politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » PB Video Analysis: Brexit – What Does “No Deal”Actually Mean?

Foxy said:

NickPalmer said:

Artist said:

Barrow and Furness is probably number one on the Tories target list now.

A general issue for people defecting from their parties is that unless they get backing from a different party, as Artist suggests, they are almost certainly doomed as the electorate is massive polarised. Neither John Woodcock nor Anna Soubry would IMO have any chance of re-election if they were opposed by both Tory and Labour candidates (and AS has zero chance of Labour endorsement). (I expect AS to get her party's selection again if she wants it. John W, not so much.)

That means that people who are happy to jump to another party have a fair chance of survival, jumping to an independent position is a bridge to oblivion, unless an entirely new and successful party is formed. That's the main reason we're not seeing it happen often.

Woodcock, I do not know as well, but apart from being pro Brexit and Pro nuclear (once again quite unremarkeable positions in Labour just a few years ago) what is there to suggest that he would fit in the Tory party?

Brexit simply does not match much of the rest of politics, helped by being in many theoretical forms, from F*** Business fortress Britain, to Hannanite Swashbuckling Singapore.

Fake news. Woodcock is a Remainer. I think you are confusing him with John Mann.

currystar said:

David_Evershed said:

currystar said:

I see inflation has stayed at 2.4% below expectations. So we now have rising wage growth, low inflation and full employment. Vote Labour!!!!

Fake news.

CPI for June 2018 is 2.3% not 2.4%

See https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices

Looks like currystar took the BBC's incorrectly reported figure instead of the source.

Edit: Could be my confusion between CPIH and some other CPI.

The correct source further enhances my point. Does anyone think that the Government should get any credit for this incredible economic performance or is this performance absolutely nothing to do with the Government ?

So, real wages are still down on when the Cons took power in 2010? Sure, if you want to take credit for that then go ahead.

Sandpit said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Sandpit said:

ralphmalph said:

El_Capitano said:

All of these proposed “centre” parties are non-starters unless they accept Brexit is happening. Right now they all see opposition to it as an article of faith, which might put them in the centre ground in SW1 but certainly doesn’t in the wider country.

The funniest example was James Chapman’s “The Democrats”, whose first principle was to campaign to overturn the largest democratic vote in British history!

And yes, the SNP are still utterly toxic in England.

They’ll be pitching themselves at the majority who think it’s a wrong decision and/or the still greater majority who are now Brexit pessimists.

“Accepting Brexit” means different things to different people. Some lunatics on here still believe that it requires a customs union despite the fact only one in six know what a customs union is. A politician who articulated a positive vision for constructive engagement with the EU would find a ready audience.

But it’s not going to happen. As of now, the choices are ultra-destructive no-deal Brexit, Remain and Mayan Brexit. All three would be catastrophic for Britain in diffferent ways. None would resolve Britain’s relationship with the EU.

You have said yourself that Brexit needs to be allowed to happen. We also agree that the EU are not going to put a fence across Ireland no matter what has been said by Varakdar and Barnier in recent months.

My personal view is that a managed exit to WTO terms from an 18 month implementation period is doable if both sides agree now or shortly that there’s not going to be a deal. Negotiating a Canada or Japan style deal from outside is going to be easier than trying to maintain links to existing EU structures after we leave, and a negotiation from outside will be more equitable than the one-sided A50 rules. Hopefully (yes I know) politicians on all sides will want to engage with the EU once we have left, but right now there’s too many on all sides who are trying to scupper anything reasonable in persuit of their ideology.

Reading this article this morning:
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/may-and-the-overpowering-stench-of-treachery/
It’s clear why Davis resigned, his whole department having been undermined by Number 10.

How do you stop Ireland vetoing a deal that creates a hard border on the island of Ireland?

Whatever problems you might think that Theresa May has they are as nothing compared to the extinction of Fine Gael that would follow them accepting that.

Some awareness of the politics and history of your counterparts in a negotiation is required to reach a successful agreement.

OblitusSumMe said:

Sandpit said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Sandpit said:

ralphmalph said:

El_Capitano said:

All of these proposed “centre” parties are non-starters unless they accept Brexit is happening. Right now they all see opposition to it as an article of faith, which might put them in the centre ground in SW1 but certainly doesn’t in the wider country.

The funniest example was James Chapman’s “The Democrats”, whose first principle was to campaign to overturn the largest democratic vote in British history!

And yes, the SNP are still utterly toxic in England.

They’ll be pitching themselves at the majority who think it’s a wrong decision and/or the still greater majority who are now Brexit pessimists.

But it’s not going to happen. As of now, the choices are ultra-destructive no-deal Brexit, Remain and Mayan Brexit. All three would be catastrophic for Britain in diffferent ways. None would resolve Britain’s relationship with the EU.

You have said yourself that Brexit needs to be allowed to happen. We also agree that the EU are not going to put a fence across Ireland no matter what has been said by Varakdar and Barnier in recent months.

