politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How Mr Corbyn could end Cameron’s Premiership

JohnO said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Robert Peston suggesting Blairite MPs might cross the floor to the Tories: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34267886

Keep an eye on John Woodcock, MP for Barrow and Furness (majority 795) who promised in his election manifesto to resign if Labour opposed Trident renewal. Now that would be a spectacularly fun by-election.

Agree a likely jumper. Woodcock is chair of Progress and a key member of Liz Kendall's campaign. Not exactly a success.

@Cyclefree

Housing.

Agreed. For all of the lunacy that is Corbyn and his acolytes on most things there is a real issue here on housing which needs fixing, and the Govt needs to start to get a better grip.

Now Jezza in his instincts seems to want rent controls, compulsory purchases of private property at a discount, demonisation of private landlords (many of whom are trying get a return for their old age in a world where interest rates are sod all, and pensions are the smouldering ruin left by G Brown), combined with not much in the way of immigration controls which will of course tend to concentrate the problem even more in London and the S East, as I'm sure immigrants don't look at the map and alight on Salford, Llanelli, and Motherwell as places to build a life. It's a receipe for disaster as the population most rises in the "wrong places", people sell flats rather than have the Dear Leader decide the price of rents and have rafts of other regulations imposed. A temporary housing glut in certain sectors might ensue pushing prices down (all that negative equity appearing), which may help the better off renters closer to saving a deposit, but will then create shortages further down the scale as rented flats/houses disappear from the market.

However, that's not to say there is not a real live problem (particularly in London, where half a mill doesn't seem to buy you a decent family house anywhere you'd aspire to live - from my experience of the place at least - mostly the N West suburbs), and there must be insecurity for people trying, for example, to educate kids without longish tenure of housing, difficulty getting people to work in certain jobs, given the costs of accommodation in certain areas, and just the knock on effects on the economy where sections of the population are shelling out large percentages of income on rent/mortgages rather than other "stuff".

We simply have to increase supply and the Govt should be incentivising industry to expand big time, via tax breaks, less regulation (yes that's going to mean upsetting a few Tory nimbies here and there), less green belt, more "upwards" building (and hopefully avoiding the disasters of the 60's), and yes conceivably intervening to build more social housing in a targeted way. Finding a way of not having the population increase by nearly the population of Cardiff each year is also part of that equation.

It ain't easy at all, but we have to act.

BannedInParis said:

Has anyone else spotted the Charlie Hebdo take on the migration crisis?

It's ... um .. a bit ... close to the bone.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-16/charlie-hebdo-stirs-new-controversy-with-migrant-cartoons/6778946

flightpath01 said:

GarethoftheVale2 said:

MattW said:

JonathanD said:

stodge said:

to live in a camp for months, if not years, with no prospects, would seem like purgatory. The camps can and must be a temporary solution not a permanent home for the Syrian Diaspora.

You are quite right that living in one of those camps must be miserable - the very first thing that needs to be sorted is to ensure that they are fully and well funded by the international community. The 'hard headed realists' must not lose compassion for the very real suffering these Syrian refugees are enduring.

However, given there are 3 or 4 million displaced Syrians and no country has that many empty houses, wherever they are moved to, they will be living in camps for quite some time. Better to focus money and effort on improving their lives where they are rather than wasting it in transport costs.

Spain. 3.4 million.
Germany. 1.8 million.
France + Italy 2m plus each.
Ireland 400k.
UK 700k.
Portugal 700k.
Still better to keep them in secure camps in region, however.
Unusually for the G, I believe those numbers roughly.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/feb/23/europe-11m-empty-properties-enough-house-homeless-continent-twice?CMP=fb_gu
https://i.guim.co.uk/img/static/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/2/23/1393176517114/unnamed.png?w=620&q=85&auto=format&sharp=10&s=14e0b9b449bc43280ed7d587db69d38f

The issue with this is that in the UK at least, most empty homes are likely to be in areas with very high unemployment so if you put refugees in them they would struggle to find a job.

The issue of empty homes is a red herring. Given Spanish levels of unemployment - just what benefit would a million migrants bring to them?
These mass movements of people are far from the normal movements between countries and the movements up to now within the EU. They are illegal and unregulated and it must be quite clear to even the thickest lefty moron living in their cloud cuckoo land that any accession to this movement will result in greater tragedies all round.

Hmmm.

A large number of billions coming to be spent in Spain every year would have no effect? I don't see that.

