politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Damian Green – my 70/1 longshot to be next CON leader

https://twitter.com/martinboon/status/877844833922039809

The next problem for the government may come now the PM has announced nobody will be left to live in an unsafe block. When that is followed by the '600' statement, a reasonable question from tenants is 'are we safe?' And'where will you house us?'
Messy.

rottenborough said:

For the brave there is an 8% return available on BF for May being PM after QS vote i.e. forms a government after royal assent. 1.08 that it is May. 8% in a week is better than a bank account.

If I had more money to 'risk' in betting scenarios I might be tempted on this one.

There's a 15% return on Merkel being returned as Chancellor in September. A better return and less risky I would have thought. But you have to wait a bit longer. I have a lump on but not the whole bank.

2006 building regs apparently. What did they say and how were they applied?

Lab far from off the hook here.

"New approach to social housing" could be a game-changer. Could.

kurtjester said:

Sean_F said:

dyedwoolie said:

currystar said:

dyedwoolie said:

Thousands of you have been corralled into potential death traps that are that way so as to look pretty to your betters in private homes.
How the f... do you sell that as a Government?!

Do you really think that they have clad these buildings to make them look pretty?

Well it sure wasn't for fire safety was it?!

The main purpose of cladding is insulation. It's a good thing, because tower blocks have been plagued with damp in the past. But, if the cladding is flammable, it's going to have to be taken down and replaced.

As an interim measure why not fit external sprinkler systems? Fuel storage sites use them in tank farms.

Not all tall older buildings are suitable for sprinklers.

dyedwoolie said:

The next problem for the government may come now the PM has announced nobody will be left to live in an unsafe block. When that is followed by the '600' statement, a reasonable question from tenants is 'are we safe?' And'where will you house us?'
Messy.

The cladding has also been used on brand new apartments. This one is in a Labour borough so the Council will not be at fault at all.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-40368427/grenfell-cladding-used-on-tottenham-tower-block

TOPPING said:

For the government two things work in their favour:

1. If this is an endemic problem then it won't have materialised in 2010 and hence all governments can be found responsible.

The regeneration of tower blocks dates from 2000, the Decent Homes Programme (specifically the part that specified insulation levels). That's not something unique to Britain either, any number of countries have made similar choices.

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/877829736940134400

Sean_F said:

Pulpstar said:

Sean_F said:

dyedwoolie said:

Thousands of you have been corralled into potential death traps that are that way so as to look pretty to your betters in private homes.
How the f... do you sell that as a Government?!

I'm sure that most of us live in houses and flats that don't comply with modern best practice in terms of fire safety. But, that's a risk that many of us are prepared to take.

The standards in a tower block simply have to be higher though. I know my hob isn't strictly to standard, but I have a very good chance to get out through the bathroom window should my misses somehow set the house on fire whilst cooking downstairs.
It is different when you're on the 15th floor up in a flat.

I think the cladding has to be checked, and if it's flammable, then it must be replaced.

But, most fire deaths and injuries don't take place in tower blocks.

One of the 'worst offenders' apparently is liquid paraffin or similar based treatments for leg ulcers. Material soaks into the bedding and the whole becomes a fire-trap.
These are often used by less mobile elderly, who are also more likely to be smokers.

ThreeQuidder said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

williamglenn said:

Remember the Japanese government's paper on Brexit which demanded we stay in the customs union and single market and stay under the EU regulatory umbrella?

http://www.mofa.go.jp/files/000185466.pdf

Now it seems Japanese business is starting to take matters into its own hands:

https://twitter.com/business/status/877765607780868096

Shocked.

Did any PBer warn that some in the financial services industry might relocate from the UK after Brexit?

*Innocent Face*

before transferring fewer than 100 employees from London to the city

How many does Nomura employ in the UK? Is this much more than a nameplate?

Even a relatively small numerical loss of well remunerated jobs will have an impact on the overall tax take given how much of income tax comes from the top 5% of those who pay it.

