politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » As the Brexit “deal” reaches another critical week the public
Comments
-
But real unemployment is much higher than that when account is taken of the many who are obliged to work far fewer hours than they would normally choose. Others have declared themselves Self Employed but earn peanuts.another_richard said:So what level of posturing has PB seen today ?
A Jo Johnson level or has it reached a Boris Johnson level ?
Looking in some detail at today's employment data it suggests that the minimum level of unemployment can only be fractionally below 4%.
Its noticeable that a slight increase in unemployment has happened at the same time as vacancies reaching another record high, redundancies reaching another record low and a continuing shift to full time, permanent employment from part-time, temporary and self-employment.0 -
Different rules.Jonathan said:
Not so. It took fewer to topple Thatcher.HYUFD said:
No they do not.DecrepitJohnL said:
They have the numbers to topple May. What they do not have is the numbers to elect the right successor. Worse, their own two candidates, Boris and Davis, are busted flushes. From their point of view, Hunt, Javid or Hammond would be even worse than May, not least because they are more competent and less likely to crash out by mistake.HYUFD said:
Tgey do not have the numbers to topple May as Leader so it is all bravadokle4 said:
How stupid does he think everyone is? They've been saying May's days are numbered for a long time.HYUFD said:IDS warns May 'her days are numbered' because of this Deal. IDS backed Leadsom in 2016 of course
https://mobile.twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1062405003766362113
I'm very convinced many May opponents are lying about how bad things would be, else they would have taken action and been more forthright about needing to remove her a long time ago. Only some have been so bold.
This is irrespective of if the deal is terrible. It might be, but their actions are cynical and pathetic.
They need 160 Tory MPs to topple May. May got 165 Tory MPs in the first round alone in 2016 and only 120 Tory MPs even backed Leave
Thatcher would have lost to Heseltine in round 2, now if you get 50.1% in a no confidence vote you cannot be challenged for a year.
Thatcher would have survived in 1990 under these rules0 -
-
https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/1062421715400179713another_richard said:So what level of posturing has PB seen today ?
A Jo Johnson level or has it reached a Boris Johnson level ?0 -
Indeed.Pulpstar said:So Boris and Rees Mogg come out denouncing potentially the most important document in the last 50 years before even reading the bloody thing. Idiots.
The ERG hardliners have really exposed their lack of maturity and rationality.0 -
She would be damaged and potentially couldn’t get legislation through parliament. She would be safe as leader, but not as PM.rpjs said:
Thatcher was facing further votes that she could not win. If May wins by one vote she's "safe" from a further internal party challenge for a year.Jonathan said:
Not so. It took fewer to topple Thatcher.HYUFD said:
No they do not.DecrepitJohnL said:
They have the numbers to topple May. What they do not have is the numbers to elect the right successor. Worse, their own two candidates, Boris and Davis, are busted flushes. From their point of view, Hunt, Javid or Hammond would be even worse than May, not least because they are more competent and less likely to crash out by mistake.HYUFD said:
Tgey do not have the numbers to topple May as Leader so it is all bravadokle4 said:
How stupid does he think everyone is? They've been saying May's days are numbered for a long time.HYUFD said:IDS warns May 'her days are numbered' because of this Deal. IDS backed Leadsom in 2016 of course
https://mobile.twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1062405003766362113
I'm very convinced many May opponents are lying about how bad things would be, else they would have taken action and been more forthright about needing to remove her a long time ago. Only some have been so bold.
This is irrespective of if the deal is terrible. It might be, but their actions are cynical and pathetic.
They need 160 Tory MPs to topple May. May got 165 Tory MPs in the first round alone in 2016 and only 120 Tory MPs even backed Leave
0 -
The keys to number 10.Jonathan said:So the only interesting question is what does Corbyn want to save the deal.
0 -
They have a good track record of working with the Tories. They brought us Thatcher after all.justin124 said:
The SNP will not help the Tories. Were they to do so , they would drive the left of centre voters back to Labour in Scotland and lose a bucket full of seats next time.Jonathan said:Would the SNP lend her the votes if she. added an Indyref2 clause?
0 -
0
-
Well done Nick.NickPalmer said:To all those who said there wouldn't be a deal at the last minute - I told you so. It's how the EU handles crises. Whether it will get through Parliament is another story, but I suspect it will.
Your's has been a voice of good sense on how far things would proceed.0 -
No, you never will.HYUFD said:
ConHome got the 2005 Tory leadership election spot on, the last time the members were consulted.ydoethur said:
You are still quoting Conservative Home.HYUFD said:
Nothing 'for fuck's sake about it' even your own poll has 57% of 2017 Tory voters wanting a Canada Deal as first preference, the problem is the backstopydoethur said:
Oh for fuck's sake.HYUFD said:
I still repeat mine most Tory members let alone voters back a Canada Deal over No Deal, No Deal as a last resortydoethur said:
The most recent poll put the split at 48/41. On the assumption that the remaining 11% are probably not closet Liberal Democrats, I still repeat my comment.HYUFD said:
Actually most Tory voters want a Canada Deal, No Deal is just a last resort.ydoethur said:
In case you hadn't spotted this, I commented that it was most of THEIR voters. As in, more than half of just under 43%. I stand by that comment.HYUFD said:
Most voters do not want No Deal, not one poll has No Deal preferred to a Deal or even Remainydoethur said:If Labour vote against a deal and we leave with no deal - this being the alternative - will their voters ever actually forgive them?
