politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Leading Corbynista calls for Labour to introduce US-style prim

@Richard_Tyndall are you still here?

_Anazina_ said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Swindon_Addick said:

Even someone totally uninterested in Tory politics should have picked up that Sarah Wollaston is more moderate than the rest of her party, and is quite rebellious on some issues. It's hard to see why primaries would have a different result for Labour - relatively moderate MPs who are less willing to toe the leadership's line. Primaries also produce a strong pro-incumbent bias as many of the voters haven't heard of the challenger. I don't think Aaron has thought this through.

Wollaston is an odd example.

It's worth bearing in mind that Wollaston won her primary from memory as a sceptic. She was a rebel who voted for an EU referendum early on.

She's since then transformed into an extremist second referendum Remainer who doesn't respect the outcome of the vote she campaigned to have called.

It would be like having Tony Blair be first elected to Parliament on Michael Foot's manifesto. Oh wait ...

So now Dr Sarah Wollaston is an extremist.

As someone once said...

Only from the PB Tories.

Only on PB.

Yes she is.

There are only about a dozen second vote rebels amongst the Parliamentary Conservative Party seeking to reverse the referendum. By definition they are extremists. It is literally what the word means.

To put it into a context you might understand let's imagine Corbyn gets elected on a manifesto of nationalising the railways. A hardcore of 12 MPs led by Liz Kendall seek to block nationalisation by working with Tories and other opposition parties. Would Kendall then be an extremist within your party?

algarkirk said:

Radio 4 Today this morning. The failure to press the leader of the DUP about what she actually wants with regard to the WA as opposed to what she does not want stuck out a mile. Does anyone know why this is happening?

Call off the dogs on the Heating (or whatever it was) Inquiry? Don't think even May could go that far.

Pulpstar said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Sandpit said:

Talking of deselections, Uncle Vince reckons he's got up to 20 Labour MPs and five Conservatives preparing to resign from their parties and join him in an "Informal Alliance" over the next few months....
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6667941/Twenty-Labour-MPs-five-Tories-form-new-centrist-group-Liberal-Democrat-leader-claims.html

Over the weekend it was a Formal Alliance and now it's an Informal Alliance. Proof enough it's nto going anywhere

Can't even get Wollaston to defect..

Sarah Wollaston and Heidi Allen have been on LD defection watch for what seems like years, I keep expecting to see one of them shaking hands with Vince, but he’s not managed it yet.

Theuniondivvie said:

OldKingCole said:

MikeSmithson said:

Morris_Dancer said:

King Cole, how many MPs do the SNP have now? 30 odd?

35

20 rebel Tories, 5 rebel Labour, 11 Lib Dems, plus presumably Stephen Lloyd again gives 37.

Setting aside Vince's optimistic numbers, wouldn't that have to be a formal rather than informal arrangement to give them 3rd party status?

Do Parliamentary rules on third party status depend upon the current state of the parties (ie after defections) or elected state of the parties?

I'm guessing it would be current state but I believe from memory Short Money is more dependent upon the votes cast so a beefed up Lib Dems may get a second question at PMQs but Corbyn would still get the Short Money for any defected MPs votes?

matt said:

_Anazina_ said:

matt said:

_Anazina_ said:

DavidL said:

Swindon_Addick said:

Even someone totally uninterested in Tory politics should have picked up that Sarah Wollaston is more moderate than the rest of her party, and is quite rebellious on some issues. It's hard to see why primaries would have a different result for Labour - relatively moderate MPs who are less willing to toe the leadership's line. Primaries also produce a strong pro-incumbent bias as many of the voters haven't heard of the challenger. I don't think Aaron has thought this through.

It snip sin.

Cortez is hardly an extremist. Her policy positions would be well within the mainstream were she in Europe. That the US has a extreme rightwing position on healthcare puts it out of step, not her.

The reason she draws such opprobrium from the right is that she is a good communicator who gets social media and (I have to write this because it’s part of her appeal, not because I think it should matter) very pretty and lots of fun.

But an extremist? No.

She’s extreme in the US system, which is the point. That you think she is in the mainstream is a comment on you and your narrowness not on the political system in which she exists.

Erm no, not at all. The fact that I don’t consider her extreme means I am narrow? I suspect you might need to grab a coffee and rethink that one.

Narrow because you are looking at “extreme” through your own British social and political lens and not the US political environment that you are commenting on. Which is the point of the comment about “extremists”.

And you are arguably looking at it through an equally distorting lens.
A control freak like Pelosi would hardly have overseen the appointment of a first term congressperson to powerful House committees, if she were truly viewed as an "extremist", which is a somewhat loaded term.

She is undoubtedly very firmly on the left of the party, but the 'US political environment' is very different to what it was even five years ago. She is not someone imposed by activists on her constituency - she was elected with broad popular support.

I don't think there is a useful British analogue.

I

Philip_Thompson said:

_Anazina_ said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Swindon_Addick said:

Even someone totally uninterested in Tory politics should have picked up that Sarah Wollaston is more moderate than the rest of her party, and is quite rebellious on some issues. It's hard to see why primaries would have a different result for Labour - relatively moderate MPs who are less willing to toe the leadership's line. Primaries also produce a strong pro-incumbent bias as many of the voters haven't heard of the challenger. I don't think Aaron has thought this through.

Wollaston is an odd example.

It's worth bearing in mind that Wollaston won her primary from memory as a sceptic. She was a rebel who voted for an EU referendum early on.

She's since then transformed into an extremist second referendum Remainer who doesn't respect the outcome of the vote she campaigned to have called.

It would be like having Tony Blair be first elected to Parliament on Michael Foot's manifesto. Oh wait ...

So now Dr Sarah Wollaston is an extremist.

As someone once said...

Only from the PB Tories.

Only on PB.

Yes she is.

