politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Betting on a David Miliband return could make sense
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Betting on a David Miliband return could make sense
Having left British politics a few years ago, David Miliband is making a comeback of sorts, less than a week after Labour’s conference in September (and less than a month after Labour’s new leader has been elected) as he will be the keynote speaker at the Institute of Directors’ annual convention.
0
Comments
-
First?
Not sure that DM will be back. First there needs to be a by-election in a winnable seat, then there needs to be a parachuted selection then a successful by election. Can't see it myself. The appearance at the IOD is just an "I told you so!" to the Labour Party.0 -
0
-
Looking at tomorrow's front pages, my fear about the Tory Party being irrecoverably damaged by the EU is a little closer to be realised0
-
Labour was always bananas.0
-
Both an In vote and an Out vote have tremendous risks for the Tories. Either way there is going to be major rancour.TheScreamingEagles said:Looking at tomorrow's front pages, my fear about the Tory Party being irrecoverably damaged by the EU is a little closer to be realised
A good opportunity for a LD and Labour revival.0 -
.....and for UKIP to come through the middle and take the prize.TheScreamingEagles said:Looking at tomorrow's front pages, my fear about the Tory Party being irrecoverably damaged by the EU is a little closer to be realised
0 -
They can build on their 102 current seats...MikeK said:
.....and for UKIP to come through the middle and take the prize.TheScreamingEagles said:Looking at tomorrow's front pages, my fear about the Tory Party being irrecoverably damaged by the EU is a little closer to be realised
0 -
We'll build on our nearly 4 million votes!foxinsoxuk said:
They can build on their 102 current seats...MikeK said:
.....and for UKIP to come through the middle and take the prize.TheScreamingEagles said:Looking at tomorrow's front pages, my fear about the Tory Party being irrecoverably damaged by the EU is a little closer to be realised
0 -
What... to take us deeper into the EU? How does that work then? How does any of all this that and the other work when nobody knows nothing about anything that hasn't happened? Headlines? We should be worried about headlines. Headlines about some imaginary ripple in the space time continuum that will be tomorrow's chip paper. No one has learned anything have they?foxinsoxuk said:
Both an In vote and an Out vote have tremendous risks for the Tories. Either way there is going to be major rancour.TheScreamingEagles said:Looking at tomorrow's front pages, my fear about the Tory Party being irrecoverably damaged by the EU is a little closer to be realised
A good opportunity for a LD and Labour revival.0 -
On Sol @ 66/1 !
You've got to be in it to win it; DM can only have a chance if he puts in the hours and returns to Westminster at the first available opportunity. If he does not put his name in at the first realistic by-election, then he won:t have a chance. His track record suggests he doesn't have the bottle ( unlike his brother)!0 -
It's not just Labour voters who were relieved you lost Harriet.TheScreamingEagles said:Harriet Harman being commendably honest
0 -
Which was down on the number of votes in 2014. Peak Kipper.MikeK said:
We'll build on our nearly 4 million votes!foxinsoxuk said:
They can build on their 102 current seats...MikeK said:
.....and for UKIP to come through the middle and take the prize.TheScreamingEagles said:Looking at tomorrow's front pages, my fear about the Tory Party being irrecoverably damaged by the EU is a little closer to be realised
Indeed I think it quite likely that the number of UKIP MPs will go down next GE.0 -
More likely you'll fall back. What odds would you give to UKIP polling less than this time, next time?MikeK said:
We'll build on our nearly 4 million votes!foxinsoxuk said:
They can build on their 102 current seats...MikeK said:
.....and for UKIP to come through the middle and take the prize.TheScreamingEagles said:Looking at tomorrow's front pages, my fear about the Tory Party being irrecoverably damaged by the EU is a little closer to be realised
0 -
See. Ed with his Bacon sandwich and David with his banana. The Tories start their warfare even before the war starts.0
-
A Tory party navel gazing over Europe will be a major turn off for swing voters, who are not obsessed by the EU, and want a bit of competent government.Flightpathl said:
What... to take us deeper into the EU? How does that work then? How does any of all this that and the other work when nobody knows nothing about anything that hasn't happened? Headlines? We should be worried about headlines. Headlines about some imaginary ripple in the space time continuum that will be tomorrow's chip paper. No one has learned anything have they?foxinsoxuk said:
Both an In vote and an Out vote have tremendous risks for the Tories. Either way there is going to be major rancour.TheScreamingEagles said:Looking at tomorrow's front pages, my fear about the Tory Party being irrecoverably damaged by the EU is a little closer to be realised
A good opportunity for a LD and Labour revival.
Indeed it is not impossible that a Tory government could collapse in the aftermath of the referendum, and not go the full 5 years.0 -
Cameron isn't seriously telling members of his Cabinet how to vote in a secret ballot is he?0
-
Blimey, the Kippers are rattled.
Mind you, given the lamentable state of the Out campaign, they have good reason to be rattled. It's probably not too much of an exaggeration to say they've already lost.
I did tell 'em their strategy (if that's not too strong a word) was bonkers.0 -
The Kippers are worried they're going to lose and have their fox shot. Easier to complain we haven't had a vote, than know you've lost one.0
-
Amusing quote from Hammond on Marr:
Government ministers will be free to support the government line.0 -
Pretty standard collective responsibility to have government ministers support the government line.
Given the renegotiation hasn't finished yet that doesn't mean its pre-determine. Cameron has said only if his renegotiation is successful - in which case it makes sense as government policy. To have government ministers say the government failed while the government says it was right would be absurd.
Nobody is pre-judging the negotiation or saying backbenchers need to be mute.0 -
As for Miliband (D), who wants yesterday's man? Even less will they want him when he reminds them of Miliband minor. He'd be well advised, for his own sake, to keep well away.0
-
Not really, Wilson allowed his ministers to vote how they liked. Typical arrogance from Cameron to refuse to do the same.Philip_Thompson said:Pretty standard collective responsibility to have government ministers support the government line.
Given the renegotiation hasn't finished yet that doesn't mean its pre-determine. Cameron has said only if his renegotiation is successful - in which case it makes sense as government policy. To have government ministers say the government failed while the government says it was right would be absurd.
Nobody is pre-judging the negotiation or saying backbenchers need to be mute.0 -
Cameron will allow his ministers to vote how they like, its a secret ballot. Cameron is showing leadership, if you think its typical of Cameron then its no wonder Cameron is the most successful Tory leader since Thatcher.0
-
Don't be daft. It's got absolutely zero to do with arrogance. Wilson was cornered and had no choice.AndyJS said:Not really, Wilson allowed his ministers to vote how they liked. Typical arrogance from Cameron to refuse to do the same.
As it happens, I think that Cameron will probably also have no choice, and will allow certainly Conservative MPs, and possibly ministers (although maybe not cabinet ministers), to campaign on either side. If so, it will be the weakness of his political position, not arrogance, which is the determining factor. In other words, reality - the party is split on this issue, and there's no getting away from that.0 -
It's rather depressing. As an outer what they need to do is put the fact that there is no status quo front and centre while hiding the vile racism as far away from the campaign as possible. It seems like they'll go for a core vote strategy of circa 33% though.Richard_Nabavi said:Blimey, the Kippers are rattled.
Mind you, given the lamentable state of the Out campaign, they have good reason to be rattled. It's probably not too much of an exaggeration to say they've already lost.
I did tell 'em their strategy (if that's not too strong a word) was bonkers.0 -
Well said Richard. I don't think Cameron should desire to be as weak as Wilson. He may end up being so, but that's not something to aspire towards.0
-
They need first, foremost and absolutely clearly to figure out what they actually want. In the EEA or not? A trade treaty with the EU, or not? If yes (and clearly it has to be yes, otherwise they'll struggle to get 10% in the referendum), on what kind of terms? - and they must be realistic terms.Chameleon said:
It's rather depressing. As an outer what they need to do is put the fact that there is no status quo front and centre while hiding the vile racism as far away from the campaign as possible. It seems like they'll go for a core vote strategy of circa 33% though.Richard_Nabavi said:Blimey, the Kippers are rattled.