Perversely, it would also massively help the Tories - by forcing them to deliver the no deal most of the voters are odd enough to want.
And @TheWhiteRabbit I hope you haven't forgotten our bet in light of recent comments...
Only UKIP voters are fully behind No Deal
https://www.politico.eu/article/theresa-may-conservatives-brexit-poll-between-a-rock-and-a-hard-place/
https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2018/10/our-survey-one-in-ten-respondents-go-for-norway-to-canada-almost-half-want-canada-plus-plus-plus.html
Your increasingly irrational devotion to them reminds me of those people who cling to minor variants in RCD as evidence the earth is 6,000 years old.
I will never apologise for quoting ConHome
Which was sort of the reason for my original outburst, to be fair.
0 -
That's a zinger...Jonathan said:
They have a good track record of working with the Tories. They brought us Thatcher after all.justin124 said:
The SNP will not help the Tories. Were they to do so , they would drive the left of centre voters back to Labour in Scotland and lose a bucket full of seats next time.Jonathan said:Would the SNP lend her the votes if she. added an Indyref2 clause?
0 -
Making the gigantic leap to assume the MPs would vote identically with a different rules / voting system. There is a risk that they were a more sophisticated electorate than that.HYUFD said:
Different rules.Jonathan said:
Not so. It took fewer to topple Thatcher.HYUFD said:
No they do not.DecrepitJohnL said:
They have the numbers to topple May. What they do not have is the numbers to elect the right successor. Worse, their own two candidates, Boris and Davis, are busted flushes. From their point of view, Hunt, Javid or Hammond would be even worse than May, not least because they are more competent and less likely to crash out by mistake.HYUFD said:
Tgey do not have the numbers to topple May as Leader so it is all bravadokle4 said:
How stupid does he think everyone is? They've been saying May's days are numbered for a long time.HYUFD said:IDS warns May 'her days are numbered' because of this Deal. IDS backed Leadsom in 2016 of course
https://mobile.twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1062405003766362113
I'm very convinced many May opponents are lying about how bad things would be, else they would have taken action and been more forthright about needing to remove her a long time ago. Only some have been so bold.
This is irrespective of if the deal is terrible. It might be, but their actions are cynical and pathetic.
They need 160 Tory MPs to topple May. May got 165 Tory MPs in the first round alone in 2016 and only 120 Tory MPs even backed Leave
Thatcher would have lost to Heseltine in round 2, now if you get 50.1% in a no confidence vote you cannot be challenged for a year.
Thatcher would have survived in 1990 under these rules0 -
Come on, you're a political person and you know it doesn't work like that.HYUFD said:
Different rules.
Thatcher would have lost to Heseltine in round 2, now if you get 50.1% in a no confidence vote you cannot be challenged for a year.
Thatcher would have survived in 1990 under these rules
If May got 200 votes or fewer in a VONC her authority would be trashed beyond repair - did Major ever recover from getting 218 votes in 1995? No and he has said he would have quit if he had got below 215.
There's mathematics and there's reality - if as a leader you see more than a third of your Party voting directly against you in a No Confidence vote, there's a message there.
0 -
-
I think May "only" needs 30-40 which is I think the voting strength of the ERG.Wulfrun_Phil said:
It would have to be triple that number for the deal to have even an outside hope.old_labour said:Channel 4 News claiming 20 labour rebels will vote with the government. Starmer denies this.
0 -
Tottenham Hotspur's fan seems to be busy tonight. All comments on the club are being marked as spam.0
-
I repeat, May got over 160 Tory MPs in the first round in 2016, only 120 Tory MPs backed Leavephiliph said:
Making the gigantic leap to assume the MPs would vote identically with a different rules / voting system. There is a risk that they were a more sophisticated electorate than that.HYUFD said:
Different rules.Jonathan said:
Not so. It took fewer to topple Thatcher.HYUFD said:
No they do not.DecrepitJohnL said:
They have the numbers to topple May. What they do not have is the numbers to elect the right successor. Worse, their own two candidates, Boris and Davis, are busted flushes. From their point of view, Hunt, Javid or Hammond would be even worse than May, not least because they are more competent and less likely to crash out by mistake.HYUFD said:
Tgey do not have the numbers to topple May as Leader so it is all bravadokle4 said:
How stupid does he think everyone is? They've been saying May's days are numbered for a long time.HYUFD said:IDS warns May 'her days are numbered' because of this Deal. IDS backed Leadsom in 2016 of course
https://mobile.twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1062405003766362113
I'm very convinced many May opponents are lying about how bad things would be, else they would have taken action and been more forthright about needing to remove her a long time ago. Only some have been so bold.
This is irrespective of if the deal is terrible. It might be, but their actions are cynical and pathetic.
They need 160 Tory MPs to topple May. May got 165 Tory MPs in the first round alone in 2016 and only 120 Tory MPs even backed Leave
Thatcher would have lost to Heseltine in round 2, now if you get 50.1% in a no confidence vote you cannot be challenged for a year.