There are only about a dozen second vote rebels amongst the Parliamentary Conservative Party seeking to reverse the referendum. By definition they are extremists. It is literally what the word means.

To put it into a context you might understand let's imagine Corbyn gets elected on a manifesto of nationalising the railways. A hardcore of 12 MPs led by Liz Kendall seek to block nationalisation by working with Tories and other opposition parties. Would Kendall then be an extremist within your party?

Not my party but no, not at all. Kendall and Wollaston represent large strands of Labour and Tory voters. That you consider them extremists really shows just how bonkers the party leaderships and loyalists like you have become in recent times.

TOPPING said:

"Use of ANPR at manned and unmanned border crossings"

Whats the issue with ANPR ?

We had an ANPR sign when you drove back into my old village a few years back, don't remember a hard border between Derbyshire and South Yorkshire.

Pulpstar said:

TOPPING said:

"Use of ANPR at manned and unmanned border crossings"

Whats the issue with ANPR ?

We had an ANPR sign when you drove back into my old village a few years back, don't remember a hard border between Derbyshire and South Yorkshire.

*slaps forehead*

"AT MANNED AND UNMANNED BORDER CROSSINGS"

OK it's early - go get a coffee.

williamglenn said:

Pulpstar said:

TOPPING said:

"Use of ANPR at manned and unmanned border crossings"

Whats the issue with ANPR ?

We had an ANPR sign when you drove back into my old village a few years back, don't remember a hard border between Derbyshire and South Yorkshire.

You didn’t have to declare in advance what was in your car to track it as you crossed the border.

Again I'm sure it is all explained later in the document but he uses this as an example:

"A company in Norther [sic] Ireland needs to move goods to a client in the UK."

WTF? Perhaps it's early for me also as I'm not getting it at all.

_Anazina_ said:

I

Philip_Thompson said:

_Anazina_ said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Swindon_Addick said:

Even someone totally uninterested in Tory politics should have picked up that Sarah Wollaston is more moderate than the rest of her party, and is quite rebellious on some issues. It's hard to see why primaries would have a different result for Labour - relatively moderate MPs who are less willing to toe the leadership's line. Primaries also produce a strong pro-incumbent bias as many of the voters haven't heard of the challenger. I don't think Aaron has thought this through.

Wollaston is an odd example.

It's worth bearing in mind that Wollaston won her primary from memory as a sceptic. She was a rebel who voted for an EU referendum early on.

She's since then transformed into an extremist second referendum Remainer who doesn't respect the outcome of the vote she campaigned to have called.

It would be like having Tony Blair be first elected to Parliament on Michael Foot's manifesto. Oh wait ...

So now Dr Sarah Wollaston is an extremist.

As someone once said...

Only from the PB Tories.

Only on PB.

Yes she is.

There are only about a dozen second vote rebels amongst the Parliamentary Conservative Party seeking to reverse the referendum. By definition they are extremists. It is literally what the word means.

To put it into a context you might understand let's imagine Corbyn gets elected on a manifesto of nationalising the railways. A hardcore of 12 MPs led by Liz Kendall seek to block nationalisation by working with Tories and other opposition parties. Would Kendall then be an extremist within your party?

Not my party but no, not at all. Kendall and Wollaston represent large strands of Labour and Tory voters. That you consider them extremists really shows just how bonkers the party leaderships and loyalists like you have become in recent times.

Kendall isn't a Tory MP and Wollaston isn't a Labour MP.

If you draw a bell curve of Tory MPs on Europe then Wollaston is at an extreme tail of the bell curve.

williamglenn said:

Pulpstar said:

TOPPING said:

"Use of ANPR at manned and unmanned border crossings"

Whats the issue with ANPR ?

We had an ANPR sign when you drove back into my old village a few years back, don't remember a hard border between Derbyshire and South Yorkshire.

You didn’t have to declare in advance what was in your car to track it as you crossed the border.

Only during the miners strike, surely?

Richard T - Thank you for replying to my post yesterday. Sorry for not responding. In response to your post:

Switzerland is (in my opinion) not an answer to my question as to where in the world an open border exists under the circumstances that may prevail on the NI/Ireland border.

a) Although commuters and holiday makers tend to travel across the border pretty freely goods vehicles tend to be held up for between 20min to 2 hours and sometimes much more. So it is a hard border for them

b) You referred to checks within 20 miles of the border. Not sure where you got this from, but I have seen an article referring to 20 kilometres as typical for vehicles being stopped. But this is intelligence led stuff, which is of course what most checks are and not limited to 20 miles/kilometres, but absolutely anywhere. It was just given as an example. That is what customs do everywhere in the world. This isn't special to Switzerland, although they may have more of it than elsewhere, but it is normal; certainly in the UK it is (I know from someone who does just that).

c) Switzerland is in the single market.

So Switzerland may appear to have no border controls as you whizz through in your car, but it jolly well does.

The other questions re fraud and carnets wasn't addressed.

Pulpstar said:

TOPPING said:

Pulpstar said:

TOPPING said:

"Use of ANPR at manned and unmanned border crossings"

Whats the issue with ANPR ?

We had an ANPR sign when you drove back into my old village a few years back, don't remember a hard border between Derbyshire and South Yorkshire.

*slaps forehead*

"AT MANNED AND UNMANNED BORDER CROSSINGS"

OK it's early - go get a coffee.

Fair point, I totally didn't read the second half of the sentence. I think cameras set up as speed cameras are on the M1 noting van and lorry numberplates would be an ideal solution with an exemption scheme for small border traders.
Of course the rade off is a certain amount of smuggling, but this likely goes on anyway with the differing duty rates between NI and Ireland.
Personal cars will likely be exempt from any number plate regulations, it'll be the same rules as the local rubbish tip (Van = business, car = personal)

I can see a massive upside - a whole new raft of market opportunities for unemployed para-militaries and criminal gangs who have suffered much since the bottom dropped out of the terrorism market.