If you want to see the costs involved, consider that Frau Merkel has budgeted - what was it - 5+bn Euro for the first 800,000?

TCPoliticalBetting said:

BannedInParis said:

Has anyone else spotted the Charlie Hebdo take on the migration crisis?

It's ... um .. a bit ... close to the bone.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-16/charlie-hebdo-stirs-new-controversy-with-migrant-cartoons/6778946

Where are the #jesuischarlie virtue signallers now?

Seems as though they are outrageous for the sake of being outrageous... That doesn't take much bravery or wisdom in my book

MikeK said:

Well all good things come to an end:
Sky News Newsdesk ‏@SkyNewsBreak 3m3 minutes ago
Update - Austrian rail operator OEBB says train traffic between #Salzburg and #Germany has been halted on the orders of German authorities

Expect explosions from the local populations and mayhem from the migrants, (especially where the group is mostly men), in Serbia, Macedonia, Greece and possibly Croatia. With the mass demonstrations on Hungary's borders, now closed.

Time to tear up the Refugee Convention? Or is it in shreds already?

http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/time-to-tear-up-the-refugee-convention/17436#disqus_thread

JackW said:

JohnO said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Robert Peston suggesting Blairite MPs might cross the floor to the Tories: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34267886

Keep an eye on John Woodcock, MP for Barrow and Furness (majority 795) who promised in his election manifesto to resign if Labour opposed Trident renewal. Now that would be a spectacularly fun by-election.

Are there Corbynistic stirrings in the Peoples Republic of Hersham, are the residents revolting? ....

Having just returned from two weeks in the People's Republic of China (scrambling unsteadily but with a certain grace along its Great Wall, and conversing with 10 year olds practicsing their near perfect english), I am now at one with the workers and peasants of Hersham.

From the Marchant piece - I think we're already there.

Seven: the party will become so obsessed with the idea that smart management of the media is an evil, that there will be a preventable, negative story about Labour on a daily basis. There will also be unpreventable ones, stemming from the whole churchyards-full of skeletons contained in the closets of Corbyn, McDonnell and other prominent figures. CCHQ already think that all their Christmases have come at once, and would be well advised to save some money by giving their Attack units a year off. The stories will write themselves.

isam said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

BannedInParis said:

Has anyone else spotted the Charlie Hebdo take on the migration crisis?

It's ... um .. a bit ... close to the bone.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-16/charlie-hebdo-stirs-new-controversy-with-migrant-cartoons/6778946

Where are the #jesuischarlie virtue signallers now?

Seems as though they are outrageous for the sake of being outrageous... That doesn't take much bravery or wisdom in my book

Yup: that's what satire is about. Outrage, bad taste, shock. See Hogarth, Rowlandson, Gillray - or listen Simon Schama on just this point on this morning's Today programme at about 7:40 or so.

No bravery should be needed because those who don't like it don't need to read it. The bravery has only been required because people have chosen violence as a reaction. That's their choice - and a very bad choice it is too.

isam said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

BannedInParis said:

Has anyone else spotted the Charlie Hebdo take on the migration crisis?

It's ... um .. a bit ... close to the bone.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-16/charlie-hebdo-stirs-new-controversy-with-migrant-cartoons/6778946

Where are the #jesuischarlie virtue signallers now?

Seems as though they are outrageous for the sake of being outrageous... That doesn't take much bravery or wisdom in my book

I value my right to offend as much as freedom of the press/speech

JEO said:

Any Blairite MPs crossing the floor should do the decent thing and resign to stand again as Conservatives.

I think that precedent has been well set.

welshowl said:

@Cyclefree

Housing.

Agreed. For all of the lunacy that is Corbyn and his acolytes on most things there is a real issue here on housing which needs fixing, and the Govt needs to start to get a better grip.

Now Jezza in his instincts seems to want rent controls, compulsory purchases of private property at a discount, demonisation of private landlords (many of whom are trying get a return for their old age in a world where interest rates are sod all, and pensions are the smouldering ruin left by G Brown), combined with not much in the way of immigration controls which will of course tend to concentrate the problem even more in London and the S East, as I'm sure immigrants don't look at the map and alight on Salford, Llanelli, and Motherwell as places to build a life. It's a receipe for disaster as the population most rises in the "wrong places", people sell flats rather than have the Dear Leader decide the price of rents and have rafts of other regulations imposed. A temporary housing glut in certain sectors might ensue pushing prices down (all that negative equity appearing), which may help the better off renters closer to saving a deposit, but will then create shortages further down the scale as rented flats/houses disappear from the market.