Thatcher would have survived in 1990 under these rules0 -
It continues to amaze me how all these parties are focusing on calculus for political advantages, rather than what is actually best for their constituents.justin124 said:
The SNP will not help the Tories. Were they to do so , they would drive the left of centre voters back to Labour in Scotland and lose a bucket full of seats next time.Jonathan said:Would the SNP lend her the votes if she. added an Indyref2 clause?
0 -
Didn't stop Corbyn staying in poststodge said:
Come on, you're a political person and you know it doesn't work like that.HYUFD said:
Different rules.
Thatcher would have lost to Heseltine in round 2, now if you get 50.1% in a no confidence vote you cannot be challenged for a year.
Thatcher would have survived in 1990 under these rules
If May got 200 votes or fewer in a VONC her authority would be trashed beyond repair - did Major ever recover from getting 218 votes in 1995? No and he has said he would have quit if he had got below 215.
There's mathematics and there's reality - if as a leader you see more than a third of your Party voting directly against you in a No Confidence vote, there's a message there.0 -
-
If you are ever in doubt as an MP what is best for constituents, do as they would do.Theo said:
It continues to amaze me how all these parties are focusing on calculus for political advantages, rather than what is actually best for their constituents.justin124 said:
The SNP will not help the Tories. Were they to do so , they would drive the left of centre voters back to Labour in Scotland and lose a bucket full of seats next time.Jonathan said:Would the SNP lend her the votes if she. added an Indyref2 clause?
0 -
That is why the shift from self-employment to employment is a good thing overall.justin124 said:
But real unemployment is much higher than that when account is taken of the many who are obliged to work far fewer hours than they would normally choose. Others have declared themselves Self Employed but earn peanuts.another_richard said:So what level of posturing has PB seen today ?
A Jo Johnson level or has it reached a Boris Johnson level ?
Looking in some detail at today's employment data it suggests that the minimum level of unemployment can only be fractionally below 4%.
Its noticeable that a slight increase in unemployment has happened at the same time as vacancies reaching another record high, redundancies reaching another record low and a continuing shift to full time, permanent employment from part-time, temporary and self-employment.
Likewise the number of people who are employed part time because they are unable to get full time employment has also fallen significantly.0 -
only the less kind ones....ydoethur said:Tottenham Hotspur's fan seems to be busy tonight. All comments on the club are being marked as spam.
hence my 'take that' post. Harsh I know...0 -
He would say that, wouldn't he ?Scott_P said:0 -
You have a low amazement threshold, sir.Theo said:
It continues to amaze me how all these parties are focusing on calculus for political advantages, rather than what is actually best for their constituents.justin124 said:
The SNP will not help the Tories. Were they to do so , they would drive the left of centre voters back to Labour in Scotland and lose a bucket full of seats next time.Jonathan said:Would the SNP lend her the votes if she. added an Indyref2 clause?
0 -
Teachers on just above the average salary, better than average pensions, once in place very hard to sack and with long holidays?ydoethur said:
Like teachers but with more job security?justin124 said:Others have declared themselves Self Employed but earn peanuts.
It is not that bad in the classroom0 -
Yes, but it's Theresa May we're talking of here. She'd shrug off winning a party VONC by a single vote and would carry on regardless. It's what she does.stodge said:
Come on, you're a political person and you know it doesn't work like that.HYUFD said:
Different rules.
Thatcher would have lost to Heseltine in round 2, now if you get 50.1% in a no confidence vote you cannot be challenged for a year.
Thatcher would have survived in 1990 under these rules
If May got 200 votes or fewer in a VONC her authority would be trashed beyond repair - did Major ever recover from getting 218 votes in 1995? No and he has said he would have quit if he had got below 215.
There's mathematics and there's reality - if as a leader you see more than a third of your Party voting directly against you in a No Confidence vote, there's a message there.0 -
These people are idiots. They care more about posturing than practical realities. By voting down this deal we will be even further removed from Europe, with no referendum coming, and a hard left in government.Scott_P said:
https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/1062421715400179713another_richard said:So what level of posturing has PB seen today ?
A Jo Johnson level or has it reached a Boris Johnson level ?0 -
So we have a deal, as forecast.
What is it?0 -
I suspect that not all of the ERG would vote against.TheWhiteRabbit said:
I think May "only" needs 30-40 which is I think the voting strength of the ERG.Wulfrun_Phil said:
It would have to be triple that number for the deal to have even an outside hope.old_labour said:Channel 4 News claiming 20 labour rebels will vote with the government. Starmer denies this.
0 -
That's almost as wrong as your claims about ConHome.HYUFD said:
Edit - if it's that good, why aren't you a teacher?0 -
As a result the SNP lost 9 of their 11 MPs at the 1979 election. I doubt that they have forgotten that.ydoethur said:
That's a zinger...Jonathan said:
They have a good track record of working with the Tories. They brought us Thatcher after all.justin124 said:
The SNP will not help the Tories. Were they to do so , they would drive the left of centre voters back to Labour in Scotland and lose a bucket full of seats next time.Jonathan said:Would the SNP lend her the votes if she. added an Indyref2 clause?
0 -
Sigh.
