Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It is clear someone is leaking to damage Amber Rudd and I thin

SystemSystem Posts: 12,061
edited April 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It is clear someone is leaking to damage Amber Rudd and I think she’s toast

BREAKING: Amber Rudd letter to PM reveals 'ambitious but deliverable' removals target https://t.co/pCV3WHqHsd

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Didn't I see something today Numbr10 denying the immigration story.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,285
    Hello all:

    I've decided to start posting on Twitter from time to time. So if you could all follow me, my 'handle' (or whatever it's called) is

    @marketwarbles
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,285
    On the subject of Twitter, is this true?

    https://twitter.com/wjharte/status/990626655663280128

    Or has someone just made it up?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,490
    Sometimes I think these threads are just put up to troll me D:
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,102
    I agree - Javid is very well placed to succeed.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 21,883
    Is Rudd officially 'beleaguered' yet?
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,609
    That immigration deal would be explosive, effectively rendering Brexit a hollow mockery. Surely Theresa would never go that far.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362

    That immigration deal would be explosive, effectively rendering Brexit a hollow mockery. Surely Theresa would never go that far.

    She's finished if it's just another name for what we have now.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516
    rcs1000 said:

    On the subject of Twitter, is this true?

    https://twitter.com/wjharte/status/990626655663280128

    Or has someone just made it up?

    There's no way the civil service would get away with bonuses like that.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,564
    F1: no further action against Perez. No word that I can see on Raikkonen yet.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    Is Rudd officially 'beleaguered' yet?

    I think she has received full backing from the board.

    She is getting on with the day job.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,466
    "another leak confirmed that Amber Rudd is going to offer a post Brexit freedom of movement" - I think you mean Theresa May?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,490
    edited April 2018
    Yep just a bunch of anti Tory hacks trying to get a decent hard working woman the sack.
    Hurrah for Hodges impartiality.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 41,572
    Off-topic:

    Watch a suborbital rocket launch and landing in a minute at: https://www.blueorigin.com/#youtubeZUV53Nn3PhA
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 61,626
    I think she will survive, but agree Javid is the replacement. Although BF punters think Hunt (small market - Javid not even on it)
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,285

    That immigration deal would be explosive, effectively rendering Brexit a hollow mockery. Surely Theresa would never go that far.

    My guess is that they'll put something in place like that between the US and Canada, where firms have to register, and then can go to an online portal and effectively issue a registered job offer to a Canadian.

    In other words, EU countries will have "preferential" access to the UK (and vice-versa), but it will stem the flow of low skilled workers.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,865
    Elliot said:

    rcs1000 said:

    On the subject of Twitter, is this true?

    https://twitter.com/wjharte/status/990626655663280128

    Or has someone just made it up?

    There's no way the civil service would get away with bonuses like that.
    https://twitter.com/wjharte/status/990635816266489857?s=19
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,459

    F1: no further action against Perez. No word that I can see on Raikkonen yet.

    NFA for Raikkonen too.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,459

    Off-topic:

    Watch a suborbital rocket launch and landing in a minute at: https://www.blueorigin.com/#youtubeZUV53Nn3PhA

    That was cool. Quite different in approach to SpaceX but with similar results of getting everything back to Earth afterwards.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,564
    Mr. Sandpit, unfortunate, but thanks for letting me know about that.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 41,572
    Sandpit said:

    Off-topic:

    Watch a suborbital rocket launch and landing in a minute at: https://www.blueorigin.com/#youtubeZUV53Nn3PhA

    That was cool. Quite different in approach to SpaceX but with similar results of getting everything back to Earth afterwards.
    Yeah, it's cool. And it'll probably be taking people up for trips later this year: a very expensive and high ten-minute trip! And no, I don't want to go, even if I could afford it ...

    I really like Blue Origin, despite some of their silliness. They've got very different aims to SpaceX and have vastly different funding schemes, but both require cheap access to space. As far as I'm concerned that's good for humanity.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,285

    Sandpit said:

    Off-topic:

    Watch a suborbital rocket launch and landing in a minute at: https://www.blueorigin.com/#youtubeZUV53Nn3PhA

    That was cool. Quite different in approach to SpaceX but with similar results of getting everything back to Earth afterwards.
    Yeah, it's cool. And it'll probably be taking people up for trips later this year: a very expensive and high ten-minute trip! And no, I don't want to go, even if I could afford it ...

    I really like Blue Origin, despite some of their silliness. They've got very different aims to SpaceX and have vastly different funding schemes, but both require cheap access to space. As far as I'm concerned that's good for humanity.
    Ummm... Do you know how expensive?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    I think she will survive, but agree Javid is the replacement. Although BF punters think Hunt (small market - Javid not even on it)

    I did wonder about Hunt because we know the PM tried to shift him from health, and the Home Office might well tempt him. But I'm not sure promotion was what she had in mind.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 41,572
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Off-topic:

    Watch a suborbital rocket launch and landing in a minute at: https://www.blueorigin.com/#youtubeZUV53Nn3PhA

    That was cool. Quite different in approach to SpaceX but with similar results of getting everything back to Earth afterwards.
    Yeah, it's cool. And it'll probably be taking people up for trips later this year: a very expensive and high ten-minute trip! And no, I don't want to go, even if I could afford it ...

    I really like Blue Origin, despite some of their silliness. They've got very different aims to SpaceX and have vastly different funding schemes, but both require cheap access to space. As far as I'm concerned that's good for humanity.
    Ummm... Do you know how expensive?
    As far as I'm aware they haven't said yet, but I'd expect little change from $200k.

    Although if Virgin ever get Spaceship 2 working, there should be some interesting choices and competition: do you want to experience weightlessness in a rocket plane or a capsule?

    More info from Blue here:
    https://www.blueorigin.com/astronaut-experience
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516
    rcs1000 said:

    That immigration deal would be explosive, effectively rendering Brexit a hollow mockery. Surely Theresa would never go that far.

    My guess is that they'll put something in place like that between the US and Canada, where firms have to register, and then can go to an online portal and effectively issue a registered job offer to a Canadian.

    In other words, EU countries will have "preferential" access to the UK (and vice-versa), but it will stem the flow of low skilled workers.
    If it is limited to high skilled workers, she could get away with it. If low skill workers can still come in huge numbers, May will lose her premiership.
  • BalrogBalrog Posts: 207
    Where can you bet on Javid? Nothing on Betfair?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,678
    edited April 2018
    Re the postscript - would Javid take the Home Office? Only one HS has gone directly on to be PM in the last 150 years (and only four in total, one of them thirty years later). He's clearly ambitious. Would he really take what has almost always proven a political graveyard? I'm doubtful. If it were the Treasury he'd bite May's hand off.

