So, is the great Brexit capitulation incoming? Get your bets in now
Will we wait to see if a deal (if one is had) is a capitulation (as may well be likely) rather than assume that a deal is, in itself, evidence of capitulation?
Both sides will claim victory, as per normal.
They'll probably simultaneously claim victory to one audience, whilst officially saying it was balanced and even maybe they lost out a little to another, even if it was one sided, so each can help sell it.
tlg86, correct me, but I guess you live in the south in an area that massively benefits from Whitehall making all the decisions that hold down the north?
Manchester was a complete mess prior to the mayoralty. Everything had to be done via informal partnership between the ten (?) boroughs and there was no figurehead to lead the city forward.
The GM mayor is a victory for anti-parochialism (“it’s Salford not Manchester, etc etc”). A similar model should have been imposed in Greater Nottingham and Greater Newcastle and other major cities that are underbounded.
Government policy on the issue was considered throughout 1982, and the Conservative Party put a "promise to scrap the metropolitan county councils" and the GLC, in their manifesto for the 1983 general election.
As was the Northern Powerhouse a policy of the Cameron government which mayors were a major part.
And when asked, the people of Manchester said "no thanks", and yet Cameron and Osborne did it anyway.
You do understand that the Manchester mayor was for a small part of the city with no power and the metro mayor covers the city region with real powers and as such the referendum gives you no insight as to what people wanted?
People want real powers devolved locally, not some bull shit mayor with no powers covering a tiny section of the city.
I'm going to be really annoying and say that I think Paris' mayor, with a very tightly defined area (in London terms bounded by the North Circular) and serious powers is actually quite a good compromise. The reason I like it is because they tend to prioritise people who actually live and work in the city centre, rather than being beholden to various NIMBY outfits and grumpy residents' associations like the London mayor is.
But EU officials, and senior diplomats from Europe’s biggest capitals, say they are relaxed about the U.K.’s posturing, which they say they recognize is necessary for Johnson to be able to sell a compromise to euro-skeptics at home. One official described the current standoff as theatrics. Another called Friday’s statement an expected and artificial provocation.
At some point Johnson has to face the music on Brexit and he seems totally unprepared to do so. Whining "They didn't give us Canada" won't cut it as people find themselves mired in the chaos.
Government policy on the issue was considered throughout 1982, and the Conservative Party put a "promise to scrap the metropolitan county councils" and the GLC, in their manifesto for the 1983 general election.
As was the Northern Powerhouse a policy of the Cameron government which mayors were a major part.
And when asked, the people of Manchester said "no thanks", and yet Cameron and Osborne did it anyway.
Which rather shows the pointlessness of asking. If they thought it was a good idea, and were prepared to do it no matter the vote outcome, they shouldn't have bothered to ask. Democratic outrage, perhaps, but they don't seem to be complaining about it now. It's like when they create unitaries - suddenly otherwise normal people get really intensely attached to their local district council or whatever, but push it through and most people won't care.
IIRC only Bristol said yes in the round of mayoral referendums.
Manchester was a complete mess prior to the mayoralty. Everything had to be done via informal partnership between the ten (?) boroughs and there was no figurehead to lead the city forward.
The GM mayor is a victory for anti-parochialism (“it’s Salford not Manchester, etc etc). A similar model should have been imposed in Greater Nottingham and Greater Newcastle and other major cities that are underbounded.
Only London should have a single figurehead fighting for all the city, not those northern peasants who should be encouraged to have in-fighting and divide and rule.
See the video of Burnham on BBC news earlier, with the news that the government wanted to divide and conquer the 10 boroughs against each other.
Andy Burnham has been elevated to cult meme status, it's such a shame he is not an MP
I chucked a couple of quid on him as next PM at 94/1. Weirder things have happened.
The next PM is likely to be a Tory.
Probably not Sunak after he's just shafted the North.
The Harrying of the North will not be forgotten.
I could see the Tories losing much of the Red Wall under Sunak but then I could see them regaining southern seats like St Albans, Putney, Richmond Park, Enfield Southgate and Battersea and a few Midlands seats like Warwick and Leamington they won under Cameron but have now lost under his leadership to partly make up for it
The Tories re-taking seats in London...?
Under Sunak yes, he has an approval rating of 56% in London and 57% with Remain voters a big contrast with Boris.
Sunak would also make the necessary compromises with the EU for a FTA most likely Boris would not eg on state aid
Had a high approval rating in early July. That was cut-price-Dishy Rishi, not Stingy Sunak.
Who is currently copping the blame for Manchester - Sunak's name isn't being mentioned
Good point. I wonder why not?
Say you are a beleaguered prime minister - colleagues are openly saying you should be replaced by your more competent and more popular chancellor. You have to stand up in a press conference to defend the indefensible policy that (as as we know) originated with that chancellor. Wouldn't you want to say, actually it's his policy?