So the crap is on the table. What do we do with it? We need to do something before it stinks the house out.
For me, the keys are:
(1) can we get out of this at a time of our own choosing, with or without notice?
(2) have we got the CU without making concessions on FoM?
(3) is it still the decision of the U.K. Parliament whether to implement EU law or does it have direct effect? If the former what are the penalties for non compliance?
(4) have we got rid of that f****** awful backstop for NI or is it still a part of the agreement? If it is what penalties have we conceded for non compliance?
Of these the most important is the first. One day, maybe, we will have a competent government with a clear understanding of consequences for both their actions and failures to act. I want that government to have the ability to make good the appalling incompetence of this one.0 -
They would have had the oil money to cover the gaps in the early 80s though.HYUFD said:
Even had Labour scraped home it would just have delayed the inevitablejustin124 said:
Far from clear though that the Tories would have won in 1978!HYUFD said:
Again the Tories still lead or are level in most polls.GIN1138 said:
Trudging to the polls in the January gloom, ice, rain and snow with darkness descending at 4:00pm...justin124 said:
January 17th is more likely!GIN1138 said:
Trudging to the polls in the December gloom, ice, rain and snow with darkness descending at 3:30pm...numbertwelve said:
Starting to think we might actually (gasp) be heading for snap GE.Morris_Dancer said:If the deal doesn't pass the Cabinet (or the Commons should it pass the Cabinet), does PB believe we are heading for No Deal, or Referendum 2: Refer Harder?
AND Theresa May leading the campaign.
What could possibly go wrong?
AND Theresa May leading the campaign.
What could possibly go wrong?
It looks more February 1974 than 1997 and the Tories won the popular vote and a majority in England in February 1974 and the subsequent Labour government was so bad the Tories were returned to power 5 years later and in power for 18 years
There are worse fates than a PM Corbyn with a minority government having to agree the Brexit Deal while the Tories rebuild in opposition0 -
Wrong. Thatcher got 54% in 1990 and was quite clear she was going on until her MPs and Cabinet told her she would lose to Heseltine in round 2.stodge said:
Come on, you're a political person and you know it doesn't work like that.HYUFD said:
Different rules.
Thatcher would have lost to Heseltine in round 2, now if you get 50.1% in a no confidence vote you cannot be challenged for a year.
Thatcher would have survived in 1990 under these rules
If May got 200 votes or fewer in a VONC her authority would be trashed beyond repair - did Major ever recover from getting 218 votes in 1995? No and he has said he would have quit if he had got below 215.
There's mathematics and there's reality - if as a leader you see more than a third of your Party voting directly against you in a No Confidence vote, there's a message there.
If May wins in round 1 she cannot be removed and has no risk of a Heseltine and she is bloody minded as anything.
For goodness sake over two thirds of Labour MPs voted against Corbyn and he ploughed on regardless. Both he and May have the hide of a rhoniceraus.
Even Major went through to the next general election after the 1995 vote0 -
The wise hold their council until they have read it.Anazina said:So we have a deal, as forecast.
What is it?
ERG trash it without reading it
Says it all really0 -
You must be new hereTheo said:
It continues to amaze me how all these parties are focusing on calculus for political advantages, rather than what is actually best for their constituents.justin124 said:
The SNP will not help the Tories. Were they to do so , they would drive the left of centre voters back to Labour in Scotland and lose a bucket full of seats next time.Jonathan said:Would the SNP lend her the votes if she. added an Indyref2 clause?
0 -
Mr G, shouldn't that be 'their counsel?'Big_G_NorthWales said:
The wise hold their council until they have read it.Anazina said:So we have a deal, as forecast.
What is it?
ERG trash it without reading it
Says it all really
They are holding a council, which is part of the problem.0 -
Maybe there’s a free owl in there. That would swing it.Scrapheap_as_was said:0 -
I think we all have low eggspectations.Jonathan said:
Maybe there’s a free owl in there. That would swing it.Scrapheap_as_was said:0 -
It’s all a bit pointless speculating till we see some detail. Unless you’re a politician seeking to frame it for your own narrow ends. Even then, some circumspection is advisable.0
-
On (1) we will be a sovereign government that can leave treaties at any time, if willing to pay the diplomatic and economic costs. Any sensible Brexiteer should be able to see that can be done at a time when it won't bring Corbyn into power.DavidL said:Sigh.
So the crap is on the table. What do we do with it? We need to do something before it stinks the house out.
For me, the keys are:
(1) can we get out of this at a time of our own choosing, with or without notice?
(2) have we got the CU without making concessions on FoM?
(3) is it still the decision of the U.K. Parliament whether to implement EU law or does it have direct effect? If the former what are the penalties for non compliance?
(4) have we got rid of that f****** awful backstop for NI or is it still a part of the agreement? If it is what penalties have we conceded for non compliance?
Of these the most important is the first. One day, maybe, we will have a competent government with a clear understanding of consequences for both their actions and failures to act. I want that government to have the ability to make good the appalling incompetence of this one.0 -
O/T
Pakistan v Ireland about to start in Guyana, in the Women's World Cup.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/cricket/456213990 -
No, of course not.Jonathan said:Would the SNP lend her the votes if she. added an Indyref2 clause?