Mind you, given the lamentable state of the Out campaign, they have good reason to be rattled. It's probably not too much of an exaggeration to say they've already lost.
I did tell 'em their strategy (if that's not too strong a word) was bonkers.
But, to be honest, I think it's too late. They should have started this three years ago.0 -
Also, what I suspect may happen, given his previous commitment to campaign for in no matter what, is that he'll go to the other leaders with a long shopping list, and when he doesn't get it he'll turn around and say, that event though he said that he would previously campaign for In, what the EU has done by refusing it so openly was an insult to Britain and it's voters and would recommend an out vote.
This combined with the pushing of there being no status quo (which is a very cutting message - reminiscent of the Conservative-SNP attack line on Labour) could quite easily see an out vote.0 -
On the topic at hand, surely what Labour need in a new leader and senior team are clean skins with 'modernising' tendencies (in the Labour context); preferably people who did not play a front line role in the previous Labour government with all the attending baggage, economic and otherwise that such connections would entail? I can't see Miliband the Elder fitting that bill and not convinced that a return to Parliament only to sit on the backbenches would hold much appeal for him.0
-
They'll never win on the specifics, if they attempt to do that it'll look utterly chaotic as there'll be campaigns for out from the left and right.Richard_Nabavi said:
They need first, foremost and absolutely clearly to figure out what they actually want. In the EEA or not? A trade treaty with the EU, or not? If yes (and clearly it has to be yes, otherwise they'll struggle to get 10% in the referendum), on what kind of terms? - and they must be realistic terms.Chameleon said:
It's rather depressing. As an outer what they need to do is put the fact that there is no status quo front and centre while hiding the vile racism as far away from the campaign as possible. It seems like they'll go for a core vote strategy of circa 33% though.Richard_Nabavi said:Blimey, the Kippers are rattled.
Mind you, given the lamentable state of the Out campaign, they have good reason to be rattled. It's probably not too much of an exaggeration to say they've already lost.
I did tell 'em their strategy (if that's not too strong a word) was bonkers.
But, to be honest, I think it's too late. They should have started this three years ago.
They need to keep this as wider debate, about whether we want Westminster to be our primary law maker, whether we want 40 more years of integration and whether the EU does what is in it's best interests instead of ours.
If DC stands up and says that if we vote no he'll use his remaining three years to get the best deal for the UK, irrespective of party allegiance, before stepping down it would calm fears.
This needs to be fought like how the YeSNP fought the Sindy campaign. However the big differences is that Out is starting from a higher base, with a softer audience and much less emotional attachment from the breakee.0 -
That simply isn't going to happen. If Cameron campaigns for Yes and the public votes No he'll have to resign. He's not going to try and calm down worries for No while wanting a Yes, nor pledge to work for No as that would have to be someone else's responsibility (it'd have to be someone who'd campaigned successfully for No).0
-
If he hadn't jumped ship across the Atlantic in a huff when he lost maybe David would seem more plausible for a return to me. It made him look very flakey.
Re Cameron's ministers and campaigning as they like, I'll take the word others it was allowed before, but I don't actually see a problem with a PM requiring his ministers to in public at the least not contradict his position if they want to remain ministers in the interim. We all know I think that Cameron will step down if he loses, so anyone going against his recommendation is, in a principled way admittedly, fighting for the of his tenure too. If they already intending to campaign for out they are saying he is going to fail, which would also be incompatible with staying in government, if accurate.
Night all.0 -
Of course, I'm assuming in that circumstance that he will campaign for No - which is a very real possibility. He won't walk away from negotiations having gotten nothing (which again, is likely) and meekly recommend an In vote.Philip_Thompson said:That simply isn't going to happen. If Cameron campaigns for Yes and the public votes No he'll have to resign. He's not going to try and calm down worries for No while wanting a Yes, nor pledge to work for No as that would have to be someone else's responsibility (it'd have to be someone who'd campaigned successfully for No).
0 -
kle4, it's true Wilson allowed his Cabinet to campaign on both sides. The Wiki entry for the 1975 referendum is quite interesting.
http://tinyurl.com/paozsot
I didn't know that Roy Jenkins resigned in protest as Deputy Leader of Labour in 1972 when the Shadow Cabinet supported an amendment in the Commons (from a Tory MP) which called for a referendum.0 -
Cameron now saying that people are perfectly capable of voting on two or more important matters at the same time.
Why, then, did he agree to the 2015 Scottish Parliament election being put back 12 months to avoid it clashing with the general election?0 -
It's not likely that he'll get nothing. Merkel and others have made clear they expect a deal to be reached. Why you think its likely to get no deal when all parties concerned say they want one and expect one is beyond me.
If Cameron expects a deal, and Merkel expects a deal, I think the deal will be made. I think Cameron and Merkel both have a very good idea both what the UK wants and what Germany and others are willing for us to have. The idea that its likely there's no common ground on that I don't understand. That's wishful thinking from you and goes against all evidence.0 -
On the question of the disposition of the Cabinet in the EU Referendum: Surely the option that the PM recommends (to say nothing of which side his Ministers are able to support) depends on the outcome of the renegotiation of our relationship with the Union? If there are no 'meaningful concessions' as previously demanded, would the PM himself not have to recommend a vote to leave? Certainly, I understand that his preference would be to remain but if he secures nothing of any significance at the bargaining table and recommends a 'Yes' vote anyway I expect that would put very heavy pressure on party unity.0
-
With the benefit of hindsight, out of tactical genius.AndyJS said:Cameron now saying that people are perfectly capable of voting on two or more important matters at the same time.
Why, then, did he agree to the 2015 Scottish Parliament election being put back 12 months to avoid it clashing with the general election?0 -
There's a massive difference between a Yes/No choice and a Party choice, versus two Party Choices for different Parliaments held using different voting systems.AndyJS said:Cameron now saying that people are perfectly capable of voting on two or more important matters at the same time.
Why, then, did he agree to the 2015 Scottish Parliament election being put back 12 months to avoid it clashing with the general election?
I think people are fully capable of comprehending both their regular elections and a straight Yes/No choice at the same time. Its not unusual to have multiple elections on the same day, we had local elections on the same day as the General Election. What caused problems in Scotland in 2007 was multiple elections using different voting systems on the same day.0 -
I do hope that is the case. It is no more than they - and you - deserve.TheScreamingEagles said:Looking at tomorrow's front pages, my fear about the Tory Party being irrecoverably damaged by the EU is a little closer to be realised
Actually I doubt it will happen unfortunately. But I would be over the moon if Cameron turned out to be the man to break the Tory party and the issue was the EU.0 -
Mo Farah told of Alberto Salazar 'doping' scandal a month ago
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/11658375/Mo-Farah-told-of-Alberto-Salazar-doping-scandal-a-month-ago.html
Whoever is advising him needs shooting. He has been caught out lying now over when he knew about this, even giving the BBC a written statement. That after the whole way he did the press conference was totally wrong, then running off back to the US at the last minute.0 -
I doubt it will happen, fortunately, but I fail to see why you'd be over the moon. The people who'd benefit the most from a broken Tory party would be Labour supporters and EU supporters. I don't see you as either.Richard_Tyndall said:
I do hope that is the case. It is no more than they - and you - deserve.TheScreamingEagles said:Looking at tomorrow's front pages, my fear about the Tory Party being irrecoverably damaged by the EU is a little closer to be realised
Actually I doubt it will happen unfortunately. But I would be over the moon if Cameron turned out to be the man to break the Tory party and the issue was the EU.0 -
I doubt the council elections will make much difference as Hague and Miliband did well in the seats up next year and badly in the general, the mid term polls will be more important if Labour trails and the new leader polls badly. I doubt Miliband would be a replacement though given his surname is now tied to defeat. On the mayoralty Alan Sugar could be an outside bet to come through the middle as an independent now he has renounced his Labour membership and of course he used to be a Tory too, especially with Boris not running again0
-
Pfft. Cameron expects to have something to present to the people, is can be as insubstantial as you like, he's a PR man, making nothing look like something is his stock-in-trade. Merkel will be delighted to offer him "nothing" dressed up any way he likes if he thinks he can sell it to the British public. This business about the cabinet not being allowed to campaign is about keeping the lid on ambitious euro-sceptics like Hammond and Gove.Philip_Thompson said:If Cameron expects a deal, and Merkel expects a deal, I think the deal will be made. I think Cameron and Merkel both have a very good idea both what the UK wants and what Germany and others are willing for us to have. The idea that its likely there's no common ground on that I don't understand. That's wishful thinking from you and goes against all evidence.