Because it invites the obvious response: “You’re the PM. If you don’t like the policy, change it or sack him. And if you can’t do that, you’re weak.”
Manchester was a complete mess prior to the mayoralty. Everything had to be done via informal partnership between the ten (?) boroughs and there was no figurehead to lead the city forward.
The GM mayor is a victory for anti-parochialism (“it’s Salford not Manchester, etc etc). A similar model should have been imposed in Greater Nottingham and Greater Newcastle and other major cities that are underbounded.
Only London should have a single figurehead fighting for all the city, not those northern peasants who should be encouraged to have in-fighting and divide and rule.
See the video of Burnham on BBC news earlier, with the news that the government wanted to divide and conquer the 10 boroughs against each other.
We need a proper federal UK, unfortunately Cummings has lied and hoodwinked a load of people into believing that is what he will deliver.
But EU officials, and senior diplomats from Europe’s biggest capitals, say they are relaxed about the U.K.’s posturing, which they say they recognize is necessary for Johnson to be able to sell a compromise to euro-skeptics at home. One official described the current standoff as theatrics. Another called Friday’s statement an expected and artificial provocation.
At some point Johnson has to face the music on Brexit and he seems totally unprepared to do so. Whining "They didn't give us Canada" won't cut it as people find themselves mired in the chaos.
One of the problems is that the government may see it in their political interests to try and go for no deal (and blame the EU) instead of the deal which they claim to want but will still be a monumental sh*tshow. People will say, "you spent months negotiating for THIS?". Only exception might be if they agreed an implementation period, but i'm not sure they'll be able to sell that either.
If Biden wins then Starmer will surely feel empowered that boring and dull can win elections again
Even Biden has more charisma than Starmer
Major had less Charisma than either and won in 1992. Charisma is a dump stat in D&D for a reason. It can only get you so far before you end up in front of a troll that wants to eat you and isn't interested in your romantic poetry.
If Biden wins then Starmer will surely feel empowered that boring and dull can win elections again
Don't buy into this "charisma" rubbish. If the economy is on its knees and the Conservatives are blamed for it, Elvis could be the incumbent Tory Prime Minister,and he would lose to anyone, even someone with a charisma-by-pass
Government policy on the issue was considered throughout 1982, and the Conservative Party put a "promise to scrap the metropolitan county councils" and the GLC, in their manifesto for the 1983 general election.
As was the Northern Powerhouse a policy of the Cameron government which mayors were a major part.
And when asked, the people of Manchester said "no thanks", and yet Cameron and Osborne did it anyway.
You do understand that the Manchester mayor was for a small part of the city with no power and the metro mayor covers the city region with real powers and as such the referendum gives you no insight as to what people wanted?
People want real powers devolved locally, not some bull shit mayor with no powers covering a tiny section of the city.
I'm going to be really annoying and say that I think Paris' mayor, with a very tightly defined area (in London terms bounded by the North Circular) and serious powers is actually quite a good compromise. The reason I like it is because they tend to prioritise people who actually live and work in the city centre, rather than being beholden to various NIMBY outfits and grumpy residents' associations like the London mayor is.
So the London mayoralty should exclude Ealing, Wimbledon, Chingford, Streatham etc etc?
No. These are London suburbs that are rightly part and parcel of a great city.
Government policy on the issue was considered throughout 1982, and the Conservative Party put a "promise to scrap the metropolitan county councils" and the GLC, in their manifesto for the 1983 general election.
As was the Northern Powerhouse a policy of the Cameron government which mayors were a major part.
And when asked, the people of Manchester said "no thanks", and yet Cameron and Osborne did it anyway.
You do understand that the Manchester mayor was for a small part of the city with no power and the metro mayor covers the city region with real powers and as such the referendum gives you no insight as to what people wanted?
People want real powers devolved locally, not some bull shit mayor with no powers covering a tiny section of the city.
I'm going to be really annoying and say that I think Paris' mayor, with a very tightly defined area (in London terms bounded by the North Circular) and serious powers is actually quite a good compromise. The reason I like it is because they tend to prioritise people who actually live and work in the city centre, rather than being beholden to various NIMBY outfits and grumpy residents' associations like the London mayor is.
So the London mayoralty should exclude Ealing, Wimbledon, Chingford, Streatham etc etc?
No. These are London suburbs that are rightly part and parcel of a great city.
Manchester was a complete mess prior to the mayoralty. Everything had to be done via informal partnership between the ten (?) boroughs and there was no figurehead to lead the city forward.
The GM mayor is a victory for anti-parochialism (“it’s Salford not Manchester, etc etc). A similar model should have been imposed in Greater Nottingham and Greater Newcastle and other major cities that are underbounded.
