Graham Brady – the man to whom the VONC letters are sent – politicalbetting.com

Scott_xP said:

The CCHQ search for precedents of PMs being booed at a royal event has just reached Spencer Perceval.
https://twitter.com/DAaronovitch/status/1532700648684257282

Scott_xP said:

The CCHQ search for precedents of PMs being booed at a royal event has just reached Spencer Perceval.
https://twitter.com/DAaronovitch/status/1532700648684257282

Foxy said:

ohnotnow said:

Leon said:

Still, at least there’s SOME good news

“Omicron subvariant drives spike in cases and deaths in Portugal

“Europe faces prospect of further Covid measures later in the year as share of Omicron BA.5 cases rise in Portugal and Germany”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/03/omicron-covid-subvariant-drives-spike-in-cases-and-deaths-in-portgual?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

It's odd that Portugal is taking such a hit when South Africa (where .4/.5 started and are dominant as far as I know) has seen barely a blip.

BA.5 is half of British cases now, though we have a low recorded rate of any covid at present. Worth noting that the vaccination rate in Portugal is 90%.

MISTY said:

Scott_xP said:

The CCHQ search for precedents of PMs being booed at a royal event has just reached Spencer Perceval.
https://twitter.com/DAaronovitch/status/1532700648684257282

All PMs get the bird. Johnson's interface with the public is meant to be his trump card, however.

Scott_xP said:

Tory supermarket boss brands PM's imperial measures idea 'utter nonsense' https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/20186079.tory-supermarket-boss-lord-rose-brands-boris-johnsons-imperial-measures-idea-utter-nonsense/?ref=twtrec

Scott_xP said:

When NHS waiting times have gone up because there are not enough EU staff, we can't fix that unless we are honest about it.

rottenborough said:

(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
·
12m
It's not exactly Ceausescu on the balcony. But Tory MPs will have noticed the boos for Boris. London crowd yes, but a crowd primarily made up of royal watchers.

IshmaelZ said:

Blimey, that is not one isolated, rogue, timid boo. That is a roar of rage from Middle England.

@ThatTimWalker

HYUFD said:

rottenborough said:

(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
·
12m
It's not exactly Ceausescu on the balcony. But Tory MPs will have noticed the boos for Boris. London crowd yes, but a crowd primarily made up of royal watchers.

It was at St Paul's which is in City of London and Westminster constituency, which now has a Labour council in Westminster.

Exellent sermon by Stephen Cottrell, Archbishop of York I thought

MISTY said:

IshmaelZ said:

Blimey, that is not one isolated, rogue, timid boo. That is a roar of rage from Middle England.

@ThatTimWalker

Indeed the tone of the crowd was genuinely really viscerally hostile.

Theuniondivvie said:

Christ, that Depp-Heard stuff is tedious.

Sees Brexteers returning to their self-pitying vomit on how Remoaners keep calling them thick racists, immediately turns to exploring the intricacies of Virginia defamation law and looking for clips of Johnny Depp on stage with Jeff Beck.

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

rottenborough said:

(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
·
12m
It's not exactly Ceausescu on the balcony. But Tory MPs will have noticed the boos for Boris. London crowd yes, but a crowd primarily made up of royal watchers.

It was at St Paul's which is in City of London and Westminster constituency, which now has a Labour council in Westminster.

Exellent sermon by Stephen Cottrell, Archbishop of York I thought

St Paul's is in the City of London, NOT the City of Westminster. So it would NOT have a Labour council!

The City is one of the most Tory rich places in the country, or it should be.

But HYUFD is intent on waving goodbye to London

MarqueeMark said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

Stuartinromford said:

DeClare said:

Leon said:

Remainers predicting we will Rejoin by 2040 should, perhaps, consider how the world has changed in the last six years, since Brexit. They are trying to look forward TWELVE years

18 years

And as the one who mentioned 2040...

Events, sure. Though events can push the dial either way. And most events, even big ones, are more transient than we might think. You can see the Vaccine War blip in the Brexit polling (and rightly so- it was a significant mistake by Brussels, albeit one that was swifty corrected), but it was a blip.

And the tectonics- both the age profile of Yay or Nay to Brexit in the UK, the sense that it isn't going well and it's not clear where the big win comes from, and the observation that nobody on the continent is looking at the UK and saying "yes, I'll have a bit of that"- point to a couple of decades.

