This Ridge interview with Johnson just three days before GE2019 looks problematical for the PM – pol
Comments
-
Great post. Genuinely insightful.Yokes said:The problem with the protocol is in the detail, whether deliberate or accidental.
The GFA had two fundamentals for individuals
.
The right of anyone living here to choose their citizenship as Irish or British. Has not changed due to Brexit. I can have two passports if I want by dint of my address.
The concept that you can travel across borders between NI/ROI/GB. This is called the common travel area, has not changed and has been in play for decades EU or no EU. I believe the Brexit agreement left that untouched.
The problem is trade, not free movement of people. That the two have intertwined is one problem, because they shouldn't have been intertwined. In short someone didn't do their detail or someone is doing too much detail.
This shouldn't be an identity issue, its an issue of doing business and for the umpteenth time, NI's biggest market, by far, for trade in and out is GB. That's all there is to it, you have customs regulations and checks on stuff to and from ROI its got a lot smaller impact than what is happening now. Some fucking whizz concluded, however, that this was a bigger problem when the stats on trade would have told you that it wasn't.
Somehow the 'oh my god they will be burning down border posts' shit kicked off. You know how much of that came from the NI parties of all stripes? Actually not a lot. Most of it I heard was from people outside of NI.
Cannot emphasise enough, there was not going to be a return to any major trouble, zero. The usual suspects were there before 31st Dec and are there now, no change. Bit more motivated? Maybe, mass recruitment? Not a fucking chance.
This can be sorted via pragmatic working and we need to take the peace threatening talk out.
Thanks0 -
Your view seems equally patronizing in dismissing the patriotic feelings of the people as if they are sheep.kinabalu said:
Boring! Knew I'd see that. Not what I mean at all. I mean persuade, explain - preach even - rather than just tamely accept the tacitly dim and patronizing view of the British people held by populist politicians of the right. They are in the box seat now but it will soon change. So this is not the time to concede an inch to their inherently dispiriting world view. Flags away. Flags away.Richard_Nabavi said:
Ah, the Brecht solution:kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.
If that is the case, would it not be be simpler,
If the government simply dissolved the people
And elected another?
Not often expressed as clearly as our very own @kinabalu expresses it.
Seems more likely to me that patriotism is more broad than that of populist politicians on the right and how they view it, but you are presuming people who are patriotic must be so in the same way, and that they are duped by those politicians.
Labour dont need to go overboard on flag waving in my view. And they can and should seek to change the country. But they dont need to act like those who say they are patriotic are all sheep of the populist right. Thats just 'eff off and join the Tories' all over again.
Its honestly not hard, i dont know why this issue seems to stir up so much passion.2 -
And yet that threatened peace was the motivation for BJ's botched 'best of both worlds' guff and a border in the Irish Sea; he must have fallen for it to some extent.TimT said:
It always stunned me that anyone even mentioned that peace would be threatened.Yokes said:The problem with the protocol is in the detail, whether deliberate or accidental.
The GFA had two fundamentals for individuals
.
The right of anyone living here to choose their citizenship as Irish or British. Has not changed due to Brexit. I can have two passports if I want by dint of my address.
The concept that you can travel across borders between NI/ROI/GB. This is called the common travel area, has not changed and has been in play for decades EU or no EU. I believe the Brexit agreement left that untouched.
The problem is trade, not free movement of people. That the two have intertwined is one problem, because they shouldn't have been intertwined. In short someone didn't do their detail or someone is doing too much detail.
This shouldn't be an identity issue, its an issue of doing business and for the umpteenth time, NI's biggest market, by far, for trade in and out is GB. That's all there is to it, you have customs regulations and checks on stuff to and from ROI its got a lot smaller impact than what is happening now. Some fucking whizz concluded, however, that this was a bigger problem when the stats on trade would have told you that it wasn't.
Somehow the 'oh my god they will be burning down border posts' shit kicked off. You know how much of that came from the NI parties of all stripes? Actually not a lot. Most of it I heard was from people outside of NI.
Cannot emphasise enough, there was not going to be a return to any major trouble, zero. The usual suspects were there before 31st Dec and are there now, no change. Bit more motivated? Maybe, mass recruitment? Not a fucking chance.
This can be sorted via pragmatic working and we need to take the peace threatening talk out.0 -
Liz Truss for PM then?Luckyguy1983 said:
I am not sure why anyone who aspires to govern the UK would particularly want the broad mass of people to care less about its success. The solution is not to hope people become less patriotic, but to advertise 'real' patriotism - the kind that shuns flag waving pomposity but quietly toils away till 2am wrestling with how to overcome non-tariff barriers etc. etc. REAL Government, REAL Patriotism.kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:1 -
PENDENT-PUNDIT ALERT!Mexicanpete said:
It is a big problem for Labour, as it was for Dems in the US for most of the last 4 years. And that worked out OK in the end without Biden wrapping himself in the Stars n' Bars.CarlottaVance said:
The Stars n' Bars was the official flag of the Confederate States of America.
This was NOT the famous CSA battle flag aka the Stainless Banner (the one with 13 stars on St Andrew's cross) though that was incorporated into the last version of the official flag.
The US flag is the Stars n' Stripes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flags_of_the_Confederate_States_of_America3 -
CNN: UK scientists have launched the world's first study examining whether different coronavirus vaccines can safely be used for two-dose regimens, an approach they say could give extra flexibility and even boost protection against Covid-19 if approved.
Participants in the 13-month study will be given the Oxford/AstraZeneca and Pfizer/BioNTech vaccines in different combinations and at different intervals.2 -
Look... If Sturgeon says it's wonderful then BBC Scotland will say it's wonderful.Alistair said:
Yes because that is what Sturgeon is claiming has been achieved in Scotland.RobD said:
You are going off the total number, rather than the number eligible?Alistair said:
But only 80% of residents vaccinated.RobD said:
99.1% visited, so the number vaccinated is probably as high as it is going to get.Alistair said:English care home vaccination data linked from this tweet. No great mystery at all it turns out.
https://twitter.com/squire67/status/1357384137137655811?s=19
If the Scottish figure is indeed correct (and I truly find it hard to believe it true) that is an astonishing difference.
And I find that fairly unbelievable.
So pay attention then "how about getting with the programme? Why don't you jump on the team and come on in for the big win?"0 -
Looks like there is a new mutation in France.
https://twitter.com/mediavenir/status/1357394907464351746?s=210 -
Possibly. Certainly I favour PR and if Labour now cannot win outright, I favour it even more. I think it's probably coming. The country will not tolerate electing Tory governments the whole time. I'd miss the dramatic brutality of FPTP but it really is a bizarre system when you think rationally about it.IanB2 said:
Labour had the chance, not to change the electorate, but to introduce a fairer way of delivering its representation, having explicitly promised to do so in its manifesto. That Labour reneged on this promise, led astray by the hubris of its false parliamentary majorities, is surely the biggest political misjudgment it has made during our lifetime.kinabalu said:
Yawn. But also not yawn - because Yes. Spot on. Change the electorate. As in move hearts & minds. As in remove scales from eyes.CarlottaVance said:
Change the electorate! That’ll be a winner!kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:0 -
Our plebs break lockdown by getting a haircut..the french....well...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9224859/19-Frenchmen-caught-brothel-raid-Spanish-police.html2 -
Trumpers in the Bahamas for a cleansed Greater England. Nice that foreigns take an interest.
https://twitter.com/IrvingFisher16/status/1357397770122915842?s=200 -
They're still there. No deaths or removals reported yet.MattW said:Does anyone have an update on the Death Wish Morons of Euston Square?
0 -
Went odds on for betting failed miserably to get electedkinabalu said:
This is a betting site uber alles so I say again a factoid which imo should be etched in people's brains for the long term.BluestBlue said:
As if I would ever say something like that! For all I know, Britain may well need and want a mainstream party of the left; it just doesn't seem all that keen on electing one to power.kinabalu said:
Although not quite as feeble as the recent "scoop" revealing that 16 years ago he said that many years before that, as a thrusting young radical, he was not enamoured by the notion of a hereditary Head of State. I mean, c'mon. If that's a big vote loser for the mainstream party of the left in Britain, Britain has no use for a mainstream party of the left. And before BluestBlue or anyone similarly inclined nips in with a smart arse reply, of course Britain does need and want a mainstream party of the left.Northern_Al said:
Doh. It's hardly a revelation that Starmer wanted to stay in, or as close as possible to, the EU back in 2018, is it? I suspect that's well known, and he can't change that. What's important now is that he has accepted that Brexit has happened and any prospect of rejoining is very distant.FrancisUrquhart said:After yesterday’s PMQs theatre, Labour reluctantly admitted Starmer had called for UK membership of the European Medicines Agency post-Brexit. Guido can reveal Starmer went further than merely talking the talk – he voted for an amendment in 2018 that would have seen the UK bound into EMA membership. The amendment in question was New Clause 17 to the 2018 Trade Bill, which read:
“It shall be the objective of an appropriate authority to take all necessary steps to implement an international trade agreement, which enables the UK to fully participate after exit day in the European medicines regulatory network partnership between the European Union, European Economic Area and the European Medicines Agency.”