I see video has been unearthed of Jezza ranting about the dangers of every closer union within EU, Lisbon treaty and NATO. Nothing particularly surprising, but I am sure the cult will still argue that they think he is nailed on Remainer.

More worrying to me, he makes the faux-pas of thinking that the monster in Frankenstein is called Frankenstein....

MarqueeMark said:

_Anazina_ said:

I

Philip_Thompson said:

_Anazina_ said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Swindon_Addick said:

Even someone totally uninterested in Tory politics should have picked up that Sarah Wollaston is more moderate than the rest of her party, and is quite rebellious on some issues. It's hard to see why primaries would have a different result for Labour - relatively moderate MPs who are less willing to toe the leadership's line. Primaries also produce a strong pro-incumbent bias as many of the voters haven't heard of the challenger. I don't think Aaron has thought this through.

Wollaston is an odd example.

It's worth bearing in mind that Wollaston won her primary from memory as a sceptic. She was a rebel who voted for an EU referendum early on.

She's since then transformed into an extremist second referendum Remainer who doesn't respect the outcome of the vote she campaigned to have called.

It would be like having Tony Blair be first elected to Parliament on Michael Foot's manifesto. Oh wait ...

So now Dr Sarah Wollaston is an extremist.

As someone once said...

Only from the PB Tories.

Only on PB.

Yes she is.

There are only about a dozen second vote rebels amongst the Parliamentary Conservative Party seeking to reverse the referendum. By definition they are extremists. It is literally what the word means.

To put it into a context you might understand let's imagine Corbyn gets elected on a manifesto of nationalising the railways. A hardcore of 12 MPs led by Liz Kendall seek to block nationalisation by working with Tories and other opposition parties. Would Kendall then be an extremist within your party?

Not my party but no, not at all. Kendall and Wollaston represent large strands of Labour and Tory voters. That you consider them extremists really shows just how bonkers the party leaderships and loyalists like you have become in recent times.

Wollaston represents Remain At Any Cost. That is not a large strand within the Conservative Party.

Quite a large strand. It includs both your surviving ex prime ministers the vast majority of your ex cabinet ministers your most famous ex advertiser and party chairman your most well known MP and 9/10ths of all significant businessmen nearly all of whom vote Tory.


Not bad for starters

FrancisUrquhart said:

I see video has been unearthed of Jezza ranting about the dangers of every closer union within EU, Lisbon treaty and NATO. Nothing particularly surprising, but I am sure the cult will still argue that they think he is nailed on Remainer.

More worrying to me, he makes the faux-pas of thinking that the monster in Frankenstein is called Frankenstein....

The monster in Frankenstein is called Frankenstein. Isn't that one of the central points of the story?

TOPPING said:

Pulpstar said:

TOPPING said:

"Use of ANPR at manned and unmanned border crossings"

Whats the issue with ANPR ?

We had an ANPR sign when you drove back into my old village a few years back, don't remember a hard border between Derbyshire and South Yorkshire.

*slaps forehead*

"AT MANNED AND UNMANNED BORDER CROSSINGS"

OK it's early - go get a coffee.

The border crossing between NI and RoI is currently unmanned except by lots of ANPR cameras, with police and customs officers responding to incidents, tipoffs and vehicles of interest away from the actual border.

A new technological system would utilise exactly the same physical infrastructure as already exists now, just with a customs and tariffs system connected to it.

Here is a former senior British customs officer’s opinion that it’s something easily workable if the political will was there to do it.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/soft-borders-work-lets-start-with-ireland/

The sticking point is that political will, and the distrust (probably on both sides to be honest) that politicians would find it to be impossible in practice because it suits them for that to be the case.

The actual new software required, a piece of ‘middleware’ between the customs and policing systems, could probably have a functional spec written by @rcs1000 and myself in a couple of weeks, it’s really not rocket science. But all the software in the world is no good if the politicians refuse to implement it.

PClipp said:

TOPPING said:

Many sensible people were agitating for elected PCCs and when they arrived they were mocked relentlessly as being unrepresentative because the pesky voters refused to turn out. I'm not sure that primaries don't fall into the same category. A good idea, increasing democracy, but then who would bother to turn out?

When you say "sensible people", do you mean Tories? I don`t remember Labour people and Lib Dems agitating for them. In fact, PCCs have proved to be an expensive mistake, and it is quite right that they should be mocked. As usual, the Tories are more interesting is destroying what was working more or less well, and centralising control over local decisions.

This is the only time I haven't voted and it was a deliberate act. I assumed the turnout would be awful and I didn't want to boost the turnout figure even if it was by spoiling my ballot paper.

williamglenn said:

AlastairMeeks said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

I see video has been unearthed of Jezza ranting about the dangers of every closer union within EU, Lisbon treaty and NATO. Nothing particularly surprising, but I am sure the cult will still argue that they think he is nailed on Remainer.

More worrying to me, he makes the faux-pas of thinking that the monster in Frankenstein is called Frankenstein....

The monster in Frankenstein is called Frankenstein. Isn't that one of the central points of the story?

It’s Frankenstein’s monster.

FrancisUrquhart said:

AlastairMeeks said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

I see video has been unearthed of Jezza ranting about the dangers of every closer union within EU, Lisbon treaty and NATO. Nothing particularly surprising, but I am sure the cult will still argue that they think he is nailed on Remainer.

More worrying to me, he makes the faux-pas of thinking that the monster in Frankenstein is called Frankenstein....

The monster in Frankenstein is called Frankenstein. Isn't that one of the central points of the story?

No it isn't.

Since the novel's publication, the name "Frankenstein" has often been used to refer to the monster itself. This usage is considered erroneous. In the novel, the monster is identified by words such as "creature", "monster", "daemon", "wretch", "abortion", "fiend" and "it".

