The Defense is now trying to argue that overturning Carmichael's election would be terrible because it would compel candidates for election to tell the truth!
Great stuff.
Absolutely - politicians should still be free to lie about getting legal advice on EU membership.
Not sure what a deliberate misinterpretation of political opponents whinging about Salmond does to help Carmichael. It's certainly not in the public perception and it is not featured in the coverage at all.
Nor have I noticed anyone (except you) hanging on every detail of the Carmichael leak enquiry. It's hardly water cooler stuff.
... but it is guaranteed to be the top story on the news today and tomorrow.
The Defense is now trying to argue that overturning Carmichael's election would be terrible because it would compel candidates for election to tell the truth!
Great stuff.
Absolutely - politicians should still be free to lie about getting legal advice on EU membership.
Not sure what a deliberate misinterpretation of political opponents whinging about Salmond does to help Carmichael. It's certainly not in the public perception and it is not featured in the coverage at all.
A lie is a lie, whether it receives coverage or not. And if the law is blind it does not matter who tells the lie once a precedent has been set.
Not really because there is no established sequence of events. One side argues that the debate was merely about whether the ministerial code would allow such advice to be disclosed, the other argued that advice was being lied about and the only conclusion was a ruling where advice could be disclosed. End of story,
Meanwhile, Carmichael's defence is about whether his lying was private or public, political or personal. No argument that he is not a liar, that is accepted by his defence in whole. Whatever the outcome, he is Lying Politician Alistair Carmichael for ever more with no danger of defamation.
The Defense is now trying to argue that overturning Carmichael's election would be terrible because it would compel candidates for election to tell the truth!
Great stuff.
Absolutely - politicians should still be free to lie about getting legal advice on EU membership.
Not sure what a deliberate misinterpretation of political opponents whinging about Salmond does to help Carmichael. It's certainly not in the public perception and it is not featured in the coverage at all.
A lie is a lie, whether it receives coverage or not. And if the law is blind it does not matter who tells the lie once a precedent has been set.
Not really because there is no established sequence of events. One side argues that the debate was merely about whether the ministerial code would allow such advice to be disclosed, the other argued that advice was being lied about and the only conclusion was a ruling where advice could be disclosed. End of story,
Meanwhile, Carmichael's defence is about whether his lying was private or public, political or personal. No argument that he is not a liar, that is accepted by his defence in whole. Whatever the outcome, he is Lying Politician Alistair Carmichael for ever more with no danger of defamation.
Unless the case against Carmichael is thrown out, the precedent will be that you can now go to court to argue the case. I note that Salmond has never instituted legal action against anyone who has accused him of lying about Scotland's automatic EU membership.
Nicola Sturgeon is fed up that ‘literally every time I’m on camera’ people discuss about her appearance. She’s so fed up, in fact, that she’s done a photo-shoot with Vogue to prove how ‘inured’ she has become. Yup, that’s right, Vogue, a magazine that is all about policy and principle; a magazine that has no truck with our image-obsessed age.
The reaction to Julia Hartley-Brewer (particularly the nasty off-air personal insult designed to rile her up when going back on air, to make the other person far nicer, calmer and reasonable - a not uncommon tactic I'm sorry to say) is precisely why I detest this latest self-indulgent craze of (sorry Robert) public values-signalling. It is selfish, narcissistic, hypocritical and it often has a nasty tinge associated with it too. People who need to be able to hate others to validate their innate moral goodness.
It reached its peak with the Nelson Mandela tributes. It's approaching another peak now.
and these people still try to brazen their way through on their "competence"
they couldn't organise a queue with one person in it.
The original headline was going to be "Labour show they can't organise a pregnancy on a council estate" or "Labour show they couldn't organise a farting contest in a baked bean factory"
Stand by for weeks of "it's not fair" from the losers.
Labour seems to be populated by people with a mental age of six.
I blame Mike. He's on holiday, when he asked me to edit PB in his absence he said nothing ever happens, you can put your feet up for three weeks.
I'm waiting for the big HerMaj is longest reigning monarch thread. If you can't get song titles in to that thread you should retire and grow turnips for malc.
Well as someone with Republican tendencies I'm not best qualified to write on that topic.
But I do like Her Majesty.
Oh dear. Your positions - for a self-proclaimed Conservative - disappoint by the day!
Being a Republican is based on sound Conservative principles.
That merit and hard work shall ensure you can get any job you so desire.
As the Labour Party are now proving........ Oh dear!
The monarchy works. You need dull unimaginative and dutiful people to do what would drive anyone else potty i.e. to be / to be seen / to represent rather than to do or say anything.
On the whole the Windsors have been all those things. Even at their worst they are better at fulfilling the Ruritanian aspect of the constitution than ex-politicians, celebrities and other egomaniacs.
The reaction to Julia Hartley-Brewer (particularly the nasty off-air personal insult designed to rile her up when going back on air, to make the other person far nicer, calmer and reasonable - a not uncommon tactic I'm sorry to say) is precisely why I detest this latest self-indulgent craze of (sorry Robert) public values-signalling. It is selfish, narcissistic, hypocritical and it often has a nasty tinge associated with it too. People who need to be able to hate others to validate their innate moral goodness.
It reached its peak with the Nelson Mandela tributes. It's approaching another peak now.
Carried by the media,over the last week or so have lost any sort of common sense.
and these people still try to brazen their way through on their "competence"
they couldn't organise a queue with one person in it.
The original headline was going to be "Labour show they can't organise a pregnancy on a council estate" or "Labour show they couldn't organise a farting contest in a baked bean factory"
Stand by for weeks of "it's not fair" from the losers.
Labour seems to be populated by people with a mental age of six.
I blame Mike. He's on holiday, when he asked me to edit PB in his absence he said nothing ever happens, you can put your feet up for three weeks.
I'm waiting for the big HerMaj is longest reigning monarch thread. If you can't get song titles in to that thread you should retire and grow turnips for malc.
Well as someone with Republican tendencies I'm not best qualified to write on that topic.
But I do like Her Majesty.
Oh dear. Your positions - for a self-proclaimed Conservative - disappoint by the day!
Being a Republican is based on sound Conservative principles.
That merit and hard work shall ensure you can get any job you so desire.
As the Labour Party are now proving........ Oh dear!
The monarchy works. You need dull unimaginative and dutiful people to do what would drive anyone else potty i.e. to be / to be seen / to represent rather than to do or say anything.
On the whole the Windsors have been all those things. Even at their worst they are better at fulfilling the Ruritanian aspect of the constitution than ex-politicians, celebrities and other egomaniacs.
Really? The Duke of Windsor was a Nazi sympathising racist.
We dodged a bullet with him because he thought with his pants.
Just imagine him as King during World War II. He would have appointed an appeaser as PM when Chamberlain stood down
Wow! The BBC really has lost the plot. Here, in an article about radicalism, by implication they equate, in degrees of radicalism, an Islamic cleric who espouses homophobia with someone who defends the right to exhibit cartoons about the prophet Mohammed.
Does al Beeb really think those two positions are comparable? Does al Beeb really think freedom of speech is 'radical'?
I had made the mistake, on national television, of failing to signal my virtue by opening up my home to a Syrian refugee family and applauding others who have made that generous offer.
This, after all, is now our national past-time, a new craze that has taken over from the ice bucket challenge as a simple and easy way to shout to the world “Look! I’m a better person than you are!”
But why? I didn’t offer my spare bedroom to refugees from Iraq of Afghanistan either. Or Somalia, or Southern Sudan, or Darfur, or Eritrea, or Libya, or Yemen, or Mali, or the Democratic Republic of Congo, or Rwanda, or Chechnya, or Myanmar, or Palestine, Lebanon or Colombia or Kashmir. Or anywhere else in the world where people are facing the horror and bloodshed of war.
In Germany, it is much more onerous. In particular, you need to have demonstrated that you will not be living off the state. (Compare and contrast with the UK, where - once you have your five years of residency - then so long as you can pass the exam, you're basically home free.)
It is highly likely that the Somalians you reference did not have jobs in the Netherlands. They certainly did not need them to become Dutch citizens.
