The danger is that holding the Euro Elections in this country would be a fest for populists.
If things do get to that point then I wouldn't want to even attempt to guess the overall result. It's not inconceivable, for example, that a fanatically pro-EU slate could emerge from the ether and win a slew of seats.
On the other hand, I'm rather less concerned about the prospect of Nigel Farage being re-elected than I am about Mr Yaxley-Lennon and 15 or 20 of his closest friends being let loose in the European Parliament. If you thought that our reputation couldn't sink any lower in that particular forum, think again.
I'm a lot more concerned about our recent entries to the Eurovision Song Contest. Firstly, it is a lot more high profile, secondly it impacts much more on ordinary life and thirdly, our recent entries have been truly embarrassing.
The songs can be somewhat lacking in originality. Next year, I propose a UK entry that extols the myriad virtues of a pound consisting of 240 pence.
That'll go down a treat in Azerbaijan.
The Italians will probably love it though. They have been looking for that sort of sneaky inflation ever since they joined the Euro.
If the Euro was sub-divided into twenty ecus that each consisted of twelve cents then that whole shitstorm over Greece and Ireland and all those bailouts could easily have been avoided. A schoolboy error, if you stop and think about it.
The danger is that holding the Euro Elections in this country would be a fest for populists.
If things do get to that point then I wouldn't want to even attempt to guess the overall result. It's not inconceivable, for example, that a fanatically pro-EU slate could emerge from the ether and win a slew of seats.
On the other hand, I'm rather less concerned about the prospect of Nigel Farage being re-elected than I am about Mr Yaxley-Lennon and 15 or 20 of his closest friends being let loose in the European Parliament. If you thought that our reputation couldn't sink any lower in that particular forum, think again.
I'm a lot more concerned about our recent entries to the Eurovision Song Contest. Firstly, it is a lot more high profile, secondly it impacts much more on ordinary life and thirdly, our recent entries have been truly embarrassing.
The songs can be somewhat lacking in originality. Next year, I propose a UK entry that extols the myriad virtues of a pound consisting of 240 pence.
That'll go down a treat in Azerbaijan.
The Italians will probably love it though. They have been looking for that sort of sneaky inflation ever since they joined the Euro.
If the Euro was sub-divided into twenty ecus that each consisted of twelve cents then that whole shitstorm over Greece and Ireland and all those bailouts could easily have been avoided. A schoolboy error, if you stop and think about it.
Whilst that might be true I am not sure you are appreciating the German mindset. I think they would rather there was only 90c in the Euro.
The danger is that holding the Euro Elections in this country would be a fest for populists.
They’d struggle to make gains versus the 2014 result.
I was thinking in terms of the likes of Tommy Robinson, who's a slightly different kettle of fish to Nigel Farage.
There’s a ceiling on support for TR and his ilk (in much the way there is - at a higher level - for Corbyn). Farage’s main achievement was convincing people that UKIP.. or at least the ones allowed on telly like him and Suzanne.. were normal people you wouldn’t be embarrassed talking about. Most importantly, he sold the story it wasn’t about race. It may have been bollocks further down the food chain, but it worked.
If there are more than 10 per cent of voters who’d consider picking Batten and Robinson, I’d be surprised.
In the W. Midlands, that could possibly yield them precisely zero seats. Currently the seven seats in the region are divided up:
3 UKIP 2 Tory 2 Labour 0 LD or Green.
They’re already down to one as Carver and Etheridge are now independents. And Jill Seymour stood down as a party spokeswoman.
I can see Lab and Tory staying on what they have - hardly in a position to grow; a Brexit brand and a Remain brand getting one each (eg Farage/TIG), and all of them (plus maybe the LibDems) fighting over the last one.
If The Times is right Sean will be settling a bet in favour of William for £1,000. In fairness, I think Sean has been expecting to lose for quite some time.
The danger is that holding the Euro Elections in this country would be a fest for populists.
If things do get to that point then I wouldn't want to even attempt to guess the overall result. It's not inconceivable, for example, that a fanatically pro-EU slate could emerge from the ether and win a slew of seats.
On the other hand, I'm rather less concerned about the prospect of Nigel Farage being re-elected than I am about Mr Yaxley-Lennon and 15 or 20 of his closest friends being let loose in the European Parliament. If you thought that our reputation couldn't sink any lower in that particular forum, think again.
I'm a lot more concerned about our recent entries to the Eurovision Song Contest. Firstly, it is a lot more high profile, secondly it impacts much more on ordinary life and thirdly, our recent entries have been truly embarrassing.
The songs can be somewhat lacking in originality. Next year, I propose a UK entry that extols the myriad virtues of a pound consisting of 240 pence.
That'll go down a treat in Azerbaijan.
The Italians will probably love it though. They have been looking for that sort of sneaky inflation ever since they joined the Euro.
If the Euro was sub-divided into twenty ecus that each consisted of twelve cents then that whole shitstorm over Greece and Ireland and all those bailouts could easily have been avoided. A schoolboy error, if you stop and think about it.
Whilst that might be true I am not sure you are appreciating the German mindset. I think they would rather there was only 90c in the Euro.
?!?!?!
What sort of warped mindset could conceive of such a thing?
Though granted subdividing one's currency by 90 is still considerably less perverse than doing so by 100 (*shudders*)
As, I think George Osborne said about 2 years ago.
Incredible.
2 years and nothing has changed.
Osborne said he voted for her to be leader when he was still an MP, so his opinion of her can’t have been that bad at the time.
Leadsom was the alternative.
Good grief, I’d forgotten that. Remarkable that the last two big party leadership elections have featured such luminaries as MayDay, Leadhead, CorBlimey and a bloke people keep calling Owen Jones.
As, I think George Osborne said about 2 years ago.
Incredible.
2 years and nothing has changed.
Osborne said he voted for her to be leader when he was still an MP, so his opinion of her can’t have been that bad at the time.
Leadsom was the alternative.
Good grief, I’d forgotten that. Remarkable that the last two big party leadership elections have featured such luminaries as MayDay, Leadhead, CorBlimey and a bloke people keep calling Owen Jones.
As, I think George Osborne said about 2 years ago.
Incredible.
2 years and nothing has changed.
Osborne said he voted for her to be leader when he was still an MP, so his opinion of her can’t have been that bad at the time.
Leadsom was the alternative.