Both of you miss the point.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Philip_Thompson said:

_Anazina_ said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Swindon_Addick said:

Even someone totally uninterested in Tory politics should have picked up that Sarah Wollaston is more moderate than the rest of her party, and is quite rebellious on some issues. It's hard to see why primaries would have a different result for Labour - relatively moderate MPs who are less willing to toe the leadership's line. Primaries also produce a strong pro-incumbent bias as many of the voters haven't heard of the challenger. I don't think Aaron has thought this through.

Wollaston is an odd example.

It's worth bearing in mind that Wollaston won her primary from memory as a sceptic. She was a rebel who voted for an EU referendum early on.

She's since then transformed into an extremist second referendum Remainer who doesn't respect the outcome of the vote she campaigned to have called.

It would be like having Tony Blair be first elected to Parliament on Michael Foot's manifesto. Oh wait ...

So now Dr Sarah Wollaston is an extremist.

As someone once said...

Only from the PB Tories.

Only on PB.

Yes she is.

There are only about a dozen second vote rebels amongst the Parliamentary Conservative Party seeking to reverse the referendum. By definition they are extremists. It is literally what the word means.

To put it into a context you might understand let's imagine Corbyn gets elected on a manifesto of nationalising the railways. A hardcore of 12 MPs led by Liz Kendall seek to block nationalisation by working with Tories and other opposition parties. Would Kendall then be an extremist within your party?

She is not an extremist.

My concern with Sarah Wollaston is that she was an eurosceptic but has now changed to leading the campaign to remain.

The party consists of hard brexiteers, a small number of remainers, and a majority of mps who favour a deal. I am with those in favour of a deal and if you want to start talking about extremists in my party it is only fair to consider many members of ERG are as extreme as SW

Actually, Wollaston appears to have been a Europhile who backed Brexit because of Cameron's deal:

https://tinyurl.com/ya4bd3qu

MarqueeMark said:

_Anazina_ said:

I

Philip_Thompson said:

_Anazina_ said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Swindon_Addick said:

Even someone totally uninterested in Tory politics should have picked up that Sarah Wollaston is more moderate than the rest of her party, and is quite rebellious on some issues. It's hard to see why primaries would have a different result for Labour - relatively moderate MPs who are less willing to toe the leadership's line. Primaries also produce a strong pro-incumbent bias as many of the voters haven't heard of the challenger. I don't think Aaron has thought this through.

Wollaston is an odd example.

It's worth bearing in mind that Wollaston won her primary from memory as a sceptic. She was a rebel who voted for an EU referendum early on.

She's since then transformed into an extremist second referendum Remainer who doesn't respect the outcome of the vote she campaigned to have called.

It would be like having Tony Blair be first elected to Parliament on Michael Foot's manifesto. Oh wait ...

So now Dr Sarah Wollaston is an extremist.

As someone once said...

Only from the PB Tories.

Only on PB.

Yes she is.

There are only about a dozen second vote rebels amongst the Parliamentary Conservative Party seeking to reverse the referendum. By definition they are extremists. It is literally what the word means.

To put it into a context you might understand let's imagine Corbyn gets elected on a manifesto of nationalising the railways. A hardcore of 12 MPs led by Liz Kendall seek to block nationalisation by working with Tories and other opposition parties. Would Kendall then be an extremist within your party?

Not my party but no, not at all. Kendall and Wollaston represent large strands of Labour and Tory voters. That you consider them extremists really shows just how bonkers the party leaderships and loyalists like you have become in recent times.

Wollaston represents Remain At Any Cost. That is not a large strand within the Conservative Party.

But they are entitled to their view without being called extremists. I do not support their aim of remaining but equally I do not support the ultras who think they own my party and just want us to crash out of the EU on some little englander crusade

Anyone taking Aaron Bastani remotely seriously is not remotely serious.

PClipp said:

TOPPING said:

Many sensible people were agitating for elected PCCs and when they arrived they were mocked relentlessly as being unrepresentative because the pesky voters refused to turn out. I'm not sure that primaries don't fall into the same category. A good idea, increasing democracy, but then who would bother to turn out?

When you say "sensible people", do you mean Tories? I don`t remember Labour people and Lib Dems agitating for them. In fact, PCCs have proved to be an expensive mistake, and it is quite right that they should be mocked. As usual, the Tories are more interesting is destroying what was working more or less well, and centralising control over local decisions.

"PC David Copperfield" thought they were a great idea - a genuinely important way for the police to be made accountable to the public they serve.

Not 100% sure that David (Stuard Davidson) could be categorised as a Tory.

AlastairMeeks said:

williamglenn said:

AlastairMeeks said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

I see video has been unearthed of Jezza ranting about the dangers of every closer union within EU, Lisbon treaty and NATO. Nothing particularly surprising, but I am sure the cult will still argue that they think he is nailed on Remainer.

More worrying to me, he makes the faux-pas of thinking that the monster in Frankenstein is called Frankenstein....

The monster in Frankenstein is called Frankenstein. Isn't that one of the central points of the story?

It’s Frankenstein’s monster.

FrancisUrquhart said:

AlastairMeeks said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

I see video has been unearthed of Jezza ranting about the dangers of every closer union within EU, Lisbon treaty and NATO. Nothing particularly surprising, but I am sure the cult will still argue that they think he is nailed on Remainer.

More worrying to me, he makes the faux-pas of thinking that the monster in Frankenstein is called Frankenstein....

The monster in Frankenstein is called Frankenstein. Isn't that one of the central points of the story?

No it isn't.

Since the novel's publication, the name "Frankenstein" has often been used to refer to the monster itself. This usage is considered erroneous. In the novel, the monster is identified by words such as "creature", "monster", "daemon", "wretch", "abortion", "fiend" and "it".

Both of you miss the point.