0 -
Quite. If Cameron tries to dress up a fig leaf as a designer suit and then attempts to make supporting In the government line, he will suffer resignations and defections in huge numbers.Expatriate_Tory said:On the question of the disposition of the Cabinet in the EU Referendum: Surely the option that the PM recommends (to say nothing of which side his Ministers are able to support) depends on the outcome of the renegotiation of our relationship with the Union? If there are no 'meaningful concessions' as previously demanded, would the PM himself not have to recommend a vote to leave? Certainly, I understand that his preference would be to remain but if he secures nothing of any significance at the bargaining table and recommends a 'Yes' vote anyway I expect that would put very heavy pressure on party unity.
0 -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/11658391/david-cameron-cabinet-ultimatum-eu-referendum.html
Mr Cameron also hinted at an early referendum, potentially as soon as May next year, and insisted that any deal he gets from EU leaders will have to be “legally binding”.
And when the "legally binding" agreement is overturned by the ECJ, then what? Do we all shrug say "Oh well, we tried", pat ourselves on the back for voting IN, and carry on down the road to EU integration ?0 -
And there would endeth a CON majority government.Sandpit said:
Quite. If Cameron tries to dress up a fig leaf as a designer suit and then attempts to make supporting In the government line, he will suffer resignations and defections in huge numbers.Expatriate_Tory said:On the question of the disposition of the Cabinet in the EU Referendum: Surely the option that the PM recommends (to say nothing of which side his Ministers are able to support) depends on the outcome of the renegotiation of our relationship with the Union? If there are no 'meaningful concessions' as previously demanded, would the PM himself not have to recommend a vote to leave? Certainly, I understand that his preference would be to remain but if he secures nothing of any significance at the bargaining table and recommends a 'Yes' vote anyway I expect that would put very heavy pressure on party unity.
0 -
Indeed Mike, it would bring down the government - hence my astonishment at Cameron's attitude. I would have expected him to allow a free campaign precisely to avoid this situation. The fact he mentions this stance so early in the negotiations renders them pretty much meaningless in terms of concessions from his EU partners.MikeSmithson said:
And there would endeth a CON majority government.Sandpit said:
Quite. If Cameron tries to dress up a fig leaf as a designer suit and then attempts to make supporting In the government line, he will suffer resignations and defections in huge numbers.Expatriate_Tory said:On the question of the disposition of the Cabinet in the EU Referendum: Surely the option that the PM recommends (to say nothing of which side his Ministers are able to support) depends on the outcome of the renegotiation of our relationship with the Union? If there are no 'meaningful concessions' as previously demanded, would the PM himself not have to recommend a vote to leave? Certainly, I understand that his preference would be to remain but if he secures nothing of any significance at the bargaining table and recommends a 'Yes' vote anyway I expect that would put very heavy pressure on party unity.
Edit: I owe @MikeK an apology for rubbishing his UKIP source for the story last night - as it happens they had it before anyone else!0 -
I do wonder if Cameron has some sort of informal pre-agreement from Merkel (and others) on what he is likely to get, he is certainly behaving as if it is a foregone conclusion.Sandpit said:
Quite. If Cameron tries to dress up a fig leaf as a designer suit and then attempts to make supporting In the government line, he will suffer resignations and defections in huge numbers.Expatriate_Tory said:On the question of the disposition of the Cabinet in the EU Referendum: Surely the option that the PM recommends (to say nothing of which side his Ministers are able to support) depends on the outcome of the renegotiation of our relationship with the Union? If there are no 'meaningful concessions' as previously demanded, would the PM himself not have to recommend a vote to leave? Certainly, I understand that his preference would be to remain but if he secures nothing of any significance at the bargaining table and recommends a 'Yes' vote anyway I expect that would put very heavy pressure on party unity.
0 -
David Miliband refused to serve under his own brother, preferring to leave the country and sulk. I cannot see him as the answer to Labour's future problems, whatever they might be.0
-
If you were the newly elected Labour leader would you want David Miliband back in the Commons? As a potential standard bearer for those who become disillusioned by your leadership? As a reminder of failures past as the party desperately tries to move on from the crushing mistake of electing Brown and the cowardice of those who would not challenge him even although he was demented?
Thought not. You'd move heaven and earth to make sure he didn't get selected as a by election candidate.0 -
Morning all.
Can I just check I have got the new line right...Cameron won't survive coalition, and will have to resign
Cameron won't survive Leveson, and will have to resign
Cameron won't survive the Coulson trial, and will have to resign
Cameron won't survive the IndyRef, and will have to resign
Cameron won't survive the other Coulson trial, and will have to resign
Cameron won't survive the election, EICIPM, and will have to resign
Cameron won't survive the EU ref, and will have to resign0 -
As for the Tories, the economically dry, socially liberal not obsessed about the EU wing will be a tiny paper boat of sanity in the maelstrom of the next few years.
This is going to determine whether Cameron is recorded as an exceptionally good PM or a great one. Holding the Tories together over this is going to take a miracle.0 -
Very funny..but not unexpected .PB lefties are killing Cameron off again...how many times does that make it.0
-
It sounds as if it is the PB righties that have him in their sights. The PB lefties are just enjoying their popcorn.richardDodd said:Very funny..but not unexpected .PB lefties are killing Cameron off again...how many times does that make it.
If Cameron expels cabinet ministers for campaigning Out, then it will improve it significantly.0 -
I think he'll survive the EU ref - but if somehow he doesn't he will resign.Scott_P said:Morning all.
Can I just check I have got the new line right...Cameron won't survive coalition, and will have to resign
Cameron won't survive Leveson, and will have to resign
Cameron won't survive the Coulson trial, and will have to resign
Cameron won't survive the IndyRef, and will have to resign
Cameron won't survive the other Coulson trial, and will have to resign
Cameron won't survive the election, EICIPM, and will have to resign
Cameron won't survive the EU ref, and will have to resign0 -
Cameron is being what he has to be.. The Boss..it is always the mark of a good PM..
..and it scares the bejesus out of weak lefties0 -
I'd suggest that many observers do a Sherlock Holmes and ask to be reminded of Norbury, before deciding Cameron was finished [passim].
Michael Farron's Dead Cat springs to mind. Cameron is at the G7 - what poker chips do you expect him to play in the negotiation dance? It is not all as it seems. Ever.
/turns off analogy and metaphor mode/0 -
PB lefties of the Labour variety would be better off looking at who leads their own party. I daresay as a caring, competent doctor, Burnham would not be getting your vote if you are/were a Labour member?foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if it is the PB righties that have him in their sights. The PB lefties are just enjoying their popcorn.richardDodd said:Very funny..but not unexpected .PB lefties are killing Cameron off again...how many times does that make it.
If Cameron expels cabinet ministers for campaigning Out, then it will improve it significantly.
