politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn would be taking a huge gamble going into an election so
Comments
-
The Guardian reports that 'Four single mothers win high court benefits battle against DWP. Lawyers said the problem was likely to affect tens of thousands of people claiming universal credit, which was introduced to replace means-tested benefits including income support and housing benefit.
The problem would arise, they said, when claimants were paid by employers on a date that “clashes” with their assessment period for universal credit.
The women pointed out that if a claimant were paid early because of a weekend or bank holiday, for example, the system would count them as having been paid twice in one month and they would receive a “vastly reduced” universal credit payment.'
It's very noticeable that even though such stories are regularly rolled rolled out, the percentage of people prepared to say they'll vote for the Nasty Party remains stubbornly high. Really emphasises the Two Nations situation in which we find ourselves.0 -
Brexit legislation can't be passed in this Parliament, because if the MV carries, the DUP crash the government.david_herdson said:
Increasing noises from the govt that Brexit implementation legislation cannot be passed by March 29.Pulpstar said:
Why ?Tissue_Price said:Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.
0 -
The Institute of Government thinks that the Swire amendment will: "give Parliament a vote on whether to implement the Northern Ireland backstop".grabcocque said:
Imagine though (unlikely, I admit) that is amendment convinced enough Brexiteers to hold their nose and support the deal thinking that they had a veto on the backstop.Richard_Nabavi said:
No, that's not what they say. It would give parliament a veto on whether to implement the backstop in UK law. That's meaningless, parliament could always refuse to implement it in UK law, just as it can refuse to implement the UK regulations required under any international treaty. That would of course put the UK in breach of its international obligations, but the ability to do so is not increased by the Swire amendment.TOPPING said:Interesting that the IoG is reading the Swire amendment as indeed giving parliament a veto over the backstop.
Contrary to your interpretation yesterday.
Edit: I don't point that latter out to be snitty!!
Still, if if makes MPs feel happier about agreeing the deal, then great.
Then the bill to implement the WA comes forward, and the bill makes quite clear they have no such power at all, and that the text of the WA is entirely unchanged.
I'm sure her party would just quietly let it slide that she won the MV by befuddling her more gullible colleagues with some legal legerdemain.
It's yet more evidence that May's time window for thinking about the consequence of her actions is simply "will it help me survive the next 24 hours?"
Of course, there would probably be a majority to implement it, with only the ERGoLoons dissenting. But I'm sure they've realised that.0 -
Yes, it's unwise to put the UK in a position where it seems to be contemplating abrogation of international obligations.grabcocque said:
Imagine though (unlikely, I admit) that is amendment convinced enough Brexiteers to hold their nose and support the deal thinking that they had a veto on the backstop.Richard_Nabavi said:
No, that's not what they say. It would give parliament a veto on whether to implement the backstop in UK law. That's meaningless, parliament could always refuse to implement it in UK law, just as it can refuse to implement the UK regulations required under any international treaty. That would of course put the UK in breach of its international obligations, but the ability to do so is not increased by the Swire amendment.TOPPING said:Interesting that the IoG is reading the Swire amendment as indeed giving parliament a veto over the backstop.
Contrary to your interpretation yesterday.
Edit: I don't point that latter out to be snitty!!
Still, if if makes MPs feel happier about agreeing the deal, then great.
Then the bill to implement the WA comes forward, and the bill makes quite clear they have no such power at all, and that the text of the WA is entirely unchanged.
I'm sure her party would just quietly let it slide that she won the MV by befuddling her more gullible colleagues with some legal legerdemain.
It's yet more evidence that May's time window for thinking about the consequence of her actions is simply "will it help me survive the next 24 hours?"
Still, if you're trying to herd cats, you need every bit of help you can get. And even then they are likely to run off.0 -
I know I am shocked how many people still say they will vote Labour...OldKingCole said:
It's very noticeable that even though such stories are regularly rolled rolled out, the percentage of people prepared to say they'll vote for the Nasty Party remains stubbornly high. Really emphasises the Two Nations situation in which we find ourselves.0 -
Something they can't just have realiseddavid_herdson said:
Increasing noises from the govt that Brexit implementation legislation cannot be passed by March 29.Pulpstar said:
Why ?Tissue_Price said:Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.
0 -
😀FrancisUrquhart said:
I know I am shocked how many people still say they will vote Labour...OldKingCole said:
It's very noticeable that even though such stories are regularly rolled rolled out, the percentage of people prepared to say they'll vote for the Nasty Party remains stubbornly high. Really emphasises the Two Nations situation in which we find ourselves.0 -
The coming by-election in Peterborough could be absolutely crucial.grabcocque said:
Brexit legislation can't be passed in this Parliament, because if the MV carries, the DUP crash the government.david_herdson said:
Increasing noises from the govt that Brexit implementation legislation cannot be passed by March 29.Pulpstar said:
Why ?Tissue_Price said:Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.
0 -
Been on this since November at 2.3.IanB2 said:
Something they can't just have realiseddavid_herdson said:
Increasing noises from the govt that Brexit implementation legislation cannot be passed by March 29.Pulpstar said:
Why ?Tissue_Price said:Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.
Just beer money though.0 -
Yes. If Parliament chose not to implement the backstop, the UK would be in breach of its international obligations, and the EU would be well within its rights to impose sanctions for acting in such bad faith.TOPPING said:
The Institute of Government thinks that the Swire amendment will: "give Parliament a vote on whether to implement the Northern Ireland backstop".grabcocque said:
Imagine though (unlikely, I admit) that is amendment convinced enough Brexiteers to hold their nose and support the deal thinking that they had a veto on the backstop.Richard_Nabavi said:
No, that's not what they say. It would give parliament a veto on whether to implement the backstop in UK law. That's meaningless, parliament could always refuse to implement it in UK law, just as it can refuse to implement the UK regulations required under any international treaty. That would of course put the UK in breach of its international obligations, but the ability to do so is not increased by the Swire amendment.TOPPING said:Interesting that the IoG is reading the Swire amendment as indeed giving parliament a veto over the backstop.