Correct

OT. Lady from the FA thinks female footballers should get paid the same as men

SouthamObserver said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Huawei....again...allegedly stealing trade secrets.

Huawei accused of stealing trade secrets following FBI raid

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2019/02/04/huawei-accused-stealing-trade-secrets-following-fbi-raid/

Huawei is a very different beast to ZTE in many, many ways - and for that reason is going to be a lot harder to take down. First off, it is privately owned. Second off, and probably a lot more important for the longer term, it has a very large and high quality portfolio of standards essential patents reading on 5G. Basically, along with a handful of other companies (Ericsson, Nokia, Qualcomm and Samsung), it has a strong hold on the future.

Yes I know. The UK government have been incredibly slow to act on this though.

Bloomberg India reporting that Sajid Javid has signed the papers for the extradition of Vijay Mallya to India. Former F1 team owner is wanted in India over more than £1bn of debts.
Mallya intends to appeal.
https://www.bloombergquint.com/law-and-policy/uk-home-secretary-orders-mallyas-extradition-to-india

Roger said:

OT. Lady from the FA thinks female footballers should get paid the same as men

I think the men should be paid the same as the women.

Sandpit said:

TOPPING said:

Pulpstar said:

TOPPING said:

"Use of ANPR at manned and unmanned border crossings"

Whats the issue with ANPR ?

We had an ANPR sign when you drove back into my old village a few years back, don't remember a hard border between Derbyshire and South Yorkshire.

*slaps forehead*

"AT MANNED AND UNMANNED BORDER CROSSINGS"

OK it's early - go get a coffee.

The border crossing between NI and RoI is currently unmanned except by lots of ANPR cameras, with police and customs officers responding to incidents, tipoffs and vehicles of interest away from the actual border.

A new technological system would utilise exactly the same physical infrastructure as already exists now, just with a customs and tariffs system connected to it.

Here is a former senior British customs officer’s opinion that it’s something easily workable if the political will was there to do it.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/soft-borders-work-lets-start-with-ireland/

The sticking point is that political will, and the distrust (probably on both sides to be honest) that politicians would find it to be impossible in practice because it suits them for that to be the case.

The actual new software required, a piece of ‘middleware’ between the customs and policing systems, could probably have a functional spec written by @rcs1000 and myself in a couple of weeks, it’s really not rocket science. But all the software in the world is no good if the politicians refuse to implement it.

A border is significant for rather more than customs and related financial matters, no?

I'm thinking of livestock, agricultural produce and of course people. The people bit is particularly important when one side of the border you have Freedom Of Movement (within EU jurisdictions) and on the other side (UK) you do not. What is the technological solution to this?

Are there any helpful examples of such technological solutions elsewhere? I'm thinking particularly of Norway/Sweden and USA/Canada, but I am sure there are others.

Sandpit said:

TOPPING said:

Pulpstar said:

TOPPING said:

"Use of ANPR at manned and unmanned border crossings"

Whats the issue with ANPR ?

We had an ANPR sign when you drove back into my old village a few years back, don't remember a hard border between Derbyshire and South Yorkshire.

*slaps forehead*

"AT MANNED AND UNMANNED BORDER CROSSINGS"

OK it's early - go get a coffee.

The border crossing between NI and RoI is currently unmanned except by lots of ANPR cameras, with police and customs officers responding to incidents, tipoffs and vehicles of interest away from the actual border.

A new technological system would utilise exactly the same physical infrastructure as already exists now, just with a customs and tariffs system connected to it.

Here is a former senior British customs officer’s opinion that it’s something easily workable if the political will was there to do it.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/soft-borders-work-lets-start-with-ireland/

The sticking point is that political will, and the distrust (probably on both sides to be honest) that politicians would find it to be impossible in practice because it suits them for that to be the case.

The actual new software required, a piece of ‘middleware’ between the customs and policing systems, could probably have a functional spec written by @rcs1000 and myself in a couple of weeks, it’s really not rocket science. But all the software in the world is no good if the politicians refuse to implement it.

Indeed. The Irish border issue is one of political goodwill, not one of practicality. People ignore the fact that there is already extensive infrastructure in place and different tax regimes on either side of the border. People like Topping do strongly give the impression they simply don't want a border solution because of their intellectual opposition to Brexit and as such will attempt to undermine any reasonable solution to the issue.

But there are plenty of people out there with real world experience of these systems who say it can work perfectly well.

tlg86 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Philip_Thompson said:

_Anazina_ said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Swindon_Addick said:

Even someone totally uninterested in Tory politics should have picked up that Sarah Wollaston is more moderate than the rest of her party, and is quite rebellious on some issues. It's hard to see why primaries would have a different result for Labour - relatively moderate MPs who are less willing to toe the leadership's line. Primaries also produce a strong pro-incumbent bias as many of the voters haven't heard of the challenger. I don't think Aaron has thought this through.

Wollaston is an odd example.

It's worth bearing in mind that Wollaston won her primary from memory as a sceptic. She was a rebel who voted for an EU referendum early on.

She's since then transformed into an extremist second referendum Remainer who doesn't respect the outcome of the vote she campaigned to have called.

It would be like having Tony Blair be first elected to Parliament on Michael Foot's manifesto. Oh wait ...

So now Dr Sarah Wollaston is an extremist.

As someone once said...

Only from the PB Tories.

Only on PB.

Yes she is.

There are only about a dozen second vote rebels amongst the Parliamentary Conservative Party seeking to reverse the referendum. By definition they are extremists. It is literally what the word means.

To put it into a context you might understand let's imagine Corbyn gets elected on a manifesto of nationalising the railways. A hardcore of 12 MPs led by Liz Kendall seek to block nationalisation by working with Tories and other opposition parties. Would Kendall then be an extremist within your party?

She is not an extremist.

My concern with Sarah Wollaston is that she was an eurosceptic but has now changed to leading the campaign to remain.