TOPPING said:

2006 building regs apparently. What did they say and how were they applied?

Lab far from off the hook here.

"New approach to social housing" could be a game-changer. Could.

Won't it depend on how the likes of McDonnell and Corbyn voted on things? They would argue they were largely opposed to the last Labour government :-)

@KateProctorES: Cladding to be removed five Camden tower blocks: Dorney, Bray, Burnham, Taplow, Blashford. Residents will stay while material removed.

Barnesian said:

SouthamObserver said:

rcs1000 said:

GIN1138 said:

FPT

All this stuff about hard/soft Brexit seems pointless to me now the DUP have confirmed they are in favour of leaving the single market and customs union and will be voting with the government?

Even accounting for Con rebellions from the likes of Clarke and Soubry the government should still have the numbers for the Brexit they want (especially as you'll have a few people on the Labour side like Field and Hoey also voting with the government)

Looks like we're leaving the single market and customs union. The only question is whether there's any transitional arrangements and if so how long they last.

I think the DUP issue is that they are also committed to a "frictionless" border with the Republic of Ireland. If they have to choose between passport checks plus customs booths and single market/customs union, which way do they jump?

Or customs checks on the UK mainland for flights and ships coming from NI - which is the easiest way to ensure a frictionless border between north and south.

That could be a key DUP sticking point.

Wouldn't the easiest method be to arrange for an Irish re-unification referendum and manage a 50.1% vote in favour?

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Glenn, if the EU had suggested the status quo was available, that might be so.

They've instead indicated (Verhofstadt[sp]) that remaining means on worse terms than those we rejected. Doubt it'll happen.

I don't think that's what he said. IIRC, he said if we wanted back in, the terms would be worse. I don't think he opined on whether we could revoke article 50 and remain on our current terms.

currystar said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

dyedwoolie said:

The point is that this is how it will be perceived. It's a natural leap from where we are and how things have been. It's a disgrace, there can't really be any other conclusion.
And I make no bones about stating what I think will be the reaction, it's something the country needs to be ready for and address.

It would be helpful if the opposition didn't try exploit the issue to to stir up hatred based on misrepresentation. Fat chance, I know.

I do find it grmily amusing though that the argument is that refurbishing a building at public expense to make it warmer as well as visually more attractive is somehow an evil plot against the proletariat by wicked Tory capitalists. The implication is that the Left think that the proletariat should properly be left shivering in ugly concrete monstrosities.

This point is exactly what has annoyed me about the "lack of investment" claims regarding Grenfell Towers. The simple fact is if the building had not been modernised then the fire would have been confined to one flat.

But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.

He’s been close friend of TMay since they were at Oxford together in the 1970s and they were both at different times Presidents of the Union.

OGH is mis-informed. May never got past Librarian - Green became President - in hindsight possibly because he's a lot more 'clubbable' than May. I'd also rate him as the more astute politician. If I'd just returned from Mars and been told that one of either May or Green had become PM I'd have guessed Green in a heartbeat. His lack of advancement under the posh boys is high on my list of 'exhibits for the prosecution'.

I suspect May will see through Brexit then step down before GE2022 - and the Tories will have a proper leadership election, which Green would not flourish in. If however, some further calamity were to overcome May before then, Green would be an excellent choice.

Like May he's had a long and happy marriage to a very smart partner (who neither forgives nor forgets, so a Green premiership might have some extra piquancy...)

CarlottaVance said:

I suspect May will see through Brexit then step down before GE2022

Brexit will not be done by 2022.

Unless we abandon it.

SouthamObserver said:

TOPPING said:

2006 building regs apparently. What did they say and how were they applied?

Lab far from off the hook here.

"New approach to social housing" could be a game-changer. Could.

Won't it depend on how the likes of McDonnell and Corbyn voted on things? They would argue they were largely opposed to the last Labour government :-)

Haha yes indeed I forgot just how bonkers the times we live in now are.

Scott_P said:

CarlottaVance said:

I suspect May will see through Brexit then step down before GE2022

Brexit will not be done by 2022.