My personal view is that a managed exit to WTO terms from an 18 month implementation period is doable if both sides agree now or shortly that there’s not going to be a deal. Negotiating a Canada or Japan style deal from outside is going to be easier than trying to maintain links to existing EU structures after we leave, and a negotiation from outside will be more equitable than the one-sided A50 rules. Hopefully (yes I know) politicians on all sides will want to engage with the EU once we have left, but right now there’s too many on all sides who are trying to scupper anything reasonable in persuit of their ideology.

Reading this article this morning:
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/may-and-the-overpowering-stench-of-treachery/
It’s clear why Davis resigned, his whole department having been undermined by Number 10.

How do you stop Ireland vetoing a deal that creates a hard border on the island of Ireland?

Whatever problems you might think that Theresa May has they are as nothing compared to the extinction of Fine Gael that would follow them accepting that.

Some awareness of the politics and history of your counterparts in a negotiation is required to reach a successful agreement.

LOL. For PB Leavers, Ireland is just a theoretical problem that can be solved by sending a construction group to build a wall in Crossmaglen and telling all parties to just suck it up.

Sean_F said:

williamglenn said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Unhinged.

Just over two years ago you thought the negotiations would be a walk in the park. Now you want to inflict an avoidable massive recession on Britain just to prove a point.

The genuinely patriotic Casino Royale has been silent since the Chequers implosion, which speaks volumes.

Maybe he's on holiday.

Where there's wifi there's a way.

Corbyn just dropped a clanger

IanB2 said:

rkrkrk said:

surby said:

AndyJS said:

Yet another House of Commons voting cock-up:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44867866

"An MP who is on maternity leave has accused the government of a breach of trust over a key House of Commons vote on Brexit.

Lib Dem Jo Swinson was "paired" with Tory chairman Brandon Lewis so she could be at home with her baby son during the Trade Bill vote.

This should mean neither MP votes so their absences cancel each other out.

But Mr Lewis did vote with the government - he has since apologised for an "honest mistake" by whips."

I am sure even you do not believe it was a Tory cock-up. He only voted on the two votes which were supposed to be close but did not vote on the others.

Basically, Tories cannot be trusted

Wasn't there a story on here a while back with Corbyn saying Labour wouldn't agree to pairing with the Tories any more? Seems clear why...

Other paired Tories apparently confirm they were pressured by whips to break the arrangement. Which I suggest paints Lewis as not an honest man.

The appropriate response should be for other MPs to refuse to pair with Lewis in future.

The appropriate response should be for an MP paired with him to vote anyway, during a close crucial vote

What does a Woodcock cock when a woodcock cocks up wood?

TM sorted Corbyn out today. He is just dreadful

DecrepitJohnL said:

rkrkrk said:

Cracking article from Martin Wolf on the US political situation.
My fear is that we are going down this route here, although thankfully our Conservative party is still much more honourable and decent than the US republican party.
https://www.ft.com/content/3aea8668-88e2-11e8-bf9e-8771d5404543

Paywalled for me but if I had to point to parallels between the US Republicans and our Conservatives, the obvious one is that both are filled with legislators who criticise their president or prime minister but who take no steps to remove him or her.

What is more worrying is that under Cameron's leadership (although not necessarily instigated by him) the Conservatives do seem to have adopted some practices from the Republicans, most notably around voter suppression and gerrymandering (which ironically cost Cameron the referendum and his premiership) and demonisation of opponents -- not the devil eyes thing but vetoing Gordon Brown for the IMF, for instance, which parallels Republicans refusing to consider Obama's nominated Supreme Court judge.

You can get a few articles free... this one is well worth handing out your email address for...
Yes there are some parallels, but nothing the Tories have done is at the same scale/level as the Republicans IMO.

justin124 said:

currystar said:

David_Evershed said:

currystar said:

I see inflation has stayed at 2.4% below expectations. So we now have rising wage growth, low inflation and full employment. Vote Labour!!!!

Fake news.

CPI for June 2018 is 2.3% not 2.4%

See https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices

Looks like currystar took the BBC's incorrectly reported figure instead of the source.

Edit: Could be my confusion between CPIH and some other CPI.

The correct source further enhances my point. Does anyone think that the Government should get any credit for this incredible economic performance or is this performance absolutely nothing to do with the Government ?

On a like for like 1970s basis unemployment would still be circa 2 million before applying the many 'adjustments' made in the 1980s & 1990s.. RPI inflation at over 3% is comparable to the 1960s and the mid-1980s.

I don't think you can easily make any sensible comparison between now and the 1970s, because of the massive change in employment demographics. In 1971 the female employment rate was about 53%, now it's about 71%. That reflects big changes in the nature of home and work.

12.04 EC fines Google €4.34bn

NEWSFLASH: The European Commission has fined Google €4.34bn for breaching EU antitrust rules.

The tech giant is being sanctioned for abusing its dominant position in the Android operating system for mobile phones.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2018/jul/18/uk-inflation-cost-of-living-wages-google-fine-fed-chair-business-live

Richard_Nabavi said:

12.04 EC fines Google €4.34bn

NEWSFLASH: The European Commission has fined Google €4.34bn for breaching EU antitrust rules.