However, that's not to say there is not a real live problem (particularly in London, where half a mill doesn't seem to buy you a decent family house anywhere you'd aspire to live - from my experience of the place at least - mostly the N West suburbs), and there must be insecurity for people trying, for example, to educate kids without longish tenure of housing, difficulty getting people to work in certain jobs, given the costs of accommodation in certain areas, and just the knock on effects on the economy where sections of the population are shelling out large percentages of income on rent/mortgages rather than other "stuff".

We simply have to increase supply and the Govt should be incentivising industry to expand big time, via tax breaks, less regulation (yes that's going to mean upsetting a few Tory nimbies here and there), less green belt, more "upwards" building (and hopefully avoiding the disasters of the 60's), and yes conceivably intervening to build more social housing in a targeted way. Finding a way of not having the population increase by nearly the population of Cardiff each year is also part of that equation.

It ain't easy at all, but we have to act.

Agreed. The Tories are being too complacent on this. They seem to be assuming that simply reheating a version of what they did in the 1980s will work. And I don't think that's enough. It's an open goal for Labour and it is interesting that Corbyn has mentioned it because that will resonate with people - even if his solutions are not the right ones.

JackW said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I'm also on this bet

@MSmithsonPB: Just had my first next LAB leader bet - £10 on Alan Johnson at 25/1 on Betfair. Could he be the party's Michael Howard?

Only if Johnson has something of the night about him.

The membership will probably think that he has something of the right about him.

DavidL said:

MaxPB said:

Productivity gains galore!

Unemployment steady (rate down), pay rises up (well above inflation), employment still rising (up 42k QoQ). Hours worked down, employment up, so probable probability gains as well, but we need to wait for the BoE report to confirm it.

I think the easy gains have gone though, now we need businesses to invest and grow their employee base. It's not easy.

Good news on youth unemployment as well, down to 15.6%, among the lowest in the EU, but we still need to reduce that to less than 10% sooner rather than later.

I do think we are seeing the end of the really quite peculiar UK jobs miracle. The move to the living wage will push employers to be more sparing with labour and improve productivity.

The reduction in WTCs will make part time work of 16 hours or so marginally less attractive, albeit full time work more so. So there will over time be more full time and a reduction in part time working.

There are signs that the economy is starting to slow. If that continues total employment may struggle to hold current levels. Immigration and an increasing population should then see rising unemployment but hopefully only on a modest scale.

I think immigration will begin to slow as a natural consequence of our slowing jobs market. The employment rate among Bulgarians and Romanians has increased in the last few months, that alone will slow the rate of new arrivals.

LOL

@JohnRentoul: Huge political opportunity for Lib Dems, with millions of centrist voters now homeless. Shame about Tim Farron.

Ha!

Tissue_Price said:

JackW said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I'm also on this bet

@MSmithsonPB: Just had my first next LAB leader bet - £10 on Alan Johnson at 25/1 on Betfair. Could he be the party's Michael Howard?

Only if Johnson has something of the night about him.

The membership will probably think that he has something of the right about him.

Plato_Says said:

Interesting little factoid from DT Live http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11867889/jeremy-corbyn-david-cameron-pmqs-live.html

• Cameron claimed £128,375.59 in expenses in 2014-15, while Corbyn claimed £158,994.44

Bet 10 downing street and all the millions he spent there were not included though, so hardly a like for like comparison

GarethoftheVale2 said:

JohnO said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Robert Peston suggesting Blairite MPs might cross the floor to the Tories: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34267886

Keep an eye on John Woodcock, MP for Barrow and Furness (majority 795) who promised in his election manifesto to resign if Labour opposed Trident renewal. Now that would be a spectacularly fun by-election.

It is also worth pointing out that Barrow is likely to be "flipped" to the Tories anyway by the boundary changes

Doesn't Bercow essentially count as a Tory as far as Parliamentary votes are concerned? As the Speaker and Deputy Speakers don't generally vote, Bercow is essentially a Tory MP still permanently tied with a Labour Deputy Speaker.

Scrapheap_as_was said:

If the Lib Dems had Norman Lamb leading I would have assumed they would have been welcoming some Labour MPs in should C&McD endure.

elswhere

John Woodcock ✔ @JWoodcockMP
oh good grief. so people can "take to twitter" to urge to my party to deselect me, but I must not respond. Ok. https://twitter.com/jessop_dylan/status/644090258754273280 …

As if Corbyn has ever "respected the Party Leadership"?