There are therefore three important differences: Firstly, Syrians in Germany will have been there much longer than Somalis in the Netherlands; Secondly, the Syrians in Germany will need to have been almost continually employed for the last eight years, and therefore are much more likely to have put down roots; Thirdly, there was a very large Somalian population in the UK, and much more generous benefits there than in the Netherlands.
I would be interested to see how many of the 30,000 or so Turks that took German citizenship last year headed off to the UK. My guess would be bugger all.
Why should the Syrians in Germany be different to the Turks?
Let's hope that Merkel doesn't make a sudden policy u-turn when it comes to granting passports or EU residence permits to "Syrian refugees" when she finds that Germany has attracted more migrants than it can cope with. Maybe it takes 8 years at the moment with the need to meet the conditions you describe... will that still be the case next year? (Or even next week, the way things seem to be going)?
I'm yet to be convinced that this isn't just The Mail stirring it. If it does happen - and there's good reason for it - then they don't need the evidence, and if it doesn't, then they can always claim that the anonymous contender must have thought twice.
I expect that, like many such stories, it's based on a real conversation between the reporter and someone in Labour, which has been somewhat over-enthusiastically interpreted by the reporter to get a story. I'm sure that the article is right that there is anger at the shambles of getting ballot papers out (it's not as though the party hasn't had plenty of time!), and it's very likely that some comment along the lines of 'maybe we should get the deadline extended or something' was made by someone in one of the leadership teams. It won't come to anything.
I had made the mistake, on national television, of failing to signal my virtue by opening up my home to a Syrian refugee family and applauding others who have made that generous offer.
This, after all, is now our national past-time, a new craze that has taken over from the ice bucket challenge as a simple and easy way to shout to the world “Look! I’m a better person than you are!”
But why? I didn’t offer my spare bedroom to refugees from Iraq of Afghanistan either. Or Somalia, or Southern Sudan, or Darfur, or Eritrea, or Libya, or Yemen, or Mali, or the Democratic Republic of Congo, or Rwanda, or Chechnya, or Myanmar, or Palestine, Lebanon or Colombia or Kashmir. Or anywhere else in the world where people are facing the horror and bloodshed of war.
In Germany, it is much more onerous. In particular, you need to have demonstrated that you will not be living off the state. (Compare and contrast with the UK, where - once you have your five years of residency - then so long as you can pass the exam, you're basically home free.)
It is highly likely that the Somalians you reference did not have jobs in the Netherlands. They certainly did not need them to become Dutch citizens.
There are therefore three important differences: Firstly, Syrians in Germany will have been there much longer than Somalis in the Netherlands; Secondly, the Syrians in Germany will need to have been almost continually employed for the last eight years, and therefore are much more likely to have put down roots; Thirdly, there was a very large Somalian population in the UK, and much more generous benefits there than in the Netherlands.
I would be interested to see how many of the 30,000 or so Turks that took German citizenship last year headed off to the UK. My guess would be bugger all.
Why should the Syrians in Germany be different to the Turks?
Let's hope that Merkel doesn't make a sudden policy u-turn when it comes to granting passports or EU residence permitsto "Syrian refugees" when she finds that Germany has attracted more migrants than it can cope with.
When I saw the headline "I wouldn't have a Syrian refugee in my house; That doesn't make me awful" in the Telegraph I was expecting something ironic or even inappropriate but amusing.......
It just never dawned on me that the notoriously horrible Julia Hartley-Brewer had been given a guest slot at the Telegraph after her years at the Sunday Express......
Moving on.....it's interesting how people here (France) see Merkel as the hero of the hour. By contrast Cameron is invisible. The bloated self importance of the British really ought to be put into context.
Listening to radio 4 or 5 and you'd think Osborne and Cameron were making all the running over the Syrian crisis. Unfortunately no one elsewhere seems to have even heard of them
and these people still try to brazen their way through on their "competence"
they couldn't organise a queue with one person in it.
The original headline was going to be "Labour show they can't organise a pregnancy on a council estate" or "Labour show they couldn't organise a farting contest in a baked bean factory"
Stand by for weeks of "it's not fair" from the losers.
Labour seems to be populated by people with a mental age of six.
I blame Mike. He's on holiday, when he asked me to edit PB in his absence he said nothing ever happens, you can put your feet up for three weeks.
I'm waiting for the big HerMaj is longest reigning monarch thread. If you can't get song titles in to that thread you should retire and grow turnips for malc.
Well as someone with Republican tendencies I'm not best qualified to write on that topic.
But I do like Her Majesty.
Oh dear. Your positions - for a self-proclaimed Conservative - disappoint by the day!
Being a Republican is based on sound Conservative principles.
That merit and hard work shall ensure you can get any job you so desire.
As the Labour Party are now proving........ Oh dear!
The monarchy works. You need dull unimaginative and dutiful people to do what would drive anyone else potty i.e. to be / to be seen / to represent rather than to do or say anything.
On the whole the Windsors have been all those things. Even at their worst they are better at fulfilling the Ruritanian aspect of the constitution than ex-politicians, celebrities and other egomaniacs.
Really? The Duke of Windsor was a Nazi sympathising racist.
We dodged a bullet with him because he thought with his pants.
Just imagine him as King during World War II. He would have appointed an appeaser as PM when Chamberlain stood down
Baldwin manipulated him into Wallis Simpson. They were looking for a way to get rid of him
and these people still try to brazen their way through on their "competence"
they couldn't organise a queue with one person in it.
The original headline was going to be "Labour show they can't organise a pregnancy on a council estate" or "Labour show they couldn't organise a farting contest in a baked bean factory"
Stand by for weeks of "it's not fair" from the losers.
Labour seems to be populated by people with a mental age of six.
I blame Mike. He's on holiday, when he asked me to edit PB in his absence he said nothing ever happens, you can put your feet up for three weeks.
I'm waiting for the big HerMaj is longest reigning monarch thread. If you can't get song titles in to that thread you should retire and grow turnips for malc.
Well as someone with Republican tendencies I'm not best qualified to write on that topic.
But I do like Her Majesty.
Oh dear. Your positions - for a self-proclaimed Conservative - disappoint by the day!
Being a Republican is based on sound Conservative principles.
That merit and hard work shall ensure you can get any job you so desire.
As the Labour Party are now proving........ Oh dear!
The monarchy works. You need dull unimaginative and dutiful people to do what would drive anyone else potty i.e. to be / to be seen / to represent rather than to do or say anything.
On the whole the Windsors have been all those things. Even at their worst they are better at fulfilling the Ruritanian aspect of the constitution than ex-politicians, celebrities and other egomaniacs.
Really? The Duke of Windsor was a Nazi sympathising racist.
We dodged a bullet with him because he thought with his pants.
Just imagine him as King during World War II. He would have appointed an appeaser as PM when Chamberlain stood down
We certainly did dodge a bullet with him. Though I doubt he would have had the power to choose a PM at will, as you suggest.
But then look at who the Labour party are, apparently, about to elect: a terrorist sympathising politician who cares nothing about the anti-Semitic character of his many "friends". Not so different in his sympathies frankly from the Duke of Windsor and probably harder to get rid of.
When I saw the headline "I wouldn't have a Syrian refugee in my house; That doesn't make me awful" in the Telegraph I was expecting something ironic or even inappropriate but amusing
It just never dawned on me that the notoriously horrible Julia Hartley-Brewer had been given a guest slot at the Telegraph after her years at the Sunday Express.
Moving on....
Lets not - your argument is that the article is false because she is "horrible".
"TheScreamingEagles" said 'I'm a fiscally dry as the Sahara Tory, soaking wet socially liberal Tory. I'm closer to you on Defence than most (whilst disagreeing about a replacement for Trident, as I want that money spent on conventional forces which have been shamefully scaled back)'
The cost of a few modern fighter planes is tremendously expensive. Take F35 development costs. These costs are spread over many years. So is Trident. The extra we would get for not having Trident would be relatively small ''The current annual spend on Trident is equivalent to less than 1 per cent of current health and education expenditure, this figure will be roughly the same for the replacement.'' ''When the initial procurement costs are added on, the total programme cost will an estimated £75 billion however, £60 billion of this figure, as mentioned earlier, is spread over the lifetime of the vessels.'' https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/how-much-will-replacing-trident-cost-us/
Nicola Sturgeon is fed up that ‘literally every time I’m on camera’ people discuss about her appearance. She’s so fed up, in fact, that she’s done a photo-shoot with Vogue to prove how ‘inured’ she has become. Yup, that’s right, Vogue, a magazine that is all about policy and principle; a magazine that has no truck with our image-obsessed age.