Good grief, I’d forgotten that. Remarkable that the last two big party leadership elections have featured such luminaries as MayDay, Leadhead, CorBlimey and a bloke people keep calling Owen Jones.
Give it another five years and it'll be Chris Williamson and Andrew Bridgen facing off at PMQs. There's so much more of this still to look forward to.
The danger is that holding the Euro Elections in this country would be a fest for populists.
If things do get to that point then I wouldn't want to even attempt to guess the overall result. It's not inconceivable, for example, that a fanatically pro-EU slate could emerge from the ether and win a slew of seats.
On the other hand, I'm rather less concerned about the prospect of Nigel Farage being re-elected than I am about Mr Yaxley-Lennon and 15 or 20 of his closest friends being let loose in the European Parliament. If you thought that our reputation couldn't sink any lower in that particular forum, think again.
I'm a lot more concerned about our recent entries to the Eurovision Song Contest. Firstly, it is a lot more high profile, secondly it impacts much more on ordinary life and thirdly, our recent entries have been truly embarrassing.
The songs can be somewhat lacking in originality. Next year, I propose a UK entry that extols the myriad virtues of a pound consisting of 240 pence.
That'll go down a treat in Azerbaijan.
The Italians will probably love it though. They have been looking for that sort of sneaky inflation ever since they joined the Euro.
If the Euro was sub-divided into twenty ecus that each consisted of twelve cents then that whole shitstorm over Greece and Ireland and all those bailouts could easily have been avoided. A schoolboy error, if you stop and think about it.
Whilst that might be true I am not sure you are appreciating the German mindset. I think they would rather there was only 90c in the Euro.
?!?!?!
What sort of warped mindset could conceive of such a thing?
Though granted subdividing one's currency by 90 is still considerably less perverse than doing so by 100 (*shudders*)
President Ne Win of Burma in 1987 voided all 50 and 100 Kyat notes and replaced them with 45 and 90 Kyat notes, on the advice of his astrologer.
As, I think George Osborne said about 2 years ago.
Incredible.
2 years and nothing has changed.
Osborne said he voted for her to be leader when he was still an MP, so his opinion of her can’t have been that bad at the time.
Leadsom was the alternative.
Good grief, I’d forgotten that. Remarkable that the last two big party leadership elections have featured such luminaries as MayDay, Leadhead, CorBlimey and a bloke people keep calling Owen Jones.
Leadhead may be back for another run.
Available to back at 25 on Betfair Exchange.
Depressingly, given how looney the Tory party is these days, this looks like quite good value. (After all, she was the first British woman in space.)
As, I think George Osborne said about 2 years ago.
Incredible.
2 years and nothing has changed.
Osborne said he voted for her to be leader when he was still an MP, so his opinion of her can’t have been that bad at the time.
Leadsom was the alternative.
Well the last ballot was Gove, Leadsom and May.
You cannot underestimate the Cameroon hatred/fury towards Gove in July 2016.
For some it has healed now, but then if Gove was on fire, the Cameroons would have poured petrol on him for his betrayal of Dave.
Osborne was really whitewashing Gove’s record in his GQ interview this week. The way Osborne told it, Gove didn’t put a foot wrong in the way he handled the referendum.
Mogg and co really are a bunch of hypocrites. After dishing out the vassal state and slave state rhetoric further dividing the country now all of a sudden pen the martyr routine , under sufference and a heavy heart they’ll now back the deal !
As, I think George Osborne said about 2 years ago.
Incredible.
2 years and nothing has changed.
Osborne said he voted for her to be leader when he was still an MP, so his opinion of her can’t have been that bad at the time.
Leadsom was the alternative.
Well the last ballot was Gove, Leadsom and May.
You cannot underestimate the Cameroon hatred/fury towards Gove in July 2016.
For some it has healed now, but then if Gove was on fire, the Cameroons would have poured petrol on him for his betrayal of Dave.
Osborne was really whitewashing Gove’s record in his GQ interview this week. The way Osborne told it, Gove didn’t put a foot wrong in the way he handled the referendum.
It's a complicated relationship.
This was Gove reaching out to Osborne and the Cameroons for his conduct during the referendum.
Mogg and co really are a bunch of hypocrites. After dishing out the vassal state and slave state rhetoric further dividing the country now all of a sudden pen the martyr routine , under sufference and a heavy heart they’ll now back the deal !
As, I think George Osborne said about 2 years ago.
Incredible.
2 years and nothing has changed.
Osborne said he voted for her to be leader when he was still an MP, so his opinion of her can’t have been that bad at the time.
Leadsom was the alternative.
Good grief, I’d forgotten that. Remarkable that the last two big party leadership elections have featured such luminaries as MayDay, Leadhead, CorBlimey and a bloke people keep calling Owen Jones.
Leadhead may be back for another run.
Perhaps we could have bets on which Cabinet Minister is behind the “Fuck knows/Living Dead” comment.
I do wonder about the mindsets of Mogg, Baker, Jenkin and what's alleged to be the 'brains' in the ERG.
When they find themselves voting alongside hundreds of Remainer MPs do they ever think "either they're our useful idiots or we're they're useful idiots" and then worry that they might not be as clever as they thought they were ?
As, I think George Osborne said about 2 years ago.
Incredible.
2 years and nothing has changed.
Osborne said he voted for her to be leader when he was still an MP, so his opinion of her can’t have been that bad at the time.
Leadsom was the alternative.
Good grief, I’d forgotten that. Remarkable that the last two big party leadership elections have featured such luminaries as MayDay, Leadhead, CorBlimey and a bloke people keep calling Owen Jones.
Leadhead may be back for another run.
Available to back at 25 on Betfair Exchange.
Depressingly, given how looney the Tory party is these days, this looks like quite good value. (After all, she was the first British woman in space.)
Papers like the mail are making out it’s all very meaningful.
At least MV 2.5 will be interesting to see how many Spartans are still standing, how many grand wizards are still with them, and how many Labour are huddled in there with them.
Or maybe that won’t be... wait for it... indicative at all if it cannot really be a meaningful vote that properly passes the WA?
Has the motion been published yet? AG was saying it’s all very water tight and legal to cut the worm in half and only vote on the pink wriggling half, but is he right?