The tech giant is being sanctioned for abusing its dominant position in the Android operating system for mobile phones.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2018/jul/18/uk-inflation-cost-of-living-wages-google-fine-fed-chair-business-live

Anyone would think they have a large upcoming gap to plug in their finances....

felix said:

Sean_F said:

NickPalmer said:

Artist said:

Barrow and Furness is probably number one on the Tories target list now.

A general issue for people defecting from their parties is that unless they get backing from a different party, as Artist suggests, they are almost certainly doomed as the electorate is massive polarised. Neither John Woodcock nor Anna Soubry would IMO have any chance of re-election if they were opposed by both Tory and Labour candidates (and AS has zero chance of Labour endorsement). (I expect AS to get her party's selection again if she wants it. John W, not so much.)

That means that people who are happy to jump to another party have a fair chance of survival, jumping to an independent position is a bridge to oblivion, unless an entirely new and successful party is formed. That's the main reason we're not seeing it happen often.

Agreed. I wonder if John Woodcock will join the Conservatives.

I doubt it but if he did he would get a massive majority.

Er! Not in Barrow and Furness he won't. He upset too many people. Just been checking up/ researching FB and the local papers on line. Seems to be a recurring theme of arrogance and nit picking, and not actually representing or even visiting his constituency or local party. Just a random quote from May that I quite liked to give some idea of what many in the local CLP and BLP thought (of a meeting with Cathy Smith MP) in May'18: "You know what was so different? The relaxed, friendly buzz from all there, the good humour and welcoming feel. A couple of little hitches were treated - like a couple of little hitches. And an interesting talk from Cathy Smith who unlike some could be bothered to meet the foot soldiers."

I was quite surprised at how few outright derogatory remarks there were about Woodcock and the downright silence about anything complimentary, which I put down to "he's our MP, love him or hate him, we will support him" outlook, but of the few I did find, again from May:

"I feel your MP is doing more to harm Labour than any Conservative, Lib Dem, UKIP or Green candidate could ever do"

"Spot on there and local members feel the same. Many of us loathe him but taking the next steps is a big decision"

"I am trying to help people who are affected by the many cuts to public services including the most vulnerable in our society. I tell the vulnerable a better world is out there and under Mr Corbyn we may achieve this. Then this man continually helps the Conservatives attack Mr Corbyn he is a disgrace to the Labour Party. He needs to decide who he is working for the Labour Party or the Conservatives"

justin124 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

justin124 said:

currystar said:

David_Evershed said:

currystar said:

I see inflation has stayed at 2.4% below expectations. So we now have rising wage growth, low inflation and full employment. Vote Labour!!!!

Fake news.

CPI for June 2018 is 2.3% not 2.4%

See https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices

Looks like currystar took the BBC's incorrectly reported figure instead of the source.

Edit: Could be my confusion between CPIH and some other CPI.

The correct source further enhances my point. Does anyone think that the Government should get any credit for this incredible economic performance or is this performance absolutely nothing to do with the Government ?

On a like for like 1970s basis unemployment would still be circa 2 million before applying the many 'adjustments' made in the 1980s & 1990s.. RPI inflation at over 3% is comparable to the 1960s and the mid-1980s.

I don't think you can easily make any sensible comparison between now and the 1970s, because of the massive change in employment demographics. In 1971 the female employment rate was about 53%, now it's about 71%. That reflects big changes in the nature of home and work.

I understand that but would suggest that the implication is that in terms of male full employment the labour market is far tougher than in the 1970s.So many people are forced to rely on Zero Hours Contracts to obtain any work at all.

Do you really think that? There is so much work available

felix said:

Sean_F said:

NickPalmer said:

Artist said:

Barrow and Furness is probably number one on the Tories target list now.

A general issue for people defecting from their parties is that unless they get backing from a different party, as Artist suggests, they are almost certainly doomed as the electorate is massive polarised. Neither John Woodcock nor Anna Soubry would IMO have any chance of re-election if they were opposed by both Tory and Labour candidates (and AS has zero chance of Labour endorsement). (I expect AS to get her party's selection again if she wants it. John W, not so much.)

That means that people who are happy to jump to another party have a fair chance of survival, jumping to an independent position is a bridge to oblivion, unless an entirely new and successful party is formed. That's the main reason we're not seeing it happen often.

Agreed. I wonder if John Woodcock will join the Conservatives.

I doubt it but if he did he would get a massive majority.

I doubt it. I stand corrected on his Brexit position, but with the shift of lead to 5% Lab lead, I think his Labour replacement would get an increased majority.

Politicians often are convinced that they have a big personal mandate, but it is rarely true. Even anti-Corbyn MPs like Liz Kendall or the scandal ridden Keith Vaz got much the same swing as national polling suggested.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

TM sorted Corbyn out today. He is just dreadful

It is said that a country gets the politicians it deserves. What is it that this country has done that it deserves Boris Johnson, Rees-Mogg and Corbyn . Oh, hang on.....

Foxy said:

felix said:

Sean_F said:

NickPalmer said:

Artist said:

Barrow and Furness is probably number one on the Tories target list now.

A general issue for people defecting from their parties is that unless they get backing from a different party, as Artist suggests, they are almost certainly doomed as the electorate is massive polarised. Neither John Woodcock nor Anna Soubry would IMO have any chance of re-election if they were opposed by both Tory and Labour candidates (and AS has zero chance of Labour endorsement). (I expect AS to get her party's selection again if she wants it. John W, not so much.)