But it is 18 years

Try and pick an 18 year period since, say, 1900, in which the world has not been transformed

1900-1918. The Great War, the Russian Revolution, the Spanish flu, the end of the Austrian and Ottoman empires, and much more

1918-1936? The Great Depression, the Russian Civil War, the rise of Hitler, Mussolini, Irish indy, the Spanish civil war

1936-1954 I shan’t bother

1954-1974 Space is explored. Man on the moon. Indian independence. End of empires. The sexual revolution. The pill. Nuclear stand off. The EEC is founded, Vietnam

1974-1992 Vietnam War ends. Watergate. Britain collapses. Thatcher, Reagan. Berlin Wall falls. The end of communism. EEC evolves towards EU. The internet begins

1992-2010 History speeds up again. Germany reunited. Collapse of USSR. War across Asia. American hegemony then the end of the American century. China rises. Incredible globalisation. Internet goes mad. 9/11. Terrorism. Smartphones. Iraq.

2010-now transformation of global economy. China becomes biggest trader. Africa turns to Beijing. EU expands. Scottish indy no. Brexit! Mass migration. Climate change. Social media changes humanity. Trump. Global plague. Ukraine


Ergo, predicting there will be a recognisable UK to join a recognisable EU in 18 years time is a fool’s errand. 18 years is an epoch and so much will happen to render this prediction quite fatuous

Indian independence was 1947.

But not until the constitution of 1956 was Pakistan an Islamic democratic country. And there was the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965. And East Pakistan then became Bangladesh in 1971. So a considerable turmoil on the sub-Continent for the 18 year epoch....

BartholomewRoberts said:

eristdoof said:

Andy_JS said:

kinabalu said:

Morning all. I think this one is pretty easy. The ideal is obviously to have standard units of measurement that everyone - young and old, right left or centrist, British or burdened by being foreign - understands and uses. That's the point of a measurement system. Clarity and consistency across people and places. So this should be the direction of travel. Going in the opposite direction, whilst not the most terrible thing in the world, is a bit silly. Which is on brand for this government. Everything they do that isn't terrible is a bit silly.

Hardly anyone in the UK uses metric measurements to describe their height.

Height really is the exteme in the measurement discussion though. In Australia they introduced the metric system for everything well over fifty years ago. When I lived there 20 years ago, most people still quoted their height in feet and inches even though all other linear measurements were in m/km/cm/mm and not many know how far 10 miles is. Weight is always given in Kg even in informal conversation.

I'm sure the reason for this is that people numeric height's are quoted and discussed in informal conversation very often (much more often than weight is) and so the old units remain in common usage for a long time.

Also height, unlike weight, effectively doesn't change for an adult.

Once you know your height, as an adult, you quote the same number pretty much for the rest of your life. Quoting a different number would be as alien as changing your date of birth.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

rottenborough said:

(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
·
12m
It's not exactly Ceausescu on the balcony. But Tory MPs will have noticed the boos for Boris. London crowd yes, but a crowd primarily made up of royal watchers.

It was at St Paul's which is in City of London and Westminster constituency, which now has a Labour council in Westminster.

Exellent sermon by Stephen Cottrell, Archbishop of York I thought

St Paul's is in the City of London, NOT the City of Westminster. So it would NOT have a Labour council!

It is in the City of London AND Westminster parliamentary constituency, Westminster council is now Labour controlled.

The City of London corporation candidates only stand as independents

Er, yes, and? St Paul's is NOT under Labour-held Westminster City Council.

Casino_Royale said:

For me, like many Leavers, it was the Lisbon Treaty that made me decide to leave once it was clear that no meaningful renegotiation was possible.

Amongst many things that awful treaty did, as a nakedly transparent rehash of the EU Constitution, it gave the EU legal identity so it could sign treaties in its own name, without reference to its member nations, created a president and high commissioner for foreign affairs, drove a huge extension in QMV voting, and enshrined the Charter of Fundamental Rights into EU law. This was one of the most potent drivers for me as it made rights judicable by the ECJ which led to them demanding the UK review its policy of not giving suffrage to prisoners.

This was then exacerbated by the agenda laid down by the new President Juncker who wanted to go even further and laid out a vision of EU social and fiscal union on top. A man who Cameron tried to stop and failed to stop.

No. No No No.

If Cameron had managed to achieve what he'd laid out in his Bloomberg Speech in 2013 it might have been different, but it wasn't.

I won't vote for any party that wants to take the UK back into that.

Roger said:

Casino_Royale said:

For me, like many Leavers, it was the Lisbon Treaty that made me decide to leave once it was clear that no meaningful renegotiation was possible.

Amongst many things that awful treaty did, as a nakedly transparent rehash of the EU Constitution, it gave the EU legal identity so it could sign treaties in its own name, without reference to its member nations, created a president and high commissioner for foreign affairs, drove a huge extension in QMV voting, and enshrined the Charter of Fundamental Rights into EU law. This was one of the most potent drivers for me as it made rights judicable by the ECJ which led to them demanding the UK review its policy of not giving suffrage to prisoners.

This was then exacerbated by the agenda laid down by the new President Juncker who wanted to go even further and laid out a vision of EU social and fiscal union on top. A man who Cameron tried to stop and failed to stop.

No. No No No.