Surely the EU Withdrawal Act (s13(1)) explicitly requires the WA and PD to be voted on together to be a goal, otherwise it’s all as meaningless as one of those balls in the onion sack that don’t count because of offside flag?
Keen to hear your opinion. But it looks clear cut, you can’t cut it in half and achieve anything meaningful voting on just half of it.
If AG is wrong how legally sound this is, surely he and Leader of the House should both resign for this misleading shambles? The Daily Mail at the very least would have been made into complete mugs with their front page? If not legally sound as a MV is this the most gratuitous attempt in history to mislead parliament
As, I think George Osborne said about 2 years ago.
Incredible.
2 years and nothing has changed.
Osborne said he voted for her to be leader when he was still an MP, so his opinion of her can’t have been that bad at the time.
Leadsom was the alternative.
Good grief, I’d forgotten that. Remarkable that the last two big party leadership elections have featured such luminaries as MayDay, Leadhead, CorBlimey and a bloke people keep calling Owen Jones.
Give it another five years and it'll be Chris Williamson and Andrew Bridgen facing off at PMQs. There's so much more of this still to look forward to.
When do we get Rebecca Long-Bailey and Andrea Jenkyns ?
As, I think George Osborne said about 2 years ago.
Incredible.
2 years and nothing has changed.
Osborne said he voted for her to be leader when he was still an MP, so his opinion of her can’t have been that bad at the time.
Leadsom was the alternative.
Good grief, I’d forgotten that. Remarkable that the last two big party leadership elections have featured such luminaries as MayDay, Leadhead, CorBlimey and a bloke people keep calling Owen Jones.
Give it another five years and it'll be Chris Williamson and Andrew Bridgen facing off at PMQs. There's so much more of this still to look forward to.
When do we get Rebecca Long-Bailey and Andrea Jenkyns ?
The latter has a problem finding a safe seat me thinks.
I do wonder about the mindsets of Mogg, Baker, Jenkin and what's alleged to be the 'brains' in the ERG.
When they find themselves voting alongside hundreds of Remainer MPs do they ever think "either they're our useful idiots or we're they're useful idiots" and then worry that they might not be as clever as they thought they were ?
As, I think George Osborne said about 2 years ago.
Incredible.
2 years and nothing has changed.
Osborne said he voted for her to be leader when he was still an MP, so his opinion of her can’t have been that bad at the time.
Leadsom was the alternative.
Good grief, I’d forgotten that. Remarkable that the last two big party leadership elections have featured such luminaries as MayDay, Leadhead, CorBlimey and a bloke people keep calling Owen Jones.
Leadhead may be back for another run.
Perhaps we could have bets on which Cabinet Minister is behind the “Fuck knows/Living Dead” comment.
Fuck knows sounds like a Leader of HoC comment, as she tries to write a shopping list of House business.
Living Dead is someone challenging their inner Osborne. Hancock?
Papers like the mail are making out it’s all very meaningful.
At least MV 2.5 will be interesting to see how many Spartans are still standing, how many grand wizards are still with them, and how many Labour are huddled in there with them.
Or maybe that won’t be... wait for it... indicative at all if it cannot really be a meaningful vote that properly passes the WA?
Has the motion been published yet? AG was saying it’s all very water tight and legal to cut the worm in half and only vote on the pink wriggling half, but is he right?
Surely the EU Withdrawal Act (s13(1)) explicitly requires the WA and PD to be voted on together to be a goal, otherwise it’s all as meaningless as one of those balls in the onion sack that don’t count because of offside flag?
Keen to hear your opinion. But it looks clear cut, you can’t cut it in half and achieve anything meaningful voting on just half of it.
If AG is wrong how legally sound this is, surely he and Leader of the House should both resign for this misleading shambles? The Daily Mail at the very least would have been made into complete mugs with their front page? If not legally sound as a MV is this the most gratuitous attempt in history to mislead parliament
It will satisfy the EU for an extension to 22nd May (perhaps although that might be legally dodgy) but what it does not allow is for Parliament to ratify the WA. There would still need to be a meaningful vote to allow that as per S13(1) of the EU (Withdrawal) Act 2018.
I do wonder about the mindsets of Mogg, Baker, Jenkin and what's alleged to be the 'brains' in the ERG.
When they find themselves voting alongside hundreds of Remainer MPs do they ever think "either they're our useful idiots or we're they're useful idiots" and then worry that they might not be as clever as they thought they were ?
When we are still in the EU in March 2021 do you think they will re-evaluate their decision?
Papers like the mail are making out it’s all very meaningful.
At least MV 2.5 will be interesting to see how many Spartans are still standing, how many grand wizards are still with them, and how many Labour are huddled in there with them.
Or maybe that won’t be... wait for it... indicative at all if it cannot really be a meaningful vote that properly passes the WA?
Has the motion been published yet? AG was saying it’s all very water tight and legal to cut the worm in half and only vote on the pink wriggling half, but is he right?
Surely the EU Withdrawal Act (s13(1)) explicitly requires the WA and PD to be voted on together to be a goal, otherwise it’s all as meaningless as one of those balls in the onion sack that don’t count because of offside flag?
Keen to hear your opinion. But it looks clear cut, you can’t cut it in half and achieve anything meaningful voting on just half of it.
If AG is wrong how legally sound this is, surely he and Leader of the House should both resign for this misleading shambles? The Daily Mail at the very least would have been made into complete mugs with their front page? If not legally sound as a MV is this the most gratuitous attempt in history to mislead parliament
Tomorrow's vote is not designed to fulfil s13(1) EUWA. It's designed solely to kick the can from 12 April to 22 May.
The PM still has time to call the whips and make it a confidence vote. It's a hail Mary pass, it's a 90-foot buzzer-beater, it will make for SCENES, but she must know by now that it's the only way to get the deal.
I do wonder about the mindsets of Mogg, Baker, Jenkin and what's alleged to be the 'brains' in the ERG.
When they find themselves voting alongside hundreds of Remainer MPs do they ever think "either they're our useful idiots or we're they're useful idiots" and then worry that they might not be as clever as they thought they were ?
It's not the destination for them, it's the journey. They want to be patriotically outraged.
As, I think George Osborne said about 2 years ago.
Incredible.
2 years and nothing has changed.
Osborne said he voted for her to be leader when he was still an MP, so his opinion of her can’t have been that bad at the time.
Leadsom was the alternative.