That means that people who are happy to jump to another party have a fair chance of survival, jumping to an independent position is a bridge to oblivion, unless an entirely new and successful party is formed. That's the main reason we're not seeing it happen often.

Agreed. I wonder if John Woodcock will join the Conservatives.

I doubt it but if he did he would get a massive majority.

I doubt it. I stand corrected on his Brexit position, but with the shift of lead to 5% Lab lead, I think his Labour replacement would get an increased majority.

Politicians often are convinced that they have a big personal mandate, but it is rarely true. Even anti-Corbyn MPs like Liz Kendall or the scandal ridden Keith Vaz got much the same swing as national polling suggested.

Simon Danczuk's vote last year is a reminder of how much "personal vote" an MP usually enjoys. Woodcock maybe would get double what Danczuk did, if lucky.

currystar said:

justin124 said:

currystar said:

David_Evershed said:

currystar said:

I see inflation has stayed at 2.4% below expectations. So we now have rising wage growth, low inflation and full employment. Vote Labour!!!!

Fake news.

CPI for June 2018 is 2.3% not 2.4%

See https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices

Looks like currystar took the BBC's incorrectly reported figure instead of the source.

Edit: Could be my confusion between CPIH and some other CPI.

The correct source further enhances my point. Does anyone think that the Government should get any credit for this incredible economic performance or is this performance absolutely nothing to do with the Government ?

On a like for like 1970s basis unemployment would still be circa 2 million before applying the many 'adjustments' made in the 1980s & 1990s.. RPI inflation at over 3% is comparable to the 1960s and the mid-1980s.

I cant see real unemployment where someone actually wants a job being anywhere near 2 million. There are currently hundreds if thousands of job vacancies in the UK. We have been permanently advertising for people here for the last year and get no applications. On the industrial estate where I work just about every business has job vacancy signs on their entrance. I have never ever known anything like this.

Worth noting that ILO and World Bank numbers for the UK, which use their own methodology, also have the UK at essentially full employment.

TGOHF said:

TOPPING said:

LOL. For PB Leavers, Ireland is just a theoretical problem that can be solved by sending a construction group to build a wall in Crossmaglen and telling all parties to just suck it up.

Nobody can answer the questions on this EU hard border - how long will it take the ROI to build it and will Dublin be recompensed by the EU for the expense ?

If by "Hard Border", you mean "Customs Posts", then it could be achieved with a couple of portacabins.

Nigel_Foremain said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

TOPPING said:

May knocked it out of the park.

She is one of the few grown ups in the HOC

I think there are lots of grown-ups on both sides of the house. The problem is that the adolescents have managed to steel the keys to the family car

Good comment

justin124 said:

currystar said:

justin124 said:

currystar said:

David_Evershed said:

currystar said:

I see inflation has stayed at 2.4% below expectations. So we now have rising wage growth, low inflation and full employment. Vote Labour!!!!

Fake news.

CPI for June 2018 is 2.3% not 2.4%

See https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices

Looks like currystar took the BBC's incorrectly reported figure instead of the source.

Edit: Could be my confusion between CPIH and some other CPI.

The correct source further enhances my point. Does anyone think that the Government should get any credit for this incredible economic performance or is this performance absolutely nothing to do with the Government ?

On a like for like 1970s basis unemployment would still be circa 2 million before applying the many 'adjustments' made in the 1980s & 1990s.. RPI inflation at over 3% is comparable to the 1960s and the mid-1980s.

I cant see real unemployment where someone actually wants a job being anywhere near 2 million. There are currently hundreds if thousands of job vacancies in the UK. We have been permanently advertising for people here for the last year and get no applications. On the industrial estate where I work just about every business has job vacancy signs on their entrance. I have never ever known anything like this.

But several hundred thousand are underemployed - yet removed from the register because they work more than 16 hours per week. Many others have been coerced by the DWP to declare themselves 'self employed' but earn peanuts.

There must have been lots of people who were underemployed back in the 1970's, or shut out of the Labour market completely.

Stereotomy said:

currystar said:

justin124 said:

currystar said:

justin124 said:

currystar said:

David_Evershed said:

currystar said:

I see inflation has stayed at 2.4% below expectations. So we now have rising wage growth, low inflation and full employment. Vote Labour!!!!

Fake news.

CPI for June 2018 is 2.3% not 2.4%

See https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices

Looks like currystar took the BBC's incorrectly reported figure instead of the source.

Edit: Could be my confusion between CPIH and some other CPI.

The correct source further enhances my point. Does anyone think that the Government should get any credit for this incredible economic performance or is this performance absolutely nothing to do with the Government ?

On a like for like 1970s basis unemployment would still be circa 2 million before applying the many 'adjustments' made in the 1980s & 1990s.. RPI inflation at over 3% is comparable to the 1960s and the mid-1980s.