The negotiations will be largely concluded by 2020 - of course there will be years of dotting 'i's and crossing 't's.....but its shape will be known.

On topic, 70/1 is a very good price for Green. Punters should remember that Tory leadership elections are often (nearly always) about who the candidates are not rather than who they are. Green has the advantage of few negatives.

That's not to say he should be favourite either - he would need positive support (indeed, he'd need to choose to run in the first place, which would be no given), and there's no great evidence to suggest he has that support: Theresa May doesn't have a long-standing machine in the party in the way that some politicians develop one over years, and what she does have can't be assumed to be strong or cohesive enough to be transferable to a successor. All the same, there are no candidates who shine out as head and shoulders above the field and Green could easily simultaneously fulfil the roles of stop-Boris, stop-Davis, stop-Leadsom and stop-Gove.

OldKingCole said:

Barnesian said:

SouthamObserver said:

rcs1000 said:

GIN1138 said:

FPT

All this stuff about hard/soft Brexit seems pointless to me now the DUP have confirmed they are in favour of leaving the single market and customs union and will be voting with the government?

Even accounting for Con rebellions from the likes of Clarke and Soubry the government should still have the numbers for the Brexit they want (especially as you'll have a few people on the Labour side like Field and Hoey also voting with the government)

Looks like we're leaving the single market and customs union. The only question is whether there's any transitional arrangements and if so how long they last.

I think the DUP issue is that they are also committed to a "frictionless" border with the Republic of Ireland. If they have to choose between passport checks plus customs booths and single market/customs union, which way do they jump?

Or customs checks on the UK mainland for flights and ships coming from NI - which is the easiest way to ensure a frictionless border between north and south.

That could be a key DUP sticking point.

Wouldn't the easiest method be to arrange for an Irish re-unification referendum and manage a 50.1% vote in favour?

Indeed, if we're going to have customs checks on everything moving between NI and GB then it's hard to argue they are in the same country.

Can someone stick down an amendment to remove this cookie shit in the Great Repeal Bill, please?

Richard_Nabavi said:

not_on_fire said:

But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.

Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.

Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself

Casino_Royale said:

Can someone stick down an amendment to remove this cookie shit in the Great Repeal Bill, please?

Like internet cookies?

I hope not, while I'd like that shit to be removed too the Great Repeal Bill is not the place. If everyone starts passing amendments for every bit of stupid crap the EU has ever done the Great Repeal Bill will be the longest bill ever and never get through Parliament.

Richard_Nabavi said:

not_on_fire said:

But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.

Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.

Yeah, I shudder to think what calamity might have befallen the residents had the building management been too busy not cladding their homes in flammable materials to sit back and think about the big picture.

Richard_Nabavi said:

not_on_fire said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

not_on_fire said:

But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.

Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.

Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself

No, the problem is that contrary to what the Left seem to believe, more regulation is not synonymous with good regulation., in fact often the opposite.

Evidently not in the case of Grenfell

AlastairMeeks said:

I see that Leavers' preferred solution to the problem of finding agricultural workers is still self-picking fruit.

That joke might not be quite as funny in 10 years time once AI fully takes off, though.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Stereotomy said:

Yeah, I shudder to think what calamity might have befallen the residents had the building management been too busy not cladding their homes in flammable materials to sit back and think about the big picture.

Leaving aside the potential libel in your post, yes, you are right: thinking about the big picture of the fire risk, rather than micro-regulations, might well have averted all these unnecessary deaths.

So the regulation either didn't exist or they didn't comply with it, but they did spend enough time dwelling on it that it prevented them from thinking about fires?

kurtjester said:

Sean_F said:

dyedwoolie said:

currystar said:

dyedwoolie said:

Thousands of you have been corralled into potential death traps that are that way so as to look pretty to your betters in private homes.
How the f... do you sell that as a Government?!

Do you really think that they have clad these buildings to make them look pretty?

Well it sure wasn't for fire safety was it?!