Good grief, I’d forgotten that. Remarkable that the last two big party leadership elections have featured such luminaries as MayDay, Leadhead, CorBlimey and a bloke people keep calling Owen Jones.
Leadhead may be back for another run.
Available to back at 25 on Betfair Exchange.
Depressingly, given how looney the Tory party is these days, this looks like quite good value. (After all, she was the first British woman in space.)
Dear God, Glad I am just green on her.
I half want her to become Prime Minister just so that we can have endless jokes about her having discovered penicillin, invented the Internet, decoded Enigma, demolished the Berlin Wall, won Britain's Got Talent (three times), retaken the Falklands and eradicated malaria, all while raising a whole brood of healthy bouncing sprogs.
I do wonder about the mindsets of Mogg, Baker, Jenkin and what's alleged to be the 'brains' in the ERG.
When they find themselves voting alongside hundreds of Remainer MPs do they ever think "either they're our useful idiots or we're they're useful idiots" and then worry that they might not be as clever as they thought they were ?
When we are still in the EU in March 2021 do you think they will re-evaluate their decision?
Apparently Jenkin is guilt ridden for not opposing Maastricht so to make up for it is now opposing the WA.
Mogg and Baker are excessively religious so they will go all Old Testament Prophet.
As, I think George Osborne said about 2 years ago.
Incredible.
2 years and nothing has changed.
Osborne said he voted for her to be leader when he was still an MP, so his opinion of her can’t have been that bad at the time.
Leadsom was the alternative.
Good grief, I’d forgotten that. Remarkable that the last two big party leadership elections have featured such luminaries as MayDay, Leadhead, CorBlimey and a bloke people keep calling Owen Jones.
Give it another five years and it'll be Chris Williamson and Andrew Bridgen facing off at PMQs. There's so much more of this still to look forward to.
When do we get Rebecca Long-Bailey and Andrea Jenkyns ?
The latter has a problem finding a safe seat me thinks.
M&O is becoming safer for the Conservatives with every new housing development.
Its a long way from being safe Conservative yet but we're a long way from a Labour overall majority at present.
As, I think George Osborne said about 2 years ago.
Incredible.
2 years and nothing has changed.
Osborne said he voted for her to be leader when he was still an MP, so his opinion of her can’t have been that bad at the time.
Leadsom was the alternative.
Good grief, I’d forgotten that. Remarkable that the last two big party leadership elections have featured such luminaries as MayDay, Leadhead, CorBlimey and a bloke people keep calling Owen Jones.
Leadhead may be back for another run.
Available to back at 25 on Betfair Exchange.
Depressingly, given how looney the Tory party is these days, this looks like quite good value. (After all, she was the first British woman in space.)
Dear God, Glad I am just green on her.
I half want her to become Prime Minister just so that we can have endless jokes about her having discovered penicillin, invented the Internet, decoded Enigma, demolished the Berlin Wall, won Britain's Got Talent (three times), retaken the Falklands and eradicated malaria, all while raising a whole brood of healthy bouncing sprogs.
Surely shome mistake (ed). You are referring to UKIP leader Paul Nuthall?
As, I think George Osborne said about 2 years ago.
Incredible.
2 years and nothing has changed.
Osborne said he voted for her to be leader when he was still an MP, so his opinion of her can’t have been that bad at the time.
Leadsom was the alternative.
Good grief, I’d forgotten that. Remarkable that the last two big party leadership elections have featured such luminaries as MayDay, Leadhead, CorBlimey and a bloke people keep calling Owen Jones.
Leadhead may be back for another run.
Available to back at 25 on Betfair Exchange.
Depressingly, given how looney the Tory party is these days, this looks like quite good value. (After all, she was the first British woman in space.)
Dear God, Glad I am just green on her.
I half want her to become Prime Minister just so that we can have endless jokes about her having discovered penicillin, invented the Internet, decoded Enigma, demolished the Berlin Wall, won Britain's Got Talent (three times), retaken the Falklands and eradicated malaria, all while raising a whole brood of healthy bouncing sprogs.
Surely shome mistake (ed). You are referring to UKIP leader Paul Nuthall?
I do wonder about the mindsets of Mogg, Baker, Jenkin and what's alleged to be the 'brains' in the ERG.
When they find themselves voting alongside hundreds of Remainer MPs do they ever think "either they're our useful idiots or we're they're useful idiots" and then worry that they might not be as clever as they thought they were ?
It's not the destination for them, it's the journey. They want to be patriotically outraged.
Its a journey to an EVENT - a Wagnerian apocalyptic gotterdammerung - its Frodo's quest to Mount Doom.
Whereas to those with sense Leaving the EU should be a process to a non-event (they all lived happily ever after).
1. Back WA tomorrow 2. Govt benches go and play xbox / decide next leader / watch the IPL until 12 April 3. Further extension and revocation then both impossible because no Euro Elections 4. Deal (incorporated into WA bill before May 22) or no deal (since passing the WA alone doesn't pass the s13(1) test) duke it out.
1. Back WA tomorrow 2. Govt benches go and play xbox / decide next leader / watch the IPL until 12 April 3. Further extension and revocation then both impossible because no Euro Elections 4. Deal (incorporated into WA bill before May 22) or no deal (since passing the WA alone doesn't pass the s13(1) test) duke it out.
Spoiler: deal.
I'd be surprised if they can hold the Remain end of the Tory party for this. How is the British government going to do trade deals with the rest of the world if they're playing silly buggers with an agreement they made two weeks ago?
1. Back WA tomorrow 2. Govt benches go and play xbox / decide next leader / watch the IPL until 12 April 3. Further extension and revocation then both impossible because no Euro Elections 4. Deal (incorporated into WA bill before May 22) or no deal (since passing the WA alone doesn't pass the s13(1) test) duke it out.
Spoiler: deal.
I'd be surprised if they can hold the Remain end of the Tory party for this. How is the British government going to do trade deals with the rest of the world if they're playing silly buggers with an agreement they made two weeks ago?
I'd be surprised if they could hold either end of the Tory party together for this, which is why they should be taking my advice and making it a confidence motion too.
I'd put very little stock in the "dicking about with trade deals makes you an unattractive trade deal counterparty" line: arguably the two biggest dicker-abouters right now are still two of the most attractive FTA scalps; China and the US. Countries will still continue to seek deals in their own Ricardian comparative advantage.