During the epic May-era parliamentary battle, Starmer, along with 240 Labour MPs, two sitting Tories and others – voted for this, trying to ensure the UK made it a negotiating objective “to participate in the European medicines regulatory network partnership between the EU, EEA and the European Medicines Agency”. At the time proclaiming this would ensure patients continue “to have access to high-quality, effective and safe pharmaceutical and medical products, fully aligned with the member states of the EU and EEA.” Keir might be be hoping we have forgotten, Guido is not convinced his famously forensic legal brain would have really forgotten...
https://order-order.com/2021/02/04/starmer-voted-to-keep-uk-in-the-ema/
This story feels very much like a #10 sting and something they were extremely bad at all of last year.
They have dug out a specific and topical example of where old Remainer Starmer was consistently doing everything possible to keep the UK in the EU....and then helpfully pointed a friendly gossip monger to where to go looking.
It smacks a bit of desperation to land a killer blow on Starmer, and will fail. Maybe the Tories, and Guido, should focus on what he's said/done since he became leader.
In the early hours of the morning following GE17 a certain Jeremy Corbyn - not just left wing but a lifelong member of the HARD left - went odds on favourite in running to be the next Prime Minister of this country.
Think on.1 -
For PB’s many rail travel enthusiasts:
https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/trans-europe-express-trains/index.html
To deliver the massive modal shift required, TEE 2.0 will look very different to its luxury predecessor, but a comprehensive and integrated network of frequent high-speed trains has the potential to transform how we travel across Europe over the next three decades.1 -
You think BBC Scotland are supporters of Sturgeon?FlightsPath said:
Look... If Sturgeon says it's wonderful then BBC Scotland will say it's wonderful.Alistair said:
Yes because that is what Sturgeon is claiming has been achieved in Scotland.RobD said:
You are going off the total number, rather than the number eligible?Alistair said:
But only 80% of residents vaccinated.RobD said:
99.1% visited, so the number vaccinated is probably as high as it is going to get.Alistair said:English care home vaccination data linked from this tweet. No great mystery at all it turns out.
https://twitter.com/squire67/status/1357384137137655811?s=19
If the Scottish figure is indeed correct (and I truly find it hard to believe it true) that is an astonishing difference.
And I find that fairly unbelievable.
So pay attention then "how about getting with the programme? Why don't you jump on the team and come on in for the big win?"
Golly.0 -
Hmm... thats a good idea. The Scottish Nationalists abolished the Saltire didnt they. Didnt they?Northern_Al said:
No. Persuade the electorate; that's what campaigning is about. Labour will never (and doesn't want to) win over those who are very right wing, whether they be Tory toffs, Faragists, or sections of the white working class (not that high a proportion, actually) that tend towards xenophobia and other prejudices. But they need to persuade others that they are fit to govern. That means neutralising the 'patriotism' issue, not by flag waving but by persuading the majority that Labour likes this country (which it does) and will protect its interests. If the electorate is unpersuadable, then we may as well give up. But Labour doesn't need to persuade BluestBlue, for example; he is out of reach.CarlottaVance said:
Change the electorate! That’ll be a winner!kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:
Scottish Nationalists... the clue is in the word.1 -
EHPAD = Etablissement d'Hébergement Pour Personnes Agées Dépendantes = old peoples' home.williamglenn said:Looks like there is a new mutation in France.
https://twitter.com/mediavenir/status/1357394907464351746?s=21
27 dead in one swoop looks disastrous.1 -
Sure. But if all patriotism means is success for the country it becomes meaningless. Because everyone here wants that. Even me.Luckyguy1983 said:
I am not sure why anyone who aspires to govern the UK would particularly want the broad mass of people to care less about its success. The solution is not to hope people become less patriotic, but to advertise 'real' patriotism - the kind that shuns flag waving pomposity but quietly toils away till 2am wrestling with how to overcome non-tariff barriers etc. etc. REAL Government, REAL Patriotism.kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:0 -
At least we’ll be safe from any French mutation at lunchtimes and over the weekend.williamglenn said:Looks like there is a new mutation in France.
https://twitter.com/mediavenir/status/1357394907464351746?s=211 -
Thinking rationally is generally preferable.kinabalu said:
Possibly. Certainly I favour PR and if Labour now cannot win outright, I favour it even more. I think it's probably coming. The country will not tolerate electing Tory governments the whole time. I'd miss the dramatic brutality of FPTP but it really is a bizarre system when you think rationally about it.IanB2 said:
Labour had the chance, not to change the electorate, but to introduce a fairer way of delivering its representation, having explicitly promised to do so in its manifesto. That Labour reneged on this promise, led astray by the hubris of its false parliamentary majorities, is surely the biggest political misjudgment it has made during our lifetime.kinabalu said:
Yawn. But also not yawn - because Yes. Spot on. Change the electorate. As in move hearts & minds. As in remove scales from eyes.CarlottaVance said:
Change the electorate! That’ll be a winner!kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:1 -
FFS. That does look like it could be a pain in the Aisne.williamglenn said:Looks like there is a new mutation in France.
https://twitter.com/mediavenir/status/1357394907464351746?s=210 -
But won't somebdy think of theIanB2 said:
At least we’ll be safe from any French mutation at lunchtimes and over the weekend.williamglenn said:Looks like there is a new mutation in France.
https://twitter.com/mediavenir/status/1357394907464351746?s=21childrenmistresses?0 -
Absolutely.Alistair said:
Yes because that is what Sturgeon is claiming has been achieved in Scotland.RobD said:
You are going off the total number, rather than the number eligible?Alistair said:
But only 80% of residents vaccinated.RobD said:
99.1% visited, so the number vaccinated is probably as high as it is going to get.Alistair said:English care home vaccination data linked from this tweet. No great mystery at all it turns out.
https://twitter.com/squire67/status/1357384137137655811?s=19
If the Scottish figure is indeed correct (and I truly find it hard to believe it true) that is an astonishing difference.
And I find that fairly unbelievable.
I'd be extremely surprised if the sum of all Care residents who (A) refused the vaccine, (B) currently have [or are suspected to have] Covid so can't receive the vaccine yet and (C) are allergic to or otherwise incapable of receiving the vaccine . . . are all combined less than 2%.0 -
Well they did, talk of fragility and surprisingly frequent raising of the spectre of customs posts on the border getting attacked. Those posts were never going to happen.TimT said:
It always stunned me that anyone even mentioned that peace would be threatened.Yokes said:The problem with the protocol is in the detail, whether deliberate or accidental.
The GFA had two fundamentals for individuals
.
The right of anyone living here to choose their citizenship as Irish or British. Has not changed due to Brexit. I can have two passports if I want by dint of my address.
The concept that you can travel across borders between NI/ROI/GB. This is called the common travel area, has not changed and has been in play for decades EU or no EU. I believe the Brexit agreement left that untouched.
The problem is trade, not free movement of people. That the two have intertwined is one problem, because they shouldn't have been intertwined. In short someone didn't do their detail or someone is doing too much detail.
This shouldn't be an identity issue, its an issue of doing business and for the umpteenth time, NI's biggest market, by far, for trade in and out is GB. That's all there is to it, you have customs regulations and checks on stuff to and from ROI its got a lot smaller impact than what is happening now. Some fucking whizz concluded, however, that this was a bigger problem when the stats on trade would have told you that it wasn't.
Somehow the 'oh my god they will be burning down border posts' shit kicked off. You know how much of that came from the NI parties of all stripes? Actually not a lot. Most of it I heard was from people outside of NI.
Cannot emphasise enough, there was not going to be a return to any major trouble, zero. The usual suspects were there before 31st Dec and are there now, no change. Bit more motivated? Maybe, mass recruitment? Not a fucking chance.
This can be sorted via pragmatic working and we need to take the peace threatening talk out.
Sadly the reality is that getting a fairly coherent working solution with paperwork but a bit of common sense may end up taking an incident to focus minds because so called principles guiding some of the rules aren't principles at all. In all the talk about the fragility of peace, the bureaucrats, by accident or design, have worked a position where people are getting antsy because a lot of it is petty nonsense. Its the consumer market where the problem lies because its visible. A few problems with deliveries and some companies have just knocked it on the head. People notice some goods are not on the shelves. Garden centres have issues because of some crap about GB soil.
My gut is that some sense and also some patience to get the processes right will move things on a lot, but will you get sense? The danger is you wont until its forced on an agenda.
0 -
Yes, great comment. Politicians should persuade not pander (my point) and should listen not lecture (your point). Out of this comes the right balance. Right now we're doing too much pandering and lecturing and not enough persuading and listening.maaarsh said:
What if, and bear with me on this, it's the majority that have something to teach you?kinabalu said:
Boring! Knew I'd see that. Not what I mean at all. I mean persuade, explain - preach even - rather than just tamely accept the tacitly dim and patronizing view of the British people held by populist politicians of the right. They are in the box seat now but it will soon change. So this is not the time to concede an inch to their inherently dispiriting world view. Flags away. Flags away.Richard_Nabavi said:
Ah, the Brecht solution:kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.
If that is the case, would it not be be simpler,
If the government simply dissolved the people
And elected another?