    I'm also intrigued that Rudd is being so heavily briefed against. It almost looks personal rather than political. If so, May will be very loath to part with her. Moreover, since New Labour and Brown, Byers and Blair himself a precedent has been set that Ministers who mislead the House in error (Blair) through forgetfulness (Brown) or even because they are dishonest morons who lie, cheat and take money not because they need to but because it's in their nature (Byers) don't actually have to resign.

    That's a fairly damning indictment of the standards of old Mr Whiter than White, and I think Rudd should go. I'm just sceptical if she will.

    Edit - looking at the time Byers misled the House 15 years ago, what's really amusing in this context is the reaction of his Conservative Shadow:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1393505/Byers-admits-misleading-MPs-in-Sixsmith-affair.html

    Guess who it was?
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,609
    Elliot said:

    rcs1000 said:

    That immigration deal would be explosive, effectively rendering Brexit a hollow mockery. Surely Theresa would never go that far.

    My guess is that they'll put something in place like that between the US and Canada, where firms have to register, and then can go to an online portal and effectively issue a registered job offer to a Canadian.

    In other words, EU countries will have "preferential" access to the UK (and vice-versa), but it will stem the flow of low skilled workers.
    If it is limited to high skilled workers, she could get away with it. If low skill workers can still come in huge numbers, May will lose her premiership.
    But we all know that the economy depends upon cheap, non-skilled labour, so I suspect that if they introduced such a scheme then bar tender, warehouse operative and fruit picker would suddenly be given a more illustrious status.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,678
    edited April 2018
    Elliot said:

    rcs1000 said:

    That immigration deal would be explosive, effectively rendering Brexit a hollow mockery. Surely Theresa would never go that far.

    My guess is that they'll put something in place like that between the US and Canada, where firms have to register, and then can go to an online portal and effectively issue a registered job offer to a Canadian.

    In other words, EU countries will have "preferential" access to the UK (and vice-versa), but it will stem the flow of low skilled workers.
    If it is limited to high skilled workers, she could get away with it. If low skill workers can still come in huge numbers, May will lose her premiership.
    Win-win?

    Unless I suppose her replacement is the Jezaster...
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    "The optics of a non white son of a immigrant Windrush generation bus driver trying to sort out the Windrush deportations mess are appealing."

    Isn't that the sort of tokenism that demeans politics? If he gets the job that is fine if it is on ability. If he gets it because he is an ethnic minority with an interesting cover story I am not so sure it is a good idea. People are heartily sick of the Blairite/Cameron spin on things - they take us all for mugs who cannot see the smoke and mirrors. I think we live in a post spin age, Cameron/Osborne taunted Brown about him being PM in a digital age but having analogue presentation skills. I think many of todays politicians and commentators have a similar disconnect. The game has changed and those who seek to lead do not even notice the difference!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,285
    edited April 2018
    Elliot said:

    rcs1000 said:

    That immigration deal would be explosive, effectively rendering Brexit a hollow mockery. Surely Theresa would never go that far.

    My guess is that they'll put something in place like that between the US and Canada, where firms have to register, and then can go to an online portal and effectively issue a registered job offer to a Canadian.

    In other words, EU countries will have "preferential" access to the UK (and vice-versa), but it will stem the flow of low skilled workers.
    If it is limited to high skilled workers, she could get away with it. If low skill workers can still come in huge numbers, May will lose her premiership.
    Low skilled workers are much, much less likely to be in salaried employment, and are much more likely to be "cash in hand", so I think it would likely have a significant effect, even if it was theoretically open to all. (Assuming, of course, that the British government started cracking down on the 'cash in hand economy' - which is long overdue.)

    We currently have "open borders" with the EU, and net migration in the year to September 2007 was 90,000 (against 205,000 from non-EU countries). That 90,000 was made up of 220,000 coming here and 130,000 leaving. (All stats from Migration Watch.)

    My guess is that the number returning home would remain fairly constant in this scenario, but you'd probably see the number coming fall by a third or so. That would make net EU migration a fairly negligable number: perhaps only an eighth of the level of non-EU migration.
  • ydoethur said:

    Re the postscript - would Javid take the Home Office? Only one HS has gone directly on to be PM in the last 150 years (and only four in total, one of them thirty years later). He's clearly ambitious. Would he really take what has almost always proven a political graveyard? I'm doubtful. If it were the Treasury he'd bite May's hand off.

    I'm also intrigued that Rudd is being so heavily briefed against. It almost looks personal rather than political. If so, May will be very loath to part with her. Moreover, since New Labour and Brown, Byers and Blair himself a precedent has been set that Ministers who mislead the House in error (Blair) through forgetfulness (Brown) or even because they are dishonest morons who lie, cheat and take money not because they need to but because it's in their nature (Byers) don't actually have to resign.

    That's a fairly damning indictment of the standards of old Mr Whiter than White, and I think Rudd should go. I'm just sceptical if she will.

    The logic for him taking the Home Office job was that Theresa May could fall within days (over the customs union for example) and Javid won't be in office long enough to get doomed at the Home Department. But by being Home Secretary he becomes a credible contender to be PM if May goes in the next few months.
  • "The optics of a non white son of a immigrant Windrush generation bus driver trying to sort out the Windrush deportations mess are appealing."

    Isn't that the sort of tokenism that demeans politics? If he gets the job that is fine if it is on ability. If he gets it because he is an ethnic minority with an interesting cover story I am not so sure it is a good idea. People are heartily sick of the Blairite/Cameron spin on things - they take us all for mugs who cannot see the smoke and mirrors. I think we live in a post spin age, Cameron/Osborne taunted Brown about him being PM in a digital age but having analogue presentation skills. I think many of todays politicians and commentators have a similar disconnect. The game has changed and those who seek to lead do not even notice the difference!

    It would be tokenism if he wasn't qualified for the job, he is eminently qualified to be Home Secretary.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,678

    "The optics of a non white son of a immigrant Windrush generation bus driver trying to sort out the Windrush deportations mess are appealing."

    Isn't that the sort of tokenism that demeans politics? If he gets the job that is fine if it is on ability. If he gets it because he is an ethnic minority with an interesting cover story I am not so sure it is a good idea. People are heartily sick of the Blairite/Cameron spin on things - they take us all for mugs who cannot see the smoke and mirrors. I think we live in a post spin age, Cameron/Osborne taunted Brown about him being PM in a digital age but having analogue presentation skills. I think many of todays politicians and commentators have a similar disconnect. The game has changed and those who seek to lead do not even notice the difference!

    It would be tokenism if he wasn't qualified for the job, he is eminently qualified to be Home Secretary.
    He's not been a successful Minister but has too big a following within the party to be totally ignored?

    That seems to be the usual qualification...
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,609
    rcs1000 said:

    Elliot said:

    rcs1000 said:

    That immigration deal would be explosive, effectively rendering Brexit a hollow mockery. Surely Theresa would never go that far.