Contrary to your interpretation yesterday.
Edit: I don't point that latter out to be snitty!!
Still, if if makes MPs feel happier about agreeing the deal, then great.
Then the bill to implement the WA comes forward, and the bill makes quite clear they have no such power at all, and that the text of the WA is entirely unchanged.
I'm sure her party would just quietly let it slide that she won the MV by befuddling her more gullible colleagues with some legal legerdemain.
It's yet more evidence that May's time window for thinking about the consequence of her actions is simply "will it help me survive the next 24 hours?"
This, of course, would be the same EU we'd be hoping to conclude an ambitious and comprehensive free trade agreement.0 -
So the real mystery is why the non-Tory/Lab parties aren't riding highFrancisUrquhart said:
I know I am shocked how many people still say they will vote Labour...OldKingCole said:
It's very noticeable that even though such stories are regularly rolled rolled out, the percentage of people prepared to say they'll vote for the Nasty Party remains stubbornly high. Really emphasises the Two Nations situation in which we find ourselves.0 -
No way would such a proposed referendum get through the HoC. If there is no Remain option, there will not be a referendum.AlastairMeeks said:If there were a referendum without a Remain option at a time when Remain was polling at least as well as both Leave options put together, that really would be a democratic outrage.
0 -
In all seriousness, Labour should be spanking the Tories. Its midterm, the Tories seemingly have no ideas, Kim Jong May is a rubbish leader, lots of policies have been poorly thought out, Brexit, etc etc etc.OldKingCole said:
😀FrancisUrquhart said:
I know I am shocked how many people still say they will vote Labour...OldKingCole said:
It's very noticeable that even though such stories are regularly rolled rolled out, the percentage of people prepared to say they'll vote for the Nasty Party remains stubbornly high. Really emphasises the Two Nations situation in which we find ourselves.0 -
Yes, Scotland, that is a match within a match when it comes to a general election.Theuniondivvie said:Except in Scotland.
While continually fluffing the issue may work (for a time) in England, it won't here.
Leonard, the SLab leader, given a standard BBC Scotland kid glove interview, was unable to give any coherent answer when asked if Labour would have a position on Brexit in the general election he had just said was necessary to break the Brexit deadlock. If I wasn't invested in the situation, I'd think it tragic that SLab now have a fixed tradition of electing a leader measurably worse than their predecessor. He's worse than Iain Gray ffs!
A GE pre-Brexit, IMO, has very different dynamics to one held after the dirty deed is either done or cancelled, and I guess that would apply equally north of the border.
If Labour joined with the SNP to force a Brexit referendum a.k.a. cancellation, I wonder which of the two would trouser the credit with Scottish remainers?0 -
I'm glad that the court has found in their favour, but why did they have to take HMG to court? This has been raised as a problem so many times, could a minister not have agreed it was wrong and made sure it was fixed?OldKingCole said:The Guardian reports that 'Four single mothers win high court benefits battle against DWP. Lawyers said the problem was likely to affect tens of thousands of people claiming universal credit, which was introduced to replace means-tested benefits including income support and housing benefit.
The problem would arise, they said, when claimants were paid by employers on a date that “clashes” with their assessment period for universal credit.
The women pointed out that if a claimant were paid early because of a weekend or bank holiday, for example, the system would count them as having been paid twice in one month and they would receive a “vastly reduced” universal credit payment.'
It's very noticeable that even though such stories are regularly rolled rolled out, the percentage of people prepared to say they'll vote for the Nasty Party remains stubbornly high. Really emphasises the Two Nations situation in which we find ourselves.
No great matter of principle is at stake, it's simply an issue of good governance. Why are our governments (of both parties) now so resistant to accepting minor corrections?0 -
The question would be revocation or extension of Article 50.
The former is something we can do unilaterally, the latter requires the consent of every other EU nation.
Revocation it is then.0 -
We may well see more LD/Green/LD tactical voting. While there are doubts over Jezza, the overwhelming number of individual Lab MPs are for Remain.IanB2 said:
So the real mystery is why the non-Tory/Lab parties aren't riding highFrancisUrquhart said:
I know I am shocked how many people still say they will vote Labour...OldKingCole said:
It's very noticeable that even though such stories are regularly rolled rolled out, the percentage of people prepared to say they'll vote for the Nasty Party remains stubbornly high. Really emphasises the Two Nations situation in which we find ourselves.0 -
Well yes, I expect so. But this recurrent fantasy of diehard Leavers needs proper examination for the nonsense that it is.Foxy said:
No way would such a proposed referendum get through the HoC. If there is no Remain option, there will not be a referendum.AlastairMeeks said:If there were a referendum without a Remain option at a time when Remain was polling at least as well as both Leave options put together, that really would be a democratic outrage.
0 -
If they had a more acceptable leader - and for once there's a few decent alternatives - they'd be 15 points ahead.FrancisUrquhart said:
In all seriousness, Labour should be spanking the Tories. Its midterm, the Tories seemingly have no ideas, Kim Jong May is a rubbish leader, lots of policies have been poorly thought out, Brexit, etc etc etc.OldKingCole said:
😀FrancisUrquhart said:
I know I am shocked how many people still say they will vote Labour...OldKingCole said:
It's very noticeable that even though such stories are regularly rolled rolled out, the percentage of people prepared to say they'll vote for the Nasty Party remains stubbornly high. Really emphasises the Two Nations situation in which we find ourselves.0 -
Quite agree. The toxic legacy of the Coalition is still affecting the LD's too, otherwise they'd be at a much higher percentage.FrancisUrquhart said:
In all seriousness, Labour should be spanking the Tories. Its midterm, the Tories seemingly have no ideas, Kim Jong May is a rubbish leader, lots of policies have been poorly thought out, Brexit, etc etc etc.OldKingCole said:
😀FrancisUrquhart said:
I know I am shocked how many people still say they will vote Labour...OldKingCole said:
It's very noticeable that even though such stories are regularly rolled rolled out, the percentage of people prepared to say they'll vote for the Nasty Party remains stubbornly high. Really emphasises the Two Nations situation in which we find ourselves.