Not often expressed as clearly as our very own @kinabalu expresses it.0 -
I have just checked the numbers. It is indeed true.FlightsPath said:
Look... If Sturgeon says it's wonderful then BBC Scotland will say it's wonderful.Alistair said:
Yes because that is what Sturgeon is claiming has been achieved in Scotland.RobD said:
You are going off the total number, rather than the number eligible?Alistair said:
But only 80% of residents vaccinated.RobD said:
99.1% visited, so the number vaccinated is probably as high as it is going to get.Alistair said:English care home vaccination data linked from this tweet. No great mystery at all it turns out.
https://twitter.com/squire67/status/1357384137137655811?s=19
If the Scottish figure is indeed correct (and I truly find it hard to believe it true) that is an astonishing difference.
And I find that fairly unbelievable.
So pay attention then "how about getting with the programme? Why don't you jump on the team and come on in for the big win?"
Scotland has vaccinated 98% of older adult care homes. England has done 81%.
That is an astonishing difference.0 -
How exactly do you expect to get to pr if labour can no long win outright they can only win with the snp. That means an independence referendum. That means labour loses power and tories come back in because scotland is now a different country. Even if you pass a law on pr first the tories just go fuck you and repeal itkinabalu said:
Possibly. Certainly I favour PR and if Labour now cannot win outright, I favour it even more. I think it's probably coming. The country will not tolerate electing Tory governments the whole time. I'd miss the dramatic brutality of FPTP but it really is a bizarre system when you think rationally about it.IanB2 said:
Labour had the chance, not to change the electorate, but to introduce a fairer way of delivering its representation, having explicitly promised to do so in its manifesto. That Labour reneged on this promise, led astray by the hubris of its false parliamentary majorities, is surely the biggest political misjudgment it has made during our lifetime.kinabalu said:
Yawn. But also not yawn - because Yes. Spot on. Change the electorate. As in move hearts & minds. As in remove scales from eyes.CarlottaVance said:
Change the electorate! That’ll be a winner!kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:0 -
French mutation will take one look at the vaccine and wave the white flag.IanB2 said:
At least we’ll be safe from any French mutation at lunchtimes and over the weekend.williamglenn said:Looks like there is a new mutation in France.
https://twitter.com/mediavenir/status/1357394907464351746?s=210 -
I thought that M. Macron what not supposed to be a traditionalist of the Left *or* the Right.MarqueeMark said:
But won't somebdy think of theIanB2 said:
At least we’ll be safe from any French mutation at lunchtimes and over the weekend.williamglenn said:Looks like there is a new mutation in France.
https://twitter.com/mediavenir/status/1357394907464351746?s=21childrenmistresses?0 -
But the likes of Johnson don't want to remove them. That's very fishy.MarqueeMark said:
The electorate are very reluctant to have scales removed from eyes.kinabalu said:
Yawn. But also not yawn - because Yes. Spot on. Change the electorate. As in move hearts & minds. As in remove scales from eyes.CarlottaVance said:
Change the electorate! That’ll be a winner!kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:
I mean, they kept voting for Salmond and Sturgeon.....0 -
Do who is being sent in - The Bailiffs, The Police, The Child Protection Authorities or the Men in White Coats?LostPassword said:
They're still there. No deaths or removals reported yet.MattW said:Does anyone have an update on the Death Wish Morons of Euston Square?
0 -
Has HYUFD got a new account?Theuniondivvie said:Trumpers in the Bahamas for a cleansed Greater England. Nice that foreigns take an interest.
https://twitter.com/IrvingFisher16/status/1357397770122915842?s=200 -
Will it require a Vichy vaccine?Philip_Thompson said:
French mutation will take one look at the vaccine and wave the white flag.IanB2 said:
At least we’ll be safe from any French mutation at lunchtimes and over the weekend.williamglenn said:Looks like there is a new mutation in France.
https://twitter.com/mediavenir/status/1357394907464351746?s=210 -
Liz doesn't shun flag waving pomposity though.MarqueeMark said:
Liz Truss for PM then?Luckyguy1983 said:
I am not sure why anyone who aspires to govern the UK would particularly want the broad mass of people to care less about its success. The solution is not to hope people become less patriotic, but to advertise 'real' patriotism - the kind that shuns flag waving pomposity but quietly toils away till 2am wrestling with how to overcome non-tariff barriers etc. etc. REAL Government, REAL Patriotism.kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:
1 -
Judging from Zahawi's comments today, 21 June for pub openings is looking spot on. Actually a bit optimistic.
Harper in parliament got absolutely nowhere with his attempt to push the process.
because
Over 50s
Transmissability report (oh dear)
Cases
Potential low take up
Mutant strains
Or something.
As Sunak opined, the goalposts are moveable at the government's will. There will always be a reason, if they want there to be.
0 -
Mmm. We are soon to be a Pacific Rim country. Exciting or what. Impossible to combat a Tory government that can weave that sort of magic.Stuartinromford said:
And, let's be honest, there's an important strand of the government that is tying to do the same thing. "Britannia Unchained" is all about the idea that the British Public need to raise their eyes to the far horizon and work harder to take opportunities on the other side of the world.kinabalu said:
Yawn. But also not yawn - because Yes. Spot on. Change the electorate. As in move hearts & minds. As in remove scales from eyes.CarlottaVance said:
Change the electorate! That’ll be a winner!kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:
What if Liz Truss invites us all to a party on the other side of the world, and nobody from Britain turns up?
(But yes. From the perspective of a politically homeless Clarkeite ex-Conservative, Labour needs to be more relaxed about having flags in the backdrop. I've said that Cool Britannia or the Spirit of 2012 is the way to do this.)
An ex-con? I thought you were solid Labour! Poor show by me on that. Losing my touch.1 -
They must have really flung the kitchen sink at the initial programme, it would certainly explain why the initial rollout was painstakingly slow.Alistair said:
I have just checked the numbers. It is indeed true.FlightsPath said:
Look... If Sturgeon says it's wonderful then BBC Scotland will say it's wonderful.Alistair said:
Yes because that is what Sturgeon is claiming has been achieved in Scotland.RobD said:
You are going off the total number, rather than the number eligible?Alistair said:
But only 80% of residents vaccinated.RobD said:
99.1% visited, so the number vaccinated is probably as high as it is going to get.Alistair said:English care home vaccination data linked from this tweet. No great mystery at all it turns out.
https://twitter.com/squire67/status/1357384137137655811?s=19
If the Scottish figure is indeed correct (and I truly find it hard to believe it true) that is an astonishing difference.
And I find that fairly unbelievable.
So pay attention then "how about getting with the programme? Why don't you jump on the team and come on in for the big win?"
Scotland has vaccinated 98% of older adult care homes. England has done 81%.
That is an astonishing difference.0 -
I’m pretty sure this wasn’t the agreed line...
https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/13573760669444464770 -
Your problem is there is no way the SNP will vote to allow PR - because then they are a side-show at Westminster, rather than the support Labour vitally needs to form a Government.kinabalu said:
Possibly. Certainly I favour PR and if Labour now cannot win outright, I favour it even more. I think it's probably coming. The country will not tolerate electing Tory governments the whole time. I'd miss the dramatic brutality of FPTP but it really is a bizarre system when you think rationally about it.IanB2 said:
Labour had the chance, not to change the electorate, but to introduce a fairer way of delivering its representation, having explicitly promised to do so in its manifesto. That Labour reneged on this promise, led astray by the hubris of its false parliamentary majorities, is surely the biggest political misjudgment it has made during our lifetime.kinabalu said:
Yawn. But also not yawn - because Yes. Spot on. Change the electorate. As in move hearts & minds. As in remove scales from eyes.CarlottaVance said:
Change the electorate! That’ll be a winner!kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:0 -
Why should they bother? They’re not in the way and they merely look faintly ridiculous.MattW said:
Do who is being sent in - The Bailiffs, The Police, The Child Protection Authorities or the Men in White Coats?LostPassword said:
They're still there. No deaths or removals reported yet.MattW said:Does anyone have an update on the Death Wish Morons of Euston Square?
0 -
This is the report the Holyrood Committee wants to suppress refuses to publish:
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/full-text-alex-salmond-s-submission-to-the-hamilton-inquiry1 -
I honestly feel a bit of a dick for getting so pissed off at how slow the rollout was going now.Theuniondivvie said:
They must have really flung the kitchen sink at the initial programme, it would certainly explain why the initial rollout was painstakingly slow.Alistair said:
I have just checked the numbers. It is indeed true.FlightsPath said:
Look... If Sturgeon says it's wonderful then BBC Scotland will say it's wonderful.Alistair said:
Yes because that is what Sturgeon is claiming has been achieved in Scotland.RobD said:
You are going off the total number, rather than the number eligible?Alistair said:
But only 80% of residents vaccinated.RobD said:
99.1% visited, so the number vaccinated is probably as high as it is going to get.Alistair said:English care home vaccination data linked from this tweet. No great mystery at all it turns out.
https://twitter.com/squire67/status/1357384137137655811?s=19
If the Scottish figure is indeed correct (and I truly find it hard to believe it true) that is an astonishing difference.
And I find that fairly unbelievable.
So pay attention then "how about getting with the programme? Why don't you jump on the team and come on in for the big win?"
Scotland has vaccinated 98% of older adult care homes. England has done 81%.
That is an astonishing difference.
I'm still going to double check this again because I still struggle to believe the refused/cannot group is only 2%.0 -
I read a report in the Guardian suggesting a batch of 90 millions doses of the AZ vaccine were starting delivery for a group of countries in Africa in the next month.
