labour takes some of the blame, for that obvious bad economic consequence on the housing market? But I don't expect anyone in Labour to be putting their hands up to that one...
Where's the bad economic consequence on the housing market? The problem with the housing market is not enough supply to meet demand (because of the mad anti-construction Mary-Whitehouse-Meets-Brezhnev British planning system), so more people squeezing themselves into smaller places is helpful, no?
Perhaps the UK should get a handle on immigration both legal and otherwise first? If people are sleeping 10 to a flat, it's highly likely they have no right to be here in the first place. Why on earth should we be concreting over the Green Belt to accommodate them.
It's not just non-UK immigrants living in shitty flat-share situations in London right now. People from all over the UK want to live there, and ambitious young people don't have any better options.
Letting the market build new housing when the population grows isn't a mysteriously difficult problem. If you're really bothered about the green belt then you can let people build upwards as well; This is one of the big differences with Tokyo, which has also got a growing population, but it isn't resulting in silly rents.
Britain simply has too much government involvement in deciding who is allowed to build what where, and it's having all the same obvious, predictable consequences that excessive government control has on the Venezuelan toilet paper market.
The government needs to invest in development away from London. Whether the government builds new towns or refurbishes existing stock or even brings back the northern powerhouse guy, it needs to do something to address regional economic imbalances.
One thing Govt. could do right now would be to say that anybody would be guaranteed to get planning permission to build on their garden if it was for either a) social housing or b) property in the top two council tax bands.
After all, might as well flog it - Corbyn's only going to tax it anyway....
Mr. F, perhaps. But Corbyn's closer to Castro than Attlee.
Get a grip Mr Morris, you sound like you're beginning to believe your own side's spin. Labour's manifesto was mainstream 1980s social democracy. Would pass as normal politics anywhere else.
Where any parallel with Fidel Castro can be drawn is beyond me. It's this sort of hyperbolic nonsense that lost you votes two weeks ago because frankly people aren't as stupid as the dead tree press likes to think.
Calm down. Heat getting to you? I'm following the graphic on the threader – if you have an issue with the change numbers pick it up with Mike. I'm sure there is a good reason for them.
Mr. F, perhaps. But Corbyn's closer to Castro than Attlee.
Get a grip Mr Morris, you sound like you're beginning to believe your own side's spin. Labour's manifesto was mainstream 1980s social democracy. Would pass as normal politics anywhere else.
Where any parallel with Fidel Castro can be drawn is beyond me. It's this sort of hyperbolic nonsense that lost you votes two weeks ago because frankly people aren't as stupid as the dead tree press likes to think.
Quite right. Shades of the PB Tories calling Ed Miliband a marxist for his energy cap policy – which was then duly adopted by that well known Commie, Theresa May.
Nonsense.The changes that Attlee made formed the basis of consensual politics, shared by both Tory and Labour,that continued up until Margaret Thatcher declared class war in 1979.Have you forgotten the generations of people not having any money to pay for a doctor?
You are partly right, in that the decline of the UK which was exacerbated by the post-war consensus wasn't reversed until Maggie came into power and transformed us from the 'sick man of Europe' to one of the most succcessful European economies. Even so, many of the changes introduced by the Attlee government were, thank goodness, reversed pretty pronto, including the looniest of all, which is the one I mentioned.
As for people not being able to pay for doctors, every single party standing in the 1945 election was committed to introducing free healthcare - building on work done by the wartime coalition under a Conservative PM. The problem was that the Attlee government implemented that aim (very controversially at the time) by means of a monolithic nationalised industry; no other country in the Western world made that mistake, and it is one that haunts us to this day.
IMHO the last time the UK government was as inept as this was the Suez crisis.
Governments in between have done a lot of stuff neither they nor the rest of the country can be proud of, but none of them have made such a blinkered and overweening horlicks of so many things at the same time.
Yep, I do agree Labour made a very bad call politically. Whether it was a bad one economically is much more open to question.
If - as is being reported - Grenfell (and many other blocks in London and elsewhere) were being illegally sublet to multiple occupancy, then maybe Labour takes some of the blame, for that obvious bad economic consequence on the housing market? But I don't expect anyone in Labour to be putting their hands up to that one...
Where's the bad economic consequence on the housing market? The problem with the housing market is not enough supply to meet demand (because of the mad anti-construction Mary-Whitehouse-Meets-Brezhnev British planning system), so more people squeezing themselves into smaller places is helpful, no?
Perhaps the UK should get a handle on immigration both legal and otherwise first? If people are sleeping 10 to a flat, it's highly likely they have no right to be here in the first place. Why on earth should we be concreting over the Green Belt to accommodate them.