For all kinds of reasons.
For one IndyRef2 comes with no strings attached.
For two, they aren't going to vote for the Toriesv plan when the Tories' plan doesn't meet any of the SNP red lines.0 -
I’m a fellow Palmerian, mind. I’ve been expecting a deal all year.
The absence of a sensible alternative massively improves its chances of passing, whatever it actually says.0 -
Why you still a teacher then?ydoethur said:
That's almost as wrong as your claims about ConHome.HYUFD said:
Edit - if it's that good, why aren't you a teacher?
I did not say life as a teacher was perfect but they are hardly on zero hours contracts or minimum wage or unemployed even if doing supply.0 -
You do quite frequently.HYUFD said:
I repeat, May got over 160 Tory MPs in the first round in 2016, only 120 Tory MPs backed Leavephiliph said:
Making the gigantic leap to assume the MPs would vote identically with a different rules / voting system. There is a risk that they were a more sophisticated electorate than that.HYUFD said:
Different rules.Jonathan said:
Not so. It took fewer to topple Thatcher.HYUFD said:
No they do not.DecrepitJohnL said:
They have the numbers to topple May. What they do not have is the numbers to elect the right successor. Worse, their own two candidates, Boris and Davis, are busted flushes. From their point of view, Hunt, Javid or Hammond would be even worse than May, not least because they are more competent and less likely to crash out by mistake.HYUFD said:
Tgey do not have the numbers to topple May as Leader so it is all bravadokle4 said:
How stupid does he think everyone is? They've been saying May's days are numbered for a long time.HYUFD said:IDS warns May 'her days are numbered' because of this Deal. IDS backed Leadsom in 2016 of course
https://mobile.twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1062405003766362113
I'm very convinced many May opponents are lying about how bad things would be, else they would have taken action and been more forthright about needing to remove her a long time ago. Only some have been so bold.
This is irrespective of if the deal is terrible. It might be, but their actions are cynical and pathetic.
They need 160 Tory MPs to topple May. May got 165 Tory MPs in the first round alone in 2016 and only 120 Tory MPs even backed Leave
Thatcher would have lost to Heseltine in round 2, now if you get 50.1% in a no confidence vote you cannot be challenged for a year.
Thatcher would have survived in 1990 under these rules
The point is next time they will be voting on the May of 2018/2019, and in her performance over the last couple of years, not the ex Home Secretary May from before her ascent to PM.
The votes harvested by candidates vary from election to election.0 -
Yes of course. Thank youydoethur said:
Mr G, shouldn't that be 'their counsel?'Big_G_NorthWales said:
The wise hold their council until they have read it.Anazina said:So we have a deal, as forecast.
What is it?
ERG trash it without reading it
Says it all really
They are holding a council, which is part of the problem.0 -
Independence gets round it surely.Alistair said:
No, of course not.Jonathan said:Would the SNP lend her the votes if she. added an Indyref2 clause?
For all kinds of reasons.
For one IndyRef2 comes with no strings attached.
For two, they aren't going to vote for the Toriesv plan when the Tories' plan doesn't meet any of the SNP red lines.
Anyway, if May doesn’t have the numbers she will have to give someone something. I wonder what it might be.0 -
That's my assumption, the full claimed membership of the ERG is 60 to 80. Which is probably true when the nation's future is not at stake.another_richard said:
I suspect that not all of the ERG would vote against.TheWhiteRabbit said:
I think May "only" needs 30-40 which is I think the voting strength of the ERG.Wulfrun_Phil said:
It would have to be triple that number for the deal to have even an outside hope.old_labour said:Channel 4 News claiming 20 labour rebels will vote with the government. Starmer denies this.
0 -
Yes they are on zero hours contracts if doing supply. It's one reason why no government will get rid of them.HYUFD said:
Good question, why [am] I still a teacher? I don't know. Nor does the letter of resignation I'm in the process of drafting.
It is actually very easy to get rid of teachers you don't want, contrary to popular belief. Woodhead's lie about bad teachers is still believed even though ironically he was sacked twice himself.
As for 'it's not that bad in the classroom,' how on earth would you know? Pure sophistry.0 -
A whole lot of posturing. I've no doubt the government will try to constrain the vote on the deal, but what does that really matter since the EU is under no obligation to reopen matters from what the government has negotiated if parliament instructs the government to do so?Scott_P said:
So I presume it is just political positioning on all sides.0 -
A deal was always there. Trivial. The challenge was to get a deal that could pass the Commons.AlastairMeeks said:I’m a fellow Palmerian, mind. I’ve been expecting a deal all year.
The absence of a sensible alternative massively improves its chances of passing, whatever it actually says.
It’s like killing cancer. Utterly trivial. It’s killing it without killing the patient that’s the hard bit0 -
Re levels of EU employment in the UK.
Interesting splits over the last year:
Increases in employment of Western Europeans, Romanians / Bulgarians and from Cyprus / Malta / Croatia but a big fall in the number employed from the EU8 (who I'll refer to as 'Poles').
I rather suspect that the 'Poles' leaving the UK are neither as highly skilled as the Western Europeans employed nor as willing to accept poor pay and conditions as the Romanians and Bulgarians.