Have the EU demanded they be diverted yet?0 -
Actually they've supported voting reform at Westminster for yonks, to the extent of supporting and campaigning for the miserable little compromise. Not quite sure what vital relevance and influence you think they'd be giving up.MarqueeMark said:
Your problem is there is no way the SNP will vote to allow PR - because then they are a side-show at Westminster, rather than the support Labour vitally needs to form a Government.kinabalu said:
Possibly. Certainly I favour PR and if Labour now cannot win outright, I favour it even more. I think it's probably coming. The country will not tolerate electing Tory governments the whole time. I'd miss the dramatic brutality of FPTP but it really is a bizarre system when you think rationally about it.IanB2 said:
Labour had the chance, not to change the electorate, but to introduce a fairer way of delivering its representation, having explicitly promised to do so in its manifesto. That Labour reneged on this promise, led astray by the hubris of its false parliamentary majorities, is surely the biggest political misjudgment it has made during our lifetime.kinabalu said:
Yawn. But also not yawn - because Yes. Spot on. Change the electorate. As in move hearts & minds. As in remove scales from eyes.CarlottaVance said:
Change the electorate! That’ll be a winner!kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:1 -
Impressive to only have 2% who either i) refused, ii) were not suitable, because of pre-existing conditions or recent infection. Truly incredible impressive!Theuniondivvie said:
They must have really flung the kitchen sink at the initial programme, it would certainly explain why the initial rollout was painstakingly slow.Alistair said:
I have just checked the numbers. It is indeed true.FlightsPath said:
Look... If Sturgeon says it's wonderful then BBC Scotland will say it's wonderful.Alistair said:
Yes because that is what Sturgeon is claiming has been achieved in Scotland.RobD said:
You are going off the total number, rather than the number eligible?Alistair said:
But only 80% of residents vaccinated.RobD said:
99.1% visited, so the number vaccinated is probably as high as it is going to get.Alistair said:English care home vaccination data linked from this tweet. No great mystery at all it turns out.
https://twitter.com/squire67/status/1357384137137655811?s=19
If the Scottish figure is indeed correct (and I truly find it hard to believe it true) that is an astonishing difference.
And I find that fairly unbelievable.
So pay attention then "how about getting with the programme? Why don't you jump on the team and come on in for the big win?"
Scotland has vaccinated 98% of older adult care homes. England has done 81%.
That is an astonishing difference.0 -
Yes, it's not plausible.Philip_Thompson said:
Absolutely.Alistair said:
Yes because that is what Sturgeon is claiming has been achieved in Scotland.RobD said:
You are going off the total number, rather than the number eligible?Alistair said:
But only 80% of residents vaccinated.RobD said:
99.1% visited, so the number vaccinated is probably as high as it is going to get.Alistair said:English care home vaccination data linked from this tweet. No great mystery at all it turns out.
https://twitter.com/squire67/status/1357384137137655811?s=19
If the Scottish figure is indeed correct (and I truly find it hard to believe it true) that is an astonishing difference.
And I find that fairly unbelievable.
I'd be extremely surprised if the sum of all Care residents who (A) refused the vaccine, (B) currently have [or are suspected to have] Covid so can't receive the vaccine yet and (C) are allergic to or otherwise incapable of receiving the vaccine . . . are all combined less than 2%.1 -
My understanding from some GPs doing older people was that take up has been very high indeed. Its possible care homes are in the same bracket. The reasoning was simple. They just want their lives back.Alistair said:
I honestly feel a bit of a dick for getting so pissed off at how slow the rollout was going now.Theuniondivvie said:
They must have really flung the kitchen sink at the initial programme, it would certainly explain why the initial rollout was painstakingly slow.Alistair said:
I have just checked the numbers. It is indeed true.FlightsPath said:
Look... If Sturgeon says it's wonderful then BBC Scotland will say it's wonderful.Alistair said:
Yes because that is what Sturgeon is claiming has been achieved in Scotland.RobD said:
You are going off the total number, rather than the number eligible?Alistair said:
But only 80% of residents vaccinated.RobD said:
99.1% visited, so the number vaccinated is probably as high as it is going to get.Alistair said:English care home vaccination data linked from this tweet. No great mystery at all it turns out.
https://twitter.com/squire67/status/1357384137137655811?s=19
If the Scottish figure is indeed correct (and I truly find it hard to believe it true) that is an astonishing difference.
And I find that fairly unbelievable.
So pay attention then "how about getting with the programme? Why don't you jump on the team and come on in for the big win?"
Scotland has vaccinated 98% of older adult care homes. England has done 81%.
That is an astonishing difference.
I'm still going to double check this again because I still struggle to believe the refused/cannot group is only 2%.0 -
0
-
At least we can all agree that 81% (and the mealy mouthed cover up of that figure) is deeply unimpressive.CarlottaVance said:
Impressive to only have 2% who either i) refused, ii) were not suitable, because of pre-existing conditions or recent infection. Truly incredible impressive!Theuniondivvie said:
They must have really flung the kitchen sink at the initial programme, it would certainly explain why the initial rollout was painstakingly slow.Alistair said:
I have just checked the numbers. It is indeed true.FlightsPath said:
Look... If Sturgeon says it's wonderful then BBC Scotland will say it's wonderful.Alistair said:
Yes because that is what Sturgeon is claiming has been achieved in Scotland.RobD said:
You are going off the total number, rather than the number eligible?Alistair said:
But only 80% of residents vaccinated.RobD said:
99.1% visited, so the number vaccinated is probably as high as it is going to get.Alistair said:English care home vaccination data linked from this tweet. No great mystery at all it turns out.
https://twitter.com/squire67/status/1357384137137655811?s=19
If the Scottish figure is indeed correct (and I truly find it hard to believe it true) that is an astonishing difference.
And I find that fairly unbelievable.
So pay attention then "how about getting with the programme? Why don't you jump on the team and come on in for the big win?"
Scotland has vaccinated 98% of older adult care homes. England has done 81%.
That is an astonishing difference.
Can't we?0 -
I think I agree, Ian. The country wants a vision. Not the same one, obviously and thankfully, but certainly something more than just a return to moderation and competence. The world is really changing fast.IanB2 said:
During the war Labour used the political breathing space to develop a truly radical blueprint for the better society it wanted to see after the war - much of it drawn from inter-war liberal thinking (such as the Beveridge report); securing election in 1945 on the back of this programme, the extent of change it achieved during its first term was breathtaking - the creation of the NHS, the modern welfare state, and the groundbreaking Planning Act.kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:
Where are the signs that anyone on the centre or left of politics is even thinking about the same amount of heavy lifting for the 21st century?
Taking the widest historical view, the left of politics has always concerned itself with the radical changes needed to march society toward a better future (the consequences of such are for another day). Where is such a vision today? If Labour in 2024 simply puts itself forward as a more credible team of technocratic managers than the current lot, they are surely doomed.0 -
The SNP has a fabulous opportunity to get exactly what it wants - if they are propping up a minority Labour Govt. If they get it, then they won't give a damn about PR for the rump UK Parliament. But they would be idiots to agree it in advance of that - whatever their prior position has been. And they will not be idiots.Theuniondivvie said:
Actually they've supported voting reform at Westminster for yonks, to the extent of supporting and campaigning for the miserable little compromise. Not quite sure what vital relevance and influence you think they'd be giving up.MarqueeMark said:
Your problem is there is no way the SNP will vote to allow PR - because then they are a side-show at Westminster, rather than the support Labour vitally needs to form a Government.kinabalu said:
Possibly. Certainly I favour PR and if Labour now cannot win outright, I favour it even more. I think it's probably coming. The country will not tolerate electing Tory governments the whole time. I'd miss the dramatic brutality of FPTP but it really is a bizarre system when you think rationally about it.IanB2 said:
Labour had the chance, not to change the electorate, but to introduce a fairer way of delivering its representation, having explicitly promised to do so in its manifesto. That Labour reneged on this promise, led astray by the hubris of its false parliamentary majorities, is surely the biggest political misjudgment it has made during our lifetime.kinabalu said:
Yawn. But also not yawn - because Yes. Spot on. Change the electorate. As in move hearts & minds. As in remove scales from eyes.CarlottaVance said:
Change the electorate! That’ll be a winner!kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:0 -
I take you at your word, but not everyone here (or anywhere) is passionate about wanting the UK to succeed. Our energies go in lots of different directions, and some loyalties conflict. Some people will be more 'patriotic' toward Yorkshire, Scotland, or the EU than they are about the UK. Some won't prioritise a place at all - it will be about money, or a corporation, for some, their loyalty will lie with the global proletariat. If not enough people feel sufficiently bought in to the idea of the nation state, it becomes an issue.kinabalu said:
Sure. But if all patriotism means is success for the country it becomes meaningless. Because everyone here wants that. Even me.Luckyguy1983 said:
I am not sure why anyone who aspires to govern the UK would particularly want the broad mass of people to care less about its success. The solution is not to hope people become less patriotic, but to advertise 'real' patriotism - the kind that shuns flag waving pomposity but quietly toils away till 2am wrestling with how to overcome non-tariff barriers etc. etc. REAL Government, REAL Patriotism.kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:1 -
"Via pragmatic working" does not amount to a solution from Yokes. The issue is to put in clear English the overall solution that is neither a square circle nor a unicorn. The reluctance of the DUP and the Tory headbangers to describe it, as opposed to rejecting every option, is quite telling.Yokes said:
Well they did, talk of fragility and surprisingly frequent raising of the spectre of customs posts on the border getting attacked. Those posts were never going to happen.TimT said:
It always stunned me that anyone even mentioned that peace would be threatened.Yokes said:The problem with the protocol is in the detail, whether deliberate or accidental.