If they could get some Press (in the widest sense) coverage it would help too. Look at how we reacted to Layla Moran recently!
Edit.... predictive text strikes again!0 -
Because the 'rightness' of UC is now a Tory article of faith.OblitusSumMe said:
I'm glad that the court has found in their favour, but why did they have to take HMG to court? This has been raised as a problem so many times, could a minister not have agreed it was wrong and made sure it was fixed?OldKingCole said:The Guardian reports that 'Four single mothers win high court benefits battle against DWP. Lawyers said the problem was likely to affect tens of thousands of people claiming universal credit, which was introduced to replace means-tested benefits including income support and housing benefit.
The problem would arise, they said, when claimants were paid by employers on a date that “clashes” with their assessment period for universal credit.
The women pointed out that if a claimant were paid early because of a weekend or bank holiday, for example, the system would count them as having been paid twice in one month and they would receive a “vastly reduced” universal credit payment.'
It's very noticeable that even though such stories are regularly rolled rolled out, the percentage of people prepared to say they'll vote for the Nasty Party remains stubbornly high. Really emphasises the Two Nations situation in which we find ourselves.
No great matter of principle is at stake, it's simply an issue of good governance. Why are our governments (of both parties) now so resistant to accepting minor corrections?0 -
Interesting little exchange between Sky politicos:
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/10836740674824314890 -
A fine calculation.kinabalu said:
Yes, Scotland, that is a match within a match when it comes to a general election.Theuniondivvie said:Except in Scotland.
While continually fluffing the issue may work (for a time) in England, it won't here.
Leonard, the SLab leader, given a standard BBC Scotland kid glove interview, was unable to give any coherent answer when asked if Labour would have a position on Brexit in the general election he had just said was necessary to break the Brexit deadlock. If I wasn't invested in the situation, I'd think it tragic that SLab now have a fixed tradition of electing a leader measurably worse than their predecessor. He's worse than Iain Gray ffs!
A GE pre-Brexit, IMO, has very different dynamics to one held after the dirty deed is either done or cancelled, and I guess that would apply equally north of the border.
If Labour joined with the SNP to force a Brexit referendum a.k.a. cancellation, I wonder which of the two would trouser the credit with Scottish remainers?
Remainer Unionists sickened with Labour's Brexity shennanigans may have to be convinced that their (Labour's) conversion to the cause was real, conversely their loyalty to the UK might override any qualms.0 -
Hate the idea of another referendum, just hate it, but the above is one that I can just about get my head around.David_Evershed said:Since the people voted to Leave in the last referendum if there were another referendum it would be on which version of Leave the people wanted such as May's Deal or No Deal.
However even May's deal is not definitive since the future relationship is yet to be negotiated.
The government has negotiated a Treaty under which the UK will leave the European Union. Should parliament now ratify that Treaty? YES/NO
Essentially putting the question before the House now to the public.
If YES, we are sorted.
If NO, we are back where we are now, no better off, but no worse.
NB: This is different to putting NO DEAL as an active choice on the ballot paper. That is not a runner.
The other possible question is Deal vs Remain. But the flaw in that does not need pointing out.0 -
Well, relative to this time two years ago this is spanking the Tories for a Corbyn-led Labour party. They aren't trailing by double digits any more.FrancisUrquhart said:
In all seriousness, Labour should be spanking the Tories. Its midterm, the Tories seemingly have no ideas, Kim Jong May is a rubbish leader, lots of policies have been poorly thought out, Brexit, etc etc etc.OldKingCole said:
😀FrancisUrquhart said:
I know I am shocked how many people still say they will vote Labour...OldKingCole said:
It's very noticeable that even though such stories are regularly rolled rolled out, the percentage of people prepared to say they'll vote for the Nasty Party remains stubbornly high. Really emphasises the Two Nations situation in which we find ourselves.0 -
You are right.OblitusSumMe said:
I'm glad that the court has found in their favour, but why did they have to take HMG to court? This has been raised as a problem so many times, could a minister not have agreed it was wrong and made sure it was fixed?OldKingCole said:The Guardian reports that 'Four single mothers win high court benefits battle against DWP. Lawyers said the problem was likely to affect tens of thousands of people claiming universal credit, which was introduced to replace means-tested benefits including income support and housing benefit.
The problem would arise, they said, when claimants were paid by employers on a date that “clashes” with their assessment period for universal credit.
The women pointed out that if a claimant were paid early because of a weekend or bank holiday, for example, the system would count them as having been paid twice in one month and they would receive a “vastly reduced” universal credit payment.'
It's very noticeable that even though such stories are regularly rolled rolled out, the percentage of people prepared to say they'll vote for the Nasty Party remains stubbornly high. Really emphasises the Two Nations situation in which we find ourselves.
No great matter of principle is at stake, it's simply an issue of good governance. Why are our governments (of both parties) now so resistant to accepting minor corrections?
Oddly, HMRC seem to be aware of this problem. They wrote to employers in December as follows:
We know that some employers pay their employees earlier than usual during the festive period, this may be due to the business closing for Christmas and New Year.
If you do pay early, please report your normal payment date on your Full Payment Submission (FPS).
For example: if you pay on 21 December but your normal payment date is 31 December, please report the payment date as 31 December. In this example the FPS would need to be sent on or before the 31 December.
Doing this will protect your employees' eligibility for Universal Credit, because an early payment could affect further entitlements.
This guidance applies only for the 2018 festive period.0 -
Politics is in a a state of Brexit limbo. Whilst not the primary driver for all voters there is enough uncertainty and confusion in the system to make all statements along the lines “Party X should be N points ahead” entirely redundant. Collectively we have no idea where the polls will be post March. Hell, in 2017 no one believed the Exit Poll.