Cameron has been underestimated on here time and time again. We even saw the 'lucky general' meme brought out the other day. He has a very difficult course to navigate wrt the referendum, but he's sailed such courses before.
On the other hand, you have an 'out' vote that is likely to be led by that hopeless idiot, the unelectable (*) Farage. It'll be no contest. Sadly.
(*) Except by party lists.0 -
I assume so - it's how the EU normally works. An informal agreement is accompanied by lots of drama for domestic audiences, but the key is to spot what everyone is making a red line. Cameron is saying it's slower benefits for migrants, Poland is saying benefits only if the rules apply to Brits too (Cameron will be fine with that), Germany and France are saying no new Treaty (yeah, whatever), everyone is up for verbiage (Britain is not compelled to agree to closer union, ever - well, we aren't now in practice because there's a veto on Treaty change, so that's in the bag). Throw in something about the City and a fudge about the ECHR and you've basically got a deal that nobody has said they won't accept.JohnLilburne said:
I do wonder if Cameron has some sort of informal pre-agreement from Merkel (and others) on what he is likely to get, he is certainly behaving as if it is a foregone conclusion.Sandpit said:
Quite. If Cameron tries to dress up a fig leaf as a designer suit and then attempts to make supporting In the government line, he will suffer resignations and defections in huge numbers.Expatriate_Tory said:On the question of the disposition of the Cabinet in the EU Referendum: Surely the option that the PM recommends (to say nothing of which side his Ministers are able to support) depends on the outcome of the renegotiation of our relationship with the Union? If there are no 'meaningful concessions' as previously demanded, would the PM himself not have to recommend a vote to leave? Certainly, I understand that his preference would be to remain but if he secures nothing of any significance at the bargaining table and recommends a 'Yes' vote anyway I expect that would put very heavy pressure on party unity.
People who want the EU to be radically different won't be pleased and will campaign for Out, but lose. Europhiles will feel it's not wonderful but hey. In a few years, we'll struggle to remember what's changed.0 -
Cameron is not negotiating on his own behalf, he is negotiating on behalf of the UK government. If ministers do not like what the UK government does and do not feel they can defend the line it takes, then they have to leave. It was ever thus. The only surprise is that anyone might have thought otherwise.
What will Boris do? He has a career-defining choice to make in the next year or so.0 -
Don't forget fewer employment protections for British workers and less statutory holidays etc. That will be a nice bone for the Tory right and one which our European chums will be happy to give to us bearing in mind our already abysmal productivity record.NickPalmer said:
I assume so - it's how the EU normally works. An informal agreement is accompanied by lots of drama for domestic audiences, but the key is to spot what everyone is making a red line. Cameron is saying it's slower benefits for migrants, Poland is saying benefits only if the rules apply to Brits too (Cameron will be fine with that), Germany and France are saying no new Treaty (yeah, whatever), everyone is up for verbiage (Britain is not compelled to agree to closer union, ever - well, we aren't now in practice because there's a veto on Treaty change, so that's in the bag). Throw in something about the City and a fudge about the ECHR and you've basically got a deal that nobody has said they won't accept.JohnLilburne said:
I do wonder if Cameron has some sort of informal pre-agreement from Merkel (and others) on what he is likely to get, he is certainly behaving as if it is a foregone conclusion.Sandpit said:
Quite. If Cameron tries to dress up a fig leaf as a designer suit and then attempts to make supporting In the government line, he will suffer resignations and defections in huge numbers.Expatriate_Tory said:On the question of the disposition of the Cabinet in the EU Referendum: Surely the option that the PM recommends (to say nothing of which side his Ministers are able to support) depends on the outcome of the renegotiation of our relationship with the Union? If there are no 'meaningful concessions' as previously demanded, would the PM himself not have to recommend a vote to leave? Certainly, I understand that his preference would be to remain but if he secures nothing of any significance at the bargaining table and recommends a 'Yes' vote anyway I expect that would put very heavy pressure on party unity.
People who want the EU to be radically different won't be pleased and will campaign for Out, but lose. Europhiles will feel it's not wonderful but hey. In a few years, we'll struggle to remember what's changed.
0 -
Agreed - the left blank out reality so quickly. Yesterday the moronic hyufd was writing in a nailed on LD and Labour revival by 2020 onthe basis sfa. Credit to Harman today for acknowledging the real issues Labour faces. I doubt we'll see the same from the LDs.JosiasJessop said:
PB lefties of the Labour variety would be better off looking at who leads their own party. I daresay as a caring, competent doctor, Burnham would not be getting your vote if you are/were a Labour member?foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if it is the PB righties that have him in their sights. The PB lefties are just enjoying their popcorn.richardDodd said:Very funny..but not unexpected .PB lefties are killing Cameron off again...how many times does that make it.
If Cameron expels cabinet ministers for campaigning Out, then it will improve it significantly.
Cameron has been underestimated on here time and time again. We even saw the 'lucky general' meme brought out the other day. He has a very difficult course to navigate wrt the referendum, but he's sailed such courses before.
On the other hand, you have an 'out' vote that is likely to be led by that hopeless idiot, the unelectable (*) Farage. It'll be no contest. Sadly.
.
(*) Except by party lists.0 -
The usually excellent Mr Tyndall is suffering from the malaise that too many BOOers are infected with: they are looking for excuses about why they lost the referendum before the vote has even taken place. In the same way some were arguing that there would never be a referendum.Philip_Thompson said:
I doubt it will happen, fortunately, but I fail to see why you'd be over the moon. The people who'd benefit the most from a broken Tory party would be Labour supporters and EU supporters. I don't see you as either.Richard_Tyndall said:
I do hope that is the case. It is no more than they - and you - deserve.TheScreamingEagles said:Looking at tomorrow's front pages, my fear about the Tory Party being irrecoverably damaged by the EU is a little closer to be realised
Actually I doubt it will happen unfortunately. But I would be over the moon if Cameron turned out to be the man to break the Tory party and the issue was the EU.
As someone who is inclined to vote out, it is depressing that this is happening, but it seems that 'out' currently has little of any positive value to say. They've had years to prepare for this, and there is an absolute intellectual vacuum at out's heart.0 -
He will support In. His power base in London wants it very badly, he wants to be a part of a successful government and the 2m centrist voters that Cameron picked up to replace the Kippers are more his sort of people anyway.SouthamObserver said:Cameron is not negotiating on his own behalf, he is negotiating on behalf of the UK government. If ministers do not like what the UK government does and do not feel they can defend the line it takes, then they have to leave. It was ever thus. The only surprise is that anyone might have thought otherwise.
What will Boris do? He has a career-defining choice to make in the next year or so.0 -
Wow. I largely concur. Help!NickPalmer said:
I assume so - it's how the EU normally works. An informal agreement is accompanied by lots of drama for domestic audiences, but the key is to spot what everyone is making a red line. Cameron is saying it's slower benefits for migrants, Poland is saying benefits only if the rules apply to Brits too (Cameron will be fine with that), Germany and France are saying no new Treaty (yeah, whatever), everyone is up for verbiage (Britain is not compelled to agree to closer union, ever - well, we aren't now in practice because there's a veto on Treaty change, so that's in the bag). Throw in something about the City and a fudge about the ECHR and you've basically got a deal that nobody has said they won't accept.JohnLilburne said:
I do wonder if Cameron has some sort of informal pre-agreement from Merkel (and others) on what he is likely to get, he is certainly behaving as if it is a foregone conclusion.Sandpit said:
Quite. If Cameron tries to dress up a fig leaf as a designer suit and then attempts to make supporting In the government line, he will suffer resignations and defections in huge numbers.Expatriate_Tory said:On the question of the disposition of the Cabinet in the EU Referendum: Surely the option that the PM recommends (to say nothing of which side his Ministers are able to support) depends on the outcome of the renegotiation of our relationship with the Union? If there are no 'meaningful concessions' as previously demanded, would the PM himself not have to recommend a vote to leave? Certainly, I understand that his preference would be to remain but if he secures nothing of any significance at the bargaining table and recommends a 'Yes' vote anyway I expect that would put very heavy pressure on party unity.