Only London should have a single figurehead fighting for all the city, not those northern peasants who should be encouraged to have in-fighting and divide and rule.
See the video of Burnham on BBC news earlier, with the news that the government wanted to divide and conquer the 10 boroughs against each other.
Bit bemused by this idea that charisma is now important, we've voted for charisma and it's been a disaster.
How about some basic competence and ability to stand if front of the cameras and explain a policy in a way that actually informs the public rather than just using meaningless cliches or focus grouped phrases?
The Tories risk a repeat of the Section 28 disaster here, trying to ban things being talked about in schools is always a bad idea. Teachers are just going to avoid any discussion of contentious ideas, so kids will be left with no context, no adult guidance, no opportunity to debate and think. Kids are not attracted to BLM because of their teachers, but their teachers could help them to think the issues through carefully, with nuance and context. Without that they will just get it from YouTube. When I was at school my favourite teacher was utterly reactionary, used to lambast socialists and constantly try to pick fights with left wing pupils. But the fact that he relished political arguments made him a great teacher. At no point did he indoctrinate me or anyone else, but he helped us think through our developing political views. No doubt he'd be afraid to express any views now.
Andy Burnham has been elevated to cult meme status, it's such a shame he is not an MP
I chucked a couple of quid on him as next PM at 94/1. Weirder things have happened.
The next PM is likely to be a Tory.
Probably not Sunak after he's just shafted the North.
The Harrying of the North will not be forgotten.
I could see the Tories losing much of the Red Wall under Sunak but then I could see them regaining southern seats like St Albans, Putney, Richmond Park, Enfield Southgate and Battersea and a few Midlands seats like Warwick and Leamington they won under Cameron but have now lost under his leadership to partly make up for it
The Tories re-taking seats in London...?
Under Sunak yes, he has an approval rating of 56% in London and 57% with Remain voters a big contrast with Boris.
Sunak would also make the necessary compromises with the EU for a FTA most likely Boris would not eg on state aid
Had a high approval rating in early July. That was cut-price-Dishy Rishi, not Stingy Sunak.
Who is currently copping the blame for Manchester - Sunak's name isn't being mentioned
Good point. I wonder why not?
Say you are a beleaguered prime minister - colleagues are openly saying you should be replaced by your more competent and more popular chancellor. You have to stand up in a press conference to defend the indefensible policy that (as as we know) originated with that chancellor. Wouldn't you want to say, actually it's his policy?
Because it invites the obvious response: “You’re the PM. If you don’t like the policy, change it or sack him. And if you can’t do that, you’re weak.”
It's remarkable how often PMs, and their media and political surrogates, use it as an excuse. Chancellors forcing things on PMs is often asserted beyond the point of plausibility, as in when proposals are made in a budget which cause a media stink and are then rolled back in such a way that people make clear the PMs wanted nothing to do with it, when they must have signed it off.
I really cannot think in recent times of a pair other than Cameron and Osborne who didn't seem to be at odds, and there were probably reports of it at the time and I just don't remember it, necause they seemed so obviously in sync.
If Biden wins then Starmer will surely feel empowered that boring and dull can win elections again
Don't buy into this "charisma" rubbish. If the economy is on its knees and the Conservatives are blamed for it, Elvis could be the incumbent Tory Prime Minister,and he would lose to anyone, even someone with a charisma-by-pass
Yes, getting restaurants emailing me stating "working lunches" are ok indoors. Just spend five minutes at the start discussing if they want to invest in a potential new business venture and its all hunky dory.
The Tories risk a repeat of the Section 28 disaster here, trying to ban things being talked about in schools is always a bad idea. Teachers are just going to avoid any discussion of contentious ideas, so kids will be left with no context, no adult guidance, no opportunity to debate and think. Kids are not attracted to BLM because of their teachers, but their teachers could help them to think the issues through carefully, with nuance and context. Without that they will just get it from YouTube. When I was at school my favourite teacher was utterly reactionary, used to lambast socialists and constantly try to pick fights with left wing pupils. But the fact that he relished political arguments made him a great teacher. At no point did he indoctrinate me or anyone else, but he helped us think through our developing political views. No doubt he'd be afraid to express any views now.
Surely the point she as making was the teaching of such political things as uncontested fact was what would be wrong, not that they could not be taught, discussed and debated?
Mr Gove’s claim that Brexit was like moving to a new house — initially a hassle but ultimately worth it — was received “like a bucket of cold sick”, according to one participant. Another said it was “rehashed boosterism”. Mr Johnson said he would help business get ready for the change.
I thought we held all the cards and Brexit had no downsides?