Left's fav MP Lisa Nandy on DP BBC2 with Andrew Neil just starting. Brave move by her. Lisp noticeable - not Leadership material.

JohnO said:

JackW said:

JohnO said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Robert Peston suggesting Blairite MPs might cross the floor to the Tories: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34267886

Keep an eye on John Woodcock, MP for Barrow and Furness (majority 795) who promised in his election manifesto to resign if Labour opposed Trident renewal. Now that would be a spectacularly fun by-election.

Are there Corbynistic stirrings in the Peoples Republic of Hersham, are the residents revolting? ....

Having just returned from two weeks in the People's Republic of China (scrambling unsteadily but with a certain grace along its Great Wall, and conversing with 10 year olds practicsing their near perfect english), I am now at one with the workers and peasants of Hersham.

Thank you.

The thoughts of Chairman JohnO are always welcomed by the workers of Hersham and PB.

How does someone with a lisp say their own name? Litha?

TCPoliticalBetting said:

Left's fav MP Lisa Nandy on DP BBC2 with Andrew Neil just starting. Brave move by her. Lisp noticeable - not Leadership material.

flightpath01 said:

DavidL said:

stodge said:

DavidL said:

Good post (in other words I agree). The desire of both inners and outers to have Cameron on their side is very strong. Some on here, such as Casino_Royale are practically offering him a sainthood if he cannot bring himself to argue for In.

I think a lot of people in this country trust his judgement ahead of any other politician around today. Not the committed of course but the much more substantial its all a bit difficult crowd. If Cameron says we have a future outside the EU we do and we will very likely find out if he is right in due course.

....

I don't think it was UKIP, which Cameron never took very seriously, but party management that drove him to promise a referendum. It was a position that the Tories could agree upon, even if they did not agree on the best result.

The Scottish example makes one hesitate but I do think it is unlikely we would have another EU referendum in, say, 20 years whichever way it went. The only possibility would be if the government post Cameron negotiated our out arrangements and then asked again, well do you want this or to stay in?

We need the negotiations and thus the referendum because the EU is changing with the creation of the Euro. The Greek crisis shows this in spades. We are not in the Euro and so our differences with the EU/Eurozone are clear and inevitable. Cameron said all this in 2013 (Feb I think).
As for the result - it does not matter in respect of future govts. We can stay on or we can go out. A future govt can take any stance it wants if it thinks it can persuade/hoodwink the electorate. What is clear is we will have a referendum and everyone will have to think about the consequences of their vote in relation to the facts at the time.
Just live with that and get on with something else, or as per the new (I think Horizon based) phrase, 'Suck it up'.

I have a vague idea I am being insulted but I don't really know why.

At the risk of aggravating my folly I think it is obvious that the timing of the referendum is being driven by internal Tory politics than any specific choice we have to make. If it was not the obvious commitment would be to have an In/Out referendum on the next Treaty change. There will be no new Treaty by 2017.

I agree with you (if this helps) that the Euro has changed the nature of the EU and, as non members, not necessarily to our advantage. I have said so many times.

Cyclefree said:

welshowl said:

@Cyclefree

Housing.

Agreed. For all of the lunacy that is Corbyn and his acolytes on most things there is a real issue here on housing which needs fixing, and the Govt needs to start to get a better grip.

...

However, that's not to say there is not a real live problem (particularly in London, where half a mill doesn't seem to buy you a decent family house anywhere you'd aspire to live - from my experience of the place at least - mostly the N West suburbs), and there must be insecurity for people trying, for example, to educate kids without longish tenure of housing, difficulty getting people to work in certain jobs, given the costs of accommodation in certain areas, and just the knock on effects on the economy where sections of the population are shelling out large percentages of income on rent/mortgages rather than other "stuff".

We simply have to increase supply and the Govt should be incentivising industry to expand big time, via tax breaks, less regulation (yes that's going to mean upsetting a few Tory nimbies here and there), less green belt, more "upwards" building (and hopefully avoiding the disasters of the 60's), and yes conceivably intervening to build more social housing in a targeted way. Finding a way of not having the population increase by nearly the population of Cardiff each year is also part of that equation.

It ain't easy at all, but we have to act.

Agreed. The Tories are being too complacent on this. They seem to be assuming that simply reheating a version of what they did in the 1980s will work. And I don't think that's enough. It's an open goal for Labour and it is interesting that Corbyn has mentioned it because that will resonate with people - even if his solutions are not the right ones.

It's not an open goal because while there is clearly a problem, there is far less clearly any easy solution.