1. Back WA tomorrow 2. Govt benches go and play xbox / decide next leader / watch the IPL until 12 April 3. Further extension and revocation then both impossible because no Euro Elections 4. Deal (incorporated into WA bill before May 22) or no deal (since passing the WA alone doesn't pass the s13(1) test) duke it out.
Spoiler: deal.
I'd be surprised if they can hold the Remain end of the Tory party for this. How is the British government going to do trade deals with the rest of the world if they're playing silly buggers with an agreement they made two weeks ago?
I'd be surprised if they could hold either end of the Tory party together for this, which is why they should be taking my advice and making it a confidence motion too.
I'd put very little stock in the "dicking about with trade deals makes you an unattractive trade deal counterparty" line: arguably the two biggest dicker-abouters right now are still two of the most attractive FTA scalps; China and the US. Countries will still continue to seek deals in their own Ricardian comparative advantage.
They can't make it a confidence motion without the DUP on board.
In the 1980s the free world was led by close allies Thatcher and Reagan, as we move into the 2020s could the free world be led by close allies Johnson and Trump?
He also says of May 'Well, she's a very nice lady, she's a friend of mine. I hope she does well. I hope the Brexit movement and everything happening there goes very well. She's tough, she's in there fighting'
Of Boris Trump said 'I like Boris a lot. He's a friend of mine'
He also says of May 'Well, she's a very nice lady, she's a friend of mine. I hope she does well. I hope the Brexit movement and everything happening there goes very well. She's tough, she's in there fighting'
Of Boris Trump said 'I like Boris a lot. He's a friend of mine'
He also says of May 'Well, she's a very nice lady, she's a friend of mine. I hope she does well. I hope the Brexit movement and everything happening there goes very well. She's tough, she's in there fighting'
Of Boris Trump said 'I like Boris a lot. He's a friend of mine'
Classic Donald.
Does sound though he would prefer Boris to be PM but Theresa can be the tea lady and pop in with the jam and scones and Earl Grey half way through his meeting with BoJo
Q1. On a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 means 'I completely support Scotland becoming independent' and 10 means 'I completely support Scotland staying part of the UK'
2014 Voted YES / NO to Independence
0-2 (i.e top 3 Indy): 58 / 5 10-8 (i.e. top 3 stay UK): 25 / 80
1. Back WA tomorrow 2. Govt benches go and play xbox / decide next leader / watch the IPL until 12 April 3. Further extension and revocation then both impossible because no Euro Elections 4. Deal (incorporated into WA bill before May 22) or no deal (since passing the WA alone doesn't pass the s13(1) test) duke it out.
Spoiler: deal.
I'd be surprised if they can hold the Remain end of the Tory party for this. How is the British government going to do trade deals with the rest of the world if they're playing silly buggers with an agreement they made two weeks ago?
I'd be surprised if they could hold either end of the Tory party together for this, which is why they should be taking my advice and making it a confidence motion too.
I'd put very little stock in the "dicking about with trade deals makes you an unattractive trade deal counterparty" line: arguably the two biggest dicker-abouters right now are still two of the most attractive FTA scalps; China and the US. Countries will still continue to seek deals in their own Ricardian comparative advantage.
They can't make it a confidence motion without the DUP on board.
The PM just has to say 'this is a confidence motion. It fails, I'm off to the Palace.' What's the DUP going to do? End confidence and supply? Empty threat. Might as well get it through and keep their influence.
I have little time or respect for Jacob Rees Mogg and happily his pompous description of the UK as a "vassal state" is being turned back on him, to successfully ridicule him. But to argue that in using that phrase he "whipped up hatred" is to my mind a stretch too far.
If you accuse someone of hyperbole, don't weaken your position by committing the same offence yourself.
It's less than 2 years since the Tories had a 50% to 25% lead in the opinion polls. How did they get from there to here?
The Conservatives chose to posture rather than do proper preparation with attention to detail.
Also they tried to have an honest debate about paying for social care, which upset a lot of people. (Politicians will probably lie about it in future).
It's less than 2 years since the Tories had a 50% to 25% lead in the opinion polls. How did they get from there to here?
The Conservatives chose to posture rather than do proper preparation with attention to detail.
Also they tried to have an honest debate about paying for social care, which upset a lot of people. (Politicians will probably lie about it in future).
Maybe we will one day have a social care system where all assets are treated equally.
Why should someone who lives in a £3 million house and has £22,000 of savings and lives on a state pension get free home care.
But someone who rents a council flat and inherits £40,000 in cash from a friend and also lives on a state pension have to pay the full cost of their home care - despite the fact they own barely 1% of the assets of the former.
All so the 65 year old kids of the former can get a bigger inheritance - while the kids of the latter inherit next to nothing?!
Maybe when we care more about our elderly people with dementia than we do about inheriting their expensive houses perhaps social care in this country might improve for the better - and we can have a sensible debate on how to fund it!
It's less than 2 years since the Tories had a 50% to 25% lead in the opinion polls. How did they get from there to here?
The Conservatives chose to posture rather than do proper preparation with attention to detail.
Also they tried to have an honest debate about paying for social care, which upset a lot of people. (Politicians will probably lie about it in future).
Sorry but that was total hubris.
The time to start an "honest debate" is not in the middle of an election campaign with zero planning or forethought. You start an "honest debate" in the middle of Parliament with reports, planning etc then maybe once the groundwork is set put that in the manifesto.
It's less than 2 years since the Tories had a 50% to 25% lead in the opinion polls. How did they get from there to here?
The Conservatives chose to posture rather than do proper preparation with attention to detail.
Also they tried to have an honest debate about paying for social care, which upset a lot of people. (Politicians will probably lie about it in future).
Maybe we will one day have a social care system where all assets are treated equally.
Why should someone who lives in a £3 million house and has £22,000 of savings and lives on a state pension get free home care.
But someone who rents a council flat and inherits £40,000 in cash from a friend and also lives on a state pension have to pay the full cost of their home care - despite the fact they own barely 1% of the assets of the former.
All so the 65 year old kids of the former can get a bigger inheritance - while the kids of the latter inherit next to nothing?!
Maybe when we care more about our elderly people with dementia than we do about inheriting their expensive houses perhaps social care in this country might improve for the better - and we can have a sensible debate on how to fund it!