It's not just non-UK immigrants living in shitty flat-share situations in London right now. People from all over the UK want to live there, and ambitious young people don't have any better options.
Letting the market build new housing when the population grows isn't a mysteriously difficult problem. If you're really bothered about the green belt then you can let people build upwards as well; This is one of the big differences with Tokyo, which has also got a growing population, but it isn't resulting in silly rents.
Britain simply has too much government involvement in deciding who is allowed to build what where, and it's having all the same obvious, predictable consequences that excessive government control has on the Venezuelan toilet paper market.
The government needs to invest in development away from London. Whether the government builds new towns or refurbishes existing stock or even brings back the northern powerhouse guy, it needs to do something to address regional economic imbalances.
No! Soviet Communism didn't work in the Soviet Union and it won't work in Britain. The government doesn't need to decide where people should live and invest in development there. It needs to let people build houses where they want to live. They want to live in London. There's plenty of room to build, London is almost entirely low-rise.
FPT Ian Dale said: '1979-Callaghan 269 seats, resigned. 1992-Kinnock 271 seats, resigned. 2017-Corbyn 262 seats, claims victory & orders the winner to resign'
Such ignorance! Callaghan did not resign in 1979 following his election defeat. He continued as party leader until November 1980 when Foot beat Healey to become his successor. Moroeover, Kinnock did not resign in 1987 despite gaining only 20 seats to bring Labour up to 229.
The red flag of Brexit. All those right-wing souverainistes agitating to implement Tony Benn and Michael Foot's agenda should face a terrible reckoning.
It is not just the UK, Sanders has a 10% lead over Trump in the latest US poll, Melenchon had a reasonable performance in France, Spain has Podemos, Greece has Syriza etc. However once socialists get in people quickly change their minds, in Greece the conservative New Democracy party now has a clear lead in polls
Quite right. Shades of the PB Tories calling Ed Miliband a marxist for his energy cap policy – which was then duly adopted by that well known Commie, Theresa May.
The red flag of Brexit. All those right-wing souverainistes agitating to implement Tony Benn and Michael Foot's agenda should face a terrible reckoning.
It is not just the UK, Sanders has a 10% lead over Trump in the latest US poll, Melenchon had a reasonable performance in France, Spain has Podemos, Greece has Syriza etc. However once socialists get in people quickly change their minds, in Greece the conservative New Democracy party now has a clear lead in polls
How much of it is votes for a particular thing, as opposed to votes against the status quo?
Quite right. Shades of the PB Tories calling Ed Miliband a marxist for his energy cap policy – which was then duly adopted by that well known Commie, Theresa May.
Except it wasn't adopted by Theresa May.
Something similar enough was. We gave up the centre ground of economic policy as soon as she reheated those shitty Ed Miliband ideas.
"According to some apartment builders quoted in The Australian newspaper, every residential tower block built in Melbourne over the past 20 years incorporates the cladding."
Mr. F, perhaps. But Corbyn's closer to Castro than Attlee.
Get a grip Mr Morris, you sound like you're beginning to believe your own side's spin. Labour's manifesto was mainstream 1980s social democracy. Would pass as normal politics anywhere else.
Where any parallel with Fidel Castro can be drawn is beyond me. It's this sort of hyperbolic nonsense that lost you votes two weeks ago because frankly people aren't as stupid as the dead tree press likes to think.
There is plenty of evidence that Corbyn, McDonnell and Milne are not mainstream social democrats. Many who voted Labour are ignorant of that truth or believe that they will be constrained in power or thought that there was no realistic prospect of a Labour majority. I also believe that many assumed that the attacks on the leadership's beliefs was a classic red scare. I wish it was. On the other hand there is a reversal of the normal situation in that the leadership are way left of the majority of supporters and have yet to build a large scale extra-parliamentary movement. I also suspect that Corbyn although an ideologically fixated individual may lack the steel needed. A Corbyn government would be dangerous waters though.
Quite right. Shades of the PB Tories calling Ed Miliband a marxist for his energy cap policy – which was then duly adopted by that well known Commie, Theresa May.
Except it wasn't adopted by Theresa May.
Yes, there are differences if you are being deeply pedantic. But we have been here many times before!
Yep, I do agree Labour made a very bad call politically. Whether it was a bad one economically is much more open to question.
If - as is being reported - Grenfell (and many other blocks in London and elsewhere) were being illegally sublet to multiple occupancy, then maybe Labour takes some of the blame, for that obvious bad economic consequence on the housing market? But I don't expect anyone in Labour to be putting their hands up to that one...