People who want the EU to be radically different won't be pleased and will campaign for Out, but lose. Europhiles will feel it's not wonderful but hey. In a few years, we'll struggle to remember what's changed.0 -
I don't think he has the guts to go against Cameron on this when he will probably win. He'll probably try to position as the successor afterwards as Cameron sets in motion his leaving as the most difficult part of his term is concluded. Unless Cameron, flush with success, decides to stay on again.SouthamObserver said:Cameron is not negotiating on his own behalf, he is negotiating on behalf of the UK government. If ministers do not like what the UK government does and do not feel they can defend the line it takes, then they have to leave. It was ever thus. The only surprise is that anyone might have thought otherwise.
What will Boris do? He has a career-defining choice to make in the next year or so.
Re an agreement and what it would look like, I've no doubt one will be made and there will be concessions, I think nickplalmer characterises the way these things go well. The key is if that deal will be substantive enough to allay concerns. For me, I highly doubt it will because EU leaders are either contemptuous of the aims of many in Britain or just don't want to go that far. So as difficult as it may be Cameron will have no choice but to present something small as huge.0 -
Well quite.SouthamObserver said:
Cameron is not negotiating on his own behalf, he is negotiating on behalf of the UK government. If ministers do not like what the UK government does and do not feel they can defend the line it takes, then they have to leave. It was ever thus. The only surprise is that anyone might have thought otherwise.
What will Boris do? He has a career-defining choice to make in the next year or so.0 -
I would be quite happy with Burnham. He was fine as Minister for Health. Far better than Hewitt, Reid or Milburn who were all malignant. He would be running for PM not Minister of Health this time round.JosiasJessop said:
PB lefties of the Labour variety would be better off looking at who leads their own party. I daresay as a caring, competent doctor, Burnham would not be getting your vote if you are/were a Labour member?foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if it is the PB righties that have him in their sights. The PB lefties are just enjoying their popcorn.richardDodd said:Very funny..but not unexpected .PB lefties are killing Cameron off again...how many times does that make it.
If Cameron expels cabinet ministers for campaigning Out, then it will improve it significantly.
Cameron has been underestimated on here time and time again. We even saw the 'lucky general' meme brought out the other day. He has a very difficult course to navigate wrt the referendum, but he's sailed such courses before.
On the other hand, you have an 'out' vote that is likely to be led by that hopeless idiot, the unelectable (*) Farage. It'll be no contest. Sadly.
(*) Except by party lists.
On Farage: who ever is the official face of Out, it will be Farage who is seen as the spokesperson. He is a media tart and unable to shun the limelight. In his own words: Never has the party been so unified around me"0 -
Breast cancer-hit former NHS chief causes outrage after she moves to England to get life-saving drugs she denied Welsh patients
Mary Burrows, 58, enjoyed £200,000 salary before stepping down last year
Was chief executive of Welsh health board which denied life-saving drugs
Could not get breast cancer drug for herself in Wales so moved to London
Campaigners said it is 'kick in the teeth' for patients who don't have option
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3114654/
Results of devolution!0 -
Felix, calm down young man, early in the week to be so wound up. Sun is shining , hard week ahead chill.felix said:
Agreed - the left blank out reality so quickly. Yesterday the moronic hyufd was writing in a nailed on LD and Labour revival by 2020 onthe basis sfa. Credit to Harman today for acknowledging the real issues Labour faces. I doubt we'll see the same from the LDs.JosiasJessop said:
PB lefties of the Labour variety would be better off looking at who leads their own party. I daresay as a caring, competent doctor, Burnham would not be getting your vote if you are/were a Labour member?foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if it is the PB righties that have him in their sights. The PB lefties are just enjoying their popcorn.richardDodd said:Very funny..but not unexpected .PB lefties are killing Cameron off again...how many times does that make it.
If Cameron expels cabinet ministers for campaigning Out, then it will improve it significantly.
Cameron has been underestimated on here time and time again. We even saw the 'lucky general' meme brought out the other day. He has a very difficult course to navigate wrt the referendum, but he's sailed such courses before.
On the other hand, you have an 'out' vote that is likely to be led by that hopeless idiot, the unelectable (*) Farage. It'll be no contest. Sadly.
.
(*) Except by party lists.0 -
Foxinsox Everybody would be happy with Burnham.
0 -
I would prefer Kendall; but Burnham will be better than Cooper. The rest are non-runners.richardDodd said:Foxinsox Everybody would be happy with Burnham.
0 -
I agree with the majority view that things are looking incredibly one sided at the moment. So much so it might be worth thinking about what could go wrong.
I think there is some irritation that the EU is being distracted by this issue when the EZ is being threatened by the possible Grexit and the UK response to the Mediterranean refugee crisis is distinctly underwhelming our friends.
The ante is being raised with Greece again who are being threatened with not only a departure from the EZ but from the EU as well. It is possible that Cameron might be told yes, but now really isn't the time. The new references to something legally binding might be straws in the wind for this.
There are also straws in the wind about the global economic situation. If there was a major downturn with our deficit at current levels we, and the government, would be in serious trouble with Osborne criticised for not acting quicker. Such uncertainty ought to be bad for Out but who can say?
The situation greatly favours In but there are scenarios which gives Out a chance.0 -
So you would be happy with someone who does not support inquiries into the health service because it may hurt the trust's reputation?foxinsoxuk said:
I would be quite happy with Burnham. He was fine as Minister for Health. Far better than Hewitt, Reid or Milburn who were all malignant. He would be running for PM not Minister of Health this time round.JosiasJessop said:
PB lefties of the Labour variety would be better off looking at who leads their own party. I daresay as a caring, competent doctor, Burnham would not be getting your vote if you are/were a Labour member?foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if it is the PB righties that have him in their sights. The PB lefties are just enjoying their popcorn.richardDodd said:Very funny..but not unexpected .PB lefties are killing Cameron off again...how many times does that make it.
If Cameron expels cabinet ministers for campaigning Out, then it will improve it significantly.
Cameron has been underestimated on here time and time again. We even saw the 'lucky general' meme brought out the other day. He has a very difficult course to navigate wrt the referendum, but he's sailed such courses before.
On the other hand, you have an 'out' vote that is likely to be led by that hopeless idiot, the unelectable (*) Farage. It'll be no contest. Sadly.
(*) Except by party lists.
On Farage: who ever is the official face of Out, it will be Farage who is seen as the spokesperson. He is a media tart and unable to shun the limelight. In his own words: Never has the party been so unified around me"
Wow.
You really are one of the producers.
If he did that for health, imagine what he would do as PM.
Let me repeat: Burnham's scum.0 -
Given that I consider Cameron to be just as committed a Europhile as the Labour leadership I simply don't recognise the distinction. It is only committed Tories who believe there is any real difference between the leadership of the two parties on the EU.Philip_Thompson said:
I doubt it will happen, fortunately, but I fail to see why you'd be over the moon. The people who'd benefit the most from a broken Tory party would be Labour supporters and EU supporters. I don't see you as either.Richard_Tyndall said:
I do hope that is the case. It is no more than they - and you - deserve.TheScreamingEagles said:Looking at tomorrow's front pages, my fear about the Tory Party being irrecoverably damaged by the EU is a little closer to be realised
Actually I doubt it will happen unfortunately. But I would be over the moon if Cameron turned out to be the man to break the Tory party and the issue was the EU.0 -
Burnham set up the Stafford inquiry within a month of taking office in June 2009. It is ridiculous to say he did not support the inquiry.JosiasJessop said:
So you would be happy with someone who does not support inquiries into the health service because it may hurt the trust's reputation?foxinsoxuk said:
I would be quite happy with Burnham. He was fine as Minister for Health. Far better than Hewitt, Reid or Milburn who were all malignant. He would be running for PM not Minister of Health this time round.JosiasJessop said:
PB lefties of the Labour variety would be better off looking at who leads their own party. I daresay as a caring, competent doctor, Burnham would not be getting your vote if you are/were a Labour member?foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if it is the PB righties that have him in their sights. The PB lefties are just enjoying their popcorn.richardDodd said:Very funny..but not unexpected .PB lefties are killing Cameron off again...how many times does that make it.