That person who lives in a £3 million house will have to sell the house and virtually all of it will be liable for care costs if they need residential care, that person who rents a council flat will get to keep the majority of that £40,000 cash whether they need residential or at home care
It's less than 2 years since the Tories had a 50% to 25% lead in the opinion polls. How did they get from there to here?
The Conservatives chose to posture rather than do proper preparation with attention to detail.
Also they tried to have an honest debate about paying for social care, which upset a lot of people. (Politicians will probably lie about it in future).
Maybe we will one day have a social care system where all assets are treated equally.
Why should someone who lives in a £3 million house and has £22,000 of savings and lives on a state pension get free home care.
But someone who rents a council flat and inherits £40,000 in cash from a friend and also lives on a state pension have to pay the full cost of their home care - despite the fact they own barely 1% of the assets of the former.
All so the 65 year old kids of the former can get a bigger inheritance - while the kids of the latter inherit next to nothing?!
Maybe when we care more about our elderly people with dementia than we do about inheriting their expensive houses perhaps social care in this country might improve for the better - and we can have a sensible debate on how to fund it!
That person who lives in a £3 million house will have to sell the house and put virtually all of it toward care costs if they need residential care, that person who rents a council flat will get to keep the majority of that £40,000 cash will still keep most of it whether they need residential or at home care
No they won't - another myth.
The council would simply place a charge on the property and the elderly person could still go on living their quite happily without any cost falling on them personally until they die.
The estate would bear the costs once they die - and maybe the 65 year old kids might only get a £2.9 million inheritance instead of a £3 million one. But perhaps that better funded local authority might be able to afford better care for everyone in need - including them!
I merely argue that each person is means tested equally - and all assets are counted equally. Because you can of course turn a house into cash - when you inherit it.
Clearly you fell for some of the myths too - because in the end opposition to the dementia tax was about pure greed and wanting bigger inheritances. Improving care for the elderly and those with dementia was never the real objection at all! It was a very sad spectacle all round - but then I suppose Labour does poll well with the well off asset rich London property owning classes!
I'd be surprised if they could hold either end of the Tory party together for this, which is why they should be taking my advice and making it a confidence motion too.
I'd put very little stock in the "dicking about with trade deals makes you an unattractive trade deal counterparty" line: arguably the two biggest dicker-abouters right now are still two of the most attractive FTA scalps; China and the US. Countries will still continue to seek deals in their own Ricardian comparative advantage.
I think people have explained this to you before but the government can't make this a confidence motion because the FPTP only allows specifically-worded, standalone motions.
As far making yourself an unattractive negotiating partner goes the US and China both have a lot of negotiating clout because of the size of their markets (in China's case, including its future size). No disrespect to Britain, but it doesn't have the economic scale to screw around with its counterparties like they do.
And even despite this, I don't think China has managed to sign a lot of FTAs??? For example, the TPP is specifically designed by China's neighbours to create a trading bloc that isn't centered around China.
The PM just has to say 'this is a confidence motion. It fails, I'm off to the Palace.' What's the DUP going to do? End confidence and supply? Empty threat. Might as well get it through and keep their influence.
What the DUP would do would be carry on voting the way they were going to vote, and let TMay resign if she wants to. Parliament will still be there, and there's no shortage of ambitious Conservative MPs who'd be happy to take her job and carry on governing with the DUP's help.
She could instead threaten to ask Jeremy Corbyn to help her vote through an early election, but they'd almost definitely call her bluff and if they do, these don't really seem like the most propitious circumstances to fight one.
It's less than 2 years since the Tories had a 50% to 25% lead in the opinion polls. How did they get from there to here?
The Conservatieparation with attention to detail.
Also they tried are, which upset a ure).
Maybe wefund it!
That person who lives in a £3 me care
No they won't - another myth.
The council would simply place a charge on the property and the elderly person could still go on living their quite happily without any cost falling on them personally until they die.
The estate would bear the costs once they die - and maybe the 65 year old kids might only get a £2.9 million inheritance instead of a £3 million one. But perhaps that better funded local authority might be able to afford better care for everyone in need - including them!
I merely argue that each person is means tested equally - and all assets are counted equally. Because you can of course turn a house into cash - when you inherit it.
Clearly you fell for some of the myths too - because in the end opposition to the dementia tax was about pure greed and wanting bigger inheritances. Improving care for the elderly and those with dementia was never the real objection at all! It was a very sad spectacle all round - but then I suppose Labour does poll well with the well off asset rich London property owning classes!
If they needed a longer period of residential care it could cost significantly more than that and a valued family home perhaps passed down over generations could be lost. Not everyone who inherits a home want a to sell it, many want to live in it.
I am a Tory and believe in inheritance and inherited wealth, it is not greed it is building up wealth and assets for one's family and passing them down to the next generation. The dementia tax was not a Tory policy on any definition and was rightly scrapped, the home should only be liable for residential care costs not for at home care costs when you are still living in it or never moved out of it.
I also supported Osborne's raising of the inheritance tax threshold to £1 million so only the very wealthy pay it, something Labour and the LDs want to reverse. The Tories should believe in keeping taxes low on income and wealth and capital, the Liberals want to tax the former less and the latter more, Labour generally want to increase taxes on both but Corbyn was right to oppose the dementia tax which would have hit millions of average priced home owners and their families if they needed at home care.
Insurance (including higher National Insurance) and annuity policies should be looked at in terms of social care funding models not another dementia tax
It's less than 2 years since the Tories had a 50% to 25% lead in the opinion polls. How did they get from there to here?
The Conservatives chose to posture rather than do proper preparation with attention to detail.
Also they tried to have an honest debate about paying for social care, which upset a lot of people. (Politicians will probably lie about it in future).
Maybe we will one day have a social care system where all assets are treated equally.
Why should someone who lives in a £3 million house and has £22,000 of savings and lives on a state pension get free home care.
But someone who rents a council flat and inherits £40,000 in cash from a friend and also lives on a state pension have to pay the full cost of their home care - despite the fact they own barely 1% of the assets of the former.
All so the 65 year old kids of the former can get a bigger inheritance - while the kids of the latter inherit next to nothing?!
Maybe when we care more about our elderly people with dementia than we do about inheriting their expensive houses perhaps social care in this country might improve for the better - and we can have a sensible debate on how to fund it!