Where's the bad economic consequence on the housing market? The problem with the housing market is not enough supply to meet demand (because of the mad anti-construction Mary-Whitehouse-Meets-Brezhnev British planning system), so more people squeezing themselves into smaller places is helpful, no?
Perhaps the UK should get a handle on immigration both legal and otherwise first? If people are sleeping 10 to a flat, it's highly likely they have no right to be here in the first place. Why on earth should we be concreting over the Green Belt to accommodate them.
It's not just non-UK immigrants living in shitty flat-share situations in London right now. People from all over the UK want to live there, and ambitious young people don't have any better options.
Letting the market build new housing when the population grows isn't a mysteriously difficult problem. If you're really bothered about the green belt then you can let people build upwards as well; This is one of the big differences with Tokyo, which has also got a growing population, but it isn't resulting in silly rents.
Britain simply has too much government involvement in deciding who is allowed to build what where, and it's having all the same obvious, predictable consequences that excessive government control has on the Venezuelan toilet paper market.
The government needs to invest in development away from London. Whether the government builds new towns or refurbishes existing stock or even brings back the northern powerhouse guy, it needs to do something to address regional economic imbalances.
No! Soviet Communism didn't work in the Soviet Union and it won't work in Britain. The government doesn't need to decide where people should live and invest in development there. It needs to let people build houses where they want to live. They want to live in London. There's plenty of room to build, London is almost entirely low-rise.
Good luck getting people to accept living in high rise accommodation after last week.
I am really not being pedantic. The differences go to the heart of the matter: Ed Miliband was, apparently in all seriousness, proposing to cap energy prices, irrespective of world market prices. That was absolutely bonkers by any standard. Theresa May was proposing to correct a bug in the regulated semi-monopoly market, which is the tendency of the companies to exploit those who aren't savvy enough to switch tariffs. Completely different.
Good luck getting people to accept living in high rise accommodation after last week.
I'm not advocating getting anyone to do anything. Let people do what they want to do.
Britain has a high-rise / apartment phobia and no doubt the fire will make it worse (like plane crashes it makes the news because it's unusual and a killed a lot of people at once, but you're more likely to die in a car accident). But when it comes down to a judgement with a commuting time and a monthly rent number, you'll find housing consumers are not in fact all news-cycle-drooling morons.
I'm not advocating getting anyone to do anything. Let people do what they want to do.
Britain has a high-rise / apartment phobia and no doubt the fire will make it worse (like plane crashes it makes the news because it's unusual and a killed a lot of people at once, but you're more likely to die in a car accident). But when it comes down to a judgement with a commuting time and a monthly rent number, you'll find housing consumers are not in fact all news-cycle-drooling morons.
It doesn't require high-rise buildings to increase densities substantially compared with what we currently have in London.
The red flag of Brexit. All those right-wing souverainistes agitating to implement Tony Benn and Michael Foot's agenda should face a terrible reckoning.
It is not just the UK, Sanders has a 10% lead over Trump in the latest US poll, Melenchon had a reasonable performance in France, Spain has Podemos, Greece has Syriza etc. However once socialists get in people quickly change their minds, in Greece the conservative New Democracy party now has a clear lead in polls
How much of it is votes for a particular thing, as opposed to votes against the status quo?
It is a clear anti establishment vote I think, just the same as those voting for Trump, Le Pen, Wilders, Golden Dawn, 5* and UKIP and Leave and indeed for the SNP before this month. It is all still a legacy of the 2008 Crash which led first to rising unemployment, then lower wages and austerity rather than any great enthusiasm for socialism
Not only that but even if it was "the EU" individual EU member states have different views at a national level.
Germany is planning a new law giving authorities the right to look at private messages and fingerprint children as young as 6, the interior minister said on Wednesday after the last government gathering before a national election in September.
Ministers from central government and federal states said encrypted messaging services, such as WhatsApp and Signal, allow militants and criminals to evade traditional surveillance.
"We can't allow there to be areas that are practically outside the law," interior minister Thomas de Maiziere told reporters in the eastern town of Dresden.
I'm not advocating getting anyone to do anything. Let people do what they want to do.
Britain has a high-rise / apartment phobia and no doubt the fire will make it worse (like plane crashes it makes the news because it's unusual and a killed a lot of people at once, but you're more likely to die in a car accident). But when it comes down to a judgement with a commuting time and a monthly rent number, you'll find housing consumers are not in fact all news-cycle-drooling morons.