The main purpose of cladding is insulation. It's a good thing, because tower blocks have been plagued with damp in the past. But, if the cladding is flammable, it's going to have to be taken down and replaced.

As an interim measure why not fit external sprinkler systems? Fuel storage sites use them in tank farms.

A very good point. I have one of them on my balcony, it's a cross between a one gallon extinguisher and a sprinkler, the water pressure held back with a glass bulb, no power needed or moving parts. Must only cost £20 or so and took 20 mins to fit with three big screws into the wall. Can't be screwed to alu cladding though.

CarlottaVance said:

The negotiations will be largely concluded by 2020 - of course there will be years of dotting 'i's and crossing 't's.....but its shape will be known.

A 10 year "transisiton" that includes single market access and FoM perhaps.

Brexit "done"...

Richard_Nabavi said:

Beverley_C said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

not_on_fire said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

not_on_fire said:

But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.

Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.

Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself

No, the problem is that contrary to what the Left seem to believe, more regulation is not synonymous with good regulation., in fact often the opposite.

Actually, the biggest problem the Left have is that they think that if they come up with good or perfect rules, then everyone will obey them.

And if they don't, publish a further 10,000 pages of regulations which no-one will ever have time to read.

The Left believe they have the answers as to how people should behave, and are prepared to force them to comply.

AlastairMeeks said:

I see that Leavers' preferred solution to the problem of finding agricultural workers is still self-picking fruit.

It's clutching at straws somewhat to suggest we shouldn't leave the EU because we'll find it harder to exploit foreign workers to pick fruit.

Beverley_C said:

Casino_Royale said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Beverley_C said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

not_on_fire said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

not_on_fire said:

But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.

Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.

Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself

No, the problem is that contrary to what the Left seem to believe, more regulation is not synonymous with good regulation., in fact often the opposite.

Actually, the biggest problem the Left have is that they think that if they come up with good or perfect rules, then everyone will obey them.

And if they don't, publish a further 10,000 pages of regulations which no-one will ever have time to read.

The Left believe they have the answers as to how people should behave, and are prepared to force them to comply.

But you cannot force people to comply unless each one has a watcher assigned 24/7 and then Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Go and read a book about the Stasi....

And then remember that was in Europe. Within my lifetime.

Slowly but surely the Tories are falling back in love with Theresa. She will certainly lead them at the next general election. She will be branded as the woman who entered the maelstrom but came out the other side stronger.

Hmm... http://fortunascorner.com/2017/06/03/europe-reckons-with-its-depleted-armies-nato-members-confront-rampant-materiel-shortages-say-potus-trump-has-a-point-on-more-military-spending/

Harley has a nice promotional video detailing all their 'projects' which can be double checked

http://www.harleyfacades.co.uk/page/feature-video

Chalcot Estate Camdem Building No 9 and by far the largest value.

I feel sorry for the minions there, the company will probably go to the wall over this.

https://companycheck.co.uk/company/03991613/HARLEY-FACADES-LIMITED/companies-house-data

£280k net worth, 150k cash at Y/E 2016.

No way can it afford to rectify its work/pay all the legal fees heading its way - definitely heading for El busto.

DecrepitJohnL said:

Mortimer said:

Beverley_C said:

Casino_Royale said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Beverley_C said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

not_on_fire said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

not_on_fire said:

But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.

Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.

Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself

No, the problem is that contrary to what the Left seem to believe, more regulation is not synonymous with good regulation., in fact often the opposite.

Actually, the biggest problem the Left have is that they think that if they come up with good or perfect rules, then everyone will obey them.

And if they don't, publish a further 10,000 pages of regulations which no-one will ever have time to read.

The Left believe they have the answers as to how people should behave, and are prepared to force them to comply.

But you cannot force people to comply unless each one has a watcher assigned 24/7 and then Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Go and read a book about the Stasi....

And then remember that was in Europe. Within my lifetime.

What we often forget in this country -- and why Brexit came as such a shock to our neighbours -- is that Britain alone has not been under a totalitarian dictatorship within living memory. For us, probably uniquely, the EU is not seen as a guarantor of peace and freedom.