If Cameron expels cabinet ministers for campaigning Out, then it will improve it significantly.
Cameron has been underestimated on here time and time again. We even saw the 'lucky general' meme brought out the other day. He has a very difficult course to navigate wrt the referendum, but he's sailed such courses before.
On the other hand, you have an 'out' vote that is likely to be led by that hopeless idiot, the unelectable (*) Farage. It'll be no contest. Sadly.
(*) Except by party lists.
On Farage: who ever is the official face of Out, it will be Farage who is seen as the spokesperson. He is a media tart and unable to shun the limelight. In his own words: Never has the party been so unified around me"
Wow.
You really are one of the producers.
If he did that for health, imagine what he would do as PM.
Let me repeat: Burnham's scum.0 -
Quite. Because in reality absolutely nothing will have changed and we will still be tied to the failing economic backwater.NickPalmer said:
I assume so - it's how the EU normally works. An informal agreement is accompanied by lots of drama for domestic audiences, but the key is to spot what everyone is making a red line. Cameron is saying it's slower benefits for migrants, Poland is saying benefits only if the rules apply to Brits too (Cameron will be fine with that), Germany and France are saying no new Treaty (yeah, whatever), everyone is up for verbiage (Britain is not compelled to agree to closer union, ever - well, we aren't now in practice because there's a veto on Treaty change, so that's in the bag). Throw in something about the City and a fudge about the ECHR and you've basically got a deal that nobody has said they won't accept.JohnLilburne said:
I do wonder if Cameron has some sort of informal pre-agreement from Merkel (and others) on what he is likely to get, he is certainly behaving as if it is a foregone conclusion.Sandpit said:
Quite. If Cameron tries to dress up a fig leaf as a designer suit and then attempts to make supporting In the government line, he will suffer resignations and defections in huge numbers.Expatriate_Tory said:On the question of the disposition of the Cabinet in the EU Referendum: Surely the option that the PM recommends (to say nothing of which side his Ministers are able to support) depends on the outcome of the renegotiation of our relationship with the Union? If there are no 'meaningful concessions' as previously demanded, would the PM himself not have to recommend a vote to leave? Certainly, I understand that his preference would be to remain but if he secures nothing of any significance at the bargaining table and recommends a 'Yes' vote anyway I expect that would put very heavy pressure on party unity.
People who want the EU to be radically different won't be pleased and will campaign for Out, but lose. Europhiles will feel it's not wonderful but hey. In a few years, we'll struggle to remember what's changed.0 -
Burnham is the nations choice...for many diverse reasons.0
-
Cameron does have form in misjudging the views of the bulk of his MPs on Europe. It took rebellions to force the referendum commitment. Cameron is also surrounded by europhiles in his inner circle. So this latest hard line from Cameron may be a fundamental error. Elections in 2016 and 2017 now look more volatile in England.0
-
Dr Palmer,
As a man who seems keen on political union in the EU (apologies if I've misunderstood), I wonder if you could clarify something. We've been told that ever closer union was in the original 1957 treaty and was always the aim. Why then wasn't it made explicit and proceeded with rapidly? Was it something to do with the fact that it would have been decisively rejected?
And hence the mission creep.
Some senior Eurocrats are still insisting political union is the aim. Romano Prodi stated within ten or twenty years. Why isn't that being publicised?
As I've said on here before ... softly, softly, catchee maonkey.
0 -
Actually JJ I have never once argued the referendum wouldn't take place and have always argued it would be a stitch up. Of course many Tory fanatics on here will be arguing it wasn't a stitch up even after it is obvious to everyone else that Cameron won absolutely nothing and that Carswell was right all along about his intentions for the referendum.JosiasJessop said:
The usually excellent Mr Tyndall is suffering from the malaise that too many BOOers are infected with: they are looking for excuses about why they lost the referendum before the vote has even taken place. In the same way some were arguing that there would never be a referendum.Philip_Thompson said:
I doubt it will happen, fortunately, but I fail to see why you'd be over the moon. The people who'd benefit the most from a broken Tory party would be Labour supporters and EU supporters. I don't see you as either.Richard_Tyndall said:
I do hope that is the case. It is no more than they - and you - deserve.TheScreamingEagles said:Looking at tomorrow's front pages, my fear about the Tory Party being irrecoverably damaged by the EU is a little closer to be realised
Actually I doubt it will happen unfortunately. But I would be over the moon if Cameron turned out to be the man to break the Tory party and the issue was the EU.
As someone who is inclined to vote out, it is depressing that this is happening, but it seems that 'out' currently has little of any positive value to say. They've had years to prepare for this, and there is an absolute intellectual vacuum at out's heart.0 -
You press the personal attack button too readily, Josias, both here and in assessing public figures. Most people, in particular most people interested in the NHS like Fox and certainly most members like Burnham - the question to be decided is whether he looks rime Ministerial enough. What we think personally isn't really the issue here - we're discussing what the membership thinks and then the wider electorate.JosiasJessop said:
So you would be happy with someone who does not support inquiries into the health service because it may hurt the trust's reputation?foxinsoxuk said:
I would be quite happy with Burnham. He was fine as Minister for Health. Far better than Hewitt, Reid or Milburn who were all malignant. He would be running for PM not Minister of Health this time round.JosiasJessop said:
PB lefties of the Labour variety would be better off looking at who leads their own party. I daresay as a caring, competent doctor, Burnham would not be getting your vote if you are/were a Labour member?foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if it is the PB righties that have him in their sights. The PB lefties are just enjoying their popcorn.richardDodd said:Very funny..but not unexpected .PB lefties are killing Cameron off again...how many times does that make it.
If Cameron expels cabinet ministers for campaigning Out, then it will improve it significantly.
Cameron has been underestimated on here time and time again. We even saw the 'lucky general' meme brought out the other day. He has a very difficult course to navigate wrt the referendum, but he's sailed such courses before.
On the other hand, you have an 'out' vote that is likely to be led by that hopeless idiot, the unelectable (*) Farage. It'll be no contest. Sadly.
(*) Except by party lists.
On Farage: who ever is the official face of Out, it will be Farage who is seen as the spokesperson. He is a media tart and unable to shun the limelight. In his own words: Never has the party been so unified around me"
Wow.
You really are one of the producers.
If he did that for health, imagine what he would do as PM.
Let me repeat: Burnham's scum.
Off to Holland for a conference, so signing off for a while.0 -
Good morning, everyone.
Post-race piece should be up this morning.
Was astounded to see the papers last night. Cameron appears to have decided on taking one of three paths:
1) securing the renaming of the EU as the British Empire, with France to spend every Sunday celebrating Anglo-Saxon culture, and fees to paid to the UK rather than vice versa
2) campaigning for Out
3) getting brutally murdered by his backbenchers. And frontbenchers
It's undemocratic and really quite surprising. Trying to recall what my position was on this a week or two ago. I think I thought it was possible, but would be a mistake.0 -
Ahem. He set up a private inquiry that was widely criticised. The coalition government set up the Francis inquiry in public, which finally got to the truth.foxinsoxuk said:
Burnham set up the Stafford inquiry within a month of taking office in June 2009. It is ridiculous to say he did not support the inquiry.JosiasJessop said:
So you would be happy with someone who does not support inquiries into the health service because it may hurt the trust's reputation?foxinsoxuk said:
I would be quite happy with Burnham. He was fine as Minister for Health. Far better than Hewitt, Reid or Milburn who were all malignant. He would be running for PM not Minister of Health this time round.JosiasJessop said:
PB lefties of the Labour variety would be better off looking at who leads their own party. I daresay as a caring, competent doctor, Burnham would not be getting your vote if you are/were a Labour member?foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if it is the PB righties that have him in their sights. The PB lefties are just enjoying their popcorn.richardDodd said:Very funny..but not unexpected .PB lefties are killing Cameron off again...how many times does that make it.