I cant see real unemployment where someone actually wants a job being anywhere near 2 million. There are currently hundreds if thousands of job vacancies in the UK. We have been permanently advertising for people here for the last year and get no applications. On the industrial estate where I work just about every business has job vacancy signs on their entrance. I have never ever known anything like this.

But several hundred thousand are underemployed - yet removed from the register because they work more than 16 hours per week. Many others have been coerced by the DWP to declare themselves 'self employed' but earn peanuts.

Im sorry but I just dont see that. I have just been speaking to an agency. They are looking for 4 plumbers for a years contract in Southampton paying £20 per hour, thats £52,000 per year for a ten hour day (They dont work ten hours, they work 8 and a half but get paid ten). They have been looking for two weeks, they cant find anyone. That is the current real world.

Not everyone is a trained plumber who lives in Southampton. There can easily be unemployment/underemployment in some areas and fields and unfilled vacancies in others

Hence the need for an ongoing supply of workers from the EU, Brexit or not. Assuming they still want to come.

justin124 said:

currystar said:

justin124 said:

currystar said:

David_Evershed said:

currystar said:

I see inflation has stayed at 2.4% below expectations. So we now have rising wage growth, low inflation and full employment. Vote Labour!!!!

Fake news.

CPI for June 2018 is 2.3% not 2.4%

See https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices

Looks like currystar took the BBC's incorrectly reported figure instead of the source.

Edit: Could be my confusion between CPIH and some other CPI.

The correct source further enhances my point. Does anyone think that the Government should get any credit for this incredible economic performance or is this performance absolutely nothing to do with the Government ?

On a like for like 1970s basis unemployment would still be circa 2 million before applying the many 'adjustments' made in the 1980s & 1990s.. RPI inflation at over 3% is comparable to the 1960s and the mid-1980s.

I cant see real unemployment where someone actually wants a job being anywhere near 2 million. There are currently hundreds if thousands of job vacancies in the UK. We have been permanently advertising for people here for the last year and get no applications. On the industrial estate where I work just about every business has job vacancy signs on their entrance. I have never ever known anything like this.

But several hundred thousand are underemployed - yet removed from the register because they work more than 16 hours per week. Many others have been coerced by the DWP to declare themselves 'self employed' but earn peanuts.

The ONS disagrees with you here. The vast majority of the growth in employment since 2010 has been full time work.

Sandpit said:

.

currystar said:

justin124 said:

currystar said:

justin124 said:

currystar said:

David_Evershed said:

currystar said:

I see inflation has stayed at 2.4% below expectations. So we now have rising wage growth, low inflation and full employment. Vote Labour!!!!

Fake news.

CPI for June 2018 is 2.3% not 2.4%

See https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices

Looks like currystar took the BBC's incorrectly reported figure instead of the source.

Edit: Could be my confusion between CPIH and some other CPI.

The correct source further enhances my point. Does anyone think that the Government should get any credit for this incredible economic performance or is this performance absolutely nothing to do with the Government ?

On a like for like 1970s basis unemployment would still be circa 2 million before applying the many 'adjustments' made in the 1980s & 1990s.. RPI inflation at over 3% is comparable to the 1960s and the mid-1980s.

I cant see real unemployment where someone actually wants a job being anywhere near 2 million. There are currently hundreds if thousands of job vacancies in the UK. We have been permanently advertising for people here for the last year and get no applications. On the industrial estate where I work just about every business has job vacancy signs on their entrance. I have never ever known anything like this.

But several hundred thousand are underemployed - yet removed from the register because they work more than 16 hours per week. Many others have been coerced by the DWP to declare themselves 'self employed' but earn peanuts.

Im sorry but I just dont see that. I have just been speaking to an agency. They are looking for 4 plumbers for a years contract in Southampton paying £20 per hour, thats £52,000 per year for a ten hour day (They dont work ten hours, they work 8 and a half but get paid ten). They have been looking for two weeks, they cant find anyone. That is the current real world.

We need to be encouraging more kids into apprenticeships, rather than getting £50k into debt for mostly worthless degrees. Most plumbers starting at 18 will buy a house in their 20s on those numbers.

An Irish brother-in-law of mine did a tertiary-level qualification in welding and is doing very well as a result.

It's all part of the cultural snobbishness we have in this country about people employed in work that involves getting the hands dirty, which is also seen in the obsession with grammar schools.

Danny565 said:

Foxy said:

felix said:

Sean_F said:

NickPalmer said:

Artist said:

Barrow and Furness is probably number one on the Tories target list now.

A general issue for people defecting from their parties is that unless they get backing from a different party, as Artist suggests, they are almost certainly doomed as the electorate is massive polarised. Neither John Woodcock nor Anna Soubry would IMO have any chance of re-election if they were opposed by both Tory and Labour candidates (and AS has zero chance of Labour endorsement). (I expect AS to get her party's selection again if she wants it. John W, not so much.)

That means that people who are happy to jump to another party have a fair chance of survival, jumping to an independent position is a bridge to oblivion, unless an entirely new and successful party is formed. That's the main reason we're not seeing it happen often.

Agreed. I wonder if John Woodcock will join the Conservatives.

I doubt it but if he did he would get a massive majority.

I doubt it. I stand corrected on his Brexit position, but with the shift of lead to 5% Lab lead, I think his Labour replacement would get an increased majority.