The shrewd move is to watch and listen.0 -
If it is clear that we actually want an extension, doesn't it follow that revocation is somewhat in bad faith?TheScreamingEagles said:The question would be revocation or extension of Article 50.
The former is something we can do unilaterally, the latter requires the consent of every other EU nation.
Revocation it is then.0 -
That’s a strong buy for me.Tissue_Price said:Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.
0 -
Yes but it's a useful threat to encourage them to grant an extension if we ask for one.Tissue_Price said:
If it is clear that we actually want an extension, doesn't it follow that revocation is somewhat in bad faith?TheScreamingEagles said:The question would be revocation or extension of Article 50.
The former is something we can do unilaterally, the latter requires the consent of every other EU nation.
Revocation it is then.0 -
No. But something they've just started saying.IanB2 said:
Something they can't just have realiseddavid_herdson said:
Increasing noises from the govt that Brexit implementation legislation cannot be passed by March 29.Pulpstar said:
Why ?Tissue_Price said:Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.
0 -
Perhaps, although the implementation legislation need not necessarily have to wait to be introduced until after the WA/FR vote is passed; it can always be made contingent on it (though whether there's the government bandwidth to do both simultaneously is another matter). And while I agree that May's Deal = loss of DUP support, that doesn't necessarily mean a VoNC straight away.grabcocque said:
Brexit legislation can't be passed in this Parliament, because if the MV carries, the DUP crash the government.david_herdson said:
Increasing noises from the govt that Brexit implementation legislation cannot be passed by March 29.Pulpstar said:
Why ?Tissue_Price said:Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.
0 -
But David, surely the EU would be unlikely to grant an extension just because we couldn't get our act together in time, no?david_herdson said:
No. But something they've just started saying.IanB2 said:
Something they can't just have realiseddavid_herdson said:
Increasing noises from the govt that Brexit implementation legislation cannot be passed by March 29.Pulpstar said:
Why ?Tissue_Price said:Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.
A GE or 2nd Ref would be a different matter. It would be unreasonable for them to refuse a short delay for either, but otherwise Brexit Day is Brexit Day, non?0 -
The £ is similarly up against the Euro... back to where it was earlier in the week.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
It's funny that Remainians like you think that that would be a democratic outrage, while you're quite happy to overturn the democratic result of the June 2016 referendum.AlastairMeeks said:If there were a referendum without a Remain option at a time when Remain was polling at least as well as both Leave options put together, that really would be a democratic outrage.
You people who are ostensibly pro-democracy remind me of Chancellor Palpatine in the Star Wars films who announces, "I love democracy. I love the Republic." while he tramples all over democracy.0 -
I think I’ve seen 4 or 5 similar pieces (across different broadcasters) and without exception they’ve been from heavily leave areas - generally >60% at the referendum - where the sentiment is heavily in favour of leaving quickly by whatever means. I guess it makes better tv than interviewing despairing remainers. And of course if you are interviewing on small town high streets in the daytime the demographic is rather skewed away from employed, educated voters.Tissue_Price said:Interesting little exchange between Sky politicos:
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/10836740674824314890 -
The only people who would be overturning the democratic result of the June 2016 referendum would be the People.simonmaxwell said:
It's funny that Remainians like you think that that would be a democratic outrage, while you're quite happy to overturn the democratic result of the June 2016 referendum.AlastairMeeks said:If there were a referendum without a Remain option at a time when Remain was polling at least as well as both Leave options put together, that really would be a democratic outrage.
You people who are ostensibly pro-democracy remind me of Chancellor Palpatine in the Star Wars films who announces, "I love democracy. I love the Republic." while he tramples all over democracy.
You're suffering a touch of the Julia Hartley-Brewers!0 -
F1: new 'boss' at McLaren:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/46816256
Not a fan of splitting up the team principal role (which happened before, of course). Anyway, sounds like he'll be team boss of the F1 concern, reporting to Zak Brown.0 -
Perhaps, but judging by polling, you'd expect either an angry response, or very grudging support from Leavers.Polruan said:
I think I’ve seen 4 or 5 similar pieces (across different broadcasters) and without exception they’ve been from heavily leave areas - generally >60% at the referendum - where the sentiment is heavily in favour of leaving quickly by whatever means. I guess it makes better tv than interviewing despairing remainers. And of course if you are interviewing on small town high streets in the daytime the demographic is rather skewed away from employed, educated voters.Tissue_Price said:Interesting little exchange between Sky politicos:
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1083674067482431489
Polling does show a fair degree of support for May, though.0 -
Given what F1's become, going for someone from the world of endurance racing seems a sensible move (probably won't make any difference, though).Morris_Dancer said:F1: new 'boss' at McLaren:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/46816256
Not a fan of splitting up the team principal role (which happened before, of course). Anyway, sounds like he'll be team boss of the F1 concern, reporting to Zak Brown.0 -
Er, I would vote for the deal if I were an MP. As I have previously stated on here, if there were a fresh referendum between Remaining and voting for the deal, I would probably vote for the deal.simonmaxwell said:
It's funny that Remainians like you think that that would be a democratic outrage, while you're quite happy to overturn the democratic result of the June 2016 referendum.AlastairMeeks said:If there were a referendum without a Remain option at a time when Remain was polling at least as well as both Leave options put together, that really would be a democratic outrage.
You people who are ostensibly pro-democracy remind me of Chancellor Palpatine in the Star Wars films who announces, "I love democracy. I love the Republic." while he tramples all over democracy.
The other oddities in your post can therefore be left to one side since you are under a basic misapprehension about my position.0 -
Speaking from a purely political betting viewpoint we need a referendum this year.simonmaxwell said:
It's funny that Remainians like you think that that would be a democratic outrage, while you're quite happy to overturn the democratic result of the June 2016 referendum.AlastairMeeks said:If there were a referendum without a Remain option at a time when Remain was polling at least as well as both Leave options put together, that really would be a democratic outrage.