The GFA had two fundamentals for individuals
.
The right of anyone living here to choose their citizenship as Irish or British. Has not changed due to Brexit. I can have two passports if I want by dint of my address.
The concept that you can travel across borders between NI/ROI/GB. This is called the common travel area, has not changed and has been in play for decades EU or no EU. I believe the Brexit agreement left that untouched.
The problem is trade, not free movement of people. That the two have intertwined is one problem, because they shouldn't have been intertwined. In short someone didn't do their detail or someone is doing too much detail.
This shouldn't be an identity issue, its an issue of doing business and for the umpteenth time, NI's biggest market, by far, for trade in and out is GB. That's all there is to it, you have customs regulations and checks on stuff to and from ROI its got a lot smaller impact than what is happening now. Some fucking whizz concluded, however, that this was a bigger problem when the stats on trade would have told you that it wasn't.
Somehow the 'oh my god they will be burning down border posts' shit kicked off. You know how much of that came from the NI parties of all stripes? Actually not a lot. Most of it I heard was from people outside of NI.
Cannot emphasise enough, there was not going to be a return to any major trouble, zero. The usual suspects were there before 31st Dec and are there now, no change. Bit more motivated? Maybe, mass recruitment? Not a fucking chance.
This can be sorted via pragmatic working and we need to take the peace threatening talk out.
Sadly the reality is that getting a fairly coherent working solution with paperwork but a bit of common sense may end up taking an incident to focus minds because so called principles guiding some of the rules aren't principles at all. In all the talk about the fragility of peace, the bureaucrats, by accident or design, have worked a position where people are getting antsy because a lot of it is petty nonsense. Its the consumer market where the problem lies because its visible. A few problems with deliveries and some companies have just knocked it on the head. People notice some goods are not on the shelves. Garden centres have issues because of some crap about GB soil.
My gut is that some sense and also some patience to get the processes right will move things on a lot, but will you get sense? The danger is you wont until its forced on an agenda.
0 -
https://twitter.com/politvidchannel/status/1357405873656635394?s=20
https://twitter.com/politvidchannel/status/1357406201777016834?s=20
Crowdfund your way out of that......0 -
Stoke has gone up in the world, since my last visitFrancisUrquhart said:I think Boris' levelling up has got quite a job to do....
https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/news/stoke-on-trent-news/gallery/spent-one-hour-hanley-24-49635260 -
Just failed. There was nothing miserable about the morning after GE17 for Corbyn or a Labour supporter. It felt like 2nd May 97. Trust me, it did.Pagan2 said:
Went odds on for betting failed miserably to get electedkinabalu said:
This is a betting site uber alles so I say again a factoid which imo should be etched in people's brains for the long term.BluestBlue said:
As if I would ever say something like that! For all I know, Britain may well need and want a mainstream party of the left; it just doesn't seem all that keen on electing one to power.kinabalu said:
Although not quite as feeble as the recent "scoop" revealing that 16 years ago he said that many years before that, as a thrusting young radical, he was not enamoured by the notion of a hereditary Head of State. I mean, c'mon. If that's a big vote loser for the mainstream party of the left in Britain, Britain has no use for a mainstream party of the left. And before BluestBlue or anyone similarly inclined nips in with a smart arse reply, of course Britain does need and want a mainstream party of the left.Northern_Al said:
Doh. It's hardly a revelation that Starmer wanted to stay in, or as close as possible to, the EU back in 2018, is it? I suspect that's well known, and he can't change that. What's important now is that he has accepted that Brexit has happened and any prospect of rejoining is very distant.FrancisUrquhart said:After yesterday’s PMQs theatre, Labour reluctantly admitted Starmer had called for UK membership of the European Medicines Agency post-Brexit. Guido can reveal Starmer went further than merely talking the talk – he voted for an amendment in 2018 that would have seen the UK bound into EMA membership. The amendment in question was New Clause 17 to the 2018 Trade Bill, which read:
“It shall be the objective of an appropriate authority to take all necessary steps to implement an international trade agreement, which enables the UK to fully participate after exit day in the European medicines regulatory network partnership between the European Union, European Economic Area and the European Medicines Agency.”
During the epic May-era parliamentary battle, Starmer, along with 240 Labour MPs, two sitting Tories and others – voted for this, trying to ensure the UK made it a negotiating objective “to participate in the European medicines regulatory network partnership between the EU, EEA and the European Medicines Agency”. At the time proclaiming this would ensure patients continue “to have access to high-quality, effective and safe pharmaceutical and medical products, fully aligned with the member states of the EU and EEA.” Keir might be be hoping we have forgotten, Guido is not convinced his famously forensic legal brain would have really forgotten...
https://order-order.com/2021/02/04/starmer-voted-to-keep-uk-in-the-ema/
This story feels very much like a #10 sting and something they were extremely bad at all of last year.
They have dug out a specific and topical example of where old Remainer Starmer was consistently doing everything possible to keep the UK in the EU....and then helpfully pointed a friendly gossip monger to where to go looking.
It smacks a bit of desperation to land a killer blow on Starmer, and will fail. Maybe the Tories, and Guido, should focus on what he's said/done since he became leader.
In the early hours of the morning following GE17 a certain Jeremy Corbyn - not just left wing but a lifelong member of the HARD left - went odds on favourite in running to be the next Prime Minister of this country.
Think on.0 -
More "solidarity" (between the ears):
https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1357403656342147074?s=200 -
still doesnt change the maths thoughTheuniondivvie said:
Actually they've supported voting reform at Westminster for yonks, to the extent of supporting and campaigning for the miserable little compromise. Not quite sure what vital relevance and influence you think they'd be giving up.MarqueeMark said:
Your problem is there is no way the SNP will vote to allow PR - because then they are a side-show at Westminster, rather than the support Labour vitally needs to form a Government.kinabalu said:
Possibly. Certainly I favour PR and if Labour now cannot win outright, I favour it even more. I think it's probably coming. The country will not tolerate electing Tory governments the whole time. I'd miss the dramatic brutality of FPTP but it really is a bizarre system when you think rationally about it.IanB2 said:
Labour had the chance, not to change the electorate, but to introduce a fairer way of delivering its representation, having explicitly promised to do so in its manifesto. That Labour reneged on this promise, led astray by the hubris of its false parliamentary majorities, is surely the biggest political misjudgment it has made during our lifetime.kinabalu said:
Yawn. But also not yawn - because Yes. Spot on. Change the electorate. As in move hearts & minds. As in remove scales from eyes.CarlottaVance said:
Change the electorate! That’ll be a winner!kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:
if labour can only form a government with snp support which is going to happen
a) labour + snp form government
PR Legislation
scottish independence referendum
rump uk general election
or
b) labour + snp form government
PR legislation
general election
scottish independence referendum
It is never going to be B as far as the snp is concerned as if there is a general election they may not get an independence referendum if it goes the wrong way in the general election so being left with A) as soon as the scots go labour is no longer the government and the pr legislation gets repealed0 -
So let me get this straight, Are you implying I'm one of those headbangers?algarkirk said:
"Via pragmatic working" does not amount to a solution from Yokes. The issue is to put in clear English the overall solution that is neither a square circle nor a unicorn. The reluctance of the DUP and the Tory headbangers to describe it, as opposed to rejecting every option, is quite telling.Yokes said:
Well they did, talk of fragility and surprisingly frequent raising of the spectre of customs posts on the border getting attacked. Those posts were never going to happen.TimT said:
It always stunned me that anyone even mentioned that peace would be threatened.Yokes said:The problem with the protocol is in the detail, whether deliberate or accidental.
The GFA had two fundamentals for individuals
.
The right of anyone living here to choose their citizenship as Irish or British. Has not changed due to Brexit. I can have two passports if I want by dint of my address.
The concept that you can travel across borders between NI/ROI/GB. This is called the common travel area, has not changed and has been in play for decades EU or no EU. I believe the Brexit agreement left that untouched.
The problem is trade, not free movement of people. That the two have intertwined is one problem, because they shouldn't have been intertwined. In short someone didn't do their detail or someone is doing too much detail.
This shouldn't be an identity issue, its an issue of doing business and for the umpteenth time, NI's biggest market, by far, for trade in and out is GB. That's all there is to it, you have customs regulations and checks on stuff to and from ROI its got a lot smaller impact than what is happening now. Some fucking whizz concluded, however, that this was a bigger problem when the stats on trade would have told you that it wasn't.
Somehow the 'oh my god they will be burning down border posts' shit kicked off. You know how much of that came from the NI parties of all stripes? Actually not a lot. Most of it I heard was from people outside of NI.
Cannot emphasise enough, there was not going to be a return to any major trouble, zero. The usual suspects were there before 31st Dec and are there now, no change. Bit more motivated? Maybe, mass recruitment? Not a fucking chance.