The party consists of hard brexiteers, a small number of remainers, and a majority of mps who favour a deal. I am with those in favour of a deal and if you want to start talking about extremists in my party it is only fair to consider many members of ERG are as extreme as SW

Actually, Wollaston appears to have been a Europhile who backed Brexit because of Cameron's deal:

https://tinyurl.com/ya4bd3qu

I simply don't believe that. I think it was clear from the start that she was a Europhile who backed Brexit specifically to be able to change sides at the most inopportune moment for the Brexit campaign as a means of undermining the Leave case. Thankfully she failed.

tlg86 said:

Roger said:

OT. Lady from the FA thinks female footballers should get paid the same as men

I think the men should be paid the same as the women.

Actually I don't know this, but interesting to know. I wonder what the comparison between male professional footballers who attract similar attendances / fanbases get paid compared to the women's premier league?

I actually never really had that much of an issue with the very top level players getting paid what they do, it isn't that out of whack with other elite sports. However, my understanding is that even in say division 1 and 2 of football league players can easily make £100k+.

Yes football is a global game and very well supported game, but you don't get say a tennis player or golfer who well outside the top bracket making big money, or even NFL (the richest league in America) the salary outside of the top players / positions isn't massive.

williamglenn said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Sandpit said:

TOPPING said:

Pulpstar said:

TOPPING said:

"Use of ANPR at manned and unmanned border crossings"

Whats the issue with ANPR ?

We had an ANPR sign when you drove back into my old village a few years back, don't remember a hard border between Derbyshire and South Yorkshire.

*slaps forehead*

"AT MANNED AND UNMANNED BORDER CROSSINGS"

OK it's early - go get a coffee.

The border crossing between NI and RoI is currently unmanned except by lots of ANPR cameras, with police and customs officers responding to incidents, tipoffs and vehicles of interest away from the actual border.

A new technological system would utilise exactly the same physical infrastructure as already exists now, just with a customs and tariffs system connected to it.

Here is a former senior British customs officer’s opinion that it’s something easily workable if the political will was there to do it.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/soft-borders-work-lets-start-with-ireland/

The sticking point is that political will, and the distrust (probably on both sides to be honest) that politicians would find it to be impossible in practice because it suits them for that to be the case.

The actual new software required, a piece of ‘middleware’ between the customs and policing systems, could probably have a functional spec written by @rcs1000 and myself in a couple of weeks, it’s really not rocket science. But all the software in the world is no good if the politicians refuse to implement it.

Indeed. The Irish border issue is one of political goodwill, not one of practicality. People ignore the fact that there is already extensive infrastructure in place and different tax regimes on either side of the border. People like Topping do strongly give the impression they simply don't want a border solution because of their intellectual opposition to Brexit and as such will attempt to undermine any reasonable solution to the issue.

But there are plenty of people out there with real world experience of these systems who say it can work perfectly well.

How many people who live near the border say it can work perfectly well?

Since there has been no formal suggestion of what the solution would be how are they supposed to know?

NickPalmer said:

OldKingCole said:

Sounds fair.The difficulty is that to have any sort of voice, you have to be a member of the party. It's arguable at least that non-member supporters should have a voice, but if they are that committed, why don't they join. One can be a Party member and find excuses for doing sod-all except voting!

Sure, and as sometime CLP Membership Sec I'm happy with that - people should be able to show support and get involved now and then (e.g. on selection) without making it the lodestar of their lives. Otherwise you have a party entirely composed of fanatics, which is a Bad Idea.

In reply to the membership point and to Nigelb - I don't know Bastani so can't really speak for him. But I imagine he's looking at the equivalent of the closed primaries in some US states, where you have to be registered as a party supporter (they don't have membership as such). I shouldn't think he wants to have a lot of Tories and LibDems helping decide who should stand for us.

And as I keep pointing out, a 'closed primary' over here bears no relation whatsoever to one in the US. The comparison is purely rhetorical.

gypsumfantastic said:

kjh said:

Richard T - Thank you for replying to my post yesterday. Sorry for not responding. In response to your post:

Switzerland is (in my opinion) not an answer to my question as to where in the world an open border exists under the circumstances that may prevail on the NI/Ireland border.

a) Although commuters and holiday makers tend to travel across the border pretty freely goods vehicles tend to be held up for between 20min to 2 hours and sometimes much more. So it is a hard border for them

b) You referred to checks within 20 miles of the border. Not sure where you got this from, but I have seen an article referring to 20 kilometres as typical for vehicles being stopped. But this is intelligence led stuff, which is of course what most checks are and not limited to 20 miles/kilometres, but absolutely anywhere. It was just given as an example. That is what customs do everywhere in the world. This isn't special to Switzerland, although they may have more of it than elsewhere, but it is normal; certainly in the UK it is (I know from someone who does just that).

c) Switzerland is in the single market.

So Switzerland may appear to have no border controls as you whizz through in your car, but it jolly well does.

The other questions re fraud and carnets wasn't addressed.

Here's a picture of an EU/Switzerland customs border post. As you can see it definitely does not exist.

For a split second my irony recognition failed.

NickPalmer said:

OldKingCole said:

Sounds fair.The difficulty is that to have any sort of voice, you have to be a member of the party. It's arguable at least that non-member supporters should have a voice, but if they are that committed, why don't they join. One can be a Party member and find excuses for doing sod-all except voting!

Sure, and as sometime CLP Membership Sec I'm happy with that - people should be able to show support and get involved now and then (e.g. on selection) without making it the lodestar of their lives. Otherwise you have a party entirely composed of fanatics, which is a Bad Idea.

In reply to the membership point and to Nigelb - I don't know Bastani so can't really speak for him. But I imagine he's looking at the equivalent of the closed primaries in some US states, where you have to be registered as a party supporter (they don't have membership as such). I shouldn't think he wants to have a lot of Tories and LibDems helping decide who should stand for us.