It doesn't require high-rise buildings to increase densities substantially compared with what we currently have in London.
Much of Europe has courtyard apartments of four or five floors. They work well.
Nonsense.The changes that Attlee made formed the basis of consensual politics, shared by both Tory and Labour,that continued up until Margaret Thatcher declared class war in 1979.Have you forgotten the generations of people not having any money to pay for a doctor?
You are partly right, in that the decline of the UK which was exacerbated by the post-war consensus wasn't reversed until Maggie came into power and transformed us from the 'sick man of Europe' to one of the most succcessful European economies. Even so, many of the changes introduced by the Attlee government were, thank goodness, reversed pretty pronto, including the looniest of all, which is the one I mentioned.
As for people not being able to pay for doctors, every single party standing in the 1945 election was committed to introducing free healthcare - building on work done by the wartime coalition under a Conservative PM. The problem was that the Attlee government implemented that aim (very controversially at the time) by means of a monolithic nationalised industry; no other country in the Western world made that mistake, and it is one that haunts us to this day.
And one of the worst features was the way it caved in to the doctors who essentially have remained private companies ever since milking the system for all it's worth.
Mr. F, perhaps. But Corbyn's closer to Castro than Attlee.
Get a grip Mr Morris, you sound like you're beginning to believe your own side's spin. Labour's manifesto was mainstream 1980s social democracy. Would pass as normal politics anywhere else.
Where any parallel with Fidel Castro can be drawn is beyond me. It's this sort of hyperbolic nonsense that lost you votes two weeks ago because frankly people aren't as stupid as the dead tree press likes to think.
There is plenty of evidence that Corbyn, McDonnell and Milne are not mainstream social democrats. Many who voted Labour are ignorant of that truth or believe that they will be constrained in power or thought that there was no realistic prospect of a Labour majority. I also believe that many assumed that the attacks on the leadership's beliefs was a classic red scare. I wish it was. On the other hand there is a reversal of the normal situation in that the leadership are way left of the majority of supporters and have yet to build a large scale extra-parliamentary movement. I also suspect that Corbyn although an ideologically fixated individual may lack the steel needed. A Corbyn government would be dangerous waters though.
If I was a Jew in the UK I would be extremely worried at the prospect of a Corbyn government.
I'm not advocating getting anyone to do anything. Let people do what they want to do.
Britain has a high-rise / apartment phobia and no doubt the fire will make it worse (like plane crashes it makes the news because it's unusual and a killed a lot of people at once, but you're more likely to die in a car accident). But when it comes down to a judgement with a commuting time and a monthly rent number, you'll find housing consumers are not in fact all news-cycle-drooling morons.
It doesn't require high-rise buildings to increase densities substantially compared with what we currently have in London.
Much of Europe has courtyard apartments of four or five floors. They work well.
This is also true. The government just needs to stop micro-managing and let people build what they like.
I have to say I am getting seriously worried. They are all posturing on Brexit - Johnson, Davis and now the supposedly sensible one, Philip Hammond. On the Labour side you have Corbyn and Macdonnell who make it clear Brexit is just a bargaining chip for their advantage. Only Kier Starmer appears to be concerned about getting a decent Brexit arrangement, and no-one is paying HIM any attention.
We're heading in a Greek trap, revolving government and all. The UK is facing a much more severe humiliation than Suez.
Except the UK is the 5th largest economy in the world not the 50th largest economy like Greece. It is though possible we may be in for the same round of elections, in 2012 there were two general elections in Greece which the conservative National Democracy narrowly won, in 2015 there were two general elections which the populist leftwing Syriza won and now the latest polls have National Democracy back in front in the polls again
Bit behind the times, we are down to 8th and on a downward trajectory, can Tories not just tell the truth.
Source?
According to the World Bank we are the 5th largest economy in the world.
According to the IMF we are the 9th largest economy in the world.
The difference between the two is that the World Bank use current exchange rates to convert each country's GDP to US Dollars whereas the IMF use PPP (purchasing power parity - in essence, how much stuff can you buy with this money).
Malcolm is completely wrong to say we are on a downward trajectory. I would imagine he thinks we have slipped from 5th to 9th. We haven't. In fact we are on an upwards trajectory. On World Bank figures we were the 6th largest economy in the world in 2010 and slipped to 7th in 2011 but are now the 5th largest. On IMF figures we were 9th from 2010 to the present.
When you say "current", which year is that ? 2017, 2016, 2015 ?
Apologies for the delayed response. I've been away from my PC.
For "current" I've used 2016 - the most recent year for which figures are available.