The Tories risk a repeat of the Section 28 disaster here, trying to ban things being talked about in schools is always a bad idea. Teachers are just going to avoid any discussion of contentious ideas, so kids will be left with no context, no adult guidance, no opportunity to debate and think. Kids are not attracted to BLM because of their teachers, but their teachers could help them to think the issues through carefully, with nuance and context. Without that they will just get it from YouTube. When I was at school my favourite teacher was utterly reactionary, used to lambast socialists and constantly try to pick fights with left wing pupils. But the fact that he relished political arguments made him a great teacher. At no point did he indoctrinate me or anyone else, but he helped us think through our developing political views. No doubt he'd be afraid to express any views now.
Wait, @HYUFD was a teacher at your school? What a coincidence!
The Tories risk a repeat of the Section 28 disaster here, trying to ban things being talked about in schools is always a bad idea. Teachers are just going to avoid any discussion of contentious ideas, so kids will be left with no context, no adult guidance, no opportunity to debate and think. Kids are not attracted to BLM because of their teachers, but their teachers could help them to think the issues through carefully, with nuance and context. Without that they will just get it from YouTube. When I was at school my favourite teacher was utterly reactionary, used to lambast socialists and constantly try to pick fights with left wing pupils. But the fact that he relished political arguments made him a great teacher. At no point did he indoctrinate me or anyone else, but he helped us think through our developing political views. No doubt he'd be afraid to express any views now.
Surely the point she as making was the teaching of such political things as uncontested fact was what would be wrong, not that they could not be taught, discussed and debated?
The reality is people will just steer clear of any discussion at all. One kid misreports what you said and you face a disciplinary.
Yes, getting restaurants emailing me stating "working lunches" are ok indoors. Just spend five minutes at the start discussing if they want to invest in a potential new business venture and its all hunky dory.
A friend from London that where she is (Hampstead) there is absolutely no compliance with the rule of 6 or the one household rule in any of the venues she’s been in.
If Biden wins then Starmer will surely feel empowered that boring and dull can win elections again
Don't buy into this "charisma" rubbish. If the economy is on its knees and the Conservatives are blamed for it, Elvis could be the incumbent Tory Prime Minister,and he would lose to anyone, even someone with a charisma-by-pass
Every election in the last 50 years has been won by the most charismatic candidate except 1970 and 1992 and 2017 (though the latter saw May still lose her majority).
In 1970 the economy was in the doldrums and Wilson lost but in 1992 the economy was also in the doldrums and Major won so a mixed message and Major was more charismatic than Starmer, in 2015 the economy was also still not fully recovered but Cameron won anyway.
The Tories risk a repeat of the Section 28 disaster here, trying to ban things being talked about in schools is always a bad idea. Teachers are just going to avoid any discussion of contentious ideas, so kids will be left with no context, no adult guidance, no opportunity to debate and think. Kids are not attracted to BLM because of their teachers, but their teachers could help them to think the issues through carefully, with nuance and context. Without that they will just get it from YouTube. When I was at school my favourite teacher was utterly reactionary, used to lambast socialists and constantly try to pick fights with left wing pupils. But the fact that he relished political arguments made him a great teacher. At no point did he indoctrinate me or anyone else, but he helped us think through our developing political views. No doubt he'd be afraid to express any views now.
Surely the point she as making was the teaching of such political things as uncontested fact was what would be wrong, not that they could not be taught, discussed and debated?
The reality is people will just steer clear of any discussion at all. One kid misreports what you said and you face a disciplinary.
It's all part of the Tory idea the schools are full of leftie teachers indoctrinating the pupils
Government policy on the issue was considered throughout 1982, and the Conservative Party put a "promise to scrap the metropolitan county councils" and the GLC, in their manifesto for the 1983 general election.
As was the Northern Powerhouse a policy of the Cameron government which mayors were a major part.
And when asked, the people of Manchester said "no thanks", and yet Cameron and Osborne did it anyway.
You do understand that the Manchester mayor was for a small part of the city with no power and the metro mayor covers the city region with real powers and as such the referendum gives you no insight as to what people wanted?
People want real powers devolved locally, not some bull shit mayor with no powers covering a tiny section of the city.
I'm going to be really annoying and say that I think Paris' mayor, with a very tightly defined area (in London terms bounded by the North Circular) and serious powers is actually quite a good compromise. The reason I like it is because they tend to prioritise people who actually live and work in the city centre, rather than being beholden to various NIMBY outfits and grumpy residents' associations like the London mayor is.
So the London mayoralty should exclude Ealing, Wimbledon, Chingford, Streatham etc etc?
No. These are London suburbs that are rightly part and parcel of a great city.
I'm sure the Wimbledon Popular front will be sad, but they'll cope.
Andy Burnham has been elevated to cult meme status, it's such a shame he is not an MP
I chucked a couple of quid on him as next PM at 94/1. Weirder things have happened.