You people who are ostensibly pro-democracy remind me of Chancellor Palpatine in the Star Wars films who announces, "I love democracy. I love the Republic." while he tramples all over democracy.
2018 was so boring without a plebiscite/election, was the first time since 2013.0 -
Moran speaking now on Brexit.
For all LD leadership bettors.0 -
What the hell is wrong with you man? Pull yourself together.TheScreamingEagles said:
Speaking from a purely political betting viewpoint we need a referendum this year.simonmaxwell said:
It's funny that Remainians like you think that that would be a democratic outrage, while you're quite happy to overturn the democratic result of the June 2016 referendum.AlastairMeeks said:If there were a referendum without a Remain option at a time when Remain was polling at least as well as both Leave options put together, that really would be a democratic outrage.
You people who are ostensibly pro-democracy remind me of Chancellor Palpatine in the Star Wars films who announces, "I love democracy. I love the Republic." while he tramples all over democracy.
2018 was so boring without a plebiscite/election, was the first time since 2013.0 -
If it were Deal vs No Deal, you are quite right. But that will not happen. No Deal can't be an active choice. Not sufficiently definable, being one of many reasons.AlastairMeeks said:If there were a referendum without a Remain option at a time when Remain was polling at least as well as both Leave options put together, that really would be a democratic outrage.
But if the Question is "Should (yes or no) parliament ratify the Withdrawal Treaty?, that is meaningfully different. No is then a Remain option. It just does not guarantee it. No is also (but does not guarantee) the Hard Brexit option.
It mimics the parliamentary dynamics right now. It puts the people in precisely the position that the politicians are in and asks them to consider it. They will be able to do so without being hamstrung by party whipping etc.
Ok, such a formulation may not get through the HoC, but it has merit in principle. A 'yes' resolves the matter, a 'no' means we are no better off, but no worse. Back to parliament.
It's certainly not a democratic outrage.
That would be Deal vs Remain.0 -
Weren't people saying last year that if we revoke, we can't necessarily invoke again due to a "good faith" clause?Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes but it's a useful threat to encourage them to grant an extension if we ask for one.Tissue_Price said:
If it is clear that we actually want an extension, doesn't it follow that revocation is somewhat in bad faith?TheScreamingEagles said:The question would be revocation or extension of Article 50.
The former is something we can do unilaterally, the latter requires the consent of every other EU nation.
Revocation it is then.0 -
I think I have found something more frustrating than the daily Brexit debates...watching the live tracker of your Amazon delivery van go round and round clearly not being able to find your house...0
-
Only if he can get the money off the Democrats!TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Unlike politicians, voters don’t judge their Prime Minister’s efforts by the size of their own ego.Sean_F said:
Perhaps, but judging by polling, you'd expect either an angry response, or very grudging support from Leavers.Polruan said:
I think I’ve seen 4 or 5 similar pieces (across different broadcasters) and without exception they’ve been from heavily leave areas - generally >60% at the referendum - where the sentiment is heavily in favour of leaving quickly by whatever means. I guess it makes better tv than interviewing despairing remainers. And of course if you are interviewing on small town high streets in the daytime the demographic is rather skewed away from employed, educated voters.Tissue_Price said:Interesting little exchange between Sky politicos:
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1083674067482431489
Polling does show a fair degree of support for May, though.0 -
That was in the Advocate-General's legal advice to the ECJ, but interestingly was not in the final judgement. I dare say that it we repeatedly kept doing it, they'd rule it as abusive, but probably not the first time.Stereotomy said:
Weren't people saying last year that if we revoke, we can't necessarily invoke again due to a "good faith" clause?Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes but it's a useful threat to encourage them to grant an extension if we ask for one.Tissue_Price said:
If it is clear that we actually want an extension, doesn't it follow that revocation is somewhat in bad faith?TheScreamingEagles said:The question would be revocation or extension of Article 50.
The former is something we can do unilaterally, the latter requires the consent of every other EU nation.
Revocation it is then.0 -
re £/EUR, our auditors best not ask for 'post balance sheet event' revaluations !
0 -
I don't think it's a good idea to separate out the political from the technical like this. If the principle behind the system is to be punitive and bullying, one way it can do that is through lots of little individual implementation decisions like this- even ones which are a matter of right and wrong- which all lean the same way.OblitusSumMe said:No great matter of principle is at stake, it's simply an issue of good governance. Why are our governments (of both parties) now so resistant to accepting minor corrections?
0 -
-
He skipped 2015. How strange, I wonder why!TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
You can't just blame the coalition, which is actually something that Lib Dems should take some pride in, the current Lib Dem leadership is doing a poor job. They are essentially absent from the debate. It's perplexing that the nearest thing we have to a Remain party is doing so poorly.OldKingCole said:Quite agree. The toxic legacy of the Coalition is still affecting the LD's too, otherwise they'd be at a much higher percentage.
0 -
Absolutely correct. Brexit is very technical and would easily be overridden by these other issues in an election campaign.Sean_F said:
I still think that things like Universal Credit and austerity motivate Labour voters more than Brexit does.Peter_the_Punter said:
Not if he enables Brexit. I didn't vote Labour at the last election because my MP, John Cryer, was pro-Brexit (very unusually for a London MP.) Now I live in the Cotswolds and my MP, Laurence Robertson, is an extreme Brexiteer so no problem with my vote next time around.Sean_F said:Only Labour can beat the Tories, so they'll stick with Labour
But wtf is all this GE nonsense? The Country doesn't want a GE. It wants a resolution to Brexit, and views on how to do so cross party-lines.
On the single most significant political issue of the century, Corbyn has been a bystander, an irrelevance. Nobody is listening to him.