If we look at 2017, our GDP is expected to fall using exchange rates (i.e. World Bank approach) as the pound has fallen against the dollar. However, other countries are also suffering on this measure due to the strength of the dollar so we are projected to remain the 5th largest economy using exchange rate conversion.
Using PPP our GDP is expected to go up and we will still be the 9th largest economy.
While the SNP won't want advice from outsiders wasn't Salmond's original strategy to go for the softly softly catchy monkey approach. The end game of that strategy was to show the SNP Scottish gov't could run things very well on their own so independence was the next logical step. It nearly succeeded in 2014. A sustained period of good Scottish governance might give them another chance after both Brexit and its fallout have become fully apparent. That could well be not until 2024 - ten years since the previous one but a period most would think is acceptably long enough.
Nonsense.The changes that Attlee made formed the basis of consensual politics, shared by both Tory and Labour,that continued up until Margaret Thatcher declared class war in 1979.Have you forgotten the generations of people not having any money to pay for a doctor?
You are partly right, in that the decline of the UK which was exacerbated by the post-war consensus wasn't reversed until Maggie came into power and transformed us from the 'sick man of Europe' to one of the most succcessful European economies. Even so, many of the changes introduced by the Attlee government were, thank goodness, reversed pretty pronto, including the looniest of all, which is the one I mentioned.
As for people not being able to pay for doctors, every single party standing in the 1945 election was committed to introducing free healthcare - building on work done by the wartime coalition under a Conservative PM. The problem was that the Attlee government implemented that aim (very controversially at the time) by means of a monolithic nationalised industry; no other country in the Western world made that mistake, and it is one that haunts us to this day.
And one of the worst features was the way it caved in to the doctors who essentially have remained private companies ever since milking the system for all it's worth.
More nonsense.All the Tories have done is create slum landlords,closed all our local railways and squandered our North Sea oil money on high unemployment in a class war against organised labour.
If the far-left and socialism are both polling in the mid 40's then that is because Conservatives have failed to articulate why they would be economically bad and what would be a popular alternative. You can't do that in the middle of an election campaign you have to did it week in week out.
Simple question - will the Queen's Speech be voted on on 21st June? I seem to remember hearing there would be votes on 28th/29th June but no business is scheduled in the House of Commons for those days.
Good luck getting people to accept living in high rise accommodation after last week.
I'm not advocating getting anyone to do anything. Let people do what they want to do.
Britain has a high-rise / apartment phobia and no doubt the fire will make it worse (like plane crashes it makes the news because it's unusual and a killed a lot of people at once, but you're more likely to die in a car accident). But when it comes down to a judgement with a commuting time and a monthly rent number, you'll find housing consumers are not in fact all news-cycle-drooling morons.
Most people in Britain dream of their own home (preferably detached) with a garden, not a flat.
While the SNP won't want advice from outsiders wasn't Salmond's original strategy to go for the softly softly catchy monkey approach. The end game of that strategy was to show the SNP Scottish gov't could run things very well on their own so independence was the next logical step. It nearly succeeded in 2014. A sustained period of good Scottish governance might give them another chance after both Brexit and its fallout have become fully apparent. That could well be not until 2024 - ten years since the previous one but a period most would think is acceptably long enough.
Yet more victims of the EU Referendum. Cameron and his loopy Party have a lot to answer for.
While the SNP won't want advice from outsiders wasn't Salmond's original strategy to go for the softly softly catchy monkey approach. The end game of that strategy was to show the SNP Scottish gov't could run things very well on their own so independence was the next logical step. It nearly succeeded in 2014. A sustained period of good Scottish governance might give them another chance after both Brexit and its fallout have become fully apparent. That could well be not until 2024 - ten years since the previous one but a period most would think is acceptably long enough.
Scottish independence is a dead letter surely.
If it's fiendishly complicated (indeed nigh on impossible) for the UK to detach from a trade bloc we've been part of for only 40 years, then how much harder than that must it surely be for Scotland to detach from a full political union it's been part of for 300 years?
Good luck getting people to accept living in high rise accommodation after last week.
I'm not advocating getting anyone to do anything. Let people do what they want to do.
Britain has a high-rise / apartment phobia and no doubt the fire will make it worse (like plane crashes it makes the news because it's unusual and a killed a lot of people at once, but you're more likely to die in a car accident). But when it comes down to a judgement with a commuting time and a monthly rent number, you'll find housing consumers are not in fact all news-cycle-drooling morons.
Most people in Britain dream of their own home (preferably detached) with a garden, not a flat.