Paying your money for membership is, of course, the minimum effort required. And where would LibDem or, I suspect, Labour constituency parties be without those subs. Although I was once told, when getting a grant from Liberal Party HQ that I was spending the last of the money that Lloyd George 'raised'.
Not quite so sure about Constituency Conservative parties. Think they do it differently.

FrancisUrquhart said:

tlg86 said:

Roger said:

OT. Lady from the FA thinks female footballers should get paid the same as men

I think the men should be paid the same as the women.

Actually I don't know this, but interesting to know. I wonder what the comparison between male professional footballers who attract similar attendances / fanbases get paid compared to the women's premier league?

I actually never really had that much of an issue with the very top level players getting paid what they do, it isn't that out of whack with other elite sports. However, my understanding is that even in say division 1 and 2 of football league players can easily make £100k+.

Yes football is a global game and very well supported game, but you don't get say a tennis player or golfer who well outside the top bracket making big money, or even NFL (the richest league in America) the salary outside of the top players / positions isn't massive.

Not sure of the answer, but I'd also be interested to know the value of BT's TV deal with the National League (the fifth level of English football) compared with the value of the deal for the Women's Super League.

TOPPING said:

Sandpit said:

TOPPING said:

Pulpstar said:

TOPPING said:

"Use of ANPR at manned and unmanned border crossings"

Whats the issue with ANPR ?

We had an ANPR sign when you drove back into my old village a few years back, don't remember a hard border between Derbyshire and South Yorkshire.

*slaps forehead*

"AT MANNED AND UNMANNED BORDER CROSSINGS"

OK it's early - go get a coffee.

The border crossing between NI and RoI is currently unmanned except by lots of ANPR cameras, with police and customs officers responding to incidents, tipoffs and vehicles of interest away from the actual border.

A new technological system would utilise exactly the same physical infrastructure as already exists now, just with a customs and tariffs system connected to it.

Here is a former senior British customs officer’s opinion that it’s something easily workable if the political will was there to do it.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/soft-borders-work-lets-start-with-ireland/

The sticking point is that political will, and the distrust (probably on both sides to be honest) that politicians would find it to be impossible in practice because it suits them for that to be the case.

The actual new software required, a piece of ‘middleware’ between the customs and policing systems, could probably have a functional spec written by @rcs1000 and myself in a couple of weeks, it’s really not rocket science. But all the software in the world is no good if the politicians refuse to implement it.

His is a trusted trader scheme. Whoopy fucking doo. I'm sure that all the dissident XXXs will sign up pronto.

Plus I love this line:

"...if the trade, post Brexit, were to change dramatically, including increased suspicious flow from the UK mainland, on to Northern Ireland and to the Republic, HMRC could easily become aware and co-operate through a binding protocol with their Irish colleagues to deal with it."

Yep - a binding protocol between the EU and the UK. Wait, what? You mean like a deal? That would be great - and while it is negotiated we need something to prevent a "stupid" border. And hence the WA and the backstop.

Don't you lot actually read the stuff you link to?

Poor comment Topping. The argument is not over whether or not we accept the WA. I am certainly in favour of it. The argument is over whether or not a technological solution can be put in place which makes it unnecessary for the backstop to come into effect after the end of the 2 year transition. All of this is predicated on accepting a deal, not on having a No Deal.

Edited to remove 'stupid'. It was unnecessarily confrontational.

Morning all, and on topic:

Primaries for Labour? No thank you. I do not want to see us importing ideas about elections from America. They have way too much voting over there. Always voting on stuff, it's ridiculous. And in any case a great strength of the Labour party is its strong link to the unions. I would hate for this to be weakened. Unions are comprised of millions of ordinary hard-working men and women, some of them a teeny bit unevolved, many of them Leave voters, all of them just trying to put food on the table. They are the sort of people who keep this country going, keep the show on the road each and every day of the week, whatever the weather. Their voice within the party should never be muted.

This is all the more important now that Labour has transformed itself into a radical left movement with mass appeal to trendy young people, and indeed trendy old people such as myself. It's great that this has happened, and let's please have more of it, but there is a risk that it could morph into a kind of hyper-woke, metro-sexual bubble that floats off into dreamland and forgets its roots. Like the working class kid who goes to uni, gets all smart and sophisticated, then never visits his folks except at Christmas and even then only on Boxing Day. This is not a good look for a political party aspiring to national government and it is the link with the unions which prevents it happening. Labour loses it at its peril.

tlg86 said:

Roger said:

OT. Lady from the FA thinks female footballers should get paid the same as men

I think the men should be paid the same as the women.

That would be entirely justified in respect of the employees and officials of the Football Association.

TOPPING said:

Sandpit said:

The border crossing between NI and RoI is currently unmanned except by lots of ANPR cameras, with police and customs officers responding to incidents, tipoffs and vehicles of interest away from the actual border.

A new technological system would utilise exactly the same physical infrastructure as already exists now, just with a customs and tariffs system connected to it.

Here is a former senior British customs officer’s opinion that it’s something easily workable if the political will was there to do it.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/soft-borders-work-lets-start-with-ireland/

The sticking point is that political will, and the distrust (probably on both sides to be honest) that politicians would find it to be impossible in practice because it suits them for that to be the case.

The actual new software required, a piece of ‘middleware’ between the customs and policing systems, could probably have a functional spec written by @rcs1000 and myself in a couple of weeks, it’s really not rocket science. But all the software in the world is no good if the politicians refuse to implement it.

His is a trusted trader scheme. Whoopy fucking doo. I'm sure that all the dissident XXXs will sign up pronto.

Plus I love this line:

"...if the trade, post Brexit, were to change dramatically, including increased suspicious flow from the UK mainland, on to Northern Ireland and to the Republic, HMRC could easily become aware and co-operate through a binding protocol with their Irish colleagues to deal with it."