I'd be interested for Labour posters' views.0 -
Basically, just tweeting lies (Evolve that is).TheScreamingEagles said:
Good response:
https://twitter.com/andrewclark80/status/10834359130976829440 -
Mr. Urquhart, I once stayed in for a package that was 'on its way' only for it to be cancelled. That was a shade frustrating.0
-
Indeed, even QT last night one woman said she normally votes Labour but could not at the moment until Corbyn committed to oppose Brexit. Yougov is also showing Labour voters moving to the LDs due to Corbyn's failure to commit to back EUref2 with a Remain option0
-
In a Deal vs Remain contest, the Deal need not bother coming out of the dressing room.Sean_F said:Perhaps, but judging by polling, you'd expect either an angry response, or very grudging support from Leavers.
Polling does show a fair degree of support for May, though.
However, with "Should parliament ratify the Deal, yes or no?" - i.e. flipping the Meaningful Vote to the public, it has IMO a very good chance indeed.
In fact I think it would probably win.
Food for thought for parliamentarians voting next Tuesday, I would suggest.0 -
Reflecting on where we are, I think TM is actually demonstrating a zeal to win brexit but not no deal
The last few days has seen her talking to labour and even the unions as she works on her plan B
I do believe her intention is to say to the ERG and DUP this is your chance for Brexit but vote it down and I will move towards a much softer Brexit, even Norway, and that would not only satisfy Stephen Kinnock and others in labour but as important is in line with the SNP demands
She is insisting that 29th March remains and it is possible if she gets the HOC to coalesce around her final position she could seek a few weeks extension for the legislation
Ironically, if this ends up as the deal, ERG will have shot themselves in the foot as the current Brexit is nearer respecting the referendum than Norway
I am not surprised Lewis Goodall of Sky is finding wide support for TM and the deal in the Country and do think many on here underestimate how liked she is outside of the bubble. As I have said, she has many faults and the conservatives need a new leader for the next GE, but right now they have a leader who is miles ahead of any of the alternatives, and as for Corbyn he is increasingly becoming a liability for the labour party0 -
So you think Margaret Beckett was deliberately trying to drive farmers to suicide in the Rural Payments Agency fiasco?Stereotomy said:
I don't think it's a good idea to separate out the political from the technical like this. If the principle behind the system is to be punitive and bullying, one way it can do that is through lots of little individual implementation decisions like this- even ones which are a matter of right and wrong- which all lean the same way.OblitusSumMe said:No great matter of principle is at stake, it's simply an issue of good governance. Why are our governments (of both parties) now so resistant to accepting minor corrections?
0 -
Ah, clever. If you only pick two data points, the omission of 2015 is less glaring.rottenborough said:
Basically, just tweeting lies (Evolve that is).TheScreamingEagles said:
Good response:
https://twitter.com/andrewclark80/status/10834359130976829440 -
Am I missing below the statement by Theresa May's spokesman "ruling out" an extension?
Reuters reports that, but apparently it was an hour ago, so I must be missing it.0 -
Morning all and on thread, as I said last week on here it would be somewhat ironic if Jeremy Corbyn and Labour succeed next week and force a General Election only to see Theresa May secure an overall majority in the resulting election. With e.g. Con 40, Lab 36, LibDem 10, Green 2 and UKIP 1 with the numbers being basically unchanged from last year but Lab down from 27 to 25 (which would be remarkable given all Scottish polling) according to Baxter that would give Con 327 Lab 246 LibDem 18 SNP 37, Green 1 and PC 3 giving Theresa May a majority of 4. That ignores the likely "Brexit" factor working for and against both main parties and I reckon there would be more down for Labour than for Tories due to Brexit.0
-
Not at all. Any sensible country - and most other democracies - wouldn't countenance making a major change such as this, that will affect its people for a generation - on the back of a single 50%+ vote that spelled out neither the implications or the destination. Requiring a threshold greater than 50%, or asking people to confirm their intentions in a further vote, is how they would do it.kinabalu said:
If it were Deal vs No Deal, you are quite right. But that will not happen. No Deal can't be an active choice. Not sufficiently definable, being one of many reasons.AlastairMeeks said:If there were a referendum without a Remain option at a time when Remain was polling at least as well as both Leave options put together, that really would be a democratic outrage.
But if the Question is "Should (yes or no) parliament ratify the Withdrawal Treaty?, that is meaningfully different. No is then a Remain option. It just does not guarantee it. No is also (but does not guarantee) the Hard Brexit option.
It mimics the parliamentary dynamics right now. It puts the people in precisely the position that the politicians are in and asks them to consider it. They will be able to do so without being hamstrung by party whipping etc.
Ok, such a formulation may not get through the HoC, but it has merit in principle. A 'yes' resolves the matter, a 'no' means we are no better off, but no worse. Back to parliament.
It's certainly not a democratic outrage.
That would be Deal vs Remain.
We are victims to Cameron's hubris that he could stroll to victory in a single vote without making any significant effort. The democratic outrage would be to press ahead over the cliff without seeking any further democratic endorsement.0 -
I appear to have the most geographically challenged delivery driver in the history of mankind. 30 mins looping around my house and still not found it.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Urquhart, I once stayed in for a package that was 'on its way' only for it to be cancelled. That was a shade frustrating.
0 -
We cannot revoke and then invoke as a political mechanism to gain an advantage for this brexitStereotomy said:
Weren't people saying last year that if we revoke, we can't necessarily invoke again due to a "good faith" clause?Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes but it's a useful threat to encourage them to grant an extension if we ask for one.Tissue_Price said:
If it is clear that we actually want an extension, doesn't it follow that revocation is somewhat in bad faith?TheScreamingEagles said:The question would be revocation or extension of Article 50.
The former is something we can do unilaterally, the latter requires the consent of every other EU nation.