The next PM is likely to be a Tory.
Probably not Sunak after he's just shafted the North.
The Harrying of the North will not be forgotten.
I could see the Tories losing much of the Red Wall under Sunak but then I could see them regaining southern seats like St Albans, Putney, Richmond Park, Enfield Southgate and Battersea and a few Midlands seats like Warwick and Leamington they won under Cameron but have now lost under his leadership to partly make up for it
The Tories re-taking seats in London...?
Under Sunak yes, he has an approval rating of 56% in London and 57% with Remain voters a big contrast with Boris.
Sunak would also make the necessary compromises with the EU for a FTA most likely Boris would not eg on state aid
Had a high approval rating in early July. That was cut-price-Dishy Rishi, not Stingy Sunak.
Who is currently copping the blame for Manchester - Sunak's name isn't being mentioned
Good point. I wonder why not?
Say you are a beleaguered prime minister - colleagues are openly saying you should be replaced by your more competent and more popular chancellor. You have to stand up in a press conference to defend the indefensible policy that (as as we know) originated with that chancellor. Wouldn't you want to say, actually it's his policy?
Because it invites the obvious response: “You’re the PM. If you don’t like the policy, change it or sack him. And if you can’t do that, you’re weak.”
It's remarkable how often PMs, and their media and political surrogates, use it as an excuse. Chancellors forcing things on PMs is often asserted beyond the point of plausibility, as in when proposals are made in a budget which cause a media stink and are then rolled back in such a way that people make clear the PMs wanted nothing to do with it, when they must have signed it off.
I really cannot think in recent times of a pair other than Cameron and Osborne who didn't seem to be at odds, and there were probably reports of it at the time and I just don't remember it, necause they seemed so obviously in sync.
Ozzie told Cameron, "FFS don't hold an EU Referendum, you will lose". At odds, or just sound friendly advice?
Tier 3 is national lockdown by stealth but with none of the financial support.
It’s exactly the sort of dishonesty you expect from a government led by a liar, wh has appointed so many liars to his Cabinet.
If it continues the economic pain will be awful.
Yep. I can't see how we avoid an economic depression now. The reckoning on all this is going to be way beyond anything any of us have seen in our lifetimes.
Cities are being locked down where the case rate is falling. If that's the scientific "advice" then the whole UK will be locked down apart from the Scilly Isles by end of October.
But EU officials, and senior diplomats from Europe’s biggest capitals, say they are relaxed about the U.K.’s posturing, which they say they recognize is necessary for Johnson to be able to sell a compromise to euro-skeptics at home. One official described the current standoff as theatrics. Another called Friday’s statement an expected and artificial provocation.
At some point Johnson has to face the music on Brexit and he seems totally unprepared to do so. Whining "They didn't give us Canada" won't cut it as people find themselves mired in the chaos.
One of the problems is that the government may see it in their political interests to try and go for no deal (and blame the EU) instead of the deal which they claim to want but will still be a monumental sh*tshow. People will say, "you spent months negotiating for THIS?". Only exception might be if they agreed an implementation period, but i'm not sure they'll be able to sell that either.
It's going to be a monumental shitshow either way. No Deal is worse however. Problem is they are STILL talking about Opportunities of Becoming an Independent State. If they warned people a tsunami will hit you on January 1st, for God's sake get ready, (a) people will be less shocked when it does actually hit and (b) might demand the government concede something to the EU to mitigate the damage.
I'm not sure what the betting implications are, other than late shifts in the polls (e.g. after this week's debate) are of diminishing importance. So on balance that's probably good for Biden given his lead.
I think Sunak might repeat Cameron's 2015 performance but I think Tory seats are down from 2019's high point. Fair play, they beat us good.
I genuinely wonder if 2024 will be 2010 repeat but with Labour the largest party.
If Labour lose in 2024 after the combined post-Brexit/ post- Covid s***show, you can hunker down for a lifetime of Conservative governments.
People said the same after 1992, until 1997
What is coming down the track is far, far worse than Black Wednesday. If Labour lose in 2024 it is time to board up the shop and move on.
Only if we go to No Deal with the EU on top of Covid with no vaccine and are still in that scenario in 2024
What do you make of the argument put forward by (say) Phillip that the deal Boris is seeking is so supermodel-thin that it won't make much difference whether a deal happens or not? On one hand, I think he's right, the success or failure of January 2021 depends on having import/export systems working, and zero tariffs are neither here nor there. But I don't see the systems working, and I do see that failure being an extinction-level disaster for the government.
Second, how does Rishi keep clean enough hands to convincingly take over after Johnson and make everything better? If the next act of Brexit goes wrong, isn't he complicit?