    My guess is that they'll put something in place like that between the US and Canada, where firms have to register, and then can go to an online portal and effectively issue a registered job offer to a Canadian.

    In other words, EU countries will have "preferential" access to the UK (and vice-versa), but it will stem the flow of low skilled workers.
    If it is limited to high skilled workers, she could get away with it. If low skill workers can still come in huge numbers, May will lose her premiership.
    Low skilled workers are much, much less likely to be in salaried employment, and are much more likely to be "cash in hand", so I think it would likely have a significant effect, even if it was theoretically open to all. (Assuming, of course, that the British government started cracking down on the 'cash in hand economy' - which is long overdue.)

    We currently have "open borders" with the EU, and net migration in the year to September 2007 was 90,000 (against 205,000 from non-EU countries). That 90,000 was made up of 220,000 coming here and 130,000 leaving. (All stats from Migration Watch.)

    My guess is that the number returning home would remain fairly constant in this scenario, but you'd probably see the number coming fall by a third or so. That would make net EU migration a fairly negligable number: perhaps only an eighth of the level of non-EU migration.
    Is there much 'cash in hand' work in Britain these days? When I was a benefit-fraud investigator in the 1990s I can't recall a single fraudster who wasn't on the books.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,865
    rcs1000 said:

    Elliot said:

    rcs1000 said:

    That immigration deal would be explosive, effectively rendering Brexit a hollow mockery. Surely Theresa would never go that far.

    My guess is that they'll put something in place like that between the US and Canada, where firms have to register, and then can go to an online portal and effectively issue a registered job offer to a Canadian.

    In other words, EU countries will have "preferential" access to the UK (and vice-versa), but it will stem the flow of low skilled workers.
    If it is limited to high skilled workers, she could get away with it. If low skill workers can still come in huge numbers, May will lose her premiership.
    Low skilled workers are much, much less likely to be in salaried employment, and are much more likely to be "cash in hand", so I think it would likely have a significant effect, even if it was theoretically open to all. (Assuming, of course, that the British government started cracking down on the 'cash in hand economy' - which is long overdue.)

    We currently have "open borders" with the EU, and net migration in the year to September 2007 was 90,000 (against 205,000 from non-EU countries). That 90,000 was made up of 220,000 coming here and 130,000 leaving. (All stats from Migration Watch.)

    My guess is that the number returning home would remain fairly constant in this scenario, but you'd probably see the number coming fall by a third or so. That would make net EU migration a fairly negligable number: perhaps only an eighth of the level of non-EU migration.
    Highly skilled migrants (such as Doctors and Nurses) require continuing automatic recognition of EEA qualifications as exists at present. That would seem sensible, but is a nessecary condition.

    Presumably reciprococity in terms of work in the EU could be agreed, but for retirees may be more problematic, unless that too was mutual.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,285

    rcs1000 said:

    Elliot said:

    rcs1000 said:

    That immigration deal would be explosive, effectively rendering Brexit a hollow mockery. Surely Theresa would never go that far.

    My guess is that they'll put something in place like that between the US and Canada, where firms have to register, and then can go to an online portal and effectively issue a registered job offer to a Canadian.

    In other words, EU countries will have "preferential" access to the UK (and vice-versa), but it will stem the flow of low skilled workers.
    If it is limited to high skilled workers, she could get away with it. If low skill workers can still come in huge numbers, May will lose her premiership.
    Low skilled workers are much, much less likely to be in salaried employment, and are much more likely to be "cash in hand", so I think it would likely have a significant effect, even if it was theoretically open to all. (Assuming, of course, that the British government started cracking down on the 'cash in hand economy' - which is long overdue.)

    We currently have "open borders" with the EU, and net migration in the year to September 2007 was 90,000 (against 205,000 from non-EU countries). That 90,000 was made up of 220,000 coming here and 130,000 leaving. (All stats from Migration Watch.)

    My guess is that the number returning home would remain fairly constant in this scenario, but you'd probably see the number coming fall by a third or so. That would make net EU migration a fairly negligable number: perhaps only an eighth of the level of non-EU migration.
    Is there much 'cash in hand' work in Britain these days? When I was a benefit-fraud investigator in the 1990s I can't recall a single fraudster who wasn't on the books.
    Most builders offer discounts for cash in hand, I believe.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,609
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Elliot said:

    rcs1000 said:

    That immigration deal would be explosive, effectively rendering Brexit a hollow mockery. Surely Theresa would never go that far.

    My guess is that they'll put something in place like that between the US and Canada, where firms have to register, and then can go to an online portal and effectively issue a registered job offer to a Canadian.

    In other words, EU countries will have "preferential" access to the UK (and vice-versa), but it will stem the flow of low skilled workers.
    If it is limited to high skilled workers, she could get away with it. If low skill workers can still come in huge numbers, May will lose her premiership.
    Low skilled workers are much, much less likely to be in salaried employment, and are much more likely to be "cash in hand", so I think it would likely have a significant effect, even if it was theoretically open to all. (Assuming, of course, that the British government started cracking down on the 'cash in hand economy' - which is long overdue.)

    We currently have "open borders" with the EU, and net migration in the year to September 2007 was 90,000 (against 205,000 from non-EU countries). That 90,000 was made up of 220,000 coming here and 130,000 leaving. (All stats from Migration Watch.)

    My guess is that the number returning home would remain fairly constant in this scenario, but you'd probably see the number coming fall by a third or so. That would make net EU migration a fairly negligable number: perhaps only an eighth of the level of non-EU migration.
    Is there much 'cash in hand' work in Britain these days? When I was a benefit-fraud investigator in the 1990s I can't recall a single fraudster who wasn't on the books.
    Most builders offer discounts for cash in hand, I believe.
    Ah, you mean the self-employed on the fiddle. I thought you meant employers paying cash in hand to avoid NI contributions, insurance etc.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,285

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Elliot said:

    rcs1000 said:

    That immigration deal would be explosive, effectively rendering Brexit a hollow mockery. Surely Theresa would never go that far.

    My guess is that they'll put something in place like that between the US and Canada, where firms have to register, and then can go to an online portal and effectively issue a registered job offer to a Canadian.

    In other words, EU countries will have "preferential" access to the UK (and vice-versa), but it will stem the flow of low skilled workers.
    If it is limited to high skilled workers, she could get away with it. If low skill workers can still come in huge numbers, May will lose her premiership.
    Low skilled workers are much, much less likely to be in salaried employment, and are much more likely to be "cash in hand", so I think it would likely have a significant effect, even if it was theoretically open to all. (Assuming, of course, that the British government started cracking down on the 'cash in hand economy' - which is long overdue.)