Revocation it is then.0 -
I meant to add the numbers in Scotland basically being unchanged but Labour down to 25 which is largely in line with most Scottish polling where Tories shown as a comfortable second.NorthCadboll said:Morning all and on thread, as I said last week on here it would be somewhat ironic if Jeremy Corbyn and Labour succeed next week and force a General Election only to see Theresa May secure an overall majority in the resulting election. With e.g. Con 40, Lab 36, LibDem 10, Green 2 and UKIP 1 with the numbers being basically unchanged from last year but Lab down from 27 to 25 (which would be remarkable given all Scottish polling) according to Baxter that would give Con 327 Lab 246 LibDem 18 SNP 37, Green 1 and PC 3 giving Theresa May a majority of 4. That ignores the likely "Brexit" factor working for and against both main parties and I reckon there would be more down for Labour than for Tories due to Brexit.
0 -
Listening to Radio 5 in the morning they have a Brexit chat with voters each day, and there does indeed seem to be a fair amount of support for the PM and deal, even some Remainers seem to accept it. There's little support on the other hand for a second referendum or crashing out.Tissue_Price said:Interesting little exchange between Sky politicos:
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1083674067482431489
Not only is the leave/remain split in Parliament at odds with the country, Parliament seems to be more polarised as well, with more ardent Europhiles and Europhobes than would be found amongst a similar number of the public.0 -
Of course not. Labour politicians' motives are pure, Conservative politicians' motives are base.Richard_Nabavi said:
So you think Margaret Beckett was deliberately trying to drive farmers to suicide in the Rural Payments Agency fiasco?Stereotomy said:
I don't think it's a good idea to separate out the political from the technical like this. If the principle behind the system is to be punitive and bullying, one way it can do that is through lots of little individual implementation decisions like this- even ones which are a matter of right and wrong- which all lean the same way.OblitusSumMe said:No great matter of principle is at stake, it's simply an issue of good governance. Why are our governments (of both parties) now so resistant to accepting minor corrections?
0 -
Yougov had it Deal 50% and Remain 50% after preferences, Deltapoll had Deal aheadkinabalu said:
In a Deal vs Remain contest, the Deal need not bother coming out of the dressing room.Sean_F said:Perhaps, but judging by polling, you'd expect either an angry response, or very grudging support from Leavers.
Polling does show a fair degree of support for May, though.
However, with "Should parliament ratify the Deal, yes or no?" - i.e. flipping the Meaningful Vote to the public, it has IMO a very good chance indeed.
In fact I think it would probably win.
Food for thought for parliamentarians voting next Tuesday, I would suggest.0 -
You can argue that Jeremy Corbyn did quite well in Scotland last year but you need to be very one-eyed to argue that Tony Blair's policies destroyed Labour support in Scotland when he left office with large numbers of Scottish Labour MPs in Parliament and when every Labour MP was returned at the following election also (at a time when Labour was otherwise losing support in the rest of Britain).Stereotomy said:
Ah, clever. If you only pick two data points, the omission of 2015 is less glaring.rottenborough said:
Basically, just tweeting lies (Evolve that is).TheScreamingEagles said:
Good response:
https://twitter.com/andrewclark80/status/10834359130976829440 -
The poll referred to here is the suspect Bank Holiday survey conducted over a two week period from 21st December to 4th January. Both the timing and the extended period of the survey make it highly dubious. The same applies to the various subsets referred to - ie London and Scotland.0
-
I see Betfair's implied probability of leaving on schedule is now down to the low 20%s.0
-
Er, I have no idea. I don't know about that one.Richard_Nabavi said:
So you think Margaret Beckett was deliberately trying to drive farmers to suicide in the Rural Payments Agency fiasco?Stereotomy said:
I don't think it's a good idea to separate out the political from the technical like this. If the principle behind the system is to be punitive and bullying, one way it can do that is through lots of little individual implementation decisions like this- even ones which are a matter of right and wrong- which all lean the same way.OblitusSumMe said:No great matter of principle is at stake, it's simply an issue of good governance. Why are our governments (of both parties) now so resistant to accepting minor corrections?
My point, by the way, wasn't that we should take any individual fuck-up as proof of some nefarious political intent, just that we shouldn't start from a position of taking it for granted that everything either falls into "technical implementation" or "political position" and that those categories have no overlap.0 -
Mr. Urquhart, is it a Yodel delivery?0
-
Sure the fact the Tories are still polling above 40% despite everything that is going on is good evidence for support for May and her position?Tissue_Price said:Interesting little exchange between Sky politicos:
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/10836740674824314890 -
He's so bloody stupid it takes your breath away.rottenborough said:
Only if he can get the money off the Democrats!TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Serves you right for living on a roundaboutFrancisUrquhart said:
I appear to have the most geographically challenged delivery driver in the history of mankind. 30 mins looping around my house and still not found it.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Urquhart, I once stayed in for a package that was 'on its way' only for it to be cancelled. That was a shade frustrating.
0 -
As far as I can tell, it is delivery by Amazon i.e. when they subcontract out to some random with a car / van, which you can track via their web interface. They even came down my street and some how managed to not find my house!Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Urquhart, is it a Yodel delivery?
0 -
Late to the party.Richard_Nabavi said:0 -
Speaking for myself, yes.Sean_F said:I still think that things like Universal Credit and austerity motivate Labour voters more than Brexit does.
I'd be interested for Labour posters' views.
I am more animated by the idea of a modern metrosexual version of "securing for the workers, whether by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange" than I am by whether it's Norway or Canada plus.0 -
That is worth noting, not least because Mr Odey was a big backer of Brexit.Richard_Nabavi said:0 -
The latest Scotland poll of the 4th January has SNP 40% Con 25% Lab 21% Lib Dem 8% confirming labours slide in ScotlandNorthCadboll said:
I meant to add the numbers in Scotland basically being unchanged but Labour down to 25 which is largely in line with most Scottish polling where Tories shown as a comfortable second.NorthCadboll said:Morning all and on thread, as I said last week on here it would be somewhat ironic if Jeremy Corbyn and Labour succeed next week and force a General Election only to see Theresa May secure an overall majority in the resulting election. With e.g. Con 40, Lab 36, LibDem 10, Green 2 and UKIP 1 with the numbers being basically unchanged from last year but Lab down from 27 to 25 (which would be remarkable given all Scottish polling) according to Baxter that would give Con 327 Lab 246 LibDem 18 SNP 37, Green 1 and PC 3 giving Theresa May a majority of 4. That ignores the likely "Brexit" factor working for and against both main parties and I reckon there would be more down for Labour than for Tories due to Brexit.