Politicians often are convinced that they have a big personal mandate, but it is rarely true. Even anti-Corbyn MPs like Liz Kendall or the scandal ridden Keith Vaz got much the same swing as national polling suggested.

Simon Danczuk's vote last year is a reminder of how much "personal vote" an MP usually enjoys. Woodcock maybe would get double what Danczuk did, if lucky.

I would have thought the fact that Danczuk was clearly a total cock may also have played a role.

On the other hand... Peter Law.

OblitusSumMe said:

Sandpit said:

.

currystar said:

justin124 said:

currystar said:

justin124 said:

currystar said:

David_Evershed said:

currystar said:

I see inflation has stayed at 2.4% below expectations. So we now have rising wage growth, low inflation and full employment. Vote Labour!!!!

Fake news.

CPI for June 2018 is 2.3% not 2.4%

See https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices

Looks like currystar took the BBC's incorrectly reported figure instead of the source.

Edit: Could be my confusion between CPIH and some other CPI.

The correct source further enhances my point. Does anyone think that the Government should get any credit for this incredible economic performance or is this performance absolutely nothing to do with the Government ?

On a like for like 1970s basis unemployment would still be circa 2 million before applying the many 'adjustments' made in the 1980s & 1990s.. RPI inflation at over 3% is comparable to the 1960s and the mid-1980s.

I cant see real unemployment where someone actually wants a job being anywhere near 2 million. There are currently hundreds if thousands of job vacancies in the UK. We have been permanently advertising for people here for the last year and get no applications. On the industrial estate where I work just about every business has job vacancy signs on their entrance. I have never ever known anything like this.

But several hundred thousand are underemployed - yet removed from the register because they work more than 16 hours per week. Many others have been coerced by the DWP to declare themselves 'self employed' but earn peanuts.

Im sorry but I just dont see that. I have just been speaking to an agency. They are looking for 4 plumbers for a years contract in Southampton paying £20 per hour, thats £52,000 per year for a ten hour day (They dont work ten hours, they work 8 and a half but get paid ten). They have been looking for two weeks, they cant find anyone. That is the current real world.

We need to be encouraging more kids into apprenticeships, rather than getting £50k into debt for mostly worthless degrees. Most plumbers starting at 18 will buy a house in their 20s on those numbers.

An Irish brother-in-law of mine did a tertiary-level qualification in welding and is doing very well as a result.

It's all part of the cultural snobbishness we have in this country about people employed in work that involves getting the hands dirty, which is also seen in the obsession with grammar schools.

Immigrants come because we have done a poor job in training people to do jobs that need doing.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Recidivist said:

El_Capitano said:

In the light of this morning's conversation about a new party, this is quite an interesting quote from Soubry's Today programme interview:

“I personally would abandon the Labour frontbench and I would reach beyond it and I would encompass Plaid Cymru, the SNP and other sensible, pragmatic people who believe in putting this country’s interests first and foremost,” she said.

The willingness to talk to the SNP - perhaps she's already done so? - changes the maths.

A loose alliance of (let's say) the new Centre party, the LibDems, Plaid and the SNP would be fighting the next election with 150 incumbents. Retaining at least half of those would seem plausible and I suspect they could hope to do much, much better.

There's the question of how toxic the SNP is to English voters. My sense is that centrists are less offended by it than the extremes of either main party, so an alliance may not offend that many of the Centre party's potential voters - but that's just supposition. (And of course there's a few LD/SNP battlegrounds and an LD/Plaid one, which probably rules out a formal alliance but not a loose understanding. I could see a Centre party deciding not to fight in Scotland at all.)

All good points. I also think that Soubry has the right adjectives too. It would be a government of national unity to begin with. So you start with sensible MPs from all parties joining to put forward a moderate Brexit programme. They then vote no confidence in May and ask the queen to allow them to form a government. The formation of the new party follows on from that.

It sounds like what the country needs.

Without being put to the people without with a GE

We had a referendum. If this is the only way its result can be implemented then I don't see the problem.

Recidivist said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Recidivist said:

El_Capitano said:

In the light of this morning's conversation about a new party, this is quite an interesting quote from Soubry's Today programme interview:

“I personally would abandon the Labour frontbench and I would reach beyond it and I would encompass Plaid Cymru, the SNP and other sensible, pragmatic people who believe in putting this country’s interests first and foremost,” she said.

The willingness to talk to the SNP - perhaps she's already done so? - changes the maths.

A loose alliance of (let's say) the new Centre party, the LibDems, Plaid and the SNP would be fighting the next election with 150 incumbents. Retaining at least half of those would seem plausible and I suspect they could hope to do much, much better.

There's the question of how toxic the SNP is to English voters. My sense is that centrists are less offended by it than the extremes of either main party, so an alliance may not offend that many of the Centre party's potential voters - but that's just supposition. (And of course there's a few LD/SNP battlegrounds and an LD/Plaid one, which probably rules out a formal alliance but not a loose understanding. I could see a Centre party deciding not to fight in Scotland at all.)