I know, but a lot of them also dream of owning a Lamborghini. Wisely, the government doesn't mandate all kinds of restrictions on the production of Ford Fiestas.
Simple question - will the Queen's Speech be voted on on 21st June? I seem to remember hearing there would be votes on 28th/29th June but no business is scheduled in the House of Commons for those days.
Thanks!
I think there are five days of debate, before the Queen's Speech is voted on.
Simple, the DUP have said they'll vote for the Queen's Speech. Therefore, there are at least 328 votes in favour.
Blimey Sean, we're safe in our beds for a few more weeks then .... after that I suppose we'll all have to take our chance in Gerrards Cross .... Saints preserve us ....
Good luck getting people to accept living in high rise accommodation after last week.
I'm not advocating getting anyone to do anything. Let people do what they want to do.
Britain has a high-rise / apartment phobia and no doubt the fire will make it worse (like plane crashes it makes the news because it's unusual and a killed a lot of people at once, but you're more likely to die in a car accident). But when it comes down to a judgement with a commuting time and a monthly rent number, you'll find housing consumers are not in fact all news-cycle-drooling morons.
Most people in Britain dream of their own home (preferably detached) with a garden, not a flat.
I know, but a lot of them also dream of owning a Lamborghini. Wisely, the government doesn't mandate all kinds of restrictions on the production of Ford Fiestas.
I largely agree with you.
I'm just pointing out that the cultural norms of what represents a dream residence in the UK are different to those on the continent.
Simple question - will the Queen's Speech be voted on on 21st June? I seem to remember hearing there would be votes on 28th/29th June but no business is scheduled in the House of Commons for those days.
The State Opening of Parliament will take place on Wednesday 21 June following the general election on 8 June 2017.
The State Opening of Parliament marks the formal start of the parliamentary year and the Queen's Speech sets out the government’s agenda for the coming session, outlining proposed policies and legislation.
After the State Opening members of both Houses debate the content of the Queen’s Speech and agree an 'Address in Reply to Her Majesty’s Gracious Speech'. Each House continues the debate on the planned legislative programme for several days, looking at different subject areas.
The Queen's Speech is voted on by the Commons, but no vote is taken in the Lords.
While the SNP won't want advice from outsiders wasn't Salmond's original strategy to go for the softly softly catchy monkey approach. The end game of that strategy was to show the SNP Scottish gov't could run things very well on their own so independence was the next logical step. It nearly succeeded in 2014. A sustained period of good Scottish governance might give them another chance after both Brexit and its fallout have become fully apparent. That could well be not until 2024 - ten years since the previous one but a period most would think is acceptably long enough.
Scottish independence is a dead letter surely.
If it's fiendishly complicated (indeed nigh on impossible) for the UK to detach from a trade bloc we've been part of for only 40 years, then how much harder than that must it surely be for Scotland to detach from a full political union it's been part of for 300 years?
Carving out a new sovereign state from another is something that has been done countless times. There is no precedent for leaving the EU, particularly while attempting to keep all the benefits.
Good luck getting people to accept living in high rise accommodation after last week.
I'm not advocating getting anyone to do anything. Let people do what they want to do.
Britain has a high-rise / apartment phobia and no doubt the fire will make it worse (like plane crashes it makes the news because it's unusual and a killed a lot of people at once, but you're more likely to die in a car accident). But when it comes down to a judgement with a commuting time and a monthly rent number, you'll find housing consumers are not in fact all news-cycle-drooling morons.
Most people in Britain dream of their own home (preferably detached) with a garden, not a flat.
I know, but a lot of them also dream of owning a Lamborghini. Wisely, the government doesn't mandate all kinds of restrictions on the production of Ford Fiestas.
Well, with leasing these days, plenty of people find a way to drive around in very fancy cars indeed. Fancier, dare I say, than their annual income might reasonably justify.
Nonsense.The changes that Attlee made formed the basis of consensual politics, shared by both Tory and Labour,that continued up until Margaret Thatcher declared class war in 1979.Have you forgotten the generations of people not having any money to pay for a doctor?
You are partly right, in that the decline of the UK which was exacerbated by the post-war consensus wasn't reversed until Maggie came into power and transformed us from the 'sick man of Europe' to one of the most succcessful European economies. Even so, many of the changes introduced by the Attlee government were, thank goodness, reversed pretty pronto, including the looniest of all, which is the one I mentioned.
As for people not being able to pay for doctors, every single party standing in the 1945 election was committed to introducing free healthcare - building on work done by the wartime coalition under a Conservative PM. The problem was that the Attlee government implemented that aim (very controversially at the time) by means of a monolithic nationalised industry; no other country in the Western world made that mistake, and it is one that haunts us to this day.