If Cameron expels cabinet ministers for campaigning Out, then it will improve it significantly.
Cameron has been underestimated on here time and time again. We even saw the 'lucky general' meme brought out the other day. He has a very difficult course to navigate wrt the referendum, but he's sailed such courses before.
On the other hand, you have an 'out' vote that is likely to be led by that hopeless idiot, the unelectable (*) Farage. It'll be no contest. Sadly.
(*) Except by party lists.
On Farage: who ever is the official face of Out, it will be Farage who is seen as the spokesperson. He is a media tart and unable to shun the limelight. In his own words: Never has the party been so unified around me"
Wow.
You really are one of the producers.
If he did that for health, imagine what he would do as PM.
Let me repeat: Burnham's scum.
As for supporting the Francis inquiry:Andy Burnham said events had borne out his view that the benefits of a public inquiry had not outweighed the reputational damage to the hospital.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2873911/Outcry-Burnham-claims-Mid-Staffs-probe-mistake-Labour-accused-insulting-victims-saying-better-report-never-published.html
...
Mr Burnham replied: 'I was worried that a full public inquiry would damage the trust beyond repair. Think that's been borne out.'
So you're wrong.0 -
Cameron's stance seems so unnecessarily risky, especially for so skilled a politician, that I'm beginning to wonder if he has got the nod and wink from Merkel for a really good deal on Europe.0
-
I'm very cool - about to set off on a Mediterranean cruise tomorrow! But calm or not the PB lefties like hyufd are moronicmalcolmg said:
Felix, calm down young man, early in the week to be so wound up. Sun is shining , hard week ahead chill.felix said:
Agreed - the left blank out reality so quickly. Yesterday the moronic hyufd was writing in a nailed on LD and Labour revival by 2020 onthe basis sfa. Credit to Harman today for acknowledging the real issues Labour faces. I doubt we'll see the same from the LDs.JosiasJessop said:
PB lefties of the Labour variety would be better off looking at who leads their own party. I daresay as a caring, competent doctor, Burnham would not be getting your vote if you are/were a Labour member?foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if it is the PB righties that have him in their sights. The PB lefties are just enjoying their popcorn.richardDodd said:Very funny..but not unexpected .PB lefties are killing Cameron off again...how many times does that make it.
If Cameron expels cabinet ministers for campaigning Out, then it will improve it significantly.
Cameron has been underestimated on here time and time again. We even saw the 'lucky general' meme brought out the other day. He has a very difficult course to navigate wrt the referendum, but he's sailed such courses before.
On the other hand, you have an 'out' vote that is likely to be led by that hopeless idiot, the unelectable (*) Farage. It'll be no contest. Sadly.
.
(*) Except by party lists.
0 -
Mr. Jessop, must agree on Stafford.
Mr. Penkridge, that's it. Either he gets the best deal realistically possible, he campaigns for Out, or his party kills him six minutes after the polls close (either in revenge or celebration).0 -
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2873911/Outcry-Burnham-claims-Mid-Staffs-probe-mistake-Labour-accused-insulting-victims-saying-better-report-never-published.htmlJosiasJessop said:
Ahem. He set up a private inquiry that was widely criticised. The coalition government set up the Francis inquiry in public, which finally got to the truth.foxinsoxuk said:
Burnham set up the Stafford inquiry within a month of taking office in June 2009. It is ridiculous to say he did not support the inquiry.JosiasJessop said:
So you would be happy with someone who does not support inquiries into the health service because it may hurt the trust's reputation?foxinsoxuk said:
I would be quite happy with Burnham. He was fine as Minister for Health. Far better than Hewitt, Reid or Milburn who were all malignant. He would be running for PM not Minister of Health this time round.JosiasJessop said:
PB lefties of the Labour varietyfoxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if it is the PB righties that have him in their sights. The PB lefties are just enjoying their popcorn.richardDodd said:Very funny..but not unexpected .PB lefties are killing Cameron off again...how many times does that make it.
If Cameron expels cabinet ministers for campaigning Out, then it will improve it significantly.
On Farage: who ever is the official face of Out, it will be Farage who is seen as the spokesperson. He is a media tart and unable to shun the limelight. In his own words: Never has the party been so unified around me"
Wow.
You really are one of the producers.
If he did that for health, imagine what he would do as PM.
Let me repeat: Burnham's scum.
As for supporting the Francis inquiry:Andy Burnham said events had borne out his view that the benefits of a public inquiry had not outweighed the reputational damage to the hospital.
...
Mr Burnham replied: 'I was worried that a full public inquiry would damage the trust beyond repair. Think that's been borne out.'
So you're wrong.
I said that he set up the original inquiry, which is entirely correct.
Confidential and public inquiries have their pros and cons. Confidential inquiries are speedier, cheaper and often people are able to speak more frankly.
The 10 hospitals with worse SHIMI (Standardised Hospital Inpatient Mortality Index) than Stafford have not had public inquiries.
It was Labour who brought such statistics into the public domain, in part to drive improvements.
Off to work now, but while I have many disagreements with Labours management of the NHS (it was a major reason that I left the party) Burnhams role is not one of them.0 -
In the same way that I rarely doubt facts presented by @Richard_Tyndall on the EU or AGW, I feel the same about yours re Stafford. Your tragic personal experience of it speaks for itself re knowing your onions.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2873911/Outcry-Burnham-claims-Mid-Staffs-probe-mistake-Labour-accused-insulting-victims-saying-better-report-never-published.htmlJosiasJessop said:
Ahem. He set up a private inquiry that was widely criticised. The coalition government set up the Francis inquiry in public, which finally got to the truth.foxinsoxuk said:
Burnham set up the Stafford inquiry within a month of taking office in June 2009. It is ridiculous to say he did not support the inquiry.JosiasJessop said:
So you would be happy with someone who does not support inquiries into the health service because it may hurt the trust's reputation?foxinsoxuk said:
I would be quite happy with Burnham. He was fine as Minister for Health. Far better than Hewitt, Reid or Milburn who were all malignant. He would be running for PM not Minister of Health this time round.JosiasJessop said:
snipfoxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if it is the PB righties that have him in their sights. The PB lefties are just enjoying their popcorn.richardDodd said:Very funny..but not unexpected .PB lefties are killing Cameron off again...how many times does that make it.
If Cameron expels cabinet ministers for campaigning Out, then it will improve it significantly.
(*) Except by party lists.
On Farage: who ever is the official face of Out, it will be Farage who is seen as the spokesperson. He is a media tart and unable to shun the limelight. In his own words: Never has the party been so unified around me"
Wow.
You really are one of the producers.
If he did that for health, imagine what he would do as PM.
Let me repeat: Burnham's scum.
As for supporting the Francis inquiry:Andy Burnham said events had borne out his view that the benefits of a public inquiry had not outweighed the reputational damage to the hospital.
...
Mr Burnham replied: 'I was worried that a full public inquiry would damage the trust beyond repair. Think that's been borne out.'
So you're wrong.