If Biden wins then Starmer will surely feel empowered that boring and dull can win elections again
Don't buy into this "charisma" rubbish. If the economy is on its knees and the Conservatives are blamed for it, Elvis could be the incumbent Tory Prime Minister,and he would lose to anyone, even someone with a charisma-by-pass
Every election in the last 50 years has been won by the most charismatic candidate except 1970 and 1992 and 2017 (though the latter saw May still lose her majority).
In 1970 the economy was in the doldrums and Wilson lost but in 1992 the economy was also in the doldrums and Major won so a mixed message and Major was more charismatic than Starmer, in 2015 the economy was also still not fully recovered but Cameron won anyway.
...and the economy won't be in the doldrums in 2024?
Damn, I've inadvertently bought into your ridiculous premise!
I'm not sure what the betting implications are, other than late shifts in the polls (e.g. after this week's debate) are of diminishing importance. So on balance that's probably good for Biden given his lead.
It potentially shows voter enthusiasm. I think there'll be a good turnout, but I'm not sure it tells us much else.
The Tories risk a repeat of the Section 28 disaster here, trying to ban things being talked about in schools is always a bad idea. Teachers are just going to avoid any discussion of contentious ideas, so kids will be left with no context, no adult guidance, no opportunity to debate and think. Kids are not attracted to BLM because of their teachers, but their teachers could help them to think the issues through carefully, with nuance and context. Without that they will just get it from YouTube. When I was at school my favourite teacher was utterly reactionary, used to lambast socialists and constantly try to pick fights with left wing pupils. But the fact that he relished political arguments made him a great teacher. At no point did he indoctrinate me or anyone else, but he helped us think through our developing political views. No doubt he'd be afraid to express any views now.
Surely the point she as making was the teaching of such political things as uncontested fact was what would be wrong, not that they could not be taught, discussed and debated?
The reality is people will just steer clear of any discussion at all. One kid misreports what you said and you face a disciplinary.
It's all part of the Tory idea the schools are full of leftie teachers indoctrinating the pupils
It's so fucking stupid, only a Tory could believe it.
I don't think that Johnson has quite appreciated that this isn't just about Manchester. It's about the Conservatives being seen to be willing to stuff the North in general in its hour of need, and indeed anywhere north of Watford Gap. People in Liverpool and Lancashire won't be castigating Burnham for seeking a slightly better settlement than the paltry one their leaders got. No, they'll be cheering Burnham on. As are those in the North-East and Yorkshire who know they're next in the firing line, followed by the Midlands. This is a government that thinks nothing of throwing billions in lucrative contracts the way of any of the usual outsourcing suspects lining up to profit from coronavirus, in return for services that repeatedly fail to live up to their billing, yet which draws the line at settling for just a paltry £5m extra for Greater Manchester. Desperate people and businesses left to go hang. All the effort that went into winning seats in the Red Wall and promoting the fiction of Levelling Up is being undone before our eyes because Sunak can't find £5m.
The Tories risk a repeat of the Section 28 disaster here, trying to ban things being talked about in schools is always a bad idea. Teachers are just going to avoid any discussion of contentious ideas, so kids will be left with no context, no adult guidance, no opportunity to debate and think. Kids are not attracted to BLM because of their teachers, but their teachers could help them to think the issues through carefully, with nuance and context. Without that they will just get it from YouTube. When I was at school my favourite teacher was utterly reactionary, used to lambast socialists and constantly try to pick fights with left wing pupils. But the fact that he relished political arguments made him a great teacher. At no point did he indoctrinate me or anyone else, but he helped us think through our developing political views. No doubt he'd be afraid to express any views now.
I don't believe schools should promote particular moral or political views, but they should promote civic values and mutual respect. Tackling racism as a topic is absolutely part of that.
Been spotting Betfair stupidity. In both the Alaska and Arkansas Senate race they have it as a Republican vs Dem match up. In neither state is a Democrat running. In Alaska the Republican is facing an Independent. In Arkansas Tom Cotton is facing a Libertarian opponent.
Just lay the Republican. (If you’re determined to bet.)
Just cast my NEC ballot. Avoided the slates - including Pidcock. I fully expect that none of my choices will be elected.
What is exciting is that the voting system has been changed from first N past the post to AV. So less chance of a single slate getting all of the seats. However it is likely to take a week to count the ballots.
Yes, getting restaurants emailing me stating "working lunches" are ok indoors. Just spend five minutes at the start discussing if they want to invest in a potential new business venture and its all hunky dory.
A friend from London that where she is (Hampstead) there is absolutely no compliance with the rule of 6 or the one household rule in any of the venues she’s been in.
As I said last week, I can see lots of London meetings taking place at 4.30pm in the pub.
It’s a great way around it which will help London pubs, not so much those elsewhere, such as your daughter’s.