    We currently have "open borders" with the EU, and net migration in the year to September 2007 was 90,000 (against 205,000 from non-EU countries). That 90,000 was made up of 220,000 coming here and 130,000 leaving. (All stats from Migration Watch.)

    My guess is that the number returning home would remain fairly constant in this scenario, but you'd probably see the number coming fall by a third or so. That would make net EU migration a fairly negligable number: perhaps only an eighth of the level of non-EU migration.
    Is there much 'cash in hand' work in Britain these days? When I was a benefit-fraud investigator in the 1990s I can't recall a single fraudster who wasn't on the books.
    Most builders offer discounts for cash in hand, I believe.
    Ah, you mean the self-employed on the fiddle. I thought you meant employers paying cash in hand to avoid NI contributions, insurance etc.
    I think that happens in the building trade too. Are there eight guys on the site or six?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,001
    I said the game was up for Ms. Rudd on Friday.

    She'll resign this week.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,322
    Sajid Javid is doing a good job as the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and is currently in the middle of some serious leasehold/property management reform. I would really rather he finished what he started!
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    If Amber Rudd does go, her replacement will be someone ldesigned to douse things down but keep on the track set by Theresa May and loyal. Sajid Javid is possible but I would have thought Esther McVey or David Livingston were more likely.
  • GIN1138 said:

    I said the game was up for Ms. Rudd on Friday.

    She'll resign this week.

    Are you saying that because of illegal immigration targets or you see her as a threat to Brexit

    You may be right but on balance I think she will stay in post
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,106

    Sajid Javid is doing a good job as the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and is currently in the middle of some serious leasehold/property management reform. I would really rather he finished what he started!

    Since when does ministerial competence and continuity outplay political expediency...

    Sajid Javid is one of the very few Tories that could turn my head to the blues
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,997
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Off-topic:

    Watch a suborbital rocket launch and landing in a minute at: https://www.blueorigin.com/#youtubeZUV53Nn3PhA

    That was cool. Quite different in approach to SpaceX but with similar results of getting everything back to Earth afterwards.
    Yeah, it's cool. And it'll probably be taking people up for trips later this year: a very expensive and high ten-minute trip! And no, I don't want to go, even if I could afford it ...

    I really like Blue Origin, despite some of their silliness. They've got very different aims to SpaceX and have vastly different funding schemes, but both require cheap access to space. As far as I'm concerned that's good for humanity.
    Ummm... Do you know how expensive?
    I believe Bezon has offered Trump a free seat....
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 62,175
    edited April 2018
    tyson said:

    Sajid Javid is doing a good job as the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and is currently in the middle of some serious leasehold/property management reform. I would really rather he finished what he started!

    Since when does ministerial competence and continuity outplay political expediency...

    Sajid Javid is one of the very few Tories that could turn my head to the blues
    I thought I was one as well Tyson !!!!!
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 21,883
    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Off-topic:

    Watch a suborbital rocket launch and landing in a minute at: https://www.blueorigin.com/#youtubeZUV53Nn3PhA

    That was cool. Quite different in approach to SpaceX but with similar results of getting everything back to Earth afterwards.
    Yeah, it's cool. And it'll probably be taking people up for trips later this year: a very expensive and high ten-minute trip! And no, I don't want to go, even if I could afford it ...

    I really like Blue Origin, despite some of their silliness. They've got very different aims to SpaceX and have vastly different funding schemes, but both require cheap access to space. As far as I'm concerned that's good for humanity.
    Ummm... Do you know how expensive?
    I believe Bezon has offered Trump a free seat....
    Is that a single or a return?
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,106

    GIN1138 said:

    I said the game was up for Ms. Rudd on Friday.

    She'll resign this week.

    Are you saying that because of illegal immigration targets or you see her as a threat to Brexit

    You may be right but on balance I think she will stay in post
    O/T Big G...but as much as I love what Man City have done this year, the remaining games at the top of the table have all the feel of friendlies..The Utd/Arsenal match had the intensity of a Theresa May speech....
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,997
    ydoethur said:

    Re the postscript - would Javid take the Home Office? Only one HS has gone directly on to be PM in the last 150 years (and only four in total, one of them thirty years later). He's clearly ambitious. Would he really take what has almost always proven a political graveyard? I'm doubtful. If it were the Treasury he'd bite May's hand off.

    I'm also intrigued that Rudd is being so heavily briefed against. It almost looks personal rather than political. If so, May will be very loath to part with her. Moreover, since New Labour and Brown, Byers and Blair himself a precedent has been set that Ministers who mislead the House in error (Blair) through forgetfulness (Brown) or even because they are dishonest morons who lie, cheat and take money not because they need to but because it's in their nature (Byers) don't actually have to resign.

    That's a fairly damning indictment of the standards of old Mr Whiter than White, and I think Rudd should go. I'm just sceptical if she will.

    Edit - looking at the time Byers misled the House 15 years ago, what's really amusing in this context is the reaction of his Conservative Shadow:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1393505/Byers-admits-misleading-MPs-in-Sixsmith-affair.html

    Guess who it was?

    And a great quote...
    “This latest revelation suggests (Mr Byers/insert name as applicable) either misled Parliament, the press and the public, or that he has no grip on his/her department.
    "Either way (s)he must now come to the House of Commons and answer allegations that (s)he misled MPs."
  • tyson said:

    GIN1138 said:

    I said the game was up for Ms. Rudd on Friday.

    She'll resign this week.

    Are you saying that because of illegal immigration targets or you see her as a threat to Brexit

    You may be right but on balance I think she will stay in post
    O/T Big G...but as much as I love what Man City have done this year, the remaining games at the top of the table have all the feel of friendlies..The Utd/Arsenal match had the intensity of a Theresa May speech....
    It was poor but the result puts Utd in the champions league and 4 points out of the next 9 gives them runners up with only Brighton and West Ham away and Watford at home
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,997

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Off-topic:

    Watch a suborbital rocket launch and landing in a minute at: https://www.blueorigin.com/#youtubeZUV53Nn3PhA

    That was cool. Quite different in approach to SpaceX but with similar results of getting everything back to Earth afterwards.
    Yeah, it's cool. And it'll probably be taking people up for trips later this year: a very expensive and high ten-minute trip! And no, I don't want to go, even if I could afford it ...

    I really like Blue Origin, despite some of their silliness. They've got very different aims to SpaceX and have vastly different funding schemes, but both require cheap access to space. As far as I'm concerned that's good for humanity.
    Ummm... Do you know how expensive?
    I believe Bezos has offered Trump a free seat....
    Is that a single or a return?
    I think they’re planning to recover the launch vehicle, but there’s always the possibility of an EVA...
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 50,720
    How about Amber Rudd and Anna Soubry do a job swap?
  • How about Amber Rudd and Anna Soubry do a job swap?