1. You do not need to have been employed continuously for eight years in Germany. You merely have to show, at the point of application "you have independent means of securing a living (including for family members entitled to maintenance) without resorting to welfare payments and unemployment benefit."
2. The Syrians will not have been in Germany much longer than the Dutch Somalis. Five years versus eight years is not a huge difference in the scheme of integration. And even if we assume it did make a big difference, and they come here at only half the rate of the Dutch Somalis, that would still be 160k for just those turning up this year.
3. Benefits was not a driver of people deciding to move to the UK via another EU country. See this Guardian article, that mentions many of the Africans that come to the UK came from places like Sweden and Denmark, with higher welfare than we have. They also mention a lot of Nigerians coming here from... Germany. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jan/28/british-dream-europe-african-citizens
4. Turks in Germany have often been there for many decades, with family roots put down in the country in the 1950s during guest worker programs. If you believe the five vs eight year difference is a big one, it would be dwarfed by the 30+ years for Turks than the 8 years for Syrians. But anyway, we do not have data, so you are asking me to explain a difference we do not know exists.
5. The prior Somali population of the UK was not that well established, as they were taken in at the same time the Dutch first took them in. Yet it accelerated very quickly from a low base, as Syrians would do. And while we do not have many Syrians yet in the UK, we do have a large Arab population, that they would be culturally similar to.
6. I too would like to see better data on this. It would be nice if the government did some analysis so we can have a more accurate estimation of how many German refugees we will get second hand. Sadly, it seems the government is asleep at the wheel. Perhaps some enterprising MP could ask on Wednesday?
''Well, i suspected it but even I was surprised to hear how blunt those exchanges had been''.
At some juncture next year, there may be a poll that shows a substantial BOO lead.
At that point, we may find out what our continental cousins really think of us. Cameron may be screaming at them to Offer Something to make us stay in.
Or..he may become as fed up as many hitherto BOI-ers and say sod it.
I mean these last few weeks have almost been designed to tip the balance and public opinion against staying in. Cam may fear for his legacy but I don't think "The PM who lead the UK to freedom" is as worrying as "The PM who lost The Union" and he won that one.
When I saw the headline "I wouldn't have a Syrian refugee in my house; That doesn't make me awful" in the Telegraph I was expecting something ironic or even inappropriate but amusing.......
It just never dawned on me that the notoriously horrible Julia Hartley-Brewer had been given a guest slot at the Telegraph after her years at the Sunday Express......
Moving on.....it's interesting how people here (France) see Merkel as the hero of the hour. By contrast Cameron is invisible. The bloated self importance of the British really ought to be put into context.
Listening to radio 4 or 5 and you'd think Osborne and Cameron were making all the running over the Syrian crisis. Unfortunately no one elsewhere seems to have even heard of them
How many migrants are you prepared to accommodate Roger? We're all ears.
and these people still try to brazen their way through on their "competence"
they couldn't organise a queue with one person in it.
The original headline was going to be "Labour show they can't organise a pregnancy on a council estate" or "Labour show they couldn't organise a farting contest in a baked bean factory"
Stand by for weeks of "it's not fair" from the losers.
Labour seems to be populated by people with a mental age of six.
I blame Mike. He's on holiday, when he asked me to edit PB in his absence he said nothing ever happens, you can put your feet up for three weeks.
I'm waiting for the big HerMaj is longest reigning monarch thread. If you can't get song titles in to that thread you should retire and grow turnips for malc.
Well as someone with Republican tendencies I'm not best qualified to write on that topic.
But I do like Her Majesty.
Oh dear. Your positions - for a self-proclaimed Conservative - disappoint by the day!
Being a Republican is based on sound Conservative principles.
That merit and hard work shall ensure you can get any job you so desire.
As the Labour Party are now proving........ Oh dear!
The monarchy works. You need dull unimaginative and dutiful people to do what would drive anyone else potty i.e. to be / to be seen / to represent rather than to do or say anything.
On the whole the Windsors have been all those things. Even at their worst they are better at fulfilling the Ruritanian aspect of the constitution than ex-politicians, celebrities and other egomaniacs.
Really? The Duke of Windsor was a Nazi sympathising racist.
We dodged a bullet with him because he thought with his pants.
Just imagine him as King during World War II. He would have appointed an appeaser as PM when Chamberlain stood down
It's more likely that we'd have had another constitutional crisis. In a time of war that could have led to a vacant throne, possibly even ending in an actual Republic during the first post-war Labour government.
I do love the "1% of current health and education expenditure" line, largely because we spend a hell of a lot on health and education - something like 11-12% of GDP. It's a shamelessly transparent way of making what is undoubtedly a lot of money sound less than it is.
"Lets not - your argument is that the article is false because she is "horrible".
Wrong. Certain things are so lacking in sensitivity no decent person or newspaper would say them. The Telegraph for all it's bias isn't usually one of them. I was genuinely surprised that such a headline appeared-until I saw the Hartley-Brewer byline.
The discussion about refugees is another matter altogether
It's hard to see how long Schengen can survive for. Hungary's new fence may help a bit in the short term but the refugees will probably find another way (perhaps crossing from Greece to Italy by ferry).
I note that Romania and Bulgaria are legally obliged to join - I expect they will put it off as long as possible.
The exchanges between Cameron and Merkel as described by Anthony Seldon are really interesting.
I think it's safe to say that there will be nothing on offer to keep the UK in the EU.
Is that news? Well, i suspected it but even I was surprised to hear how blunt those exchanges had been.
I do wonder how Cameron will play this if he has zilch all to play with next year. Perhaps a very luke warm endorsement of the proposals by a sitting PM, with a tacit acceptance that cabinet colleagues can campaign how they like whilst he takes a back seat, might be enough for some floating voters to question it.
I don't really expect us to leave even if we get a 'leave'.
Although, if you are in a position where you know the other side won't compromise an inch it makes sense to take a very moderate position.
Then when it doesn't work you can regretfully say how reasonable you were, but [Merkel] was just intransigent so you have to recommend out.
From the British perspective, Cameron has been very pragmatic and reasonable. From the European, he's acted like a total arsehole.
To be honest, that fact alone is telling enough to Leave.
Indeed. They've agreed a position, and significant numbers here didn't agree and never said beforehand they would, but because they've made up their minds we are, no doubt in this instance like in the past, treated as though not agreeing to something others agreed is being a nuisance.
When I saw the headline "I wouldn't have a Syrian refugee in my house; That doesn't make me awful" in the Telegraph I was expecting something ironic or even inappropriate but amusing.......
It just never dawned on me that the notoriously horrible Julia Hartley-Brewer had been given a guest slot at the Telegraph after her years at the Sunday Express......
Moving on.....it's interesting how people here (France) see Merkel as the hero of the hour. By contrast Cameron is invisible. The bloated self importance of the British really ought to be put into context.
Listening to radio 4 or 5 and you'd think Osborne and Cameron were making all the running over the Syrian crisis. Unfortunately no one elsewhere seems to have even heard of them
How many migrants are you prepared to accommodate Roger? We're all ears.
Yesterday's poll gives 27% for Marine Le Pen, 25% for Nicolas Sarkozy, and 3% for an independent right winger. I doubt if any of those voters see Markel as "the hero of the hour" or want to emulate her.
I do love the "1% of current health and education expenditure" line, largely because we spend a hell of a lot on health and education - something like 11-12% of GDP. It's a shamelessly transparent way of making a lot of money sound like less than it is.
No, it's a sensible way of putting it into context, since many people on the left seem to think that by cancelling Trident there would be a large pot of money freed up for, you know, health and education. Yes it's a lot of money, but it's not enough to be a big factor in discussions about the total UK budget.
I had made the mistake, on national television, of failing to signal my virtue by opening up my home to a Syrian refugee family and applauding others who have made that generous offer.