If Cameron had managed to achieve what he'd laid out in his Bloomberg Speech in 2013 it might have been different, but it wasn't.

I won't vote for any party that wants to take the UK back into that.

Believing that the students who looked forward to learning Italian with a bar job in Florence or Rome or doing street photography in Arles or waiting tables in Vienna or doing ski instruction in Insbruch or being allowed free movement to 28 different countries is a sacrifice worth making so that prisoners in the UK don't get the right to vote is barking mad

GarethoftheVale2 said:

Question - does the UK have a designated survivor for public events like the US does? Seems like an awful lot of the UK's senior people are all in one place right now.

Sandpit said:

MattW said:

Farooq said:

Carnyx said:

Farooq said:

kle4 said:

Farooq said:

Stuartinromford said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Foxy said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Foxy said:

Sandpit said:

.

Foxy said:

kjh said:

MaxPB said:

Casino_Royale said:

noneoftheabove said:

Casino_Royale said:

noneoftheabove said:

Scott_xP said:

Taking back control-
Aviation chaos: We need to talk about Brexit | The Independent https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/airport-airline-chaos-flight-brexit-b2091300.html

“Brexit was a mistake which is causing harm but we shouldn’t do anything to reverse it” is a bizarre way of thinking. It’s like mishandling a knife and then resolving to let yourself bleed to death.
https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1532630897173962752

Not really. Some divorces are mistakes and people find out the grass is not greener. For that group it would still be the exception rather than the rule to get back together with the ex.

Perhaps we should try and tempt the EU with friends with benefits instead of a second marriage or bitter enemies bitching about each other?

I think that, in time, the UK and the EU will adopt a closer and more cooperative relationship with each other but we'll never go back to full EU membership. You can't ever put the genie wholly back in the box.

We had decades of friction over our membership for very good reasons and I think both sides recognise it was the wrong model for both the EU and the UK.

Agree with that although would replace wrong with imperfect. The Ukraine war may actually open up possibilities for different levels of involvement with the EU and a strong UK government would be exploring what possibilities an outside EU satellite group could develop.

Of course, if you look at the original Vote Leave manifesto (and I'm not trying to trigger anyone here) but 'create a new European institutional architecture' was in there.

It's certainly what I voted for, and would consider supporting today too.

I think that's a bit naïve, CR. Anything that puts the UK back in the EU's orbit is, IMO, unacceptable. I have no issue with co-operation with the EU as long as it's a very tightly defined set of rules with the basis of co-operation set out in separate agreements or treaties rather than one overall and undefined relationship based on "trust" or relying on the other partner to act favourably. No more freebies, no more favours.

I agree with that post. I am a remainer, but we have left and so what you describe is the way forward. I wish both sides would get on with it. In my opinion there are hundreds of trivial to complex agreements that have to be made to make all our lives better. Red tape on trade, and a particular bug bear of mine, is red tape on temporary exports, and then we trivial things, but which have significant real effects on people, like the pet passport fiasco and the 90 day in 180 day travel issue.

Lets get on with it.

However what we do re NI I have no idea.

I think that broadly will be the Labour, and LD, approach to Brexit at the next election To "do away with unnessecary Brexit red tape", the former tacitly, and the latter expicitly to ultimate Rejoin.

Red Wall Tory MPs would be over the moon if Labour takes that approach.

Recent polling on Brexit as a mistake and the 58% voting Lab/LD/Green suggests other wise.

Doubling down on Brexit culture wars is not the votewinner that you think.

Thinking it was a mistake but wanting to reverse it are two different questions

Furthermore, why are those who want to rejoin not standing fair and square and honestly saying so

Oh, I think the LD policy is honestly stated. To have a closer relationship inclusing rejoining the SM with the long term aim of Rejoin once opinion has moved.

Labours is less transparent, but clearly a move to closer alignment, which in practice means following EU regulations .

Absolutely not. Labour has no intention of joining the EU short or long term under Starmer. The issue is toxic

And for now, he's right to do so. Noise and toxicity beat raw numbers.

I stick by my calendar proposed on Brexit Day;

The 2024 rewrite of the TCA (which has to happen) will actually promote trade and co-operation at the expense of the UK giving up some of the more hypothetical freedoms.

2029 will be EEA in all but name.

2040ish will be the UK choosing to be in the room when decisions are taken.

A generation of withered trade and soured relationships. And all so Boomers with 3 O-Levels could get a different coloured passport and a vacuum cleaner that pumps out useless extra heat.

I suppose those with 3 O levels were to be respected previously when they voted the right way?

Well I think if we had a less in-work and pensioner poverty they might not have lashed out in such a self-defeating way.
If they voted to not be poorer that's all very nice but it's the passports and vacuum cleaners they'll be getting instead.

If they can afford them.