This can be sorted via pragmatic working and we need to take the peace threatening talk out.
Sadly the reality is that getting a fairly coherent working solution with paperwork but a bit of common sense may end up taking an incident to focus minds because so called principles guiding some of the rules aren't principles at all. In all the talk about the fragility of peace, the bureaucrats, by accident or design, have worked a position where people are getting antsy because a lot of it is petty nonsense. Its the consumer market where the problem lies because its visible. A few problems with deliveries and some companies have just knocked it on the head. People notice some goods are not on the shelves. Garden centres have issues because of some crap about GB soil.
My gut is that some sense and also some patience to get the processes right will move things on a lot, but will you get sense? The danger is you wont until its forced on an agenda.
0 -
I agree with you, Al. I'm just expressing it in a different and less amenable way.Northern_Al said:
No. Persuade the electorate; that's what campaigning is about. Labour will never (and doesn't want to) win over those who are very right wing, whether they be Tory toffs, Faragists, or sections of the white working class (not that high a proportion, actually) that tend towards xenophobia and other prejudices. But they need to persuade others that they are fit to govern. That means neutralising the 'patriotism' issue, not by flag waving but by persuading the majority that Labour likes this country (which it does) and will protect its interests. If the electorate is unpersuadable, then we may as well give up. But Labour doesn't need to persuade BluestBlue, for example; he is out of reach.CarlottaVance said:
Change the electorate! That’ll be a winner!kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:
0 -
OMFG, out of ten MILLION jabs, perhaps 100 were not accurately queued. Jeez, the Groaniad is desperate for a bad news vaccine storyFrancisUrquhart said:More than 100 Public Health England workers have been given a Covid jab despite not falling into any of the priority categories, the Guardian can reveal.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/04/concerns-raised-over-queue-jumping-as-phe-workers-given-covid-vaccine0 -
No as I am a Unionist not an English nationalistPhilip_Thompson said:
Has HYUFD got a new account?Theuniondivvie said:Trumpers in the Bahamas for a cleansed Greater England. Nice that foreigns take an interest.
https://twitter.com/IrvingFisher16/status/1357397770122915842?s=200 -
Starmer is much more popular in Scotland than Boris, hence also much more likely to grant a legal indyref2 than Boris as he is more likely to win itPagan2 said:
How exactly do you expect to get to pr if labour can no long win outright they can only win with the snp. That means an independence referendum. That means labour loses power and tories come back in because scotland is now a different country. Even if you pass a law on pr first the tories just go fuck you and repeal itkinabalu said:
Possibly. Certainly I favour PR and if Labour now cannot win outright, I favour it even more. I think it's probably coming. The country will not tolerate electing Tory governments the whole time. I'd miss the dramatic brutality of FPTP but it really is a bizarre system when you think rationally about it.IanB2 said:
Labour had the chance, not to change the electorate, but to introduce a fairer way of delivering its representation, having explicitly promised to do so in its manifesto. That Labour reneged on this promise, led astray by the hubris of its false parliamentary majorities, is surely the biggest political misjudgment it has made during our lifetime.kinabalu said:
Yawn. But also not yawn - because Yes. Spot on. Change the electorate. As in move hearts & minds. As in remove scales from eyes.CarlottaVance said:
Change the electorate! That’ll be a winner!kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:0 -
Yup. The only important things are speed and the total number. It doesn't matter if some people skip the queue as long as the majority are allocated as per the agreed priority list. It's not like people who have been vaccinated are allowed to go to the pub or are treated in any special way, so who cares?Leon said:
OMFG, out of ten MILLION jabs, perhaps 100 were not accurately queued. Jeez, the Groaniad is desperate for a bad news vaccine storyFrancisUrquhart said:More than 100 Public Health England workers have been given a Covid jab despite not falling into any of the priority categories, the Guardian can reveal.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/04/concerns-raised-over-queue-jumping-as-phe-workers-given-covid-vaccine0 -
Well I can understand that....if your team consistently lose you try and take victories out of not doing so bad. Personally I think 2017 was more that no one thought corbyn had a chance and plenty who voted for him wouldn't have if they felt the vote was going to be even as close as it is.kinabalu said:
Just failed. There was nothing miserable about the morning after GE17 for Corbyn or a Labour supporter. It felt like 2nd May 97. Trust me, it did.Pagan2 said:
Went odds on for betting failed miserably to get electedkinabalu said:
This is a betting site uber alles so I say again a factoid which imo should be etched in people's brains for the long term.BluestBlue said:
As if I would ever say something like that! For all I know, Britain may well need and want a mainstream party of the left; it just doesn't seem all that keen on electing one to power.kinabalu said:
Although not quite as feeble as the recent "scoop" revealing that 16 years ago he said that many years before that, as a thrusting young radical, he was not enamoured by the notion of a hereditary Head of State. I mean, c'mon. If that's a big vote loser for the mainstream party of the left in Britain, Britain has no use for a mainstream party of the left. And before BluestBlue or anyone similarly inclined nips in with a smart arse reply, of course Britain does need and want a mainstream party of the left.Northern_Al said:
Doh. It's hardly a revelation that Starmer wanted to stay in, or as close as possible to, the EU back in 2018, is it? I suspect that's well known, and he can't change that. What's important now is that he has accepted that Brexit has happened and any prospect of rejoining is very distant.FrancisUrquhart said:After yesterday’s PMQs theatre, Labour reluctantly admitted Starmer had called for UK membership of the European Medicines Agency post-Brexit. Guido can reveal Starmer went further than merely talking the talk – he voted for an amendment in 2018 that would have seen the UK bound into EMA membership. The amendment in question was New Clause 17 to the 2018 Trade Bill, which read:
“It shall be the objective of an appropriate authority to take all necessary steps to implement an international trade agreement, which enables the UK to fully participate after exit day in the European medicines regulatory network partnership between the European Union, European Economic Area and the European Medicines Agency.”
During the epic May-era parliamentary battle, Starmer, along with 240 Labour MPs, two sitting Tories and others – voted for this, trying to ensure the UK made it a negotiating objective “to participate in the European medicines regulatory network partnership between the EU, EEA and the European Medicines Agency”. At the time proclaiming this would ensure patients continue “to have access to high-quality, effective and safe pharmaceutical and medical products, fully aligned with the member states of the EU and EEA.” Keir might be be hoping we have forgotten, Guido is not convinced his famously forensic legal brain would have really forgotten...
https://order-order.com/2021/02/04/starmer-voted-to-keep-uk-in-the-ema/
This story feels very much like a #10 sting and something they were extremely bad at all of last year.
They have dug out a specific and topical example of where old Remainer Starmer was consistently doing everything possible to keep the UK in the EU....and then helpfully pointed a friendly gossip monger to where to go looking.
It smacks a bit of desperation to land a killer blow on Starmer, and will fail. Maybe the Tories, and Guido, should focus on what he's said/done since he became leader.
In the early hours of the morning following GE17 a certain Jeremy Corbyn - not just left wing but a lifelong member of the HARD left - went odds on favourite in running to be the next Prime Minister of this country.
Think on.
The corbyn style left have been putting their agenda to the country for 50 years and been consistently told no.....maybe they should take a hint1 -
0
-
PR would make it more difficult for the Tories to win outright but also make it impossible for the Labour left to win a majority too, Corbyn would never have come close to a majority in 2017 as he did under PR for example.kinabalu said:
Possibly. Certainly I favour PR and if Labour now cannot win outright, I favour it even more. I think it's probably coming. The country will not tolerate electing Tory governments the whole time. I'd miss the dramatic brutality of FPTP but it really is a bizarre system when you think rationally about it.IanB2 said:
Labour had the chance, not to change the electorate, but to introduce a fairer way of delivering its representation, having explicitly promised to do so in its manifesto. That Labour reneged on this promise, led astray by the hubris of its false parliamentary majorities, is surely the biggest political misjudgment it has made during our lifetime.kinabalu said:
Yawn. But also not yawn - because Yes. Spot on. Change the electorate. As in move hearts & minds. As in remove scales from eyes.CarlottaVance said:
Change the electorate! That’ll be a winner!kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:
PR would just make the LDs kingmakers in almost every general election, 2015 the only recent exception when UKIP would have held the balance of power.0 -
I was more thinking beyond the mechanics. If FPTP keeps returning pure Tory government on a minority of the vote the "people" will eventually demand a stop to it via electoral reform.MarqueeMark said:
Your problem is there is no way the SNP will vote to allow PR - because then they are a side-show at Westminster, rather than the support Labour vitally needs to form a Government.kinabalu said:
Possibly. Certainly I favour PR and if Labour now cannot win outright, I favour it even more. I think it's probably coming. The country will not tolerate electing Tory governments the whole time. I'd miss the dramatic brutality of FPTP but it really is a bizarre system when you think rationally about it.IanB2 said:
Labour had the chance, not to change the electorate, but to introduce a fairer way of delivering its representation, having explicitly promised to do so in its manifesto. That Labour reneged on this promise, led astray by the hubris of its false parliamentary majorities, is surely the biggest political misjudgment it has made during our lifetime.kinabalu said:
Yawn. But also not yawn - because Yes. Spot on. Change the electorate. As in move hearts & minds. As in remove scales from eyes.CarlottaVance said:
Change the electorate! That’ll be a winner!kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:0 -
Interesting that he's moving to exclude Germany from such a high level meeting. Clearly he believes the France now has the foreign policy whip hand within the EU and including Britain in discussions as a third party but not Germany definitely gives France some level of prominence within the EU they didn't have with the UK in it.CarlottaVance said:
Do wonder how the EU and Germany in particular will react if he does push French foreign policy objectives through means that are inaccessible to the EU and Germany.2 -
Takes me back to the heady days of Inter-Rail in the 1980s. Travelling across northern and western Europe and not arguing with the West German border guards as they woke you at 6am to check your passport.IanB2 said:For PB’s many rail travel enthusiasts:
https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/trans-europe-express-trains/index.html
To deliver the massive modal shift required, TEE 2.0 will look very different to its luxury predecessor, but a comprehensive and integrated network of frequent high-speed trains has the potential to transform how we travel across Europe over the next three decades.