What will be interesting though is to see if upcoming migration stats show net immigration fall dramatically and maybe turn negative.
After all if the number of immigrants employed falls then what are people migrating to the UK for instead ?
That the number of EU migrants who are unemployed has increased during the last year is a worrying sign about who is migrating to the UK.0 -
0
-
In lighter news losing candidate sues over Alternative Vote usage in his failed vid
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/rep-bruce-poliquin-lawsuit-maine-ranked-choice-voting-system0 -
Is that the right tactic? I don't know. I imagine there are quite a few on both benches that would like to vote against but have the deal passScott_P said:0 -
Doesn’t this deal actually prove Palmer wrong? This is by no means the last minute.AlastairMeeks said:I’m a fellow Palmerian, mind. I’ve been expecting a deal all year.
The absence of a sensible alternative massively improves its chances of passing, whatever it actually says.0 -
See my second comment.Jonathan said:
A deal was always there. Trivial. The challenge was to get a deal that could pass the Commons.AlastairMeeks said:I’m a fellow Palmerian, mind. I’ve been expecting a deal all year.
The absence of a sensible alternative massively improves its chances of passing, whatever it actually says.
It’s like killing cancer. Utterly trivial. It’s killing it without killing the patient that’s the hard bit
I expect it will be passed on a one hand one bounce basis, but not before completely destroying the credibility of a vast array of politicians, which will be nice. My advice to waverers is to get your humble pie in early.0 -
Good, thanks, that would make sense. I realised it was type.autocorrect, but normally one can make a good guess at what's intended. That one floored me completely.RobinWiggs said:
"politicians they" ?John_M said:
I suspect it's typoese or perhaps autocorrectomania.AnneJGP said:
Anyone care to offer a translation of poloroxoanstgey, please?RochdalePioneers said:This is going to be top quality entertainment. What's the point in a technical agreement by diplomats if ihe poloroxoanstgey work for are so bitterly divided that the PM refuses to show them the legal advice and needs to plead with them one by one?
How many cabinet resignations can she survive?
Good evening, everybody.0 -
Biggest scoop of the decade available for the hack that gets the story. Who will it be?0
-
I have consistently said we would have to take May’s deal no matter how awful because the alternatives are worse but blimey, she seems to be testing that theory to destruction.Theo said:
On (1) we will be a sovereign government that can leave treaties at any time, if willing to pay the diplomatic and economic costs. Any sensible Brexiteer should be able to see that can be done at a time when it won't bring Corbyn into power.DavidL said:Sigh.
So the crap is on the table. What do we do with it? We need to do something before it stinks the house out.
For me, the keys are:
(1) can we get out of this at a time of our own choosing, with or without notice?
(2) have we got the CU without making concessions on FoM?
(3) is it still the decision of the U.K. Parliament whether to implement EU law or does it have direct effect? If the former what are the penalties for non compliance?
(4) have we got rid of that f****** awful backstop for NI or is it still a part of the agreement? If it is what penalties have we conceded for non compliance?
Of these the most important is the first. One day, maybe, we will have a competent government with a clear understanding of consequences for both their actions and failures to act. I want that government to have the ability to make good the appalling incompetence of this one.0 -
No Deal is the best route to independence, a Deal makes Yes unlikelyJonathan said:
Independence gets round it surely.Alistair said:
No, of course not.Jonathan said:Would the SNP lend her the votes if she. added an Indyref2 clause?
For all kinds of reasons.
For one IndyRef2 comes with no strings attached.
For two, they aren't going to vote for the Toriesv plan when the Tories' plan doesn't meet any of the SNP red lines.
Anyway, if May doesn’t have the numbers she will have to give someone something. I wonder what it might be.0 -
It reflects the need for a margin of terror.williamglenn said:
Doesn’t this deal actually prove Palmer wrong? This is by no means the last minute.AlastairMeeks said:I’m a fellow Palmerian, mind. I’ve been expecting a deal all year.
The absence of a sensible alternative massively improves its chances of passing, whatever it actually says.0 -
I cannot see what she could. I can see a path to a referendum, maybe, but this hypothesis is about giving something to get the numbers to not need a referendum. I think Mr Meeks' theory of it being voted down, but it coming back and approved after chaos, is more plausible than May being able to offer something to Labour or the SNP to back this. Neither wants anything to do with this.Jonathan said:
Independence gets round it surely.Alistair said:
No, of course not.Jonathan said:Would the SNP lend her the votes if she. added an Indyref2 clause?
For all kinds of reasons.
For one IndyRef2 comes with no strings attached.
For two, they aren't going to vote for the Toriesv plan when the Tories' plan doesn't meet any of the SNP red lines.