And one of the worst features was the way it caved in to the doctors who essentially have remained private companies ever since milking the system for all it's worth.
More nonsense.All the Tories have done is create slum landlords,closed all our local railways and squandered our North Sea oil money on high unemployment in a class war against organised labour.
Non-sequitors abound in Corbyn's Labour - a rational argument free zone.
Surprised at how high the Tories are tbh, thought we'd be down in the mid 30s and Labour surging.
There is hope for us yet if we can get rid of May.
She won't lead us into another election, for sure.
Keep her around till Brexit has happened, find a new leader, honeymoon period, intervene in housing market, witness 2020 Tory surge....
If May can survive 6 months, she can survive longer. Why should she be the sacrificial lamb ?
Exactly. Trump and Corbyn overcame much bigger problems. I don't see any compelling reason why she shouldn't last it out until the next election and then win it.
Surprised at how high the Tories are tbh, thought we'd be down in the mid 30s and Labour surging.
There is hope for us yet if we can get rid of May.
She won't lead us into another election, for sure.
Keep her around till Brexit has happened, find a new leader, honeymoon period, intervene in housing market, witness 2020 Tory surge....
If May can survive 6 months, she can survive longer. Why should she be the sacrificial lamb ?
Exactly. Trump and Corbyn overcame much bigger problems. I don't see any compelling reason why she shouldn't last it out until the next election and then win it.
Surprised at how high the Tories are tbh, thought we'd be down in the mid 30s and Labour surging.
There is hope for us yet if we can get rid of May.
She won't lead us into another election, for sure.
Keep her around till Brexit has happened, find a new leader, honeymoon period, intervene in housing market, witness 2020 Tory surge....
If May can survive 6 months, she can survive longer. Why should she be the sacrificial lamb ?
Exactly. Trump and Corbyn overcame much bigger problems. I don't see any compelling reason why she shouldn't last it out until the next election and then win it.
She wont be fighting another election campaign, unless tories like opposition.
Nonsense.The changes that Attlee made formed the basis of consensual politics, shared by both Tory and Labour,that continued up until Margaret Thatcher declared class war in 1979.Have you forgotten the generations of people not having any money to pay for a doctor?
You are partly right, in that the decline of the UK which was exacerbated by the post-war consensus wasn't reversed until Maggie came into power and transformed us from the 'sick man of Europe' to one of the most succcessful European economies. Even so, many of the changes introduced by the Attlee government were, thank goodness, reversed pretty pronto, including the looniest of all, which is the one I mentioned.
As for people not being able to pay for doctors, every single party standing in the 1945 election was committed to introducing free healthcare - building on work done by the wartime coalition under a Conservative PM. The problem was that the Attlee government implemented that aim (very controversially at the time) by means of a monolithic nationalised industry; no other country in the Western world made that mistake, and it is one that haunts us to this day.
And one of the worst features was the way it caved in to the doctors who essentially have remained private companies ever since milking the system for all it's worth.
More nonsense.All the Tories have done is create slum landlords,closed all our local railways and squandered our North Sea oil money on high unemployment in a class war against organised labour.
They eat babies; they make people sleep with goats; they murder the disabled. It's a lengthy charge sheet.
The data in that table is inaccurate re- the % Tory majority in seats. In my own seat - Norwich North - the Tory majority was actually 1.1% - not 0.8%. Similarly Crabb's majority in Preseli Pembrokeshire is listed as 0.5% - whereas it was 0.8%.. Strangely that constituency is said to be located in the county of Dyfed - despite the fact that the latter ceased to exist 22 years ago! I have only given two examples but all the data appears to be out by a similar margin.
Comments
Or indeed, lost them.
In 2018 Celtic win the Scottish premier league by only 15 points, half the margin that they managed this year, 'The' Rangers (coincidentally the standard bearer for so many Yoon hopes & dreams) are second after coming third in 2017.
'Celtic have had the worst result of any team in this year's league, The Rangers are the real winners, Pedro is a genius etc, etc'
After all, might as well flog it - Corbyn's only going to tax it anyway....
Where any parallel with Fidel Castro can be drawn is beyond me. It's this sort of hyperbolic nonsense that lost you votes two weeks ago because frankly people aren't as stupid as the dead tree press likes to think.