I'm sure if they gave up their avocado toast they could. Did you know you can eat for 30p a day?

Hmmm.

1 - Don't mention that France 24 is reporting airport chaos across Europe, it will destroy the propaganda. Due to (quote) "staff shortages and passenger increase due to the pandemic", citing Dublin, Schipol and Lisbon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMelspGa5Gk

2 - Interesting comments.

3 - Who claimed that you could eat for 30p a day? My MP Lee Anderson certainly did not.

Airlines and airports are the same everywhere at the moment. It’s a worldwide problem, they all laid off too many staff - many with specific skills, qualifications and clearances - during the pandemic, and now can’t get enough to come back as normality returns.

Casino_Royale said:

For me, like many Leavers, it was the Lisbon Treaty that made me decide to leave once it was clear that no meaningful renegotiation was possible.

Amongst many things that awful treaty did, as a nakedly transparent rehash of the EU Constitution, it gave the EU legal identity so it could sign treaties in its own name, without reference to its member nations, created a president and high commissioner for foreign affairs, drove a huge extension in QMV voting, and enshrined the Charter of Fundamental Rights into EU law. This was one of the most potent drivers for me as it made rights judicable by the ECJ which led to them demanding the UK review its policy of not giving suffrage to prisoners.

This was then exacerbated by the agenda laid down by the new President Juncker who wanted to go even further and laid out a vision of EU social and fiscal union on top. A man who Cameron tried to stop and failed to stop.

No. No No No.

If Cameron had managed to achieve what he'd laid out in his Bloomberg Speech in 2013 it might have been different, but it wasn't.

I won't vote for any party that wants to take the UK back into that.

Foxy said:

carnforth said:

Scott_xP said:

When NHS waiting times have gone up because there are not enough EU staff, we can't fix that unless we are honest about it.

NHS waiting times are up because of the pandemic.

The majority of foreign NHS staff are, and always have been, from outside the EU.

In any event, per the commons library:

"In June 2016 there were 58,698 staff with recorded EU nationality, and in January there were over 70,660. But to present this as the full story would be misleading, because we know that there are almost 50,000 more staff for whom nationality is known now than in 2016.

It is very likely that there has been an overall increase in the number of NHS staff with EU nationality since 2016, but we can’t be sure about the scale of the change, and it would be misleading to calculate an increase just based on the two numbers above."

(emphasis mine)

Full, interesting, details:

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7783/

You don't start truth and reconciliation by telling massive porkies.

Neither do you by not including this paragraph in the link:

"Nurses and health visitors are the only staff group to record a fall in the number of recorded EU nationals since the EU referendum. EU nurses as a percentage of those with a known nationality have fallen from 7.4% of the total to 5.6%."

In my department we have only one of our Portugese or Spanish nurses left, and a Romanian. All the others have gone back, and there have been no new arrivals.

Brexit is part of the reason, but covid was the other big part. Most of the EU nurses travelled back every few months but could not, and job opportunities became availible in Spain. It was a great opprtunity to move back home so they did.

Similarly our Greek doctors (Greece exports a lot of graduates) have mostly gone for similar reasons, to be replaced by Egyptians and South Asians.

Both Nurses and Doctors tended to register for the settlement scheme, even with no intention of returning, and none of them have returned.

Leon said:

Aslan said:

kle4 said:

Farooq said:

Stuartinromford said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Foxy said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Foxy said:

Sandpit said:

.

Foxy said:

kjh said:

MaxPB said:

Casino_Royale said:

noneoftheabove said:

Casino_Royale said:

noneoftheabove said:

Scott_xP said:

Taking back control-
Aviation chaos: We need to talk about Brexit | The Independent https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/airport-airline-chaos-flight-brexit-b2091300.html

“Brexit was a mistake which is causing harm but we shouldn’t do anything to reverse it” is a bizarre way of thinking. It’s like mishandling a knife and then resolving to let yourself bleed to death.
https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1532630897173962752

Not really. Some divorces are mistakes and people find out the grass is not greener. For that group it would still be the exception rather than the rule to get back together with the ex.

Perhaps we should try and tempt the EU with friends with benefits instead of a second marriage or bitter enemies bitching about each other?

I think that, in time, the UK and the EU will adopt a closer and more cooperative relationship with each other but we'll never go back to full EU membership. You can't ever put the genie wholly back in the box.

We had decades of friction over our membership for very good reasons and I think both sides recognise it was the wrong model for both the EU and the UK.

Agree with that although would replace wrong with imperfect. The Ukraine war may actually open up possibilities for different levels of involvement with the EU and a strong UK government would be exploring what possibilities an outside EU satellite group could develop.

Of course, if you look at the original Vote Leave manifesto (and I'm not trying to trigger anyone here) but 'create a new European institutional architecture' was in there.

It's certainly what I voted for, and would consider supporting today too.