All good points. I also think that Soubry has the right adjectives too. It would be a government of national unity to begin with. So you start with sensible MPs from all parties joining to put forward a moderate Brexit programme. They then vote no confidence in May and ask the queen to allow them to form a government. The formation of the new party follows on from that.

It sounds like what the country needs.

Without being put to the people without with a GE

We had a referendum. If this is the only way its result can be implemented then I don't see the problem.

I do - it would be just wrong

justin124 said:

Sean_F said:

justin124 said:

currystar said:

justin124 said:

currystar said:

David_Evershed said:

currystar said:

I see inflation has stayed at 2.4% below expectations. So we now have rising wage growth, low inflation and full employment. Vote Labour!!!!

Fake news.

CPI for June 2018 is 2.3% not 2.4%

See https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices

Looks like currystar took the BBC's incorrectly reported figure instead of the source.

Edit: Could be my confusion between CPIH and some other CPI.

The correct source further enhances my point. Does anyone think that the Government should get any credit for this incredible economic performance or is this performance absolutely nothing to do with the Government ?

On a like for like 1970s basis unemployment would still be circa 2 million before applying the many 'adjustments' made in the 1980s & 1990s.. RPI inflation at over 3% is comparable to the 1960s and the mid-1980s.

I cant see real unemployment where someone actually wants a job being anywhere near 2 million. There are currently hundreds if thousands of job vacancies in the UK. We have been permanently advertising for people here for the last year and get no applications. On the industrial estate where I work just about every business has job vacancy signs on their entrance. I have never ever known anything like this.

But several hundred thousand are underemployed - yet removed from the register because they work more than 16 hours per week. Many others have been coerced by the DWP to declare themselves 'self employed' but earn peanuts.

There must have been lots of people who were underemployed back in the 1970's, or shut out of the Labour market completely.

Involuntary part time work was much less common in the 1970s.

On the other hand, there were few opportunities to do jobs that fitted around other schedules.

justin124 said:

If claimants were allowed to claim Contribution -based JSA for 12 months - rather than 6 months -as was the case in the 1970s, that alone would add significantly to the headline figures. There would be a similar impact from allowing claims from 16-18 year olds - and from students during vacations as was formerly the case.

It would increase the claimant count, but the ILO figures are the ones you use to look at unemployment numbers on a like for like basis.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Recidivist said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Recidivist said:

El_Capitano said:

In the light of this morning's conversation about a new party, this is quite an interesting quote from Soubry's Today programme interview:

“I personally would abandon the Labour frontbench and I would reach beyond it and I would encompass Plaid Cymru, the SNP and other sensible, pragmatic people who believe in putting this country’s interests first and foremost,” she said.

The willingness to talk to the SNP - perhaps she's already done so? - changes the maths.

A loose alliance of (let's say) the new Centre party, the LibDems, Plaid and the SNP would be fighting the next election with 150 incumbents. Retaining at least half of those would seem plausible and I suspect they could hope to do much, much better.

There's the question of how toxic the SNP is to English voters. My sense is that centrists are less offended by it than the extremes of either main party, so an alliance may not offend that many of the Centre party's potential voters - but that's just supposition. (And of course there's a few LD/SNP battlegrounds and an LD/Plaid one, which probably rules out a formal alliance but not a loose understanding. I could see a Centre party deciding not to fight in Scotland at all.)

All good points. I also think that Soubry has the right adjectives too. It would be a government of national unity to begin with. So you start with sensible MPs from all parties joining to put forward a moderate Brexit programme. They then vote no confidence in May and ask the queen to allow them to form a government. The formation of the new party follows on from that.

It sounds like what the country needs.

Without being put to the people without with a GE

We had a referendum. If this is the only way its result can be implemented then I don't see the problem.

I do - it would be just wrong

Democracy isn't something you have, it is something you do. We are fortunate in this country that we have two big and well organised parties able to put forward programmes of government and 4 more capable of playing a role in government. (We had 5 until UKIP imploded.) This is all good and us non-partisans should be grateful to the posters on here who give up their time to keep their particular parties on the road.

But sometimes situations arise that the normal configuration can't cope with. We have had national governments in the past in response to economic crises and wars. Brexit is a big enough deal to need a special way of handling it.

Recidivist said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Recidivist said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Recidivist said:

El_Capitano said:

In the light of this morning's conversation about a new party, this is quite an interesting quote from Soubry's Today programme interview:

“I personally would abandon the Labour frontbench and I would reach beyond it and I would encompass Plaid Cymru, the SNP and other sensible, pragmatic people who believe in putting this country’s interests first and foremost,” she said.

The willingness to talk to the SNP - perhaps she's already done so? - changes the maths.

A loose alliance of (let's say) the new Centre party, the LibDems, Plaid and the SNP would be fighting the next election with 150 incumbents. Retaining at least half of those would seem plausible and I suspect they could hope to do much, much better.

There's the question of how toxic the SNP is to English voters. My sense is that centrists are less offended by it than the extremes of either main party, so an alliance may not offend that many of the Centre party's potential voters - but that's just supposition. (And of course there's a few LD/SNP battlegrounds and an LD/Plaid one, which probably rules out a formal alliance but not a loose understanding. I could see a Centre party deciding not to fight in Scotland at all.)