0 -
Yes and no. It's certainly not evidence to the contrary but the Tories have been polling at around 40% pretty much since the GE, so it's unlikely that the Deal is much of a vote-mover either way (there *was* a Con-UKIP swing immediately after Chequers but that seems to have mostly worn off, most likely due to UKIP being even more useless than usual).DanSmith said:
Sure the fact the Tories are still polling above 40% despite everything that is going on is good evidence for support for May and her position?Tissue_Price said:Interesting little exchange between Sky politicos:
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/10836740674824314890 -
When I last had a delivery like that I was surprised to see the driver going round and round my neighbourhood for most of the day, before reaching me at the appointed time.FrancisUrquhart said:
As far as I can tell, it is delivery by Amazon i.e. when they subcontract out to some random with a car / van, which you can track via their web interface. They even came down my street and some how managed to not find my house!Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Urquhart, is it a Yodel delivery?
0 -
We live at the start of an unmade road; we're often asked 'If there are any house down there?' 'Yes' sometimes means a shake of a disbelieving head.IanB2 said:
Serves you right for living on a roundaboutFrancisUrquhart said:
I appear to have the most geographically challenged delivery driver in the history of mankind. 30 mins looping around my house and still not found it.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Urquhart, I once stayed in for a package that was 'on its way' only for it to be cancelled. That was a shade frustrating.
0 -
Well, I'm not going to advocate for the argument that it was Blair's fault because it's not one I necessarily support. However, it doesn't seem massively unreasonable to suggest that there might be some lag between when a policy is introduced and when its full effect is felt at the ballot box, compared to Rowling's suggestion that Jeremy Corbyn's leadership is so bad that the effect actually travelled back in time to 2015AlastairMeeks said:
You can argue that Jeremy Corbyn did quite well in Scotland last year but you need to be very one-eyed to argue that Tony Blair's policies destroyed Labour support in Scotland when he left office with large numbers of Scottish Labour MPs in Parliament and when every Labour MP was returned at the following election also (at a time when Labour was otherwise losing support in the rest of Britain).Stereotomy said:
Ah, clever. If you only pick two data points, the omission of 2015 is less glaring.rottenborough said:
Basically, just tweeting lies (Evolve that is).TheScreamingEagles said:
Good response:
https://twitter.com/andrewclark80/status/10834359130976829440 -
Labour lost Holyrood just before the end of Blair's tenure. I'm of the view that the Westminster dam didn't break in 2010 because the Scots felt they should show some loyalty to Brown and Darling.AlastairMeeks said:
You can argue that Jeremy Corbyn did quite well in Scotland last year but you need to be very one-eyed to argue that Tony Blair's policies destroyed Labour support in Scotland when he left office with large numbers of Scottish Labour MPs in Parliament and when every Labour MP was returned at the following election also (at a time when Labour was otherwise losing support in the rest of Britain).Stereotomy said:
Ah, clever. If you only pick two data points, the omission of 2015 is less glaring.rottenborough said:
Basically, just tweeting lies (Evolve that is).TheScreamingEagles said:
Good response:
https://twitter.com/andrewclark80/status/10834359130976829440 -
I think you are correct.Sean_F said:
I still think that things like Universal Credit and austerity motivate Labour voters more than Brexit does.Peter_the_Punter said:
Not if he enables Brexit. I didn't vote Labour at the last election because my MP, John Cryer, was pro-Brexit (very unusually for a London MP.) Now I live in the Cotswolds and my MP, Laurence Robertson, is an extreme Brexiteer so no problem with my vote next time around.Sean_F said:Only Labour can beat the Tories, so they'll stick with Labour
But wtf is all this GE nonsense? The Country doesn't want a GE. It wants a resolution to Brexit, and views on how to do so cross party-lines.
On the single most significant political issue of the century, Corbyn has been a bystander, an irrelevance. Nobody is listening to him.
I'd be interested for Labour posters' views.
From my own perspective , I have two severely disabled grandchildren .
My daughter and her husband had to give up work two years ago , to be full time carers.
My wife and I both help all we can , however we have both been seriously ill as late , so can not do as much as we once did.
I wrote to my Conservative MP for York Outer, asking if parents with severely disabled children could be migrated across to UC without the requirement to complete a new claim.Especially as the circumstances will not change and the DWP already hold all the information required.
This would avoid any unnecessary stress.
His secretary e mailed back, saying they had put my concerns across, to the relevant departments of government.
I HOPE they do take notice, as these parents have enough to contend with.0 -
Time to start playing Ode To Joy very loudly.Richard_Nabavi said:0 -
You mean you do not like the poll findingsjustin124 said:The poll referred to here is the suspect Bank Holiday survey conducted over a two week period from 21st December to 4th January. Both the timing and the extended period of the survey make it highly dubious. The same applies to the various subsets referred to - ie London and Scotland.
0 -
This is why the Tories wanted to talk about anything but policy at the last election, and will do so again at the next one.rottenborough said:0 -
The constituency to be galvanised against Brexit is the young and employed, yet the LibDems offer a leader who is tired and effectively retired, as well as tarnished with the compromises of coalition. Things could look very different if one of the potentially dynamic young female leaders were willing to step up to the plate.glw said:
You can't just blame the coalition, which is actually something that Lib Dems should take some pride in, the current Lib Dem leadership is doing a poor job. They are essentially absent from the debate. It's perplexing that the nearest thing we have to a Remain party is doing so poorly.OldKingCole said:Quite agree. The toxic legacy of the Coalition is still affecting the LD's too, otherwise they'd be at a much higher percentage.
0