    100/1 with Shadsy
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,285

    How about Amber Rudd and Anna Soubry do a job swap?

    100/1 with Shadsy
    I'll offer 250/1 - but has to happen by the end of the week.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 80,482
    Seems like there is a lot of big money mergers going on at the minute,

    T-Mobile agrees $26bn mega-merger with Sprint

    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-43943848
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,285
    I'm off to the inaugural LAFC home game tonight. What's really shocking is that it's only a 25,000 seater stadium.
  • Rudd goes over Windrush the spotlight goes straight onto May - who after all is the person who was responsible. Rudd has done a stellar job taking the flack for the PM but the absurdity of Tory MPs defending lie after lie after lie cant go on, no matter how much they want to avoid the likely civil war
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Rudd may be a loss to May and the deluded remainers but no loss to the country or the Conservatives.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    This is fun - EU to dictate policy or no hand outs.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/29/eu-considering-freeze-subsidies-illiberal-member-states/

    Under proposals to be unveiled in Brussels this week by Guenther Oettinger, the EU’s budget commissioner, Eastern EU states like Poland and Hungary could feel a financial squeeze if they were deemed to have failed to live up to the founding values of the EU.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,678

    Rudd goes over Windrush the spotlight goes straight onto May - who after all is the person who was responsible. Rudd has done a stellar job taking the flack for the PM but the absurdity of Tory MPs defending lie after lie after lie cant go on, no matter how much they want to avoid the likely civil war

    Stephen Byers managed a month. I think Rudd will be similar.

    Brown managed 13 years of course, but he was quite exceptionally limpet like!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,678
    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Re the postscript - would Javid take the Home Office? Only one HS has gone directly on to be PM in the last 150 years (and only four in total, one of them thirty years later). He's clearly ambitious. Would he really take what has almost always proven a political graveyard? I'm doubtful. If it were the Treasury he'd bite May's hand off.

    I'm also intrigued that Rudd is being so heavily briefed against. It almost looks personal rather than political. If so, May will be very loath to part with her. Moreover, since New Labour and Brown, Byers and Blair himself a precedent has been set that Ministers who mislead the House in error (Blair) through forgetfulness (Brown) or even because they are dishonest morons who lie, cheat and take money not because they need to but because it's in their nature (Byers) don't actually have to resign.

    That's a fairly damning indictment of the standards of old Mr Whiter than White, and I think Rudd should go. I'm just sceptical if she will.

    Edit - looking at the time Byers misled the House 15 years ago, what's really amusing in this context is the reaction of his Conservative Shadow:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1393505/Byers-admits-misleading-MPs-in-Sixsmith-affair.html

    Guess who it was?

    And a great quote...
    “This latest revelation suggests (Mr Byers/insert name as applicable) either misled Parliament, the press and the public, or that he has no grip on his/her department.
    "Either way (s)he must now come to the House of Commons and answer allegations that (s)he misled MPs."
    Do you think the Conservative Shadow May have changed her views? :smiley:
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 80,482
    edited April 2018
    TGOHF said:

    This is fun - EU to dictate policy or no hand outs.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/29/eu-considering-freeze-subsidies-illiberal-member-states/

    Under proposals to be unveiled in Brussels this week by Guenther Oettinger, the EU’s budget commissioner, Eastern EU states like Poland and Hungary could feel a financial squeeze if they were deemed to have failed to live up to the founding values of the EU.

    The EU is run like many golf clubs, there is an illusion of democracy and a whole host of commitiees, but ultimately all important decisions are taken by a very small cabal of people and they fix it so it is nearly impossible to remove them from their positions.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,678
    TGOHF said:

    This is fun - EU to dictate policy or no hand outs.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/29/eu-considering-freeze-subsidies-illiberal-member-states/

    Under proposals to be unveiled in Brussels this week by Guenther Oettinger, the EU’s budget commissioner, Eastern EU states like Poland and Hungary could feel a financial squeeze if they were deemed to have failed to live up to the founding values of the EU.

    What would they say about a country where the security services spent their time harassing the opposition? Although the PM at the time knew absolutely nothing about it, honestly he didn't.

    Would that mean no more freebies?
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,555
    TGOHF said:

    This is fun - EU to dictate policy or no hand outs.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/29/eu-considering-freeze-subsidies-illiberal-member-states/

    Under proposals to be unveiled in Brussels this week by Guenther Oettinger, the EU’s budget commissioner, Eastern EU states like Poland and Hungary could feel a financial squeeze if they were deemed to have failed to live up to the founding values of the EU.

    Because of Brexit.
    He's the Commissioner for the EU budget. Cutting down on Cohesion Funds.
    "We will not accept arbitrary mechanisms which will make the funds an instrument of political pressure, Poland's deputy European affairs minister Konrad Szymanski said."
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,001
    edited April 2018

    GIN1138 said:

    I said the game was up for Ms. Rudd on Friday.

    She'll resign this week.

    Are you saying that because of illegal immigration targets or you see her as a threat to Brexit

    Because of the Windrush scandal.

    It's been a daily drip, drip, drip of revelations and each one gets worse and worse.

    This isn't going away and my general rule of thumb is that if a SoS doesn't "close down" a scandal within a week they are usually toast in the end...

    This has been rumbling on and getting worse and worse for well over a week now so...
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,683
    Evening all :)

    A busy weekend and I'm still catching up with things.

    On matters Korean, why has Kim Yong-Il come to the negotiating table ? I've read two wildly differing hypotheses:

    a) he has his nuclear deterrent so has no real fear of attack from the US or China. As a result, he can show diplomatic largesse to his neighbours from a position of strength while Washington will adapt to Pyonygang having nuclear weapons just as it did when first Communist China and later the unstable Pakistan also got the Bomb.

    b) his nuclear weapons facility is in ruins and his advantage lost. With his regime under real threat, Kim has been persuaded by those round him to tone down the rhetoric and seek a rapprochement with Beijing and Seoul. For a quiet life, Kim can continue to enjoy his lavish lifestyle and for the next 50 years live a life of luxury while his people continue to be brutalised and the rest of the world does nothing.

    I can see a lot of positives for Kim, his coterie, for South Korea, Japan and China if the rhetoric is toned down and tensions are eased. Positives too for Washington - indeed, the only losers look to be the North Korean people who look condemned to continued brutality at the hands of the ludicrous Juche philosophy and their Government but no one else seems that bothered.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,678
    edited April 2018
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    A busy weekend and I'm still catching up with things.