This, after all, is now our national past-time, a new craze that has taken over from the ice bucket challenge as a simple and easy way to shout to the world “Look! I’m a better person than you are!”
But why? I didn’t offer my spare bedroom to refugees from Iraq of Afghanistan either. Or Somalia, or Southern Sudan, or Darfur, or Eritrea, or Libya, or Yemen, or Mali, or the Democratic Republic of Congo, or Rwanda, or Chechnya, or Myanmar, or Palestine, Lebanon or Colombia or Kashmir. Or anywhere else in the world where people are facing the horror and bloodshed of war.
In terms of saving lives, I'm sure you'd do a lot more good by donating to an aid agency that was working in the Middle East, rather than by offering to house an asylum seeker. Every pound that's spent there will go a lot further than it would here, And, IMHO, saving lives is a good deal more important than offering a fortunate minority a Western standard of living.
But rereading on the English Civil War and the Divine Rights of Kings is utter bollocks.
We need a elected Head of State.
Not when the Head of State has no real power we dont. I've never understood the purpose of an elected Head of State with only ceremonial power, when they can't act as a figurehead as they are explicitly identified most of the time with one political party. I guess other countries manage it, Ireland and India for two, but if you are going to elect someone, I feel like they should have more than ceremonial power. If they aren't, it doesn't really matter that much if they are hereditary.
Modernising for the sake of modernising leads to a Speaker who looks like a supply teacher. Change for the sake of change leads to buggered up devolution.
Huzzah for the monarchy!
Mr. Vale2, depends how long the migrant crisis lasts and how bad it gets. You may very well be right.
The exchanges between Cameron and Merkel as described by Anthony Seldon are really interesting.
I think it's safe to say that there will be nothing on offer to keep the UK in the EU.
I rather wish that Cameron had replied to Merkel's reputed comments about Britain being a "problem child" that, if there was one country in Europe which had been, pretty consistently, a "problem" it was hers. And that there were British war cemeteries all over Europe testifying to that fact.
No country has done more to help Europe out of the messes it has got itself into than Britain.
It's human nature to resent and dislike the people who've done you a good turn.
When I saw the headline "I wouldn't have a Syrian refugee in my house; That doesn't make me awful" in the Telegraph I was expecting something ironic or even inappropriate but amusing.......
It just never dawned on me that the notoriously horrible Julia Hartley-Brewer had been given a guest slot at the Telegraph after her years at the Sunday Express......
Moving on.....it's interesting how people here (France) see Merkel as the hero of the hour. By contrast Cameron is invisible. The bloated self importance of the British really ought to be put into context.
Listening to radio 4 or 5 and you'd think Osborne and Cameron were making all the running over the Syrian crisis. Unfortunately no one elsewhere seems to have even heard of them
How many migrants are you prepared to accommodate Roger? We're all ears.
Yesterday's poll gives 27% for Marine Le Pen, 25% for Nicolas Sarkozy, and 3% for an independent right winger. I doubt if any of those voters see Markel as "the hero of the hour" or want to emulate her.
Marine Le Pen has been in the 25-32% range for the last two years. In fact, in about 95% of polls since April 2013, she has been in the lead for the first round.
She still fails badly to pick up transfer votes, however. In the second round, she loses by 20% to Sarkozy, and by 34% to Juppe.
However, she might be able to edge out Hollande if she were to meet him in the second round. (Against other PS candidates, she's 10-20% behind.)
I believe that the comment was made at one of the Edinburgh Fringe shows: What about all this rubbish about stopping people in Calais entering the UK not being Racist. If a flotilla of Norwegian totty of both sexes was making it's way down the channel, how many people would suddenly discover a spare room or two?
and these people still try to brazen their way through on their "competence"
they couldn't organise a queue with one person in it.
The original headline was going to be "Labour show they can't organise a pregnancy on a council estate" or "Labour show they couldn't organise a farting contest in a baked bean factory"
Stand by for weeks of "it's not fair" from the losers.
Labour seems to be populated by people with a mental age of six.
I blame Mike. He's on holiday, when he asked me to edit PB in his absence he said nothing ever happens, you can put your feet up for three weeks.
I'm waiting for the big HerMaj is longest reigning monarch thread. If you can't get song titles in to that thread you should retire and grow turnips for malc.
Well as someone with Republican tendencies I'm not best qualified to write on that topic.
But I do like Her Majesty.
Oh dear. Your positions - for a self-proclaimed Conservative - disappoint by the day!
Being a Republican is based on sound Conservative principles.
That merit and hard work shall ensure you can get any job you so desire.
As the Labour Party are now proving........ Oh dear!
The monarchy works. You need dull unimaginative and dutiful people to do what would drive anyone else potty i.e. to be / to be seen / to represent rather than to do or say anything.
On the whole the Windsors have been all those things. Even at their worst they are better at fulfilling the Ruritanian aspect of the constitution than ex-politicians, celebrities and other egomaniacs.
Really? The Duke of Windsor was a Nazi sympathising racist.
We dodged a bullet with him because he thought with his pants.
Just imagine him as King during World War II. He would have appointed an appeaser as PM when Chamberlain stood down
Not a problem - if we ever get into a situation like that again, or some other issue where the monarch is not able to be a bland cipher and actually impacts upon matters, expect to see mass conversion to republicanism among the public and politicians very quickly indeed. There is lots of support for the monarchy, including me, but if it ever becomes a genuine, in your face problem, it will evaporate fast I expect.
The exchanges between Cameron and Merkel as described by Anthony Seldon are really interesting.
I think it's safe to say that there will be nothing on offer to keep the UK in the EU.
Is that news? Well, i suspected it but even I was surprised to hear how blunt those exchanges had been.
I do wonder how Cameron will play this if he has zilch all to play with next year. Perhaps a very luke warm endorsement of the proposals by a sitting PM, with a tacit acceptance that cabinet colleagues can campaign how they like whilst he takes a back seat, might be enough for some floating voters to question it.
I don't really expect us to leave even if we get a 'leave'.
Although, if you are in a position where you know the other side won't compromise an inch it makes sense to take a very moderate position.
Then when it doesn't work you can regretfully say how reasonable you were, but [Merkel] was just intransigent so you have to recommend out.
That only works if the other side doesn't then compromise, otherwise you end up having asked for virtually nothing and having got it.
But the way things are heading, Cameron is going to have to recommend an Out.
What a shambles the Labour Party is. Screwed up the country (at least twice) and now unable to conduct a simple contest for their next Leader.
I finally decided today to exercise my right, as a committed Tory voter with £3 to spare and a desire for a laugh, to vote for Mr Corbyn.
I went Corbyn 1, Burnham 2 (I think he's more unelectable than Corbyn TBH), Kendall 3, Balls 4. (On the basis Yvette last as she's the one likely to get Labour highest in the polls). Applying the same principles, in the Deputy Contest I went Watson, Eagle, Bradshaw, Flint, Creasey.
The exchanges between Cameron and Merkel as described by Anthony Seldon are really interesting.
I think it's safe to say that there will be nothing on offer to keep the UK in the EU.
I rather wish that Cameron had replied to Merkel's reputed comments about Britain being a "problem child" that, if there was one country in Europe which had been, pretty consistently, a "problem" it was hers. And that there were British war cemeteries all over Europe testifying to that fact.
No country has done more to help Europe out of the messes it has got itself into than Britain.
It's human nature to resent and dislike the people who've done you a good turn.
I saw an episode of the TV programme "Madam Secretary" based on the Greek financial crisis in which the portrayal of the German Chancellor, an icy Brunhilde clearly based on Merkel, was so arrogant and superior I thought it was stupid. Maybe it wasn't. She certainly seems to be feeling her oats and getting a bit ahead of herself.
Which makes me think, when it comes to the EU referendum, we should be voting on not where we should like the EU to go, or where it currently is, but what we realistically think it will evolve into. Based on Merkel's current behaviour, that it a scary place that I, for one, want no part of.
Mr. Herdson, that's the thing that confounds me. I could not previously see Cameron recommending Out. And I'm having difficulty seeing it now. But Merkel's behaviour may push him that way. I'd still be flabbergasted if he recommended Out.
On helping out abroad personally, I've always liked this comedy sketch on so called 'voluntourism' and how it can be more about the person than the cause, although it's not really applicable to recent events.