I think that's a bit naïve, CR. Anything that puts the UK back in the EU's orbit is, IMO, unacceptable. I have no issue with co-operation with the EU as long as it's a very tightly defined set of rules with the basis of co-operation set out in separate agreements or treaties rather than one overall and undefined relationship based on "trust" or relying on the other partner to act favourably. No more freebies, no more favours.

I agree with that post. I am a remainer, but we have left and so what you describe is the way forward. I wish both sides would get on with it. In my opinion there are hundreds of trivial to complex agreements that have to be made to make all our lives better. Red tape on trade, and a particular bug bear of mine, is red tape on temporary exports, and then we trivial things, but which have significant real effects on people, like the pet passport fiasco and the 90 day in 180 day travel issue.

Lets get on with it.

However what we do re NI I have no idea.

I think that broadly will be the Labour, and LD, approach to Brexit at the next election To "do away with unnessecary Brexit red tape", the former tacitly, and the latter expicitly to ultimate Rejoin.

Red Wall Tory MPs would be over the moon if Labour takes that approach.

Recent polling on Brexit as a mistake and the 58% voting Lab/LD/Green suggests other wise.

Doubling down on Brexit culture wars is not the votewinner that you think.

Thinking it was a mistake but wanting to reverse it are two different questions

Furthermore, why are those who want to rejoin not standing fair and square and honestly saying so

Oh, I think the LD policy is honestly stated. To have a closer relationship inclusing rejoining the SM with the long term aim of Rejoin once opinion has moved.

Labours is less transparent, but clearly a move to closer alignment, which in practice means following EU regulations .

Absolutely not. Labour has no intention of joining the EU short or long term under Starmer. The issue is toxic

And for now, he's right to do so. Noise and toxicity beat raw numbers.

I stick by my calendar proposed on Brexit Day;

The 2024 rewrite of the TCA (which has to happen) will actually promote trade and co-operation at the expense of the UK giving up some of the more hypothetical freedoms.

2029 will be EEA in all but name.

2040ish will be the UK choosing to be in the room when decisions are taken.

A generation of withered trade and soured relationships. And all so Boomers with 3 O-Levels could get a different coloured passport and a vacuum cleaner that pumps out useless extra heat.

I suppose those with 3 O levels were to be respected previously when they voted the right way?

It's the contempt Remainers can't stop. "Anyone that disagrees with me is old and thick". They are completely unable to have a level headed conversation about it.

And in most discussions they can't even make a single concession in the argument. If you point out the predictions of the Remain campaign all turned out to be flat out lies, they will twist and turn trying to pretend otherwise. At best they will try to say the predictions were from evil Tories, rather ignoring the Labour leader of the Remain campaign repeating them everywhere.

Yes, they exude a fetid stench of sneering and snobbery, the Remainers: they cannot help themselves. The reek always escapes

It’s like Ken Livingstone trying to have a sensible conversation about Jews. Just wait a few minutes. Ah. There it is. Bingo

kinabalu said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

kinabalu said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

eristdoof said:

Andy_JS said:

kinabalu said:

Morning all. I think this one is pretty easy. The ideal is obviously to have standard units of measurement that everyone - young and old, right left or centrist, British or burdened by being foreign - understands and uses. That's the point of a measurement system. Clarity and consistency across people and places. So this should be the direction of travel. Going in the opposite direction, whilst not the most terrible thing in the world, is a bit silly. Which is on brand for this government. Everything they do that isn't terrible is a bit silly.

Hardly anyone in the UK uses metric measurements to describe their height.

Height really is the exteme in the measurement discussion though. In Australia they introduced the metric system for everything well over fifty years ago. When I lived there 20 years ago, most people still quoted their height in feet and inches even though all other linear measurements were in m/km/cm/mm and not many know how far 10 miles is. Weight is always given in Kg even in informal conversation.

I'm sure the reason for this is that people numeric height's are quoted and discussed in informal conversation very often (much more often than weight is) and so the old units remain in common usage for a long time.

Also height, unlike weight, effectively doesn't change for an adult.

Once you know your height, as an adult, you quote the same number pretty much for the rest of your life. Quoting a different number would be as alien as changing your date of birth.

Surely you'd soon get used to saying 160 cm instead of 5 foot 3?

I just compare it to my other large object and that works pretty well

Never compare! Used to spoil my after-pool changing room experience, that did.

MattW said:

kinabalu said:

Andy_JS said:

kinabalu said:

Morning all. I think this one is pretty easy. The ideal is obviously to have standard units of measurement that everyone - young and old, right left or centrist, British or burdened by being foreign - understands and uses. That's the point of a measurement system. Clarity and consistency across people and places. So this should be the direction of travel. Going in the opposite direction, whilst not the most terrible thing in the world, is a bit silly. Which is on brand for this government. Everything they do that isn't terrible is a bit silly.