    On matters Korean, why has Kim Yong-Il come to the negotiating table ? I've read two wildly differing hypotheses:

    a) he has his nuclear deterrent so has no real fear of attack from the US or China. As a result, he can show diplomatic largesse to his neighbours from a position of strength while Washington will adapt to Pyonygang having nuclear weapons just as it did when first Communist China and later the unstable Pakistan also got the Bomb.

    b) his nuclear weapons facility is in ruins and his advantage lost. With his regime under real threat, Kim has been persuaded by those round him to tone down the rhetoric and seek a rapprochement with Beijing and Seoul. For a quiet life, Kim can continue to enjoy his lavish lifestyle and for the next 50 years live a life of luxury while his people continue to be brutalised and the rest of the world does nothing.

    I can see a lot of positives for Kim, his coterie, for South Korea, Japan and China if the rhetoric is toned down and tensions are eased. Positives too for Washington - indeed, the only losers look to be the North Korean people who look condemned to continued brutality at the hands of the ludicrous Juche philosophy and their Government but no one else seems that bothered.

    You've missed out (c).

    Having become the first person in two millennia to achieve bodily resurrection, he wants to show off.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 51,867
    Rudd is toast.

    End of.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,678

    Rudd is toast.

    End of.

    She's toast, May's Marmite.

    That works.

    Good night.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,683
    ydoethur said:


    You've missed out (c).

    Having become the first person in two millennia to achieve bodily resurrection, he wants to show off.

    So instead of offering anything approaching analysis or comment or argument, you pick me up on one mistake.

    You must be a teacher !



  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,167
    I still don’t see a smoking gun for Rudd.

    This is getting boring now. We need to move on.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,683
    Anyway, evening to those interested in serious discussion or debate :)

    Are we then to believe the Independent's story on the Government's post-Brexit immigration thinking ?

    It strikes me as asking the same question as about a Customs Union - when is Freedom of Movement not Freedom of Movement ? When it's defined by the British Government it would seem.

    For those of us hoping "Global Britain" would create a single transparent equal playing field for all those seeking to enter Britain legally, this is hugely disappointing. It would have been nice to have a process which would treat all prospective migrants equally, fairly, with dignity and to have issues resolved as quickly as possible.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    How I hate autocorrect. Lidington.
  • I still don’t see a smoking gun for Rudd.

    This is getting boring now. We need to move on.

    It really is over the top and the full on media attacks must be providing support for Rudd from the party.

    However, there is another agenda here from conservative Brexiteers who see her as a BINO and want her out. Andrew Pierce on Marr this morning was gunning for her as are some on here.

    I think the hard Brexiteers see the writing on the wall and are turning their fire on both TM and Amber Rudd who both supported remain.

    I think Brexit without a customs union is dead in the water,
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    If it's thought that getting rid of Rudd might help the Tories hold places like Westminster and Wandsworth than I think she'll probably be sacrificed for the sake of the party.
  • AndyJS said:

    If it's thought that getting rid of Rudd might help the Tories hold places like Westminster and Wandsworth than I think she'll probably be sacrificed for the sake of the party.

    Good point - I hadnt thought of that though I doubt it would make much difference
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    edited April 2018
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    A busy weekend and I'm still catching up with things.

    On matters Korean, why has Kim Yong-Il come to the negotiating table ? I've read two wildly differing hypotheses:

    a) he has his nuclear deterrent so has no real fear of attack from the US or China. As a result, he can show diplomatic largesse to his neighbours from a position of strength while Washington will adapt to Pyonygang having nuclear weapons just as it did when first Communist China and later the unstable Pakistan also got the Bomb.

    b) his nuclear weapons facility is in ruins and his advantage lost. With his regime under real threat, Kim has been persuaded by those round him to tone down the rhetoric and seek a rapprochement with Beijing and Seoul. For a quiet life, Kim can continue to enjoy his lavish lifestyle and for the next 50 years live a life of luxury while his people continue to be brutalised and the rest of the world does nothing.

    I can see a lot of positives for Kim, his coterie, for South Korea, Japan and China if the rhetoric is toned down and tensions are eased. Positives too for Washington - indeed, the only losers look to be the North Korean people who look condemned to continued brutality at the hands of the ludicrous Juche philosophy and their Government but no one else seems that bothered.

    Kim Yong il died in 2000 and retired as prime minister in 2010, so is unlikely to be influential in anything that Kim Jong-Un decides to do.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Yong-il
  • JohnLoony said:

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    A busy weekend and I'm still catching up with things.

    On matters Korean, why has Kim Yong-Il come to the negotiating table ? I've read two wildly differing hypotheses:

    a) he has his nuclear deterrent so has no real fear of attack from the US or China. As a result, he can show diplomatic largesse to his neighbours from a position of strength while Washington will adapt to Pyonygang having nuclear weapons just as it did when first Communist China and later the unstable Pakistan also got the Bomb.

    b) his nuclear weapons facility is in ruins and his advantage lost. With his regime under real threat, Kim has been persuaded by those round him to tone down the rhetoric and seek a rapprochement with Beijing and Seoul. For a quiet life, Kim can continue to enjoy his lavish lifestyle and for the next 50 years live a life of luxury while his people continue to be brutalised and the rest of the world does nothing.

    I can see a lot of positives for Kim, his coterie, for South Korea, Japan and China if the rhetoric is toned down and tensions are eased. Positives too for Washington - indeed, the only losers look to be the North Korean people who look condemned to continued brutality at the hands of the ludicrous Juche philosophy and their Government but no one else seems that bothered.

    Kim Yong il died in 2000 and retired as prime minister in 2010, so is unlikely to be influential in anything that Kim Jong-Un decides to do.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Yong-il
    Not sure that makes sense
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,683

    I still don’t see a smoking gun for Rudd.

    This is getting boring now. We need to move on.

    It really is over the top and the full on media attacks must be providing support for Rudd from the party.

    However, there is another agenda here from conservative Brexiteers who see her as a BINO and want her out. Andrew Pierce on Marr this morning was gunning for her as are some on here.

    I think the hard Brexiteers see the writing on the wall and are turning their fire on both TM and Amber Rudd who both supported remain.

    I think Brexit without a customs union is dead in the water,
    Tomorrow's statement will be critical. This isn't about Windrush any more but about whether Rudd has misled Parliament. Even if it was accidental (which I'm sure it was) the evidence is she wasn't (she may be now, she may not) in full control of her Department and that makes her look weak and vulnerable.

    The bigger issue remains the CU - as a LEAVE voter I fully understood membership of the SM and CU was incompatible with us seeking to find a new economic identity as "Global Britain". I've no problem with the EU trying to achieve the best deal with us (they would, wouldn't they ?) and there may be some aspects of the CU we can emulate in the post-EU economic relationship but we can't be in the EU's Customs Union.
  • stodge said:

    I still don’t see a smoking gun for Rudd.

    This is getting boring now. We need to move on.

    It really is over the top and the full on media attacks must be providing support for Rudd from the party.

    However, there is another agenda here from conservative Brexiteers who see her as a BINO and want her out. Andrew Pierce on Marr this morning was gunning for her as are some on here.