That person who lives in a £3 million house will have to sell the house and put virtually all of it toward care costs if they need residential care, that person who rents a council flat will get to keep the majority of that £40,000 cash will still keep most of it whether they need residential or at home care
No they won't - another myth.
The council would simply place a charge on the property and the elderly person could still go on living their quite happily without any cost falling on them personally until they die.
The estate would bear the costs once they die - and maybe the 65 year old kids might only get a £2.9 million inheritance instead of a £3 million one. But perhaps that better funded local authority might be able to afford better care for everyone in need - including them!
I merely argue that each person is means tested equally - and all assets are counted equally. Because you can of course turn a house into cash - when you inherit it.
Clearly you fell for some of the myths too - because in the end opposition to the dementia tax was about pure greed and wanting bigger inheritances. Improving care for the elderly and those with dementia was never the real objection at all! It was a very sad spectacle all round - but then I suppose Labour does poll well with the well off asset rich London property owning classes!
Well quite. The idea all assets should not be treated pari passu for care costs is outrageous.
It's less than 2 years since the Tories had a 50% to 25% lead in the opinion polls. How did they get from there to here?
The Conservatives chose to posture rather than do proper preparation with attention to detail.
Also they tried to have an honest debate about paying for social care, which upset a lot of people. (Politicians will probably lie about it in future).
Maybe we will one day have a social care system where all assets are treated equally.
Why should someone who lives in a £3 million house and has £22,000 of savings and lives on a state pension get free home care.
But someone who rents a council flat and inherits £40,000 in cash from a friend and also lives on a state pension have to pay the full cost of their home care - despite the fact they own barely 1% of the assets of the former.
All so the 65 year old kids of the former can get a bigger inheritance - while the kids of the latter inherit next to nothing?!
Maybe when we care more about our elderly people with dementia than we do about inheriting their expensive houses perhaps social care in this country might improve for the better - and we can have a sensible debate on how to fund it!
It's less than 2 years since the Tories had a 50% to 25% lead in the opinion polls. How did they get from there to here?
The Conservatives chose to posture rather than do proper preparation with attention to detail.
Also they tried to have an honest debate about paying for social care, which upset a lot of people. (Politicians will probably lie about it in future).
Maybe we will one day have a social care system where all assets are treated equally.
Why should someone who lives in a £3 million house and has £22,000 of savings and lives on a state pension get free home care.
But someone who rents a council flat and inherits £40,000 in cash from a friend and also lives on a state pension have to pay the full cost of their home care - despite the fact they own barely 1% of the assets of the former.
All so the 65 year old kids of the former can get a bigger inheritance - while the kids of the latter inherit next to nothing?!
Maybe when we care more about our elderly people with dementia than we do about inheriting their expensive houses perhaps social care in this country might improve for the better - and we can have a sensible debate on how to fund it!
It's less than 2 years since the Tories had a 50% to 25% lead in the opinion polls. How did they get from there to here?
The Conservatieparation with attention to detail.
Also they tried are, which upset a ure).
Maybe wefund it!
That person who lives in a £3 me care
The estate would bear the costs once they die - and maybe the 65 year old kids might only get a £2.9 million inheritance instead of a £3 million one. But perhaps that better funded local authority might be able to afford better care for everyone in need - including them!
I merely argue that each person is means tested equally - and all assets are counted equally. Because you can of course turn a house into cash - when you inherit it.
Clearly you fell for some of the myths too - because in the end opposition to the dementia tax was about pure greed and wanting bigger inheritances. Improving care for the elderly and those with dementia was never the real objection at all! It was a very sad spectacle all round - but then I suppose Labour does poll well with the well off asset rich London property owning classes!
If they needed a longer period of residential care it could cost significantly more than that and a valued family home perhaps passed down over generations could be lost. Not everyone who inherits a home want a to sell it, many want to live in it.
I am a Tory and believe in inheritance and inherited wealth, it is not greed it is building up wealth and assets for one's family and passing them down to the next generation. The dementia tax was not a Tory policy on any definition and was rightly scrapped, the home should only be liable for residential care costs not for at home care costs when you are still living in it or never moved out of it.
I also supported Osborne's raising of the inheritance tax threshold to £1 million so only the very wealthy pay it, something Labour and the LDs want to reverse. The Tories should believe in keeping taxes low on income and wealth and capital, the Liberals want to tax the former less and the latter more, Labour generally want to increase taxes on both but Corbyn was right to oppose the dementia tax which would have hit millions of average priced home owners and their families if they needed at home care.
Insurance (including higher National Insurance) and annuity policies should be looked at in terms of social care funding models not another dementia tax
Taking subsidies from the state so that you can protect your inheritance is just wrong. It’s a transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.
Comments
https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2019/03/mark-harper-for-brexit-to-happen-at-all-we-must-now-back-the-deal.html
I remember when Eton's patriarchs were interested in the country and the wider good.
Especially the ones brought up by nanny.
I can see Lab and Tory staying on what they have - hardly in a position to grow; a Brexit brand and a Remain brand getting one each (eg Farage/TIG), and all of them (plus maybe the LibDems) fighting over the last one.
Translation: I want to be CoE. Although I have no idea what I would do other than cut tax for hedge funds.
Incredible.
2 years and nothing has changed.
We might soon see!
What sort of warped mindset could conceive of such a thing?
Though granted subdividing one's currency by 90 is still considerably less perverse than doing so by 100 (*shudders*)
It’s a lonely place with just 40 odd million of us.
For some it has healed now, but then if Gove was on fire, the Cameroons would have poured petrol on him for his betrayal of Dave.
For some that fury has amplified further.
Depressingly, given how looney the Tory party is these days, this looks like quite good value. (After all, she was the first British woman in space.)
https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1111351553363980288
They really deserve contempt.
This was Gove reaching out to Osborne and the Cameroons for his conduct during the referendum.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/16/michael-gove-admits-leave-was-wrong-to-fuel-immigration-fears
When they find themselves voting alongside hundreds of Remainer MPs do they ever think "either they're our useful idiots or we're they're useful idiots" and then worry that they might not be as clever as they thought they were ?
At least MV 2.5 will be interesting to see how many Spartans are still standing, how many grand wizards are still with them, and how many Labour are huddled in there with them.