More houses? Nimbys.
Less immigration? Easier said than done.
Rent controls? If big, then they may distort the market leading to a slump in prices, negative equity, forced termination of tenancies or a lack of maintenance. If small, then they'll make no difference.
More council housing? Funded how?
More sheltered housing? Probably needed and deliverable but only chipping at the problem.
Discourage foreign investment in the housing market? Impossible within the EU and already been tried to little effect for those outside it.

Scott_P said:

@BBCAllegra: Understand from friend of BBC cameraman James Webb he's out of hosp + "100% likely" to go to police after being "pushed by Corbyn driver"

what a jessie, "the big boy pushed me officer"

david_herdson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I'm also on this bet

@MSmithsonPB: Just had my first next LAB leader bet - £10 on Alan Johnson at 25/1 on Betfair. Could he be the party's Michael Howard?

That is certainly value. Of the Howard options, only Johnson and Harman look viable; Harman probably more so but Johnson is overpriced at 25s.

Someone (sorry for the lack of namecheck) suggested Hilary Benn as a unity option - he is in the Shadow Cabinet but was also in government under Blair and Brown. Of the current front bench, that's probably as good a shout as anyone though whether he'll be able to walk the tightrope of foreign policy with Corbyn as leader remains to be seen. If he doesn't, then he might still be an option providing he resigns rather than become excessively tainted.

Johnson odds have shortened considerably. The PB effect?

Mr. G, if someone's pushed to the ground it's legitimate cause for complaint [there's also the issue of damage to the camera].

It's unacceptable for the press to be physically assault [as is alleged] by the entourage of a politician.

Cyclefree said:

isam said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

BannedInParis said:

Has anyone else spotted the Charlie Hebdo take on the migration crisis?

It's ... um .. a bit ... close to the bone.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-16/charlie-hebdo-stirs-new-controversy-with-migrant-cartoons/6778946

Where are the #jesuischarlie virtue signallers now?

Seems as though they are outrageous for the sake of being outrageous... That doesn't take much bravery or wisdom in my book

Yup: that's what satire is about. Outrage, bad taste, shock. See Hogarth, Rowlandson, Gillray - or listen Simon Schama on just this point on this morning's Today programme at about 7:40 or so.

No bravery should be needed because those who don't like it don't need to read it. The bravery has only been required because people have chosen violence as a reaction. That's their choice - and a very bad choice it is too.

I don't know that satire has to be about bad taste and shocking... People often say that outrageous behaviour or pushing the boundaries in art/satire is 'brave' that's the point I made, I thought that was obvious. Obviously I don't agree with the violence but really I just don't find bad taste/shocking behaviour of this kind to my taste especially in an incendiary atmosphere

malcolmg said:

Scott_P said:

@BBCAllegra: Understand from friend of BBC cameraman James Webb he's out of hosp + "100% likely" to go to police after being "pushed by Corbyn driver"

what a jessie, "the big boy pushed me officer"

I love how you defend violence when it's on your side of the spectrum...

malcolmg said:

Scott_P said:

@BBCAllegra: Understand from friend of BBC cameraman James Webb he's out of hosp + "100% likely" to go to police after being "pushed by Corbyn driver"

what a jessie, "the big boy pushed me officer"

So being assaulted makes you a jessie? And we should hold no credence with the idea a third of Scottish No voters have felt bullied?

I'm seeing a connection here.

No matter how polite and well-mannered Corbyn is at PMQs the tory benches are going to be so loud it'll be as if nothing has changed and his supporters will be majorly disappointed.

Philip_Thompson said:

malcolmg said:

Scott_P said:

@BBCAllegra: Understand from friend of BBC cameraman James Webb he's out of hosp + "100% likely" to go to police after being "pushed by Corbyn driver"

what a jessie, "the big boy pushed me officer"

So being assaulted makes you a jessie? And we should hold no credence with the idea a third of Scottish No voters have felt bullied?

I'm seeing a connection here.

Victim-blaming is popular in some circles it would appear.

A pretty shameful position to take.

We have a drowning woman live on BBC2. Andrew Neil is brutal as always, Labour MP can't stand to either back Corbyn or go against him and so sounds pathetic.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. G, if someone's pushed to the ground it's legitimate cause for complaint [there's also the issue of damage to the camera].

It's unacceptable for the press to be physically assault [as is alleged] by the entourage of a politician.