The exchanges between Cameron and Merkel as described by Anthony Seldon are really interesting.
I think it's safe to say that there will be nothing on offer to keep the UK in the EU.
Is that news? Well, i suspected it but even I was surprised to hear how blunt those exchanges had been.
I do wonder how Cameron will play this if he has zilch all to play with next year. Perhaps a very luke warm endorsement of the proposals by a sitting PM, with a tacit acceptance that cabinet colleagues can campaign how they like whilst he takes a back seat, might be enough for some floating voters to question it.
I don't really expect us to leave even if we get a 'leave'.
Although, if you are in a position where you know the other side won't compromise an inch it makes sense to take a very moderate position.
Then when it doesn't work you can regretfully say how reasonable you were, but [Merkel] was just intransigent so you have to recommend out.
That only works if the other side doesn't then compromise, otherwise you end up having asked for virtually nothing and having got it.
But the way things are heading, Cameron is going to have to recommend an Out.
What a shambles the Labour Party is. Screwed up the country (at least twice) and now unable to conduct a simple contest for their next Leader.
I finally decided today to exercise my right, as a committed Tory voter with £3 to spare and a desire for a laugh, to vote for Mr Corbyn.
I went Corbyn 1, Burnham 2 (I think he's more unelectable than Corbyn TBH), Kendall 3, Balls 4. (On the basis Yvette last as she's the one likely to get Labour highest in the polls). Applying the same principles, in the Deputy Contest I went Watson, Eagle, Bradshaw, Flint, Creasey.
Such fun... :-)
You will make Putin, Adams, Hamas, Hezbollah et al very happy. Many of this country's friends will be less impressed. Let's hope that your vote and all the others Corbyn gets do not cause the UK any problems.
On helping out abroad personally, I've always liked this comedy sketch on so called 'voluntourism' and how it can be more about the person than the cause, although it's not really applicable to recent events.
Wow! The BBC really has lost the plot. Here, in an article about radicalism, by implication they equate, in degrees of radicalism, an Islamic cleric who espouses homophobia with someone who defends the right to exhibit cartoons about the prophet Mohammed.
Does al Beeb really think those two positions are comparable? Does al Beeb really think freedom of speech is 'radical'?
I am not at all surprised. After all, look at the number of people - writers even, like Peter Carey - who objected to PEN giving an award to Charlie Hebdo. Look at the reaction of some people to the fatwa on Salman Rushdie all those years ago: all those people like Roy Hattersley and Germaine Greer and others who thought it was his fault that he'd been singled out. That he should have been more sensitive. The criticisms made then were the same as the criticisms made this year of Charlie Hebdo. And the same criticisms were made at the time of the Danish cartoons and when the Pope mentioned the criticisms made in earlier centuries of Islam's violent characteristics and are made every time anyone ever dares say anything that some trigger happy cry-baby bully (whether of the Islamic variety or otherwise) does not like.
Look at the disgracefully cringing reaction of Jack Straw to the Danish cartoons.
Look at Corbyn: signing an EDM condemning the murders on the one hand but supporting the Islamic Human Rights Commission which condemned Charlie Hebdo on the other.
Look at Leveson - testily arguing that the did not need to be told the value of free speech when he clearly did - and all those politicians jumping on that bandwagon.
There are not enough people in public life who do defend free speech. Not enough who understand why it matters, why it is the foundation stone of all our other freedoms because without the freedom to think and say what we want we cannot have any intellectual, scientific, literary or other development at all - and that all such developments have happened because people did think for themselves and say what they thought and saw, in the teeth of those who told them "You can't think that. You can't say that."
And far too many people willing to be cowed by violence or threats of it or willing to use other people's violence to get curbs on free speech which can then be used to protect them from criticism.
Fair play to Labour. Only four months ago they were telling us with a straight face that they could run the economy. Some people actually believed them. It was breathtaking cheek. It is blindingly obvious that they cannot even run an internal election. How does a professiona political party descend into incompetence so fast? The Corbyn delusions mark another step on the retreat from reality. I can scarcely believe what I am watching in a party I once supported and worked for.
What a shambles the Labour Party is. Screwed up the country (at least twice) and now unable to conduct a simple contest for their next Leader.
I finally decided today to exercise my right, as a committed Tory voter with £3 to spare and a desire for a laugh, to vote for Mr Corbyn.
I went Corbyn 1, Burnham 2 (I think he's more unelectable than Corbyn TBH), Kendall 3, Balls 4. (On the basis Yvette last as she's the one likely to get Labour highest in the polls). Applying the same principles, in the Deputy Contest I went Watson, Eagle, Bradshaw, Flint, Creasey.
Such fun... :-)
You will make Putin, Adams, Hamas, Hezbollah et al very happy. Many of this country's friends will be less impressed. Let's hope that your vote and all the others Corbyn gets do not cause the UK any problems.
Doubt it. But if so, it will be Ed Miliband's fault not mine.
Mr. Herdson, that's the thing that confounds me. I could not previously see Cameron recommending Out. And I'm having difficulty seeing it now. But Merkel's behaviour may push him that way. I'd still be flabbergasted if he recommended Out.
It will be more in sorrow than anger and will be signalled well in advance and loudly in the corridors of Brussels and then he will see how/if that changes anything.
He will of course have to be careful how exactly he recommends Out, probably an entirely deniable "as things stand if if nothing changes, I very much regret..." and then who knows, something might change.
Mr. Herdson, that's the thing that confounds me. I could not previously see Cameron recommending Out. And I'm having difficulty seeing it now. But Merkel's behaviour may push him that way. I'd still be flabbergasted if he recommended Out.
If all reasonable efforts had been made, and he could prove he did he best but the EU blocked him, and then he actually put down his own sensible proposals for a managed exit, and recommended them, and then 'won' the vote he'd become a hero to the bulk of the Tory party. He'd go down in history as one of the greatest ever Conservative leaders, and he could get that all through just before he resigned.
Mr. kle4, that's confusing the institution with the individual.
There's always the Francis Urquhart solution.
Can't see the institution lasting much beyond such a thing, given what our expectations of it now are, should the cause be so blatant as that of Mr Urquhart.
The exchanges between Cameron and Merkel as described by Anthony Seldon are really interesting.
I think it's safe to say that there will be nothing on offer to keep the UK in the EU.
I rather wish that Cameron had replied to Merkel's reputed comments about Britain being a "problem child" that, if there was one country in Europe which had been, pretty consistently, a "problem" it was hers. And that there were British war cemeteries all over Europe testifying to that fact.
No country has done more to help Europe out of the messes it has got itself into than Britain.
It's human nature to resent and dislike the people who've done you a good turn.
Which makes me think, when it comes to the EU referendum, we should be voting on not where we should like the EU to go, or where it currently is, but what we realistically think it will evolve into. Based on Merkel's current behaviour, that it a scary place that I, for one, want no part of.
I don't know about scary, but it's not where i want to me. As far as I can tell the German position is that as long as there is broad consensus, then anyone questioning it can STFU. Since they can usually agree something with France then a big chunk of that consensus is already formed. Add in those inclined to follow the EU line all things, some smaller nations who agree with the Franco-German position naturally and those who decide to go along for the sake of unity to what is fast becoming the consensus option simply because of the Franco-German dominance, and in effect the Germans believe if they support something then Europe does as well, or will do in the end.
But now an emergency has come up, and so I cannot follow on that fascinating debate. Farewell
"I will not be offering my home to a Syrian refugee family.
You probably think that makes me a terrible person. Indeed the man I was sitting next to on a TV news programme yesterday definitely thought so.
After an on-air discussion about how Britain should deal with the Syrian refugee crisis, as soon as the cameras were switched off, he turned to me and said: “I think you are a f–––ing awful person.”
He had, up until that moment, been quite nice. And, as soon as the cameras went back on, he was so again. So what had I done to prompt his extraordinary outburst?
I had made the mistake, on national television, of failing to signal my virtue by opening up my home to a Syrian refugee family and applauding others who have made that generous offer."
What a shambles the Labour Party is. Screwed up the country (at least twice) and now unable to conduct a simple contest for their next Leader.