In Denmark in 1986, they ran a scheme which included cheap accommodation in old houses (think National Trust or English Heritage style properties). Fantastic summer travelling round Denmark and southern Sweden.
Good times...1 -
I want justice for everyone, even Salmond. I would also like a constituent nation of the UK to NOT be so obviously a one-party state, corrupt at the very topTheuniondivvie said:Hey Justice for Salmond guys, here's who you're travelling with.
https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/1356699711890145284?s=20
Almost as amusing is one of the replies from Ms. Adwoa Oni, Newark, CA, USA, via Olgino, St Petersburg.
https://twitter.com/adwoaoni/status/1356863828194070530?s=20
If fixing this fucks Sturgeon and the Nats, at the same time, all the better!
But my desire is still the correct and moral choice1 -
When things are shit people need to feel able to say so. Better people say it too often than not enough. Makes things stronger.Nigelb said:I’m pretty sure this wasn’t the agreed line...
https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/13573760669444464771 -
Much less unpopular I think you meanHYUFD said:
Starmer is much more popular in Scotland than Boris, hence also much more likely to grant a legal indyref2 than Boris as he is more likely to win itPagan2 said:
How exactly do you expect to get to pr if labour can no long win outright they can only win with the snp. That means an independence referendum. That means labour loses power and tories come back in because scotland is now a different country. Even if you pass a law on pr first the tories just go fuck you and repeal itkinabalu said:
Possibly. Certainly I favour PR and if Labour now cannot win outright, I favour it even more. I think it's probably coming. The country will not tolerate electing Tory governments the whole time. I'd miss the dramatic brutality of FPTP but it really is a bizarre system when you think rationally about it.IanB2 said:
Labour had the chance, not to change the electorate, but to introduce a fairer way of delivering its representation, having explicitly promised to do so in its manifesto. That Labour reneged on this promise, led astray by the hubris of its false parliamentary majorities, is surely the biggest political misjudgment it has made during our lifetime.kinabalu said:
Yawn. But also not yawn - because Yes. Spot on. Change the electorate. As in move hearts & minds. As in remove scales from eyes.CarlottaVance said:
Change the electorate! That’ll be a winner!kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:0 -
Definitely something wrong, unless there's a different approach to consent in Scotland.Philip_Thompson said:
Absolutely.Alistair said:
Yes because that is what Sturgeon is claiming has been achieved in Scotland.RobD said:
You are going off the total number, rather than the number eligible?Alistair said:
But only 80% of residents vaccinated.RobD said:
99.1% visited, so the number vaccinated is probably as high as it is going to get.Alistair said:English care home vaccination data linked from this tweet. No great mystery at all it turns out.
https://twitter.com/squire67/status/1357384137137655811?s=19
If the Scottish figure is indeed correct (and I truly find it hard to believe it true) that is an astonishing difference.
And I find that fairly unbelievable.
I'd be extremely surprised if the sum of all Care residents who (A) refused the vaccine, (B) currently have [or are suspected to have] Covid so can't receive the vaccine yet and (C) are allergic to or otherwise incapable of receiving the vaccine . . . are all combined less than 2%.
What happened with dementia patients in care homes who aren't able/willing to consent? I'd imagine that their nearest relatives would have to be consulted?0 -
Actually, there's a decent body of evidence floating around at the moment that suggests they might well be idiots.MarqueeMark said:
The SNP has a fabulous opportunity to get exactly what it wants - if they are propping up a minority Labour Govt. If they get it, then they won't give a damn about PR for the rump UK Parliament. But they would be idiots to agree it in advance of that - whatever their prior position has been. And they will not be idiots.Theuniondivvie said:
Actually they've supported voting reform at Westminster for yonks, to the extent of supporting and campaigning for the miserable little compromise. Not quite sure what vital relevance and influence you think they'd be giving up.MarqueeMark said:
Your problem is there is no way the SNP will vote to allow PR - because then they are a side-show at Westminster, rather than the support Labour vitally needs to form a Government.kinabalu said:
Possibly. Certainly I favour PR and if Labour now cannot win outright, I favour it even more. I think it's probably coming. The country will not tolerate electing Tory governments the whole time. I'd miss the dramatic brutality of FPTP but it really is a bizarre system when you think rationally about it.IanB2 said:
Labour had the chance, not to change the electorate, but to introduce a fairer way of delivering its representation, having explicitly promised to do so in its manifesto. That Labour reneged on this promise, led astray by the hubris of its false parliamentary majorities, is surely the biggest political misjudgment it has made during our lifetime.kinabalu said:
Yawn. But also not yawn - because Yes. Spot on. Change the electorate. As in move hearts & minds. As in remove scales from eyes.CarlottaVance said:
Change the electorate! That’ll be a winner!kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:
And that's from a Yes-voting, thus-far-SNP-voting perspective.0 -
He's an optimist.Theuniondivvie said:
Much less unpopular I think you meanHYUFD said:
Starmer is much more popular in Scotland than Boris, hence also much more likely to grant a legal indyref2 than Boris as he is more likely to win itPagan2 said:
How exactly do you expect to get to pr if labour can no long win outright they can only win with the snp. That means an independence referendum. That means labour loses power and tories come back in because scotland is now a different country. Even if you pass a law on pr first the tories just go fuck you and repeal itkinabalu said:
Possibly. Certainly I favour PR and if Labour now cannot win outright, I favour it even more. I think it's probably coming. The country will not tolerate electing Tory governments the whole time. I'd miss the dramatic brutality of FPTP but it really is a bizarre system when you think rationally about it.IanB2 said:
Labour had the chance, not to change the electorate, but to introduce a fairer way of delivering its representation, having explicitly promised to do so in its manifesto. That Labour reneged on this promise, led astray by the hubris of its false parliamentary majorities, is surely the biggest political misjudgment it has made during our lifetime.kinabalu said:
Yawn. But also not yawn - because Yes. Spot on. Change the electorate. As in move hearts & minds. As in remove scales from eyes.CarlottaVance said:
Change the electorate! That’ll be a winner!kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:0 -
Except for the really explosive paragraph that is completely redactedCarlottaVance said:This is the report the Holyrood Committee wants to suppress refuses to publish:
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/full-text-alex-salmond-s-submission-to-the-hamilton-inquiry0 -
Sorry to break it to you but no one gives a feck what you want or like.Leon said:
I want justice for everyone, even Salmond. I would also like a constituent nation of the UK to NOT be so obviously a one-party state, corrupt at the very topTheuniondivvie said:Hey Justice for Salmond guys, here's who you're travelling with.
https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/1356699711890145284?s=20
Almost as amusing is one of the replies from Ms. Adwoa Oni, Newark, CA, USA, via Olgino, St Petersburg.
https://twitter.com/adwoaoni/status/1356863828194070530?s=20
If fixing this fucks Sturgeon and the Nats, at the same time, all the better!
But my desire is still the correct and moral choice
Apart from you and your multiple personalities of course.0 -
https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1357407961375645696/photo/1
This I have to say is entertaining, its the sheer spite.0 -
A fair point. Thanks.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
PENDENT-PUNDIT ALERT!Mexicanpete said:
It is a big problem for Labour, as it was for Dems in the US for most of the last 4 years. And that worked out OK in the end without Biden wrapping himself in the Stars n' Bars.CarlottaVance said:
The Stars n' Bars was the official flag of the Confederate States of America.
This was NOT the famous CSA battle flag aka the Stainless Banner (the one with 13 stars on St Andrew's cross) though that was incorporated into the last version of the official flag.
The US flag is the Stars n' Stripes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flags_of_the_Confederate_States_of_America0 -
Up to a point - you might see the two main parties fragment under an STV system though I suspect there will always be a centre-right bloc of parties and a centre-left bloc as occurs in most parliamentary systems.HYUFD said:
PR would make it more difficult for the Tories to win outright but also make it impossible for the Labour left to win a majority too, Corbyn would never have come close to a majority in 2017 as he did under PR for example.
PR would just make the LDs kingmakers in almost every general election
1 -
That's really not a spoof and he really writes shite like that? Jesus.Yokes said:https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1357407961375645696/photo/1
This I have to say is entertaining, its the sheer spite.0 -
IrvingFisher?Theuniondivvie said:Trumpers in the Bahamas for a cleansed Greater England. Nice that foreigns take an interest.
https://twitter.com/IrvingFisher16/status/1357397770122915842?s=20
Is he any relation to Irvine Welsh, the fierce Scot Nat, who lives in..... Miami?