Britain, Malta, Ireland, Sweden, Finland and Cyprus, to be exact.

Casino_Royale said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I see that Leavers' preferred solution to the problem of finding agricultural workers is still self-picking fruit.

That joke might not be quite as funny in 10 years time once AI fully takes off, though.

Substitute Omelas for the EU & the child for the immigrants who live a dozen to a flat and it's Remain vs Leave

DecrepitJohnL said:

Mortimer said:

Beverley_C said:

Casino_Royale said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Beverley_C said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

not_on_fire said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

not_on_fire said:

But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.

Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.

Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself

No, the problem is that contrary to what the Left seem to believe, more regulation is not synonymous with good regulation., in fact often the opposite.

Actually, the biggest problem the Left have is that they think that if they come up with good or perfect rules, then everyone will obey them.

And if they don't, publish a further 10,000 pages of regulations which no-one will ever have time to read.

The Left believe they have the answers as to how people should behave, and are prepared to force them to comply.

But you cannot force people to comply unless each one has a watcher assigned 24/7 and then Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Go and read a book about the Stasi....

And then remember that was in Europe. Within my lifetime.

What we often forget in this country -- and why Brexit came as such a shock to our neighbours -- is that Britain alone has not been under a totalitarian dictatorship within living memory. For us, probably uniquely, the EU is not seen as a guarantor of peace and freedom.

And also why so many who should know better are prepared to vote for Corbyn & McDonell.

Sandpit said:

Pulpstar said:

Harley has a nice promotional video detailing all their 'projects' which can be double checked

http://www.harleyfacades.co.uk/page/feature-video

Chalcot Estate Camdem Building No 9 and by far the largest value.

I feel sorry for the minions there, the company will probably go to the wall over this.

If any company involved turns out to have screwed up or cut corners, they'll be praying they have enough public liability insurance for the corporate manslaughter charge.

Cutting corners may negate pl insurance

ThreeQuidder said:

Beverley_C said:

Scott_P said:

twitter.com/lindayueh/status/877865467905323008

It is nice that there remains a way out. I wonder what the fee would be?

Schengen and euro membership...

Federalists should send a thank you note to all the people who voted for Brexit for making that outcome possible.

FrancisUrquhart said:

There is a "very good" chance the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and Conservatives will agree a parliamentary deal by next week, a DUP MP has said.

Sounds like golden gates for every Ulster man are on their way.

When the DUP is expressing surprise about the amateurish nature of the government/No. 10 operation is a good time to start worrying.

Casino_Royale said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I see that Leavers' preferred solution to the problem of finding agricultural workers is still self-picking fruit.

That joke might not be quite as funny in 10 years time once AI fully takes off, though.

Like everything about Brexit, the supposed benefits are 10 years or so away without any clear route to those benefits and with lots of obvious major drawbacks first.

TOPPING said:

For the government two things work in their favour:

1. If this is an endemic problem then it won't have materialised in 2010 and hence all governments can be found responsible.

2. Notwithstanding Pt.1, having withstood an onslaught of legitimate and less legitimate attacks over the past two weeks, I'm not sure anything can bring the govt down and any new news will be put into the existing pot.

That said, they need to do something pretty bold and inspired now and I'm not sure that included buying luxury blocks of flats for those people up and down the country.

@JosiasJessop any ideas?

IANAE, but I am unsure that the reaction of moving everyone out of blocks with this cladding on is necessary or sensible, and in fact might miss other problems. I'm writing out some of my (inexpert) thoughts elsewhere.

One thing to note: a top guy in Camden Council was on R4 at 13.00, and he said that some of their tower blocks had such cladding. He also said that it was not as commissioned.

If he is right in this, then what went wrong (at least in Camden's case) becomes more focused. Why was the material not as commissioned (a slightly odd phrase to use), and why did the council's inspectors not pick up on it?

Although what went wrong in Camden's case might be very different from Grenfell Tower.