    I think the hard Brexiteers see the writing on the wall and are turning their fire on both TM and Amber Rudd who both supported remain.

    I think Brexit without a customs union is dead in the water,
    Tomorrow's statement will be critical. This isn't about Windrush any more but about whether Rudd has misled Parliament. Even if it was accidental (which I'm sure it was) the evidence is she wasn't (she may be now, she may not) in full control of her Department and that makes her look weak and vulnerable.

    The bigger issue remains the CU - as a LEAVE voter I fully understood membership of the SM and CU was incompatible with us seeking to find a new economic identity as "Global Britain". I've no problem with the EU trying to achieve the best deal with us (they would, wouldn't they ?) and there may be some aspects of the CU we can emulate in the post-EU economic relationship but we can't be in the EU's Customs Union.
    I did fudge it by saying 'a' customs union
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited April 2018

    AndyJS said:

    If it's thought that getting rid of Rudd might help the Tories hold places like Westminster and Wandsworth than I think she'll probably be sacrificed for the sake of the party.

    Good point - I hadnt thought of that though I doubt it would make much difference
    Control of Westminster could come down to a handful of votes in one or two wards. The Tories don't want to lose the council containing most of the country's most iconic buildings and prestigious institutions.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,683
    JohnLoony said:

    Kim Yong il died in 2000 and retired as prime minister in 2010, so is unlikely to be influential in anything that Kim Jong-Un decides to do.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Yong-il

    Oh good, another pathetic pedant !!

    Are the Tories going to regain Croydon next Thursday ? I suspect not.

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited April 2018
    This is a frustrating period of time to have had no polls for two weeks:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#2018
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,285
    stodge said:

    For those of us hoping "Global Britain" would create a single transparent equal playing field for all those seeking to enter Britain legally, this is hugely disappointing. It would have been nice to have a process which would treat all prospective migrants equally, fairly, with dignity and to have issues resolved as quickly as possible.

    But all countries discriminate to a certain extent based on nationality, and almost all favour close neighbours.

    Why?

    1. Nationality is a useful heuristic. (To give a silly example: we can't expect our immigration authorities to treat all universities as of equal merit, but nor can we expect them to be in charge of rating 10,000 educational institutions.)

    2. Because countries tend to have close relations with their neighbours.

    So, NZ and Australia discriminate in favour of each other, as do Canada and the US, as do we and Ireland.

    We will never have completely non-discriminatory immigration policies, and nor should we have. It's good to keep things like working holiday visas for Australians and Canadians.
  • Barcelona win La Liga
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,678
    edited April 2018
    stodge said:

    ydoethur said:


    You've missed out (c).

    Having become the first person in two millennia to achieve bodily resurrection, he wants to show off.

    So instead of offering anything approaching analysis or comment or argument, you pick me up on one mistake.

    You must be a teacher !
    I plead guilty, m'lud! :smiley:

    On the substantive point however, since you seem piqued by my levity, your post doesn't actually get us very far. You take three paragraphs to say essentially we have bugger all idea why he's acting like this. Which isn't terribly helpful, TBH, even if you hadn't muddled up the name of the current monarch Dictator.

    That said, the truth is we have so little information of any kind - even reliable background information - that any speculation is likely to be wrong. As matters stand, Kim is making friendly noises. I can quite understand everyone is anxious to see where they lead. Anything is better than him and Trump trading nuclear threats about the size of their respective buttons on Twitter.

    As for the people of North Korea, yes, this makes it less likely they can be liberated. That is a tragedy for them. And to quote John Donne, no man is an island. However, since that was never going to happen anyway (if there had been a war, they would all have been killed) I'm not sure what difference it makes in practice. Similarly, let's face it, the record of the US in liberating people from appalling tyrannies and establishing successful democracies is approximately 100% - 100% disastrous, that is.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516
    rcs1000 said:

    stodge said:

    For those of us hoping "Global Britain" would create a single transparent equal playing field for all those seeking to enter Britain legally, this is hugely disappointing. It would have been nice to have a process which would treat all prospective migrants equally, fairly, with dignity and to have issues resolved as quickly as possible.

    But all countries discriminate to a certain extent based on nationality, and almost all favour close neighbours.

    Why?

    1. Nationality is a useful heuristic. (To give a silly example: we can't expect our immigration authorities to treat all universities as of equal merit, but nor can we expect them to be in charge of rating 10,000 educational institutions.)

    2. Because countries tend to have close relations with their neighbours.

    So, NZ and Australia discriminate in favour of each other, as do Canada and the US, as do we and Ireland.

    We will never have completely non-discriminatory immigration policies, and nor should we have. It's good to keep things like working holiday visas for Australians and Canadians.
    I thought the UK points system for skilled migrants DID treat all credited universities as equivalent for points.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,678
    AndyJS said:

    This is a frustrating period of time to have had no polls for two weeks:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#2018

    How useful would a poll be for the locals? There are so many factors at play that polls might be almost as misleading as they are for general elections.

    We've had London polling, although some on the regions would be interesting. Does anyone know of any?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,248
    stodge said:

    I still don’t see a smoking gun for Rudd.

    This is getting boring now. We need to move on.

    It really is over the top and the full on media attacks must be providing support for Rudd from the party.

    However, there is another agenda here from conservative Brexiteers who see her as a BINO and want her out. Andrew Pierce on Marr this morning was gunning for her as are some on here.

    I think the hard Brexiteers see the writing on the wall and are turning their fire on both TM and Amber Rudd who both supported remain.

    I think Brexit without a customs union is dead in the water,
    Tomorrow's statement will be critical. This isn't about Windrush any more but about whether Rudd has misled Parliament. Even if it was accidental (which I'm sure it was) the evidence is she wasn't (she may be now, she may not) in full control of her Department and that makes her look weak and vulnerable.

    The bigger issue remains the CU - as a LEAVE voter I fully understood membership of the SM and CU was incompatible with us seeking to find a new economic identity as "Global Britain". I've no problem with the EU trying to achieve the best deal with us (they would, wouldn't they ?) and there may be some aspects of the CU we can emulate in the post-EU economic relationship but we can't be in the EU's Customs Union.
    Absolutely. Brexit is pointless if we do.

    Even the Economist recognises its flaws: the EU could sell access to our market in future without any say from us at all, in whatever suits their best interests, not ours.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516
    rcs1000 said:

    Elliot said:

    rcs1000 said:

    That immigration deal would be explosive, effectively rendering Brexit a hollow mockery. Surely Theresa would never go that far.

    My guess is that they'll put something in place like that between the US and Canada, where firms have to register, and then can go to an online portal and effectively issue a registered job offer to a Canadian.