I finally decided today to exercise my right, as a committed Tory voter with £3 to spare and a desire for a laugh, to vote for Mr Corbyn.
I went Corbyn 1, Burnham 2 (I think he's more unelectable than Corbyn TBH), Kendall 3, Balls 4. (On the basis Yvette last as she's the one likely to get Labour highest in the polls). Applying the same principles, in the Deputy Contest I went Watson, Eagle, Bradshaw, Flint, Creasey.
Such fun... :-)
You will make Putin, Adams, Hamas, Hezbollah et al very happy. Many of this country's friends will be less impressed. Let's hope that your vote and all the others Corbyn gets do not cause the UK any problems.
Doubt it. But if so, it will be Ed Miliband's fault not mine.
And that makes me even happier....
Nope: everyone who voted for Corbyn for whatever reason - knowing all about his record of sharing platforms with bigots, racists, anti-semites and people who revel in the death of British citizens - are responsible for the outcome and all of the consequences.
"I will not be offering my home to a Syrian refugee family.
You probably think that makes me a terrible person. Indeed the man I was sitting next to on a TV news programme yesterday definitely thought so.
After an on-air discussion about how Britain should deal with the Syrian refugee crisis, as soon as the cameras were switched off, he turned to me and said: “I think you are a f–––ing awful person.”
He had, up until that moment, been quite nice. And, as soon as the cameras went back on, he was so again. So what had I done to prompt his extraordinary outburst?
I had made the mistake, on national television, of failing to signal my virtue by opening up my home to a Syrian refugee family and applauding others who have made that generous offer."
Despite the sources (Murdoch's right wing NY rag), this article has three significant items: 1. Tom Brokaw is opening critical of Hillary 2. Hillary is below 40% in both Iowa and New Hampshire 3. Biden does better than Hillary in the head to head with Trump.
"I will not be offering my home to a Syrian refugee family.
You probably think that makes me a terrible person. Indeed the man I was sitting next to on a TV news programme yesterday definitely thought so.
After an on-air discussion about how Britain should deal with the Syrian refugee crisis, as soon as the cameras were switched off, he turned to me and said: “I think you are a f–––ing awful person.”
He had, up until that moment, been quite nice. And, as soon as the cameras went back on, he was so again. So what had I done to prompt his extraordinary outburst?
I had made the mistake, on national television, of failing to signal my virtue by opening up my home to a Syrian refugee family and applauding others who have made that generous offer."
What a shambles the Labour Party is. Screwed up the country (at least twice) and now unable to conduct a simple contest for their next Leader.
I finally decided today to exercise my right, as a committed Tory voter with £3 to spare and a desire for a laugh, to vote for Mr Corbyn.
I went Corbyn 1, Burnham 2 (I think he's more unelectable than Corbyn TBH), Kendall 3, Balls 4. (On the basis Yvette last as she's the one likely to get Labour highest in the polls). Applying the same principles, in the Deputy Contest I went Watson, Eagle, Bradshaw, Flint, Creasey.
Such fun... :-)
You will make Putin, Adams, Hamas, Hezbollah et al very happy. Many of this country's friends will be less impressed. Let's hope that your vote and all the others Corbyn gets do not cause the UK any problems.
Doubt it. But if so, it will be Ed Miliband's fault not mine.
And that makes me even happier....
I disagree strongly. All those who vote for Corbyn own the resultant mess. And there will be a mess - whether he wins or not. Even if he loses we will have seen that a significant part of the Labour party has no problems with having as their leader a person with views as repellent as Corbyn's. That is a lesson which bodes ill for those of us who hope that such views could be cast out to the fascist fringes where they belong not circulating round the main opposition party.
"I will not be offering my home to a Syrian refugee family.
You probably think that makes me a terrible person. Indeed the man I was sitting next to on a TV news programme yesterday definitely thought so.
After an on-air discussion about how Britain should deal with the Syrian refugee crisis, as soon as the cameras were switched off, he turned to me and said: “I think you are a f–––ing awful person.”
He had, up until that moment, been quite nice. And, as soon as the cameras went back on, he was so again. So what had I done to prompt his extraordinary outburst?
I had made the mistake, on national television, of failing to signal my virtue by opening up my home to a Syrian refugee family and applauding others who have made that generous offer."
"I will not be offering my home to a Syrian refugee family.
You probably think that makes me a terrible person. Indeed the man I was sitting next to on a TV news programme yesterday definitely thought so.
After an on-air discussion about how Britain should deal with the Syrian refugee crisis, as soon as the cameras were switched off, he turned to me and said: “I think you are a f–––ing awful person.”
He had, up until that moment, been quite nice. And, as soon as the cameras went back on, he was so again. So what had I done to prompt his extraordinary outburst?
I had made the mistake, on national television, of failing to signal my virtue by opening up my home to a Syrian refugee family and applauding others who have made that generous offer."
It's hard to see how long Schengen can survive for. Hungary's new fence may help a bit in the short term but the refugees will probably find another way (perhaps crossing from Greece to Italy by ferry).
I note that Romania and Bulgaria are legally obliged to join - I expect they will put it off as long as possible.
Hungary's fence is with Serbia - who are outside the EU AND Schengen.
Wow! The BBC really has lost the plot. Here, in an article about radicalism, by implication they equate, in degrees of radicalism, an Islamic cleric who espouses homophobia with someone who defends the right to exhibit cartoons about the prophet Mohammed.
Does al Beeb really think those two positions are comparable? Does al Beeb really think freedom of speech is 'radical'?
I am not at all surprised. After all, look at the number of people - writers even, like Peter Carey - who objected to PEN giving an award to Charlie Hebdo. Look at the reaction of some people to the fatwa on Salman Rushdie all those years ago: all those people like Roy Hattersley and Germaine Greer and others who thought it was his fault that he'd been singled out. That he should have been more sensitive. The criticisms made then were the same as the criticisms made this year of Charlie Hebdo. And the same criticisms were made at the time of the Danish cartoons and when the Pope mentioned the criticisms made in earlier centuries of Islam's violent characteristics and are made every time anyone ever dares say anything that some trigger happy cry-baby bully (whether of the Islamic variety or otherwise) does not like.
Look at the disgracefully cringing reaction of Jack Straw to the Danish cartoons.
Look at Corbyn: signing an EDM condemning the murders on the one hand but supporting the Islamic Human Rights Commission which condemned Charlie Hebdo on the other.
Look at Leveson - testily arguing that the did not need to be told the value of free speech when he clearly did - and all those politicians jumping on that bandwagon.
There are not enough people in public life who do defend free speech. Not enough who understand why it matters, why it is the foundation stone of all our other freedoms because without the freedom to think and say what we want we cannot have any intellectual, scientific, literary or other development at all - and that all such developments have happened because people did think for themselves and say what they thought and saw, in the teeth of those who told them "You can't think that. You can't say that."
And far too many people willing to be cowed by violence or threats of it or willing to use other people's violence to get curbs on free speech which can then be used to protect them from criticism.
Mr. Herdson, that's the thing that confounds me. I could not previously see Cameron recommending Out. And I'm having difficulty seeing it now. But Merkel's behaviour may push him that way. I'd still be flabbergasted if he recommended Out.
If all reasonable efforts had been made, and he could prove he did he best but the EU blocked him, and then he actually put down his own sensible proposals for a managed exit, and recommended them, and then 'won' the vote he'd become a hero to the bulk of the Tory party. He'd go down in history as one of the greatest ever Conservative leaders, and he could get that all through just before he resigned.
That must be tempting.
History is full of such ironies.
I agree, if the UK voted to leave the EU under Cameron, he likely would be regarded as a truly great Conservative leader.
"I will not be offering my home to a Syrian refugee family.
You probably think that makes me a terrible person. Indeed the man I was sitting next to on a TV news programme yesterday definitely thought so.
After an on-air discussion about how Britain should deal with the Syrian refugee crisis, as soon as the cameras were switched off, he turned to me and said: “I think you are a f–––ing awful person.”
He had, up until that moment, been quite nice. And, as soon as the cameras went back on, he was so again. So what had I done to prompt his extraordinary outburst?
I had made the mistake, on national television, of failing to signal my virtue by opening up my home to a Syrian refugee family and applauding others who have made that generous offer."