Hardly anyone in the UK uses metric measurements to describe their height.

True. I don't. But the direction of travel on measurement units should be consolidation not the other way. That's my point really.

Agree there.

I use metric when calculating BMI in my head, but then the calc in Imperial is slightly complex !

What's 5'10" squared, divided by 13 stone 12 lb.? There are limits.

malcolmg said:

MattW said:

kinabalu said:

Andy_JS said:

kinabalu said:

Morning all. I think this one is pretty easy. The ideal is obviously to have standard units of measurement that everyone - young and old, right left or centrist, British or burdened by being foreign - understands and uses. That's the point of a measurement system. Clarity and consistency across people and places. So this should be the direction of travel. Going in the opposite direction, whilst not the most terrible thing in the world, is a bit silly. Which is on brand for this government. Everything they do that isn't terrible is a bit silly.

Hardly anyone in the UK uses metric measurements to describe their height.

True. I don't. But the direction of travel on measurement units should be consolidation not the other way. That's my point really.

Agree there.

I use metric when calculating BMI in my head, but then the calc in Imperial is slightly complex !

What's 5'10" squared, divided by 13 stone 12 lb.? There are limits.

Fat bastard

Carnyx said:

algarkirk said:

Carnyx said:

algarkirk said:

Scott_xP said:

Tory supermarket boss brands PM's imperial measures idea 'utter nonsense' https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/20186079.tory-supermarket-boss-lord-rose-brands-boris-johnsons-imperial-measures-idea-utter-nonsense/?ref=twtrec

Of course it's populist nonsense in terms of presentation. But there's a but.

The job of regulation is to ensure that there isn't fraud in weights and measures, and that information is given and not kept secret. That is not the same as which systems are allowed.

The best judge of how to measure things is the free market. Supermarkets have nothing to fear. A handful of them control the market and how suppliers shall operate. They also have to listen to customers.

If market traders in Barnsley and Essex want to sell apples in pounds there is decent reason for this to be decriminalised.

NB in my local German owned supermarket I buy their own brand coffee entirely in metric. The bags contain the memorable quantity of 227 grm. (Why, by the way)? Would it really be a crime to call it half a pound or 8 oz, which it is?

The buggers are already allowed to sell their apples in pounds, just so long as metric weights are also given.

Yes. The change being suggested is not great, though of course which system is the compulsory one gives a clue as to who is in charge.

And it is the sort of thing which showed a very un-UK like style of enforcement which did huge damage at the tabloid level. Governments, even Labour ones, forgot that popular tabloid readers vote.

A one size fits all approach whether you are selling potatoes to old ladies in Barnsley or doing designs for missile defence systems is not a winner.

Er, a one size approach is very necessary for missiles, and indeed anything remotely complex. Vide the Mars Climate Orbiter, which relied on a mixture of imperial (US variety) and metric.

malcolmg said:

Leon said:

Aslan said:

kle4 said:

Farooq said:

Stuartinromford said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Foxy said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Foxy said:

Sandpit said:

.

Foxy said:

kjh said:

MaxPB said:

Casino_Royale said:

noneoftheabove said:

Casino_Royale said:

noneoftheabove said:

Scott_xP said:

Taking back control-
Aviation chaos: We need to talk about Brexit | The Independent https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/airport-airline-chaos-flight-brexit-b2091300.html

“Brexit was a mistake which is causing harm but we shouldn’t do anything to reverse it” is a bizarre way of thinking. It’s like mishandling a knife and then resolving to let yourself bleed to death.
https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1532630897173962752

Not really. Some divorces are mistakes and people find out the grass is not greener. For that group it would still be the exception rather than the rule to get back together with the ex.

Perhaps we should try and tempt the EU with friends with benefits instead of a second marriage or bitter enemies bitching about each other?

I think that, in time, the UK and the EU will adopt a closer and more cooperative relationship with each other but we'll never go back to full EU membership. You can't ever put the genie wholly back in the box.

We had decades of friction over our membership for very good reasons and I think both sides recognise it was the wrong model for both the EU and the UK.

Agree with that although would replace wrong with imperfect. The Ukraine war may actually open up possibilities for different levels of involvement with the EU and a strong UK government would be exploring what possibilities an outside EU satellite group could develop.

Of course, if you look at the original Vote Leave manifesto (and I'm not trying to trigger anyone here) but 'create a new European institutional architecture' was in there.

It's certainly what I voted for, and would consider supporting today too.

I think that's a bit naïve, CR. Anything that puts the UK back in the EU's orbit is, IMO, unacceptable. I have no issue with co-operation with the EU as long as it's a very tightly defined set of rules with the basis of co-operation set out in separate agreements or treaties rather than one overall and undefined relationship based on "trust" or relying on the other partner to act favourably. No more freebies, no more favours.