0 -
Yes, Nick 'Stalker' Palmer. I'm sure I press that button too readily.NickPalmer said:
You press the personal attack button too readily, Josias, both here and in assessing public figures. Most people, in particular most people interested in the NHS like Fox and certainly most members like Burnham - the question to be decided is whether he looks rime Ministerial enough. What we think personally isn't really the issue here - we're discussing what the membership thinks and then the wider electorate.JosiasJessop said:
So you would be happy with someone who does not support inquiries into the health service because it may hurt the trust's reputation?foxinsoxuk said:
I would be quite happy with Burnham. He was fine as Minister for Health. Far better than Hewitt, Reid or Milburn who were all malignant. He would be running for PM not Minister of Health this time round.JosiasJessop said:
PB lefties of the Labour variety would be better off looking at who leads their own party. I daresay as a caring, competent doctor, Burnham would not be getting your vote if you are/were a Labour member?foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if it is the PB righties that have him in their sights. The PB lefties are just enjoying their popcorn.richardDodd said:Very funny..but not unexpected .PB lefties are killing Cameron off again...how many times does that make it.
If Cameron expels cabinet ministers for campaigning Out, then it will improve it significantly.
Cameron has been underestimated on here time and time again. We even saw the 'lucky general' meme brought out the other day. He has a very difficult course to navigate wrt the referendum, but he's sailed such courses before.
On the other hand, you have an 'out' vote that is likely to be led by that hopeless idiot, the unelectable (*) Farage. It'll be no contest. Sadly.
(*) Except by party lists.
On Farage: who ever is the official face of Out, it will be Farage who is seen as the spokesperson. He is a media tart and unable to shun the limelight. In his own words: Never has the party been so unified around me"
Wow.
You really are one of the producers.
If he did that for health, imagine what he would do as PM.
Let me repeat: Burnham's scum.
Off to Holland for a conference, so signing off for a while.
It's not as it I repeatedly accused a poster of being a stalker when I lost an argument, is it? Perhaps you should remove the plank from your eye.
Leaving that aside, are you saying that you agree with Burnham over his view on the Francis report?0 -
Cameron = Caesar
Stunning victories, within a year of taking power, stabbed in the back (and front) by a bunch of pygmies, who can never defeat him in battle.0 -
Plato said:
In the same way that I rarely doubt facts presented by @Richard_Tyndall on the EU or AGW, I feel the same about yours re Stafford. Your tragic personal experience of it speaks for itself re knowing your onions.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2873911/Outcry-Burnham-claims-Mid-Staffs-probe-mistake-Labour-accused-insulting-victims-saying-better-report-never-published.htmlJosiasJessop said:
Ahem. He set up a private inquiry that was widely criticised. The coalition government set up the Francis inquiry in public, which finally got to the truth.foxinsoxuk said:
Burnham set up the Stafford inquiry within a month of taking office in June 2009. It is ridiculous to say he did not support the inquiry.JosiasJessop said:
So you would be happy with someone who does not support inquiries into the health service because it may hurt the trust's reputation?foxinsoxuk said:
I would be quite happy with Burnham. He was fine as Minister for Health. Far better than Hewitt, Reid or Milburn who were all malignant. He would be running for PM not Minister of Health this time round.JosiasJessop said:
snipfoxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if it is the PB righties that have him in their sights. The PB lefties are just enjoying their popcorn.richardDodd said:Very funny..but not unexpected .PB lefties are killing Cameron off again...how many times does that make it.
If Cameron expels cabinet ministers for campaigning Out, then it will improve it significantly.
(*) Except by party lists.
On Farage: who ever is the official face of Out, it will be Farage who is seen as the spokesperson. He is a media tart and unable to shun the limelight. In his own words: Never has the party been so unified around me"
Wow.
You really are one of the producers.
If he did that for health, imagine what he would do as PM.
Let me repeat: Burnham's scum.
As for supporting the Francis inquiry:Andy Burnham said events had borne out his view that the benefits of a public inquiry had not outweighed the reputational damage to the hospital.
...
Mr Burnham replied: 'I was worried that a full public inquiry would damage the trust beyond repair. Think that's been borne out.'
So you're wrong.
It wasn't tragic, fortunately. But could have been. Fortunately the staff at Burton were excellent.0 -
Very pleased to hear it - I recall you mentioning your experiences in general on a number of previous occasions here.
It wasn't tragic, fortunately. But could have been. Fortunately the staff at Burton were excellent.JosiasJessop said:Plato said:In the same way that I rarely doubt facts presented by @Richard_Tyndall on the EU or AGW, I feel the same about yours re Stafford. Your tragic personal experience of it speaks for itself re knowing your onions.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2873911/Outcry-Burnham-claims-Mid-Staffs-probe-mistake-Labour-accused-insulting-victims-saying-better-report-never-published.htmlJosiasJessop said:
Ahem. He set up a private inquiry that was widely criticised. The coalition government set up the Francis inquiry in public, which finally got to the truth.foxinsoxuk said:
Burnham set up the Stafford inquiry within a month of taking office in June 2009. It is ridiculous to say he did not support the inquiry.JosiasJessop said:
So you would be happy with someone who does not support inquiries into the health service because it may hurt the trust's reputation?foxinsoxuk said:
I would be quite happy with Burnham. He was fine as Minister for Health. Far better than Hewitt, Reid or Milburn who were all malignant. He would be running for PM not Minister of Health this time round.JosiasJessop said:
snipfoxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if it is the PB righties that have him in their sights. The PB lefties are just enjoying their popcorn.richardDodd said:Very funny..but not unexpected .PB lefties are killing Cameron off again...how many times does that make it.
If Cameron expels cabinet ministers for campaigning Out, then it will improve it significantly.
(*) Except by party lists.
On Farage: who ever is the official face of Out, it will be Farage who is seen as the spokesperson. He is a media tart and unable to shun the limelight. In his own words: Never has the party been so unified around me"
Wow.
You really are one of the producers.
If he did that for health, imagine what he would do as PM.
Let me repeat: Burnham's scum.
As for supporting the Francis inquiry:Andy Burnham said events had borne out his view that the benefits of a public inquiry had not outweighed the reputational damage to the hospital.
...
Mr Burnham replied: 'I was worried that a full public inquiry would damage the trust beyond repair. Think that's been borne out.'
So you're wrong.
0 -
Even people who supported Labour at last month’s election were privately relieved afterwards that the party did not win power, Harriet Harman has admitted.
In a candid interview with The Independent, Labour’s interim leader admitted the widespread doubts about the party’s leadership and economic credibility cost it dearly. She said Labour’s much-trumpeted 6m conversations with voters counted for little because the party had the “wrong message.” Many people felt Labour was not talking to them because it raised issues such as zero hours contracts, the living wage and food banks, she said.
http://ind.pn/1Kj9Vsh0 -
Many people felt Labour was not talking to them because it raised issues such as zero hours contracts, the living wage and food banks, she said.
She missed out Non-Doms.0 -
Mr Tyndall,
I find myself agreeing with you.
Forty five years ago, I was amazed by the one-sided nature of the debate and in an almost childish protest. I voted for OUT despite wanting to be IN. Although I was safe in the knowledge that IN would win easily.
I assumed we were voting for the status quo and that the Tony Benns of the world were being paranoid. The media and politicians all poo-pooed the fears of political union in a manner worthy of General Melchett.
Why should this one be any different?0 -
David Cameron is riding a tide of confidence and is showing real leadership. He must know he has a deal in the bag that he can sell to the public. If you notice he keeps on saying it will be the people who will decide. In the HOC there are not much more than 100 MPs who will be opposed to the EU and some form of agreement on welfare, red tape and less closer union will probably win 2 to 1. Notice he has also told his MPs the boundary change will be to reduce MPs to 600.0
-
Mr. Eagles, but who are Brutus, Augustus, Mark Anthony and Cleopatra?
You really must write an article along those lines. But try to make it at least vaguely historically accurate.0
This discussion has been closed.