"The French did elect Hollande..says it all really.. now how many refugees are you and old Bony taking in.. "
I went to a photographic festival in Arles at the week-end and one of the exhibitions was devoted to tax avoidance. Not a particularly photogenic subject you might think.
..........Bono set up a company in Amsterdam to avoid the tax on $190,000,000 royalties. Holland is the only country where this is possible. The exhibit was a snap of his very small office there.
What a shambles the Labour Party is. Screwed up the country (at least twice) and now unable to conduct a simple contest for their next Leader.
I finally decided today to exercise my right, as a committed Tory voter with £3 to spare and a desire for a laugh, to vote for Mr Corbyn.
I went Corbyn 1, Burnham 2 (I think he's more unelectable than Corbyn TBH), Kendall 3, Balls 4. (On the basis Yvette last as she's the one likely to get Labour highest in the polls). Applying the same principles, in the Deputy Contest I went Watson, Eagle, Bradshaw, Flint, Creasey.
Such fun... :-)
You will make Putin, Adams, Hamas, Hezbollah et al very happy. Many of this country's friends will be less impressed. Let's hope that your vote and all the others Corbyn gets do not cause the UK any problems.
Doubt it. But if so, it will be Ed Miliband's fault not mine.
And that makes me even happier....
I disagree strongly. All those who vote for Corbyn own the resultant mess. And there will be a mess - whether he wins or not. Even if he loses we will have seen that a significant part of the Labour party has no problems with having as their leader a person with views as repellent as Corbyn's. That is a lesson which bodes ill for those of us who hope that such views could be cast out to the fascist fringes where they belong not circulating round the main opposition party.
Spot on. I can understand the temptation to give Labour a kicking - and the party certainly deserves it - but voting for Corbyn, for whatever reason, puts an anti-capitalist, anti-Western, class warrior at the helm of a party that got over nine million votes in May. That will register abroad and will have consequences.
Mr. Herdson, that's the thing that confounds me. I could not previously see Cameron recommending Out. And I'm having difficulty seeing it now. But Merkel's behaviour may push him that way. I'd still be flabbergasted if he recommended Out.
If all reasonable efforts had been made, and he could prove he did he best but the EU blocked him, and then he actually put down his own sensible proposals for a managed exit, and recommended them, and then 'won' the vote he'd become a hero to the bulk of the Tory party. He'd go down in history as one of the greatest ever Conservative leaders, and he could get that all through just before he resigned.
That must be tempting.
History is full of such ironies.
I agree, if the UK voted to leave the EU under Cameron, he likely would be regarded as a truly great Conservative leader.
What a shambles the Labour Party is. Screwed up the country (at least twice) and now unable to conduct a simple contest for their next Leader.
I finally decided today to exercise my right, as a committed Tory voter with £3 to spare and a desire for a laugh, to vote for Mr Corbyn.
I went Corbyn 1, Burnham 2 (I think he's more unelectable than Corbyn TBH), Kendall 3, Balls 4. (On the basis Yvette last as she's the one likely to get Labour highest in the polls). Applying the same principles, in the Deputy Contest I went Watson, Eagle, Bradshaw, Flint, Creasey.
Such fun... :-)
You will make Putin, Adams, Hamas, Hezbollah et al very happy. Many of this country's friends will be less impressed. Let's hope that your vote and all the others Corbyn gets do not cause the UK any problems.
Doubt it. But if so, it will be Ed Miliband's fault not mine.
And that makes me even happier....
I disagree strongly. All those who vote for Corbyn own the resultant mess. And there will be a mess - whether he wins or not. Even if he loses we will have seen that a significant part of the Labour party has no problems with having as their leader a person with views as repellent as Corbyn's. That is a lesson which bodes ill for those of us who hope that such views could be cast out to the fascist fringes where they belong not circulating round the main opposition party.
Spot on. I can understand the temptation to give Labour a kicking - and the party certainly deserves it - but voting for Corbyn, for whatever reason, puts an anti-capitalist, anti-Western, class warrior at the helm of a party that got over nine million votes in May. That will register abroad and will have consequences.
And, while the prospect is a remote one, there's always the possibility that a Corbyn-led party could win enough seats to form a coalition government.
Mr. Herdson, that's the thing that confounds me. I could not previously see Cameron recommending Out. And I'm having difficulty seeing it now. But Merkel's behaviour may push him that way. I'd still be flabbergasted if he recommended Out.
If all reasonable efforts had been made, and he could prove he did he best but the EU blocked him, and then he actually put down his own sensible proposals for a managed exit, and recommended them, and then 'won' the vote he'd become a hero to the bulk of the Tory party. He'd go down in history as one of the greatest ever Conservative leaders, and he could get that all through just before he resigned.
That must be tempting.
History is full of such ironies.
I agree, if the UK voted to leave the EU under Cameron, he likely would be regarded as a truly great Conservative leader.
Of course, one of his closest aides and advisors - Steve Hilton - wanted and expected exactly this to happen.
I honestly don't know what Cameron will do. I keep trying to forget his EU cufflinks.
Comments
Meanwhile, Carmichael's defence is about whether his lying was private or public, political or personal. No argument that he is not a liar, that is accepted by his defence in whole. Whatever the outcome, he is Lying Politician Alistair Carmichael for ever more with no danger of defamation.
It reached its peak with the Nelson Mandela tributes. It's approaching another peak now.
The monarchy works. You need dull unimaginative and dutiful people to do what would drive anyone else potty i.e. to be / to be seen / to represent rather than to do or say anything.
On the whole the Windsors have been all those things. Even at their worst they are better at fulfilling the Ruritanian aspect of the constitution than ex-politicians, celebrities and other egomaniacs.
Hungary Tells Germany To Stop Taking Refugees
The country's PM criticises Berlin for encouraging "millions" more to descend on Europe - and claims many have no case for asylum.
http://news.sky.com/story/1548073/hungary-tells-germany-to-stop-taking-refugees
We dodged a bullet with him because he thought with his pants.
Just imagine him as King during World War II. He would have appointed an appeaser as PM when Chamberlain stood down
Does al Beeb really think those two positions are comparable? Does al Beeb really think freedom of speech is 'radical'?
Wow, just wow!
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-34119412?SThisFB
Dead baby advertising hadn't been invented back then
When I saw the headline "I wouldn't have a Syrian refugee in my house; That doesn't make me awful" in the Telegraph I was expecting something ironic or even inappropriate but amusing.......
It just never dawned on me that the notoriously horrible Julia Hartley-Brewer had been given a guest slot at the Telegraph after her years at the Sunday Express......
Moving on.....it's interesting how people here (France) see Merkel as the hero of the hour. By contrast Cameron is invisible. The bloated self importance of the British really ought to be put into context.
Listening to radio 4 or 5 and you'd think Osborne and Cameron were making all the running over the Syrian crisis. Unfortunately no one elsewhere seems to have even heard of them
But then look at who the Labour party are, apparently, about to elect: a terrorist sympathising politician who cares nothing about the anti-Semitic character of his many "friends". Not so different in his sympathies frankly from the Duke of Windsor and probably harder to get rid of.
https://twitter.com/PhantomPower14/status/640872094486630400
Such a closed mind you have Roger.
'I'm a fiscally dry as the Sahara Tory, soaking wet socially liberal Tory.
I'm closer to you on Defence than most (whilst disagreeing about a replacement for Trident, as I want that money spent on conventional forces which have been shamefully scaled back)'
The cost of a few modern fighter planes is tremendously expensive. Take F35 development costs. These costs are spread over many years. So is Trident. The extra we would get for not having Trident would be relatively small
''The current annual spend on Trident is equivalent to less than 1 per cent of current health and education expenditure, this figure will be roughly the same for the replacement.''
''When the initial procurement costs are added on, the total programme cost will an estimated £75 billion however, £60 billion of this figure, as mentioned earlier, is spread over the lifetime of the vessels.''