Anyway, if May doesn’t have the numbers she will have to give someone something. I wonder what it might be.0 -
May has got a Deal, for the average Tory MP bar the diehards that is what mattersphiliph said:
You do quite frequently.HYUFD said:
I repeat, May got over 160 Tory MPs in the first round in 2016, only 120 Tory MPs backed Leavephiliph said:
Making the gigantic leap to assume the MPs would vote identically with a different rules / voting system. There is a risk that they were a more sophisticated electorate than that.HYUFD said:
Different rules.Jonathan said:
Not so. It took fewer to topple Thatcher.HYUFD said:
No they do not.DecrepitJohnL said:
They have the numbers to topple May. What they do not have is the numbers to elect the right successor. Worse, their own two candidates, Boris and Davis, are busted flushes. From their point of view, Hunt, Javid or Hammond would be even worse than May, not least because they are more competent and less likely to crash out by mistake.HYUFD said:
Tgey do not have the numbers to topple May as Leader so it is all bravadokle4 said:
How stupid does he think everyone is? They've been saying May's days are numbered for a long time.HYUFD said:IDS warns May 'her days are numbered' because of this Deal. IDS backed Leadsom in 2016 of course
https://mobile.twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1062405003766362113
I'm very convinced many May opponents are lying about how bad things would be, else they would have taken action and been more forthright about needing to remove her a long time ago. Only some have been so bold.
This is irrespective of if the deal is terrible. It might be, but their actions are cynical and pathetic.
They need 160 Tory MPs to topple May. May got 165 Tory MPs in the first round alone in 2016 and only 120 Tory MPs even backed Leave
Thatcher would have lost to Heseltine in round 2, now if you get 50.1% in a no confidence vote you cannot be challenged for a year.
Thatcher would have survived in 1990 under these rules
The point is next time they will be voting on the May of 2018/2019, and in her performance over the last couple of years, not the ex Home Secretary May from before her ascent to PM.
The votes harvested by candidates vary from election to election.0 -
Yes but the statistics only tell the story of the people the statistics have been tuned to pick up.another_richard said:So what level of posturing has PB seen today ?
A Jo Johnson level or has it reached a Boris Johnson level ?
Looking in some detail at today's employment data it suggests that the minimum level of unemployment can only be fractionally below 4%.
Its noticeable that a slight increase in unemployment has happened at the same time as vacancies reaching another record high, redundancies reaching another record low and a continuing shift to full time, permanent employment from part-time, temporary and self-employment.
As of yesterday I am unemployed. But I will not appear on any stat because I will not be claiming any social security payments. How many millions of people like myself are economically inactive?0 -
-
The only people voting down works for is those that want to see Corbyn as PM and a no deal Brexit.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Is that the right tactic? I don't know. I imagine there are quite a few on both benches that would like to vote against but have the deal passScott_P said:0 -
whatever you want it to beAnazina said:Biggest scoop of the decade available for the hack that gets the story. Who will it be?
0 -
Sky reporting Attorney General, Geoffrey Cox happy with document0
-
Right. It would make more sense for them to say we aren't getting enough sovereignty back. We are getting it in services, immigration, justice and other non-economic matters but not goods.Scott_P said:0 -
-
Anyone afraid of that outcome should demand the government offer a referendum first.Theo said:
The only people voting down works for is those that want to see Corbyn as PM and a no deal Brexit.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Is that the right tactic? I don't know. I imagine there are quite a few on both benches that would like to vote against but have the deal passScott_P said:0 -
Incorrect - it also works for those who do not care about Corbyn as PM or a no deal Brexit (or one of the two at any rate). That number is probably at least half the Commons - Labour MPs, despite their protests, SNP and the rest of the opposition, plus the ERG and DUP.Theo said:
The only people voting down works for is those that want to see Corbyn as PM and a no deal Brexit.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Is that the right tactic? I don't know. I imagine there are quite a few on both benches that would like to vote against but have the deal passScott_P said:
If they genuinely want no deal, or think Corbyn as PM and/or no deal is better than a bad deal, then they should vote it down, whatever the consequences. Fear of Corbyn alone should not do it.0 -
Most people who do supply are either looking for a permanent role or like the flexibility.ydoethur said:
Yes they are on zero hours contracts if doing supply. It's one reason why no government will get rid of them.HYUFD said:
Good question, why [am] I still a teacher? I don't know. Nor does the letter of resignation I'm in the process of drafting.
It is actually very easy to get rid of teachers you don't want, contrary to popular belief. Woodhead's lie about bad teachers is still believed even though ironically he was sacked twice himself.
As for 'it's not that bad in the classroom,' how on earth would you know? Pure sophistry.
There are far worse jobs than teaching, many lower paid and with far fewer holidays and worse pensions, most teachers do not have long commutes and the associated costs.
I never said teaching was easy nor perfect but teachers who complain all the time often have gone straight from school to university then back to the classroom with no time in the world outside0 -
-
I think it will get to that, but only after the deal is voted down. Then May will say the only way to avoid no deal is a referendum on her deal vs no deal, then there will be wrangling and remain will get added to the pile as the price for a vote.williamglenn said:
Anyone afraid of that outcome should demand the government offer a referendum first.Theo said:
The only people voting down works for is those that want to see Corbyn as PM and a no deal Brexit.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Is that the right tactic? I don't know. I imagine there are quite a few on both benches that would like to vote against but have the deal passScott_P said:-1 -
That means Hunt and Javid and Gove tooBig_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting Attorney General, Geoffrey Cox happy with document
0 -
That’s quite a biggy. He will have a lot of influence.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting Attorney General, Geoffrey Cox happy with document
0 -
who needs I'm a Celebrity, we get the same tension!!Scott_P said:0 -
You'll still appear in the unemployment figures but not on the claimant count.RochdalePioneers said:
Yes but the statistics only tell the story of the people the statistics have been tuned to pick up.another_richard said:So what level of posturing has PB seen today ?