I do hope she is okay and can somehow hold on. As I wrote in the spring, I was due to visit Cumbria in April for a walking, eating and drinking trip with my mates.
It is quite possible we would have stumbled across the hostelry of Ms Cyclefree Jr.
I don't think that Johnson has quite appreciated that this isn't just about Manchester. It's about the Conservatives being seen to be willing to stuff the North in general in its hour of need, and indeed anywhere north of Watford Gap. People in Liverpool and Lancashire won't be castigating Burnham for seeking a slightly better settlement than the paltry one their leaders got. No, they'll be cheering Burnham on. As are those in the North-East and Yorkshire who know they're next in the firing line, followed by the Midlands. This is a government that thinks nothing of throwing billions in lucrative contracts the way of any of the usual outsourcing suspects lining up to profit from coronavirus, in return for services that repeatedly fail to live up to their billing, yet which draws the line at settling for just a paltry £5m extra for Greater Manchester. Desperate people and businesses left to go hang. All the effort that went into winning seats in the Red Wall and promoting the fiction of Levelling Up is being undone before our eyes because Sunak can't find £5m.
We're due an Opinium poll this weekend.
On the same day it was revealed £7m was spent on re-branding Highways England just 5 years after its previous re-brand. But yeah, yeah, Leftie teachers and that.
I don't think that Johnson has quite appreciated that this isn't just about Manchester. It's about the Conservatives being seen to be willing to stuff the North in general in its hour of need, and indeed anywhere north of Watford Gap. People in Liverpool and Lancashire won't be castigating Burnham for seeking a slightly better settlement than the paltry one their leaders got. No, they'll be cheering Burnham on. As are those in the North-East and Yorkshire who know they're next in the firing line, followed by the Midlands. This is a government that thinks nothing of throwing billions in lucrative contracts the way of any of the usual outsourcing suspects lining up to profit from coronavirus, in return for services that repeatedly fail to live up to their billing, yet which draws the line at settling for just a paltry £5m extra for Greater Manchester. Desperate people and businesses left to go hang. All the effort that went into winning seats in the Red Wall and promoting the fiction of Levelling Up is being undone before our eyes because Sunak can't find £5m.
We're due an Opinium poll this weekend.
On the same day it was revealed £7m was spent on re-branding Highways England just 5 years after its previous re-brand. But yeah, yeah, Leftie teachers and that.
That's the corner the government have painted themselves into.
Every bit of wasteful or foolish spending the government has done or will do (and there will always be some, because people are human) is going to get compared with the £5m they couldn't find for Manchester. Every single one.
Fair? Not entirely. But thems the breaks.
And it really couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of politicians.
Went to my running club for the first time in seven months today. Was going to go last week but it was cancelled due to a covid case ! Small groups, no squash, mandatory to carry a mask (In case of someone getting injured) nevertheless a good way to see a few friends whilst adhering to both the rules and the science
Delusional. Covid and Brexit will define this government. There won’t be any post-anything.
That's a rather unreasonably harsh judgement on the use of a standard cliched term. A great many things have very long lasting effects but we still permit the use of 'Post-X'. Whatever defines this government in historical terms - and I'm sure it will be those two - I think it pretty pointless to critique a label like 'Post-Covid', which at some point there will in fact be, even if it is 'Post-Peak-Covid' only.
There's enough actual things to criticise without us getting sniffy about, in essence, political branding exercises.
Yes, getting restaurants emailing me stating "working lunches" are ok indoors. Just spend five minutes at the start discussing if they want to invest in a potential new business venture and its all hunky dory.
A friend from London that where she is (Hampstead) there is absolutely no compliance with the rule of 6 or the one household rule in any of the venues she’s been in.
As I said last week, I can see lots of London meetings taking place at 4.30pm in the pub.
It’s a great way around it which will help London pubs, not so much those elsewhere, such as your daughter’s.
I do hope she is okay and can somehow hold on. As I wrote in the spring, I was due to visit Cumbria in April for a walking, eating and drinking trip with my mates.
It is quite possible we would have stumbled across the hostelry of Ms Cyclefree Jr.
Well if it still exists when we are finally let out of our homes and you do visit you will get a very warm welcome!
If Tier 2 or 3 is imposed here without support the business is finished. She cannot operate at a loss for months on end. Nor does she want to.
So we are hoping that we are so rural and in such a forgotten part (and Covid has been very low here for months) that we might just make it.
But hope does drain away after a day like today. This government is not just useless. It is actively malicious, partly because it is weak and so has to behave in an authoritarian way to cover up the fact that it has no real idea what it is doing. And partly because of the character of the man who leads it and his advisor. Boris has never been as nice as he has tried to portray himself. Pettiness and revenge and petulance is what you get when someone without integrity or decency is thwarted.