It is remarkable how many prominent Scot Nats live about as far away from Scotland as they can.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irvine_Welsh
A trait they share, I readily confess, with some of the wankier Brexiteers
0 -
I would hope that the supermarkets realise they have a moral duty to their shareholders, and will behave in a way consistent with those obligations.Pulpstar said:0 -
Labour will only be able to come close in the UK, by making a clear and unequivocal statement that they will not work with the SNP after the election. The Tories will keep a clear lead in England otherwise.kinabalu said:
I was more thinking beyond the mechanics. If FPTP keeps returning pure Tory government on a minority of the vote the "people" will eventually demand a stop to it via electoral reform.MarqueeMark said:
Your problem is there is no way the SNP will vote to allow PR - because then they are a side-show at Westminster, rather than the support Labour vitally needs to form a Government.kinabalu said:
Possibly. Certainly I favour PR and if Labour now cannot win outright, I favour it even more. I think it's probably coming. The country will not tolerate electing Tory governments the whole time. I'd miss the dramatic brutality of FPTP but it really is a bizarre system when you think rationally about it.IanB2 said:
Labour had the chance, not to change the electorate, but to introduce a fairer way of delivering its representation, having explicitly promised to do so in its manifesto. That Labour reneged on this promise, led astray by the hubris of its false parliamentary majorities, is surely the biggest political misjudgment it has made during our lifetime.kinabalu said:
Yawn. But also not yawn - because Yes. Spot on. Change the electorate. As in move hearts & minds. As in remove scales from eyes.CarlottaVance said:
Change the electorate! That’ll be a winner!kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:2 -
-
So you claim - yet you also want the barbed wire to be straight up to Cumbria and Northumberland if they do vote to leave.HYUFD said:
No as I am a Unionist not an English nationalistPhilip_Thompson said:
Has HYUFD got a new account?Theuniondivvie said:Trumpers in the Bahamas for a cleansed Greater England. Nice that foreigns take an interest.
https://twitter.com/IrvingFisher16/status/1357397770122915842?s=200 -
Doesn't have to be with proper reform rather than tinkering round edgesstodge said:
Up to a point - you might see the two main parties fragment under an STV system though I suspect there will always be a centre-right bloc of parties and a centre-left bloc as occurs in most parliamentary systems.HYUFD said:
PR would make it more difficult for the Tories to win outright but also make it impossible for the Labour left to win a majority too, Corbyn would never have come close to a majority in 2017 as he did under PR for example.
PR would just make the LDs kingmakers in almost every general election
0 -
Levelling up is a great idea, but can it survive a wet Wednesday night in Stoke ??FrancisUrquhart said:I think Boris' levelling up has got quite a job to do....
https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/news/stoke-on-trent-news/gallery/spent-one-hour-hanley-24-49635260 -
Can you plead the fifth under Scottish law?CarlottaVance said:Didn't go willingly:
https://twitter.com/HTScotPol/status/1357408800748298241?s=200 -
0
-
The Tories could win a majority in England and Labour still get enough seats to form a government with the SNPSandpit said:
Labour will only be able to come close in the UK, by making a clear and unequivocal statement that they will not work with the SNP after the election. The Tories will keep a clear lead in England otherwise.kinabalu said:
I was more thinking beyond the mechanics. If FPTP keeps returning pure Tory government on a minority of the vote the "people" will eventually demand a stop to it via electoral reform.MarqueeMark said:
Your problem is there is no way the SNP will vote to allow PR - because then they are a side-show at Westminster, rather than the support Labour vitally needs to form a Government.kinabalu said:
Possibly. Certainly I favour PR and if Labour now cannot win outright, I favour it even more. I think it's probably coming. The country will not tolerate electing Tory governments the whole time. I'd miss the dramatic brutality of FPTP but it really is a bizarre system when you think rationally about it.IanB2 said:
Labour had the chance, not to change the electorate, but to introduce a fairer way of delivering its representation, having explicitly promised to do so in its manifesto. That Labour reneged on this promise, led astray by the hubris of its false parliamentary majorities, is surely the biggest political misjudgment it has made during our lifetime.kinabalu said:
Yawn. But also not yawn - because Yes. Spot on. Change the electorate. As in move hearts & minds. As in remove scales from eyes.CarlottaVance said:
Change the electorate! That’ll be a winner!kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:0 -
I hope everyone watched the parish council meeting from Cheshire posted earlier. Funniest thing Ive seen for ages.0
-
You are the English Nationalist who wanted to leave the EU and wants Scotland to leave the UKPhilip_Thompson said:
So you claim - yet you also want the barbed wire to be straight up to Cumbria and Northumberland if they do vote to leave.HYUFD said:
No as I am a Unionist not an English nationalistPhilip_Thompson said:
Has HYUFD got a new account?Theuniondivvie said:Trumpers in the Bahamas for a cleansed Greater England. Nice that foreigns take an interest.
https://twitter.com/IrvingFisher16/status/1357397770122915842?s=200 -
Good for him. If he can bring people on board, and - you know - get rid of someone for poor performance (UvdL), that would be an enormous step forward for the EU.Nigelb said:I’m pretty sure this wasn’t the agreed line...
https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/13573760669444464770 -
Er, it's consonant with the 15% of Brits who, apparently, refuse to take the jab. 19% of mega-oldsters say No. Add in cantankerous old gits, or deluded, trembling old cretins, to that 15% and it's easy to get 19%Theuniondivvie said:
At least we can all agree that 81% (and the mealy mouthed cover up of that figure) is deeply unimpressive.CarlottaVance said:
Impressive to only have 2% who either i) refused, ii) were not suitable, because of pre-existing conditions or recent infection. Truly incredible impressive!Theuniondivvie said:
They must have really flung the kitchen sink at the initial programme, it would certainly explain why the initial rollout was painstakingly slow.Alistair said:
I have just checked the numbers. It is indeed true.FlightsPath said:
Look... If Sturgeon says it's wonderful then BBC Scotland will say it's wonderful.Alistair said:
Yes because that is what Sturgeon is claiming has been achieved in Scotland.RobD said:
You are going off the total number, rather than the number eligible?Alistair said:
But only 80% of residents vaccinated.RobD said:
99.1% visited, so the number vaccinated is probably as high as it is going to get.Alistair said:English care home vaccination data linked from this tweet. No great mystery at all it turns out.
https://twitter.com/squire67/status/1357384137137655811?s=19
If the Scottish figure is indeed correct (and I truly find it hard to believe it true) that is an astonishing difference.
And I find that fairly unbelievable.
So pay attention then "how about getting with the programme? Why don't you jump on the team and come on in for the big win?"
Scotland has vaccinated 98% of older adult care homes. England has done 81%.
That is an astonishing difference.
Can't we?
It's not great news, however
I think Covid might be one case when we have to make jabbing compulsory. This is a fucking plague. It's REALLY NOT THE FLU
I'm a libertarian, generally, but if this disease continuously mutates through the vaccine-refusing minority then we will all be dead and there is no liberty in the grave0 -
One of the many reasons I could never vote Conservative was the undertone throughout the 1980s that you could only be patriotic if you were a Tory. Being anything other than a Conservative meant you didn't love your country.kinabalu said:
I think I agree, Ian. The country wants a vision. Not the same one, obviously and thankfully, but certainly something more than just a return to moderation and competence. The world is really changing fast.IanB2 said:
During the war Labour used the political breathing space to develop a truly radical blueprint for the better society it wanted to see after the war - much of it drawn from inter-war liberal thinking (such as the Beveridge report); securing election in 1945 on the back of this programme, the extent of change it achieved during its first term was breathtaking - the creation of the NHS, the modern welfare state, and the groundbreaking Planning Act.kinabalu said:
It doesn't mean Labour should become more patriotic necessarily. An alternative and superior solution would be for the public to grow up and become less so. The Conservatives would then have the problem. They'd have this more sophisticated and enlightened electorate getting pissed off with them and punishing them at the ballot box for banging on about Britain all the time and constantly waving flags around and implying we are something very special compared to those unfortunate enough to live elsewhere. That's where I hope we're heading once this little bout of Brexit-fueled national populism has blown itself out and people get back to brass tacks.CarlottaVance said:
Where are the signs that anyone on the centre or left of politics is even thinking about the same amount of heavy lifting for the 21st century?
Taking the widest historical view, the left of politics has always concerned itself with the radical changes needed to march society toward a better future (the consequences of such are for another day). Where is such a vision today? If Labour in 2024 simply puts itself forward as a more credible team of technocratic managers than the current lot, they are surely doomed.
That was disgraceful - men like Denis Healey and Michael Foot were patriots to the core. They had a different vision for Britain than the Conservatives but they loved their country every bit as much.
The problem with advocating radical or "bold" solutions is people are often frightened of change. It was clear in 1979 for example Butskellism had failed and we needed something different. In 1997, on the other hand, most people were happy with how thing they were - they just wanted a bit more money on public services and a change from the Conservatives.
The latter sentiment will be true again before too long - Starmer can win but only if he can persuade enough people the Labour Party he leads is a non-socialist party of the centre or centre left, supportive of the individual and small business.1