A Jo Johnson level or has it reached a Boris Johnson level ?
Looking in some detail at today's employment data it suggests that the minimum level of unemployment can only be fractionally below 4%.
Its noticeable that a slight increase in unemployment has happened at the same time as vacancies reaching another record high, redundancies reaching another record low and a continuing shift to full time, permanent employment from part-time, temporary and self-employment.
As of yesterday I am unemployed. But I will not appear on any stat because I will not be claiming any social security payments. How many millions of people like myself are economically inactive?
Best of luck in finding work.0 -
-
If May does get something through parliament then it may well be a terrible, terrible deal, but it would be a hell of a political achievement in the circumstances, not least after she threw away a majority.0
-
I do not like speculating but if the cabinet hold together and Geoffrey Cox approves it I think TM will get her deal and the country will sigh a sigh of relief and she will get the plaudits she deserves.
But it is still a big if0 -
That is truly epic ignorance. Most teachers commute over an hour to work. You are just embarrassing yourself now.HYUFD said:
Most people who do supply are either looking for a permanent role or like the flexibility.ydoethur said:
Yes they are on zero hours contracts if doing supply. It's one reason why no government will get rid of them.HYUFD said:
Good question, why [am] I still a teacher? I don't know. Nor does the letter of resignation I'm in the process of drafting.
It is actually very easy to get rid of teachers you don't want, contrary to popular belief. Woodhead's lie about bad teachers is still believed even though ironically he was sacked twice himself.
As for 'it's not that bad in the classroom,' how on earth would you know? Pure sophistry.
There are far worse jobs than teaching, many lower paid and with far fewer holidays and worse pensions, most teachers do not have long commutes and the associated costs.
I never said teaching was easy nor perfect but teachers who complain all the time often have gone straight from school to university then back to the classroom with no time in the world outside
And I spent three years in academia, three years self employed and a year as a Civil Servant before going into teaching and having to cope with a colleague literally walking out yesterday.
Take your patronising, lying shit elsewhere. It's people like you who give Tories a bad name.0 -
The economic and diplomatic costs of reneging on a treaty can be considerable. The US can get away with it through sheer size and power, the UK less so. I also recall someone posting here that we're party to a convention that forbids the unilaterally denouncing of a treaty other than by the terms (if any) set out in that treaty.Theo said:
On (1) we will be a sovereign government that can leave treaties at any time, if willing to pay the diplomatic and economic costs. Any sensible Brexiteer should be able to see that can be done at a time when it won't bring Corbyn into power.DavidL said:Sigh.
So the crap is on the table. What do we do with it? We need to do something before it stinks the house out.
For me, the keys are:
(1) can we get out of this at a time of our own choosing, with or without notice?
(2) have we got the CU without making concessions on FoM?
(3) is it still the decision of the U.K. Parliament whether to implement EU law or does it have direct effect? If the former what are the penalties for non compliance?
(4) have we got rid of that f****** awful backstop for NI or is it still a part of the agreement? If it is what penalties have we conceded for non compliance?
Of these the most important is the first. One day, maybe, we will have a competent government with a clear understanding of consequences for both their actions and failures to act. I want that government to have the ability to make good the appalling incompetence of this one.0 -
Firms up Sky saying Geoffrey Cox approves the textScott_P said:0 -
Indeed.Theo said:
Right. It would make more sense for them to say we aren't getting enough sovereignty back. We are getting it in services, immigration, justice and other non-economic matters but not goods.Scott_P said:
And I wonder how many Leavers in the manufacturing sector are quite happy with the status quo on goods rather than having the likes of Boris negotiating new trade treaties.0 -
He cannot help himself.ydoethur said:
That is truly epic ignorance. Most teachers commute over an hour to work. You are just embarrassing yourself now.HYUFD said:
Most people who do supply are either looking for a permanent role or like the flexibility.ydoethur said:
Yes they are on zero hours contracts if doing supply. It's one reason why no government will get rid of them.HYUFD said:
Good question, why [am] I still a teacher? I don't know. Nor does the letter of resignation I'm in the process of drafting.
It is actually very easy to get rid of teachers you don't want, contrary to popular belief. Woodhead's lie about bad teachers is still believed even though ironically he was sacked twice himself.
As for 'it's not that bad in the classroom,' how on earth would you know? Pure sophistry.
There are far worse jobs than teaching, many lower paid and with far fewer holidays and worse pensions, most teachers do not have long commutes and the associated costs.
I never said teaching was easy nor perfect but teachers who complain all the time often have gone straight from school to university then back to the classroom with no time in the world outside
And I spent three years in academia, three years self employed and a year as a Civil Servant before going into teaching and having to cope with a colleague literally walking out yesterday.
Take your patronising, lying shit elsewhere. It's people like you who give Tories a bad name.
He even thinks he knows more than those in the know and ends up just looking foolish0 -
Tonight David Davis, Boris Johnson, and Jacob Rees-Mogg have all reconfirmed that they are bigger c***s than Mark Reckless.Scott_P said:0