Delusional. Covid and Brexit will define this government. There won’t be any post-anything.
That's a rather unreasonably harsh judgement on the use of a standard cliched term. A great many things have very long lasting effects but we still permit the use of 'Post-X'. Whatever defines this government in historical terms - and I'm sure it will be those two - I think it pretty pointless to critique a label like 'Post-Covid', which at some point there will in fact be, even if it is 'Post-Peak-Covid' only.
There's enough actual things to criticise without us getting sniffy about, in essence, political branding exercises.
I wasn’t criticising the language so much as the idea that Covid will be over any time soon so that Boris could move into other stuff. That seems to me to be optimistic at best, delusional at worst.
Comments
Am I correct?
The GM mayor is a victory for anti-parochialism (“it’s Salford not Manchester, etc etc”). A similar model should have been imposed in Greater Nottingham and Greater Newcastle and other major cities that are underbounded.
https://twitter.com/BBCHelena/status/1318655016643735552
IIRC only Bristol said yes in the round of mayoral referendums.
Charisma doesn’t pay the bills.
And people are sick of it already.
See the video of Burnham on BBC news earlier, with the news that the government wanted to divide and conquer the 10 boroughs against each other.
There will be no other democratic western city of Manchester's size that has a mayor with so limited powers.
No. These are London suburbs that are rightly part and parcel of a great city.
When I was at school my favourite teacher was utterly reactionary, used to lambast socialists and constantly try to pick fights with left wing pupils. But the fact that he relished political arguments made him a great teacher. At no point did he indoctrinate me or anyone else, but he helped us think through our developing political views. No doubt he'd be afraid to express any views now.
I really cannot think in recent times of a pair other than Cameron and Osborne who didn't seem to be at odds, and there were probably reports of it at the time and I just don't remember it, necause they seemed so obviously in sync.
Actual LOL.
If it continues the economic pain will be awful.
There’s a strong case for bringing the likes of Wilmslow and Alderley Edge into the mayoralty.
I used to go out with a girl from Handforth. They think of themselves as Cheshire set but it’s all Manchester economically.
In 1970 the economy was in the doldrums and Wilson lost but in 1992 the economy was also in the doldrums and Major won so a mixed message and Major was more charismatic than Starmer, in 2015 the economy was also still not fully recovered but Cameron won anyway.
That clip of her is superb - remarkable talent.
Cities are being locked down where the case rate is falling. If that's the scientific "advice" then the whole UK will be locked down apart from the Scilly Isles by end of October.
https://electproject.github.io/Early-Vote-2020G/index.html
I'm not sure what the betting implications are, other than late shifts in the polls (e.g. after this week's debate) are of diminishing importance. So on balance that's probably good for Biden given his lead.
Second, how does Rishi keep clean enough hands to convincingly take over after Johnson and make everything better? If the next act of Brexit goes wrong, isn't he complicit?
Damn, I've inadvertently bought into your ridiculous premise!
On point, time after time.
https://twitter.com/GeorgeWParker/status/1318661703920398337?s=20
We're due an Opinium poll this weekend.
(If you’re determined to bet.)
What is exciting is that the voting system has been changed from first N past the post to AV. So less chance of a single slate getting all of the seats. However it is likely to take a week to count the ballots.
It’s a great way around it which will help London pubs, not so much those elsewhere, such as your daughter’s.
I do hope she is okay and can somehow hold on. As I wrote in the spring, I was due to visit Cumbria in April for a walking, eating and drinking trip with my mates.
It is quite possible we would have stumbled across the hostelry of Ms Cyclefree Jr.
But yeah, yeah, Leftie teachers and that.
Every bit of wasteful or foolish spending the government has done or will do (and there will always be some, because people are human) is going to get compared with the £5m they couldn't find for Manchester. Every single one.
Fair? Not entirely. But thems the breaks.
And it really couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of politicians.
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1318671278866399232?s=20
Small groups, no squash, mandatory to carry a mask (In case of someone getting injured) nevertheless a good way to see a few friends whilst adhering to both the rules and the science
There's enough actual things to criticise without us getting sniffy about, in essence, political branding exercises.
If Tier 2 or 3 is imposed here without support the business is finished. She cannot operate at a loss for months on end. Nor does she want to.
So we are hoping that we are so rural and in such a forgotten part (and Covid has been very low here for months) that we might just make it.
But hope does drain away after a day like today. This government is not just useless. It is actively malicious, partly because it is weak and so has to behave in an authoritarian way to cover up the fact that it has no real idea what it is doing. And partly because of the character of the man who leads it and his advisor. Boris has never been as nice as he has tried to portray himself. Pettiness and revenge and petulance is what you get when someone without integrity or decency is thwarted.