MD who knows who was pushing who, they should not be blocking people from going about their business and sticking camera's in their faces. If he was standing at the side and the guy went over and pushed him fair enough , if he was in his face and blocking/harassing him then lucky it was just a push.

Poor Lisa Nandy getting torn apart by Andrew Neil trying to defend the indefensible and avoid the questions.

Mr. T, if he goes, how many Labour leaders will that be that Cameron's faced? Five permanent, seven including interim leaders?

It's an average of about one every two years.

On the plus side, better to do it quickly if it must be done, and Labour will finally get a better leader [the first improvement for decades].

Mr. G, it's my understanding that the law would disagree, though others here are better versed in such things than me.

Downfall video done already for corbyn

https://youtu.be/tyNI7wmjS6s

Mr. Max, what did he do?

Richard_Nabavi said:

david_herdson said:

It's not an open goal because while there is clearly a problem, there is far less clearly any easy solution.

Indeed so. In addition to the points you mention, there's also the very practical problem that the housebuilding industry is already working flat out. There simply isn't any spare capacity at the moment; they are constrained by shortage of skilled labour and even shortage of materials including bricks. Increasing the supply of housing is going to take time.

Construction has too much of a cyclical nature. This happens every time there is a recession and then recovery, with skilled labour and material being in shortage once recovery begins. There must be a case for having the house building industry as a special case and having government support for the housing industry during recessions. It would need to be carefully controlled and defined however.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. G, it's my understanding that the law would disagree, though others here are better versed in such things than me.

MD, someone stopping a person going about their lawful business, harassing them and sticking objects in their face etc sounds like assault to me. More likely the wimpy BBC thug should be in the dock.

SNP Pete Wishart "I've voted with Jeremy on more votes probably than his Blairite colleagues and we look forward to working with him".

SNP and Labour link up looking more and more scary for English voters than ever. SNP continue to assist Tory Party. Thanks guys.

Looks like the Tory MPs have brought their popcorn into the chamber:

Bercow: "There's an understandable air of anticipation in the chamber at this time, let's have a bit of order."

DavidL said:

flightpath01 said:

DavidL said:

stodge said:

DavidL said:

Good post (in other words I agree). The desire of both inners and outers to have Cameron on their side is very strong. Some on here, such as Casino_Royale are practically offering him a sainthood if he cannot bring himself to argue for In.
I think a lot of people in this country trust his judgement ahead of any other politician around today. Not the committed of course but the much more substantial its all a bit difficult crowd. If Cameron says we have a future outside the EU we do and we will very likely find out if he is right in due course.

....

...

We need the negotiations and thus the referendum because the EU is changing with the creation of the Euro. The Greek crisis shows this in spades. We are not in the Euro and so our differences with the EU/Eurozone are clear and inevitable. Cameron said all this in 2013 (Feb I think).
As for the result - it does not matter in respect of future govts. We can stay on or we can go out. A future govt can take any stance it wants if it thinks it can persuade/hoodwink the electorate. What is clear is we will have a referendum and everyone will have to think about the consequences of their vote in relation to the facts at the time.
Just live with that and get on with something else, or as per the new (I think Horizon based) phrase, 'Suck it up'.

I have a vague idea I am being insulted but I don't really know why.
At the risk of aggravating my folly I think it is obvious that the timing of the referendum is being driven by internal Tory politics than any specific choice we have to make. If it was not the obvious commitment would be to have an In/Out referendum on the next Treaty change. There will be no new Treaty by 2017.
I agree with you (if this helps) that the Euro has changed the nature of the EU and, as non members, not necessarily to our advantage. I have said so many times.

I do not know where you get the idea you are being insulted - may be a smiley would have made things more clear.
The timing of the referendum is being driven by the fact that it is needed because of the issue of the Eurozone. The renegotiations are needed because of the issues we face. They cannot be avoided whilst we sit on the sidelines, and the longer it goes on the less chance for any change
As soon as they were announced all we got was kippers screaming like stuck pigs.
But to clarify - we will get what we get and vote what we want with whatever consequences we might hope for. Is there any need for any more?

TheWhiteRabbit said:

"Will Blairites cross floor to Osborne?" Robert Peston asks.

Well I'll believe it when I see it, but what a coup it would be.

Tory/Lab defections to each other are as rare as hen's teeth.

I wouldn't expect them immediately, but if Corbyn starts threatening deselection and what not then I could see some crossers.

Commons chamber absolutely packed to the brim.

Here goes - Cameron to welcome Corbyn by saying that he wishes him the very best in his new role, and long may he continue in it?