All good points. I also think that Soubry has the right adjectives too. It would be a government of national unity to begin with. So you start with sensible MPs from all parties joining to put forward a moderate Brexit programme. They then vote no confidence in May and ask the queen to allow them to form a government. The formation of the new party follows on from that.

It sounds like what the country needs.

Without being put to the people without with a GE

We had a referendum. If this is the only way its result can be implemented then I don't see the problem.

I do - it would be just wrong

Democracy isn't something you have, it is something you do. We are fortunate in this country that we have two big and well organised parties able to put forward programmes of government and 4 more capable of playing a role in government. (We had 5 until UKIP imploded.) This is all good and us non-partisans should be grateful to the posters on here who give up their time to keep their particular parties on the road.

But sometimes situations arise that the normal configuration can't cope with. We have had national governments in the past in response to economic crises and wars. Brexit is a big enough deal to need a special way of handling it.

The MP must be answerable to his/her constituents

justin124 said:

Apparently Paisley will not be available to vote until 22nd November.

Under the Recall of MPs Act 2015 we could have a by-election. It needs a petition signed by about 7500 people in North Antrim. Paisley could stand in such a by-election. I've no idea whether this is likely, perhaps some of our Northern Irish correspondents could advise?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Antrim_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Recidivist said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Recidivist said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Recidivist said:

El_Capitano said:

In the light of this morning's conversation about a new party, this is quite an interesting quote from Soubry's Today programme interview:

“I personally would abandon the Labour frontbench and I would reach beyond it and I would encompass Plaid Cymru, the SNP and other sensible, pragmatic people who believe in putting this country’s interests first and foremost,” she said.

The willingness to talk to the SNP - perhaps she's already done so? - changes the maths.

A loose alliance of (let's say) the new Centre party, the LibDems, Plaid and the SNP would be fighting the next election with 150 incumbents. Retaining at least half of those would seem plausible and I suspect they could hope to do much, much better.

There's the question of how toxic the SNP is to English voters. My sense is that centrists are less offended by it than the extremes of either main party, so an alliance may not offend that many of the Centre party's potential voters - but that's just supposition. (And of course there's a few LD/SNP battlegrounds and an LD/Plaid one, which probably rules out a formal alliance but not a loose understanding. I could see a Centre party deciding not to fight in Scotland at all.)

All good points. I also think that Soubry has the right adjectives too. It would be a government of national unity to begin with. So you start with sensible MPs from all parties joining to put forward a moderate Brexit programme. They then vote no confidence in May and ask the queen to allow them to form a government. The formation of the new party follows on from that.

It sounds like what the country needs.

Without being put to the people without with a GE

We had a referendum. If this is the only way its result can be implemented then I don't see the problem.

I do - it would be just wrong

Democracy isn't something you have, it is something you do. We are fortunate in this country that we have two big and well organised parties able to put forward programmes of government and 4 more capable of playing a role in government. (We had 5 until UKIP imploded.) This is all good and us non-partisans should be grateful to the posters on here who give up their time to keep their particular parties on the road.

But sometimes situations arise that the normal configuration can't cope with. We have had national governments in the past in response to economic crises and wars. Brexit is a big enough deal to need a special way of handling it.

The MP must be answerable to his/her constituents

Absolutely.

Recidivist said:

El_Capitano said:

In the light of this morning's conversation about a new party, this is quite an interesting quote from Soubry's Today programme interview:

“I personally would abandon the Labour frontbench and I would reach beyond it and I would encompass Plaid Cymru, the SNP and other sensible, pragmatic people who believe in putting this country’s interests first and foremost,” she said.

The willingness to talk to the SNP - perhaps she's already done so? - changes the maths.

A loose alliance of (let's say) the new Centre party, the LibDems, Plaid and the SNP would be fighting the next election with 150 incumbents. Retaining at least half of those would seem plausible and I suspect they could hope to do much, much better.

There's the question of how toxic the SNP is to English voters. My sense is that centrists are less offended by it than the extremes of either main party, so an alliance may not offend that many of the Centre party's potential voters - but that's just supposition. (And of course there's a few LD/SNP battlegrounds and an LD/Plaid one, which probably rules out a formal alliance but not a loose understanding. I could see a Centre party deciding not to fight in Scotland at all.)

All good points. I also think that Soubry has the right adjectives too. It would be a government of national unity to begin with. So you start with sensible MPs from all parties joining to put forward a moderate Brexit programme. They then vote no confidence in May and ask the queen to allow them to form a government. The formation of the new party follows on from that...

And who would lead such an effort ?

One of the reasons all three main parties are in the mess they are is the leadership vacuum. Starting with a glorified committee meeting would likely see any such arrangement stillborn.

https://twitter.com/estwebber/status/1019553062992732161

rcs1000 said:

What an incredible video: informative, artfully delivered, and enjoyable. Two thumbs up.

Robert, all your videos are very interesting. Could you possibly add subtitles for those who can't hear properly?

Good afternoon, everybody.

IanB2 said:

Is Boris having to wait for his big moment while MPs discuss rail timetables?

At present there are few in the chamber