    In other words, EU countries will have "preferential" access to the UK (and vice-versa), but it will stem the flow of low skilled workers.
    If it is limited to high skilled workers, she could get away with it. If low skill workers can still come in huge numbers, May will lose her premiership.
    Low skilled workers are much, much less likely to be in salaried employment, and are much more likely to be "cash in hand", so I think it would likely have a significant effect, even if it was theoretically open to all. (Assuming, of course, that the British government started cracking down on the 'cash in hand economy' - which is long overdue.)

    We currently have "open borders" with the EU, and net migration in the year to September 2007 was 90,000 (against 205,000 from non-EU countries). That 90,000 was made up of 220,000 coming here and 130,000 leaving. (All stats from Migration Watch.)

    My guess is that the number returning home would remain fairly constant in this scenario, but you'd probably see the number coming fall by a third or so. That would make net EU migration a fairly negligable number: perhaps only an eighth of the level of non-EU migration.
    I believe retail workers are a huge chunk of low skilled labour, and their salaries could certainly be done in a way to qualify for an "open to all" scheme. There really has to be a salary or qualifications limit for it to work.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,248
    Off topic, I’ve had two texts this weekend from two normally loyal Tory members (both Leave voters) who both said they want May’s head if she capitulates on the Customs Union.

    I think this is a serious moment for her.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516

    stodge said:

    I still don’t see a smoking gun for Rudd.

    This is getting boring now. We need to move on.

    It really is over the top and the full on media attacks must be providing support for Rudd from the party.

    However, there is another agenda here from conservative Brexiteers who see her as a BINO and want her out. Andrew Pierce on Marr this morning was gunning for her as are some on here.

    I think the hard Brexiteers see the writing on the wall and are turning their fire on both TM and Amber Rudd who both supported remain.

    I think Brexit without a customs union is dead in the water,
    Tomorrow's statement will be critical. This isn't about Windrush any more but about whether Rudd has misled Parliament. Even if it was accidental (which I'm sure it was) the evidence is she wasn't (she may be now, she may not) in full control of her Department and that makes her look weak and vulnerable.

    The bigger issue remains the CU - as a LEAVE voter I fully understood membership of the SM and CU was incompatible with us seeking to find a new economic identity as "Global Britain". I've no problem with the EU trying to achieve the best deal with us (they would, wouldn't they ?) and there may be some aspects of the CU we can emulate in the post-EU economic relationship but we can't be in the EU's Customs Union.
    Absolutely. Brexit is pointless if we do.

    Even the Economist recognises its flaws: the EU could sell access to our market in future without any say from us at all, in whatever suits their best interests, not ours.
    Potentially there is room from our side to have a customs union in select manufactured goods that mainly sell regionally - packaged food and drink, cars etc. But I would guess the EU would call that cherry picking.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 4,042
    ydoethur said:

    AndyJS said:

    This is a frustrating period of time to have had no polls for two weeks:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#2018

    How useful would a poll be for the locals? There are so many factors at play that polls might be almost as misleading as they are for general elections.

    We've had London polling, although some on the regions would be interesting. Does anyone know of any?
    Pretty sure there isn't any.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,285
    Elliot said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Elliot said:

    rcs1000 said:

    That immigration deal would be explosive, effectively rendering Brexit a hollow mockery. Surely Theresa would never go that far.

    My guess is that they'll put something in place like that between the US and Canada, where firms have to register, and then can go to an online portal and effectively issue a registered job offer to a Canadian.

    In other words, EU countries will have "preferential" access to the UK (and vice-versa), but it will stem the flow of low skilled workers.
    If it is limited to high skilled workers, she could get away with it. If low skill workers can still come in huge numbers, May will lose her premiership.
    Low skilled workers are much, much less likely to be in salaried employment, and are much more likely to be "cash in hand", so I think it would likely have a significant effect, even if it was theoretically open to all. (Assuming, of course, that the British government started cracking down on the 'cash in hand economy' - which is long overdue.)

    We currently have "open borders" with the EU, and net migration in the year to September 2007 was 90,000 (against 205,000 from non-EU countries). That 90,000 was made up of 220,000 coming here and 130,000 leaving. (All stats from Migration Watch.)

    My guess is that the number returning home would remain fairly constant in this scenario, but you'd probably see the number coming fall by a third or so. That would make net EU migration a fairly negligable number: perhaps only an eighth of the level of non-EU migration.
    I believe retail workers are a huge chunk of low skilled labour, and their salaries could certainly be done in a way to qualify for an "open to all" scheme. There really has to be a salary or qualifications limit for it to work.
    I'm much more relaxed than you. I think it's great that a 22 year old Brit can go to Paris and work for a year in a Patisserie, and have no particular issue with the Czech girl in my local Starbucks*.

    What I have more of an issue with is the fact that people can come here and receive benefits without having paid in. I have an issue that we cannot get rid of - or bar - people who have committed crimes.

    It doesn't seem to me that we need a system much more onerous than the US one.

    * This was before I moved to LA, of course.
  • Off topic, I’ve had two texts this weekend from two normally loyal Tory members (both Leave voters) who both said they want May’s head if she capitulates on the Customs Union.

    I think this is a serious moment for her.

    I would agree but the HOC numbers make it very likely and no leader, even JRM, can change the opposition to leaving a customs union
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,216
    edited April 2018
    rcs1000 said:

    stodge said:

    For those of us hoping "Global Britain" would create a single transparent equal playing field for all those seeking to enter Britain legally, this is hugely disappointing. It would have been nice to have a process which would treat all prospective migrants equally, fairly, with dignity and to have issues resolved as quickly as possible.

    But all countries discriminate to a certain extent based on nationality, and almost all favour close neighbours.

    Why?

    1. Nationality is a useful heuristic. (To give a silly example: we can't expect our immigration authorities to treat all universities as of equal merit, but nor can we expect them to be in charge of rating 10,000 educational institutions.)

    2. Because countries tend to have close relations with their neighbours.

    So, NZ and Australia discriminate in favour of each other, as do Canada and the US, as do we and Ireland.

    We will never have completely non-discriminatory immigration policies, and nor should we have. It's good to keep things like working holiday visas for Australians and Canadians.
    Why should our system not be non discriminatory? The fact other countries choose to discriminate in favour of particular neighbours is no reason for us to do so. Apart from the language advantages why would it be better for us to give preferential treatment to a Canadian rather than a Peruvian? One of the reasons for getting out of the EU was to put an end to such discriminatory practices which act against our best interests. We should not be swapping one kind of favouritism for another.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,383

    Off topic, I’ve had two texts this weekend from two normally loyal Tory members (both Leave voters) who both said they want May’s head if she capitulates on the Customs Union.

    I think this is a serious moment for her.

    And yet there is probably a majority in the Commons for remaining in a CU; if the Commons votes for a CU what would be the point in Tory Leavers replacing May?
This discussion has been closed.