Calm down. Heat getting to you? I'm following the graphic on the threader – if you have an issue with the change numbers pick it up with Mike. I'm sure there is a good reason for them.
https://twitter.com/BBCAfrica/status/875671086960181248
As for people not being able to pay for doctors, every single party standing in the 1945 election was committed to introducing free healthcare - building on work done by the wartime coalition under a Conservative PM. The problem was that the Attlee government implemented that aim (very controversially at the time) by means of a monolithic nationalised industry; no other country in the Western world made that mistake, and it is one that haunts us to this day.
Governments in between have done a lot of stuff neither they nor the rest of the country can be proud of, but none of them have made such a blinkered and overweening horlicks of so many things at the same time.
Ian Dale said:
'1979-Callaghan 269 seats, resigned. 1992-Kinnock 271 seats, resigned. 2017-Corbyn 262 seats, claims victory & orders the winner to resign'
Such ignorance! Callaghan did not resign in 1979 following his election defeat. He continued as party leader until November 1980 when Foot beat Healey to become his successor. Moroeover, Kinnock did not resign in 1987 despite gaining only 20 seats to bring Labour up to 229.
It is now ten days since Mrs May announced her DUP alliance plans and nothing.....
#JustSaying
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/australia-in-scramble-to-strip-towers-0qbp5jzmb
https://twitter.com/ed_miliband/status/876752378153795584
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/04/why-theresa-mays-1970s-style-energy-price-caps-wont-work/#
#NoSurrenderToTheDUP
About to go on @theJeremyVine show on @BBCRadio2 being hosted this week by my friend @Ed_Miliband
So we have a labour MP going on a show hosting by...a labour MP? hmm
Read into that what you will.
Britain has a high-rise / apartment phobia and no doubt the fire will make it worse (like plane crashes it makes the news because it's unusual and a killed a lot of people at once, but you're more likely to die in a car accident). But when it comes down to a judgement with a commuting time and a monthly rent number, you'll find housing consumers are not in fact all news-cycle-drooling morons.
https://twitter.com/AgentP22/status/876745268997361664
Germany is planning a new law giving authorities the right to look at private messages and fingerprint children as young as 6, the interior minister said on Wednesday after the last government gathering before a national election in September.
Ministers from central government and federal states said encrypted messaging services, such as WhatsApp and Signal, allow militants and criminals to evade traditional surveillance.
"We can't allow there to be areas that are practically outside the law," interior minister Thomas de Maiziere told reporters in the eastern town of Dresden.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-germany-security-encryption-idUKKBN1951VG
For "current" I've used 2016 - the most recent year for which figures are available.
If we look at 2017, our GDP is expected to fall using exchange rates (i.e. World Bank approach) as the pound has fallen against the dollar. However, other countries are also suffering on this measure due to the strength of the dollar so we are projected to remain the 5th largest economy using exchange rate conversion.
Using PPP our GDP is expected to go up and we will still be the 9th largest economy.
Austerity forever is not an alternative.
Simple question - will the Queen's Speech be voted on on 21st June? I seem to remember hearing there would be votes on 28th/29th June but no business is scheduled in the House of Commons for those days.
Thanks!
If it's fiendishly complicated (indeed nigh on impossible) for the UK to detach from a trade bloc we've been part of for only 40 years, then how much harder than that must it surely be for Scotland to detach from a full political union it's been part of for 300 years?
I'm just pointing out that the cultural norms of what represents a dream residence in the UK are different to those on the continent.
http://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2016/may/mps-debate-the-2016-queens-speech/
This year, given the 'light' legislative program:
State Opening and the Queen's Speech
The State Opening of Parliament will take place on Wednesday 21 June following the general election on 8 June 2017.
The State Opening of Parliament marks the formal start of the parliamentary year and the Queen's Speech sets out the government’s agenda for the coming session, outlining proposed policies and legislation.
After the State Opening members of both Houses debate the content of the Queen’s Speech and agree an 'Address in Reply to Her Majesty’s Gracious Speech'. Each House continues the debate on the planned legislative programme for several days, looking at different subject areas.
The Queen's Speech is voted on by the Commons, but no vote is taken in the Lords.
http://www.parliament.uk/about/how/elections-and-voting/general/start-of-a-new-parliament/#jump-link-5
It's report and committee stage where they are at risk of heavy amendment, from both the Commons and the Lords.
I expect several nail-biting votes at 3rd reading.
Meanwhile in Syria... Russia announces USAF and RAF aircraft west of the Euphrates are now targets after the US shot down a Syrian jet.
I believe regulatory diversity to be a good thing.
http://www.nationaldebtclock.co.uk/
Montie calls for May to go = TMay must stay*
https://twitter.com/montie/status/876776911095115776
*for now
I have only given two examples but all the data appears to be out by a similar margin.