Or maybe that won’t be... wait for it... indicative at all if it cannot really be a meaningful vote that properly passes the WA?
Has the motion been published yet? AG was saying it’s all very water tight and legal to cut the worm in half and only vote on the pink wriggling half, but is he right?
Surely the EU Withdrawal Act (s13(1)) explicitly requires the WA and PD to be voted on together to be a goal, otherwise it’s all as meaningless as one of those balls in the onion sack that don’t count because of offside flag?
Get your balls (eye variety) around this
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2018/16/section/13/enacted
Keen to hear your opinion. But it looks clear cut, you can’t cut it in half and achieve anything meaningful voting on just half of it.
If AG is wrong how legally sound this is, surely he and Leader of the House should both resign for this misleading shambles? The Daily Mail at the very least would have been made into complete mugs with their front page? If not legally sound as a MV is this the most gratuitous attempt in history to mislead parliament
What a load of Daily Mail crap.
Living Dead is someone challenging their inner Osborne. Hancock?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6862545/Trump-says-likes-Boris-Johnson-hopes-friend-does-Brexit-vote.html
V. helpful.
The PM still has time to call the whips and make it a confidence vote. It's a hail Mary pass, it's a 90-foot buzzer-beater, it will make for SCENES, but she must know by now that it's the only way to get the deal.
Spoiler: she won't do it.
Mogg and Baker are excessively religious so they will go all Old Testament Prophet.
Only the UK decided to declare war on itself.
1m
Clackmannanshire Central By-Election, 1st Prefs;
SNP - 40.9% (+2.6)
Labour - 31.9% (-8.0)
Con - 19.8% (+3.2)
UKIP - 3.3% (+3.3)
Green - 2.5% (-2.7)
Lib Dem - 1.7% (+1.7)
SNP elected at stage 6.
Its a long way from being safe Conservative yet but we're a long way from a Labour overall majority at present.
https://twitter.com/HenryNewman/status/1111387883917574144
Whereas to those with sense Leaving the EU should be a process to a non-event (they all lived happily ever after).
1. Back WA tomorrow
2. Govt benches go and play xbox / decide next leader / watch the IPL until 12 April
3. Further extension and revocation then both impossible because no Euro Elections
4. Deal (incorporated into WA bill before May 22) or no deal (since passing the WA alone doesn't pass the s13(1) test) duke it out.
Spoiler: deal.
I'd put very little stock in the "dicking about with trade deals makes you an unattractive trade deal counterparty" line: arguably the two biggest dicker-abouters right now are still two of the most attractive FTA scalps; China and the US. Countries will still continue to seek deals in their own Ricardian comparative advantage.
https://twitter.com/camusson/status/1111336366049243137
Of Boris Trump said 'I like Boris a lot. He's a friend of mine'
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/competition/10393583
Except its Scottish "LEAVE the UK" voters.
Q1. On a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 means 'I completely support Scotland becoming independent' and 10 means 'I completely support Scotland staying part of the UK'
2014 Voted YES / NO to Independence
0-2 (i.e top 3 Indy): 58 / 5
10-8 (i.e. top 3 stay UK): 25 / 80
I have little time or respect for Jacob Rees Mogg and happily his pompous description of the UK as a "vassal state" is being turned back on him, to successfully ridicule him. But to argue that in using that phrase he "whipped up hatred" is to my mind a stretch too far.
If you accuse someone of hyperbole, don't weaken your position by committing the same offence yourself.
While we may not be leaving the EU we do at least have the release of Dumbo today.
When all seems lost, find your courage and fly away......
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McsWXoXg6Xk
Why should someone who lives in a £3 million house and has £22,000 of savings and lives on a state pension get free home care.
But someone who rents a council flat and inherits £40,000 in cash from a friend and also lives on a state pension have to pay the full cost of their home care - despite the fact they own barely 1% of the assets of the former.
All so the 65 year old kids of the former can get a bigger inheritance - while the kids of the latter inherit next to nothing?!
Maybe when we care more about our elderly people with dementia than we do about inheriting their expensive houses perhaps social care in this country might improve for the better - and we can have a sensible debate on how to fund it!
The time to start an "honest debate" is not in the middle of an election campaign with zero planning or forethought. You start an "honest debate" in the middle of Parliament with reports, planning etc then maybe once the groundwork is set put that in the manifesto.
The council would simply place a charge on the property and the elderly person could still go on living their quite happily without any cost falling on them personally until they die.
The estate would bear the costs once they die - and maybe the 65 year old kids might only get a £2.9 million inheritance instead of a £3 million one. But perhaps that better funded local authority might be able to afford better care for everyone in need - including them!
I merely argue that each person is means tested equally - and all assets are counted equally. Because you can of course turn a house into cash - when you inherit it.
Clearly you fell for some of the myths too - because in the end opposition to the dementia tax was about pure greed and wanting bigger inheritances. Improving care for the elderly and those with dementia was never the real objection at all! It was a very sad spectacle all round - but then I suppose Labour does poll well with the well off asset rich London property owning classes!
As far making yourself an unattractive negotiating partner goes the US and China both have a lot of negotiating clout because of the size of their markets (in China's case, including its future size). No disrespect to Britain, but it doesn't have the economic scale to screw around with its counterparties like they do.
And even despite this, I don't think China has managed to sign a lot of FTAs??? For example, the TPP is specifically designed by China's neighbours to create a trading bloc that isn't centered around China.
She could instead threaten to ask Jeremy Corbyn to help her vote through an early election, but they'd almost definitely call her bluff and if they do, these don't really seem like the most propitious circumstances to fight one.
I am a Tory and believe in inheritance and inherited wealth, it is not greed it is building up wealth and assets for one's family and passing them down to the next generation. The dementia tax was not a Tory policy on any definition and was rightly scrapped, the home should only be liable for residential care costs not for at home care costs when you are still living in it or never moved out of it.
I also supported Osborne's raising of the inheritance tax threshold to £1 million so only the very wealthy pay it, something Labour and the LDs want to reverse. The Tories should believe in keeping taxes low on income and wealth and capital, the Liberals want to tax the former less and the latter more, Labour generally want to increase taxes on both but Corbyn was right to oppose the dementia tax which would have hit millions of average priced home owners and their families if they needed at home care.
Insurance (including higher National Insurance) and annuity policies should be looked at in terms of social care funding models not another dementia tax