Yep - a binding protocol between the EU and the UK. Wait, what? You mean like a deal? That would be great - and while it is negotiated we need something to prevent a "stupid" border. And hence the WA and the backstop.

Don't you lot actually read the stuff you link to?

Yep, I read it, and yep it’s a trusted trader scheme. The vast majority of goods crossing that border originate from only a few dozen companies.

A small amount of non-compliance really isn’t a problem - as it isn’t now with varying levels of VAT and duty on goods carried across the border. If it becomes obvious that a man in a van is doing things he shouldn’t be doing, then the authorities can co-operate, as again happens now, to deal with him.

The whole point of the backstop is nothing to do with the border in NI, it’s for the EU to prevent UK regulatory divergence after we leave and to hold leverage in the coming trade talks. I don’t see why it’s in the UK’s interest to agree to that.

Proof Netflix appear willing to fund any old shit at the moment, as more content is better than no content...

If eating according to the colours of the rainbow and steaming your vagina is just the kind of health advice you crave, get ready. Goop, the new-age lifestyle website of Oscar-winning actor Gwyneth Paltrow, will soon be coming to Netflix, according to reports.

Peter_the_Punter said:

tlg86 said:

Roger said:

OT. Lady from the FA thinks female footballers should get paid the same as men

I think the men should be paid the same as the women.

That would be entirely justified in respect of the employees and officials of the Football Association.

Indeed, and I was sure the FA already paid male and female footballers the same money when they represent the national team.

What individual clubs can pay players depends entirely on how much money they can raise from (mostly) gate receipts and television rights.

FrancisUrquhart said:

tlg86 said:

Roger said:

OT. Lady from the FA thinks female footballers should get paid the same as men

I think the men should be paid the same as the women.

Actually I don't know this, but interesting to know. I wonder what the comparison between male professional footballers who attract similar attendances / fanbases get paid compared to the women's premier league?

I actually never really had that much of an issue with the very top level players getting paid what they do, it isn't that out of whack with other elite sports. However, my understanding is that even in say division 1 and 2 of football league players can easily make £100k+.

Yes football is a global game and very well supported game, but you don't get say a tennis player or golfer who well outside the top bracket making big money, or even NFL (the richest league in America) the salary outside of the top players / positions isn't massive.

Top level women's football in this country tends to attract attendances around the lower single digit thousands, and frequently not even that (ie hundreds). The correct comparison is more like the semi-professional National League (below League 2) than the Football League itself, on that basis. I believe pay is still higher in the men's version, but not by an order of magnitude.

Although the situation is complicated by the much higher attendances women's international football picks up, and also the fact that it's much more popular in other countries.

Sandpit said:

TOPPING said:

Sandpit said:

The border crossing between NI and RoI is currently unmanned except by lots of ANPR cameras, with police and customs officers responding to incidents, tipoffs and vehicles of interest away from the actual border.

A new technological system would utilise exactly the same physical infrastructure as already exists now, just with a customs and tariffs system connected to it.

Here is a former senior British customs officer’s opinion that it’s something easily workable if the political will was there to do it.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/soft-borders-work-lets-start-with-ireland/

The sticking point is that political will, and the distrust (probably on both sides to be honest) that politicians would find it to be impossible in practice because it suits them for that to be the case.

The actual new software required, a piece of ‘middleware’ between the customs and policing systems, could probably have a functional spec written by @rcs1000 and myself in a couple of weeks, it’s really not rocket science. But all the software in the world is no good if the politicians refuse to implement it.

His is a trusted trader scheme. Whoopy fucking doo. I'm sure that all the dissident XXXs will sign up pronto.

Plus I love this line:

"...if the trade, post Brexit, were to change dramatically, including increased suspicious flow from the UK mainland, on to Northern Ireland and to the Republic, HMRC could easily become aware and co-operate through a binding protocol with their Irish colleagues to deal with it."

Yep - a binding protocol between the EU and the UK. Wait, what? You mean like a deal? That would be great - and while it is negotiated we need something to prevent a "stupid" border. And hence the WA and the backstop.

Don't you lot actually read the stuff you link to?

Yep, I read it, and yep it’s a trusted trader scheme. The vast majority of goods crossing that border originate from only a few dozen companies.

A small amount of non-compliance really isn’t a problem - as it isn’t now with varying levels of VAT and duty on goods carried across the border. If it becomes obvious that a man in a van is doing things he shouldn’t be doing, then the authorities can co-operate, as again happens now, to deal with him.

The whole point of the backstop is nothing to do with the border in NI, it’s for the EU to prevent UK regulatory divergence after we leave and to hold leverage in the coming trade talks. I don’t see why it’s in the UK’s interest to agree to that.

If you are correct why do we bother with borders anywhere? The honest will be honest and we just let the crooks get on with it.

gypsumfantastic said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Ah, the fuckwit who knows better than the experts is back again. Given your track record on being wrong on every single thing you have ever commented on I think we know exactly how much weight we should put on your opinion.

You can ad hom me all you like, doesn't change the fact that every single unicorn your thicky thick thick brexiteer friends have claimed exists has turned out to be total dogshit.

There are no magic brexiteer unicorn technology borders, anywhere on Earth. Not one. Presuming borders are designed and built by experts, and realising none of these experts has built a border run on magic brexiteer unicorn glitter and wishful thinking, leads to a fairly obvious conclusion.

I'd urge you to pause and reflect on why that might be for a second, but I think we all know if there's one thing a brexiteer will never do is pause to reflect. If they did that, their brains might start working and that doesn't bear thinking about.

They are not there because they are not considered necessary. Different countries have different systems to suit their own arrangements and political positions. That does not for a minute mean they are not possible or practical. Now I am going to take the word of various experts (you remember that much derided word?) on this rather than some fuckwitted troll.