I agree with that post. I am a remainer, but we have left and so what you describe is the way forward. I wish both sides would get on with it. In my opinion there are hundreds of trivial to complex agreements that have to be made to make all our lives better. Red tape on trade, and a particular bug bear of mine, is red tape on temporary exports, and then we trivial things, but which have significant real effects on people, like the pet passport fiasco and the 90 day in 180 day travel issue.

Lets get on with it.

However what we do re NI I have no idea.

I think that broadly will be the Labour, and LD, approach to Brexit at the next election To "do away with unnessecary Brexit red tape", the former tacitly, and the latter expicitly to ultimate Rejoin.

Red Wall Tory MPs would be over the moon if Labour takes that approach.

Recent polling on Brexit as a mistake and the 58% voting Lab/LD/Green suggests other wise.

Doubling down on Brexit culture wars is not the votewinner that you think.

Thinking it was a mistake but wanting to reverse it are two different questions

Furthermore, why are those who want to rejoin not standing fair and square and honestly saying so

Oh, I think the LD policy is honestly stated. To have a closer relationship inclusing rejoining the SM with the long term aim of Rejoin once opinion has moved.

Labours is less transparent, but clearly a move to closer alignment, which in practice means following EU regulations .

Absolutely not. Labour has no intention of joining the EU short or long term under Starmer. The issue is toxic

And for now, he's right to do so. Noise and toxicity beat raw numbers.

I stick by my calendar proposed on Brexit Day;

The 2024 rewrite of the TCA (which has to happen) will actually promote trade and co-operation at the expense of the UK giving up some of the more hypothetical freedoms.

2029 will be EEA in all but name.

2040ish will be the UK choosing to be in the room when decisions are taken.

A generation of withered trade and soured relationships. And all so Boomers with 3 O-Levels could get a different coloured passport and a vacuum cleaner that pumps out useless extra heat.

I suppose those with 3 O levels were to be respected previously when they voted the right way?

It's the contempt Remainers can't stop. "Anyone that disagrees with me is old and thick". They are completely unable to have a level headed conversation about it.

And in most discussions they can't even make a single concession in the argument. If you point out the predictions of the Remain campaign all turned out to be flat out lies, they will twist and turn trying to pretend otherwise. At best they will try to say the predictions were from evil Tories, rather ignoring the Labour leader of the Remain campaign repeating them everywhere.

Yes, they exude a fetid stench of sneering and snobbery, the Remainers: they cannot help themselves. The reek always escapes

It’s like Ken Livingstone trying to have a sensible conversation about Jews. Just wait a few minutes. Ah. There it is. Bingo

How long till you are fighting to get us back in EU

kjh said:

dixiedean said:

HYUFD said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

rottenborough said:

(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
·
12m
It's not exactly Ceausescu on the balcony. But Tory MPs will have noticed the boos for Boris. London crowd yes, but a crowd primarily made up of royal watchers.

It was at St Paul's which is in City of London and Westminster constituency, which now has a Labour council in Westminster.

Exellent sermon by Stephen Cottrell, Archbishop of York I thought

St Paul's is in the City of London, NOT the City of Westminster. So it would NOT have a Labour council!

It is in the City of London AND Westminster parliamentary constituency, Westminster council is now Labour controlled.

The City of London corporation candidates only stand as independents

Er, yes, and? St Paul's is NOT under Labour-held Westminster City Council.

It will have a Labour MP though given the swing to Labour in Westminster in the local elections, the City of London was 75% Remain and Westminster was 69% Remain, it is Remainer and anti Boris central

Are you seriously arguing that a crowd who show up to Royal watch is Remainer central?
I guess you are.

Yep that is nonsense isn't. Also those there aren't from Westminster or the City, they will be from all over the South East with many, many further afield in the UK. I mean yesterday they were interviewing people on the street from Australia, Canada and USA who had come especially.

Aslan said:

Foxy said:

MISTY said:

Scott_xP said:

The way forward on Brexit is truth and reconciliation.

We can't lance the boil until we admit the lies on which it was won.

When NHS waiting times have gone up because there are not enough EU staff, we can't fix that unless we are honest about it.

FoM was a benefit of membership, for everybody.

Both sides told whoppers, as you well know.

Of course they did. That's politics. It is the winners lies that grate though as they are the ones that we live with. Hence the falling support for Brexit.

The difference in this case is that we also get to see the losers case in action, as we witness EU bungling over vaccines, twice as high unemployment and incoherence over Ukraine.

Dura_Ace said:

MISTY said:

Scott_xP said:

The CCHQ search for precedents of PMs being booed at a royal event has just reached Spencer Perceval.
https://twitter.com/DAaronovitch/status/1532700648684257282

All PMs get the bird. Johnson's interface with the public is meant to be his trump card, however.