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/how-much-will-replacing-trident-cost-us/
1. You do not need to have been employed continuously for eight years in Germany. You merely have to show, at the point of application "you have independent means of securing a living (including for family members entitled to maintenance) without resorting to welfare payments and unemployment benefit."
http://www.bamf.de/EN/Einbuergerung/InDeutschland/indeutschland-node.html
2. The Syrians will not have been in Germany much longer than the Dutch Somalis. Five years versus eight years is not a huge difference in the scheme of integration. And even if we assume it did make a big difference, and they come here at only half the rate of the Dutch Somalis, that would still be 160k for just those turning up this year.
3. Benefits was not a driver of people deciding to move to the UK via another EU country. See this Guardian article, that mentions many of the Africans that come to the UK came from places like Sweden and Denmark, with higher welfare than we have. They also mention a lot of Nigerians coming here from... Germany. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jan/28/british-dream-europe-african-citizens
4. Turks in Germany have often been there for many decades, with family roots put down in the country in the 1950s during guest worker programs. If you believe the five vs eight year difference is a big one, it would be dwarfed by the 30+ years for Turks than the 8 years for Syrians. But anyway, we do not have data, so you are asking me to explain a difference we do not know exists.
5. The prior Somali population of the UK was not that well established, as they were taken in at the same time the Dutch first took them in. Yet it accelerated very quickly from a low base, as Syrians would do. And while we do not have many Syrians yet in the UK, we do have a large Arab population, that they would be culturally similar to.
6. I too would like to see better data on this. It would be nice if the government did some analysis so we can have a more accurate estimation of how many German refugees we will get second hand. Sadly, it seems the government is asleep at the wheel. Perhaps some enterprising MP could ask on Wednesday?
I mean these last few weeks have almost been designed to tip the balance and public opinion against staying in. Cam may fear for his legacy but I don't think "The PM who lead the UK to freedom" is as worrying as "The PM who lost The Union" and he won that one.
That actually makes sense. Not in the same league as her insistence that immigrants must learn to speak 'American'
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-09-06/sarah-palin-says-immigrants-to-u-s-must-speak-american-
"Lets not - your argument is that the article is false because she is "horrible".
Wrong. Certain things are so lacking in sensitivity no decent person or newspaper would say them. The Telegraph for all it's bias isn't usually one of them. I was genuinely surprised that such a headline appeared-until I saw the Hartley-Brewer byline.
The discussion about refugees is another matter altogether
I note that Romania and Bulgaria are legally obliged to join - I expect they will put it off as long as possible.
In terms of saving lives, I'm sure you'd do a lot more good by donating to an aid agency that was working in the Middle East, rather than by offering to house an asylum seeker. Every pound that's spent there will go a lot further than it would here, And, IMHO, saving lives is a good deal more important than offering a fortunate minority a Western standard of living.
Will the decision create UK precedent?
Mr. kle4, indeed.
Modernising for the sake of modernising leads to a Speaker who looks like a supply teacher. Change for the sake of change leads to buggered up devolution.
Huzzah for the monarchy!
Mr. Vale2, depends how long the migrant crisis lasts and how bad it gets. You may very well be right.
She still fails badly to pick up transfer votes, however. In the second round, she loses by 20% to Sarkozy, and by 34% to Juppe.
However, she might be able to edge out Hollande if she were to meet him in the second round. (Against other PS candidates, she's 10-20% behind.)
EDIT: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_French_presidential_election,_2017
Perhaps an element of truth?
"Roger..Got a surprise for you.. no one in the UK actually gives a shit what the folk in France think about Cameron and Osborne.."
That's lucky
'Roger's all mouth, and no trousers. I wonder if he's related to Cooper?'
I thought he was staying in France so he could let his second home in Old Compton street be used by Syrian refugees.
But the way things are heading, Cameron is going to have to recommend an Out.
There's always the Francis Urquhart solution.
I finally decided today to exercise my right, as a committed Tory voter with £3 to spare and a desire for a laugh, to vote for Mr Corbyn.
I went Corbyn 1, Burnham 2 (I think he's more unelectable than Corbyn TBH), Kendall 3, Balls 4. (On the basis Yvette last as she's the one likely to get Labour highest in the polls). Applying the same principles, in the Deputy Contest I went Watson, Eagle, Bradshaw, Flint, Creasey.
Such fun... :-)
Which makes me think, when it comes to the EU referendum, we should be voting on not where we should like the EU to go, or where it currently is, but what we realistically think it will evolve into. Based on Merkel's current behaviour, that it a scary place that I, for one, want no part of.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/loadingreadyrun/5231-Voluntourism
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-34173342
Look at the disgracefully cringing reaction of Jack Straw to the Danish cartoons.
Look at Corbyn: signing an EDM condemning the murders on the one hand but supporting the Islamic Human Rights Commission which condemned Charlie Hebdo on the other.
Look at Leveson - testily arguing that the did not need to be told the value of free speech when he clearly did - and all those politicians jumping on that bandwagon.
There are not enough people in public life who do defend free speech. Not enough who understand why it matters, why it is the foundation stone of all our other freedoms because without the freedom to think and say what we want we cannot have any intellectual, scientific, literary or other development at all - and that all such developments have happened because people did think for themselves and say what they thought and saw, in the teeth of those who told them "You can't think that. You can't say that."
And far too many people willing to be cowed by violence or threats of it or willing to use other people's violence to get curbs on free speech which can then be used to protect them from criticism.
And that makes me even happier....
He will of course have to be careful how exactly he recommends Out, probably an entirely deniable "as things stand if if nothing changes, I very much regret..." and then who knows, something might change.
That must be tempting.
But now an emergency has come up, and so I cannot follow on that fascinating debate. Farewell
"I will not be offering my home to a Syrian refugee family.
You probably think that makes me a terrible person. Indeed the man I was sitting next to on a TV news programme yesterday definitely thought so.
After an on-air discussion about how Britain should deal with the Syrian refugee crisis, as soon as the cameras were switched off, he turned to me and said: “I think you are a f–––ing awful person.”
He had, up until that moment, been quite nice. And, as soon as the cameras went back on, he was so again. So what had I done to prompt his extraordinary outburst?
I had made the mistake, on national television, of failing to signal my virtue by opening up my home to a Syrian refugee family and applauding others who have made that generous offer."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/11848755/I-wouldnt-have-a-Syrian-refugee-in-my-house.-That-doesnt-make-me-evil.html
Ed made me do it is not really going to wash.
This is very peculiar
The reputation of the ERS will be tarnished, if they're not careful.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/keep-calm-and-ignore-the-2016-game-changers/
And more of the drip, drip, drip for Hillary:
http://nypost.com/2015/09/06/hillary-clinton-continues-to-lose-ground-in-democratic-race/
Despite the sources (Murdoch's right wing NY rag), this article has three significant items:
1. Tom Brokaw is opening critical of Hillary
2. Hillary is below 40% in both Iowa and New Hampshire
3. Biden does better than Hillary in the head to head with Trump.
'I finally decided today to exercise my right, as a committed Tory voter with £3 to spare and a desire for a laugh, to vote for Mr Corbyn.'
I couldn't resist either and did Corbyn with Billy Bunter as deputy,no second ,third preferences. Surely the most voter repellent combination.
Is this the last sarcastic point we can expect from you. The list seems endless these days.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/57/Map_of_the_Schengen_Area.svg/2000px-Map_of_the_Schengen_Area.svg.png
I agree, if the UK voted to leave the EU under Cameron, he likely would be regarded as a truly great Conservative leader.
Bah.
"The French did elect Hollande..says it all really.. now how many refugees are you and old Bony taking in.. "
I went to a photographic festival in Arles at the week-end and one of the exhibitions was devoted to tax avoidance. Not a particularly photogenic subject you might think.
..........Bono set up a company in Amsterdam to avoid the tax on $190,000,000 royalties. Holland is the only country where this is possible. The exhibit was a snap of his very small office there.
(Gives a whole new meaning to pro bono.....)
http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/gallery/2015/jun/19/inside-tax-havens-in-pictures
I don't have a vote [never applied for one] but wouldn't back Corbyn. He's beyond the pale.
People using their freedom of speech to protest against freedom of speech outside Downing Street.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9V1H0dIcAA7wZS.jpg
Mr. T, I'd rather be angry and informed than blissfully ignorant.
Also, it's given me an idea for a potential new blog post.
I honestly don't know what Cameron will do. I keep trying to forget his EU cufflinks.