Particularly this crowd of daft twats who actually turned up in person to this nonsense bedecked in the Butcher's Apron. They should be Johnson's Republican Guard.

JonWC said:

stodge said:

JonWC said:

I was thinking of voting LibDem in the forthcoming T and H election, as I want Boris out. Reading this thread reminded my why I swore not to do that again.

Care to elaborate?

EU. The core leadership of the party would throw anything away, even liberalism and democracy, for it. The members used to be a bit more equivocal, and the voters at least in the SW were downright hostile.

I have knocked on literally thousands of doors for the LibDems. I was always bemused when other canvassers would report that Europe never came up, whereas I would receive it loud and clear at 120 decibels. I guess you hear what you want to hear.

I recall the LibDems staging a strop when their demand to get an in/out referendum was turned down. Of course when they (we) did get offered one a few years later they voted against it, duly lost it and used every trick in the Trump book to frustrate its implementation (with the honourable exception of the late great Paddy Ashdown).

Democracy when it suits doesn't work for me so I left the party after 28 years. Since then they seems to have been captured by the worst excesses of student extremism and pretty much reject the Enlightenment never mind about classical liberalism.

I actually think Jeremy Corbyn has a stronger grip on reality than the likes of Layla Moran.

Carnyx said:

kinabalu said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

kinabalu said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

eristdoof said:

Andy_JS said:

kinabalu said:

Morning all. I think this one is pretty easy. The ideal is obviously to have standard units of measurement that everyone - young and old, right left or centrist, British or burdened by being foreign - understands and uses. That's the point of a measurement system. Clarity and consistency across people and places. So this should be the direction of travel. Going in the opposite direction, whilst not the most terrible thing in the world, is a bit silly. Which is on brand for this government. Everything they do that isn't terrible is a bit silly.

Hardly anyone in the UK uses metric measurements to describe their height.

Height really is the exteme in the measurement discussion though. In Australia they introduced the metric system for everything well over fifty years ago. When I lived there 20 years ago, most people still quoted their height in feet and inches even though all other linear measurements were in m/km/cm/mm and not many know how far 10 miles is. Weight is always given in Kg even in informal conversation.

I'm sure the reason for this is that people numeric height's are quoted and discussed in informal conversation very often (much more often than weight is) and so the old units remain in common usage for a long time.

Also height, unlike weight, effectively doesn't change for an adult.

Once you know your height, as an adult, you quote the same number pretty much for the rest of your life. Quoting a different number would be as alien as changing your date of birth.

Surely you'd soon get used to saying 160 cm instead of 5 foot 3?

I just compare it to my other large object and that works pretty well

Never compare! Used to spoil my after-pool changing room experience, that did.

But that's a good point re height. I was last measured, oh, more than half a likely lifetime ago, when they were still working in feet and inches ... have never been measured in metric, though had to convert to metric to work out bmi.

northern_monkey said:

Boom!

Carnyx said:

algarkirk said:

Carnyx said:

algarkirk said:

Carnyx said:

algarkirk said:

Scott_xP said:

Tory supermarket boss brands PM's imperial measures idea 'utter nonsense' https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/20186079.tory-supermarket-boss-lord-rose-brands-boris-johnsons-imperial-measures-idea-utter-nonsense/?ref=twtrec

Of course it's populist nonsense in terms of presentation. But there's a but.

The job of regulation is to ensure that there isn't fraud in weights and measures, and that information is given and not kept secret. That is not the same as which systems are allowed.

The best judge of how to measure things is the free market. Supermarkets have nothing to fear. A handful of them control the market and how suppliers shall operate. They also have to listen to customers.

If market traders in Barnsley and Essex want to sell apples in pounds there is decent reason for this to be decriminalised.

NB in my local German owned supermarket I buy their own brand coffee entirely in metric. The bags contain the memorable quantity of 227 grm. (Why, by the way)? Would it really be a crime to call it half a pound or 8 oz, which it is?

The buggers are already allowed to sell their apples in pounds, just so long as metric weights are also given.

Yes. The change being suggested is not great, though of course which system is the compulsory one gives a clue as to who is in charge.

And it is the sort of thing which showed a very un-UK like style of enforcement which did huge damage at the tabloid level. Governments, even Labour ones, forgot that popular tabloid readers vote.

A one size fits all approach whether you are selling potatoes to old ladies in Barnsley or doing designs for missile defence systems is not a winner.

Er, a one size approach is very necessary for missiles, and indeed anything remotely complex. Vide the Mars Climate Orbiter, which relied on a mixture of imperial (US variety) and metric.

Agree. I think you misinterpret me. Potatoes and missiles don't require the same system as each other. It is possible, if trivial, to allow Steve in Barnsley a bit of slack on the banana front without destroying the planet.

But he already has that slack!

Anyway, off to finish decluttering the room ...