Nadine Writes Books @NadineDorriesMP 5h5 hours ago Stunned at IDS resignation letter. I was about to vote against ESA cuts when he sought me out - he personally and angrily begged me not to.
F1 - FP3 drawing to a close, the first chance they have had to run in the dry. Mercedes from Ferrari, with Willams, Red Bull best of the rest. A good improvement from McLaren, Manor at the back with Haas.
Not a lot of change from last year evident so far, qualy session two hours from now at 06:00GMT, the format is rather confusing and could be chaos!
Breaking : looks like a flydubai 737 carrying 60 people may have crashed at Rostov-On-Don in Russia overnight. Casualties unconfirmed so far but initial pictures don't look good.
Latest news, Cameron confirms that the changes to the payments to the disabled will not go ahead in their present form. How long before Osborne goes due to the non-confidence from the PM? How long will Cameron try and hang on as PM? Will the EuroReferendum take place or will we have a General Election instead? Questions, all these questions.
On topic, I'm completely thrown by the IDS resignation.
Happened very quickly and is giving succour to the opposition narrative regarding the changes - which were for an INCREASE in PIP spending. Since when did a Cabinet minister resign over an increase to his department's spending during a period of tightening?
It all suggests that something happened behind the scenes between IDS and Osborne, with Cameron failing to intervene in time to keep them on the same page. The PM now has the big headache of an unwanted reshuffle at a sensitive department while also trying to get the Budget passed.
What chance that IDS, a long career now behind him, decides to campaign for Leave?
What are they talking about in terms of restrictions though? Had they closed it down / made his max bet tiny because he has been really successful? Or just increased his max bet as he "valued customer" because he asked to wager more? Or something else, like better odds, "rakeback", etc?
Mr Davies was brought up in a bookmaking family and has been a keen and informed gambler. He was practising a “bad each way” strategy that allows gamblers with a knowledge of racing to exploit the odds on second and third-placed horses over a series of races. Bookmakers monitor customers’ activity and close down or restrict accounts where they suspect that it is happening.
In 2006 Ladbrokes believed Mr Davies to be practising the strategy and placed restrictions on his account. On discovering this the MP wrote to a Ladbrokes director to complain. The restrictions were then lifted.
A source who worked at Ladbrokes at the time said that a customer’s account would need to be making the “low thousands of pounds” a year to trigger restrictions.
“In my experience it is almost unheard of for restrictions on an account to be lifted. Bookmakers don’t do that because it would effectively allow a punter to make money from them indefinitely and they are not charities.”
Can someone explain how a "bad each way" strategy works?
What are they talking about in terms of restrictions though? Had they closed it down / made his max bet tiny because he has been really successful? Or just increased his max bet as he "valued customer" because he asked to wager more? Or something else, like better odds, "rakeback", etc?
Mr Davies was brought up in a bookmaking family and has been a keen and informed gambler. He was practising a “bad each way” strategy that allows gamblers with a knowledge of racing to exploit the odds on second and third-placed horses over a series of races. Bookmakers monitor customers’ activity and close down or restrict accounts where they suspect that it is happening.
In 2006 Ladbrokes believed Mr Davies to be practising the strategy and placed restrictions on his account. On discovering this the MP wrote to a Ladbrokes director to complain. The restrictions were then lifted.
A source who worked at Ladbrokes at the time said that a customer’s account would need to be making the “low thousands of pounds” a year to trigger restrictions.
“In my experience it is almost unheard of for restrictions on an account to be lifted. Bookmakers don’t do that because it would effectively allow a punter to make money from them indefinitely and they are not charities.”
Can someone explain how a "bad each way" strategy works?
Short answer - bad for the bookie.
Longer answer - usually placing e-w bets on a clear second favourite in a situation where the favourite is big odds-on and the second-fav priced long. i.e. where the fav is 1/10 and the second fav 10/1 -for the win - but a fixed proportion of that for the e/w, in other words far too long for the place. Not that that should be the punter's problem of course.
What are they talking about in terms of restrictions though? Had they closed it down / made his max bet tiny because he has been really successful? Or just increased his max bet as he "valued customer" because he asked to wager more? Or something else, like better odds, "rakeback", etc?
Mr Davies was brought up in a bookmaking family and has been a keen and informed gambler. He was practising a “bad each way” strategy that allows gamblers with a knowledge of racing to exploit the odds on second and third-placed horses over a series of races. Bookmakers monitor customers’ activity and close down or restrict accounts where they suspect that it is happening.
In 2006 Ladbrokes believed Mr Davies to be practising the strategy and placed restrictions on his account. On discovering this the MP wrote to a Ladbrokes director to complain. The restrictions were then lifted.
A source who worked at Ladbrokes at the time said that a customer’s account would need to be making the “low thousands of pounds” a year to trigger restrictions.
“In my experience it is almost unheard of for restrictions on an account to be lifted. Bookmakers don’t do that because it would effectively allow a punter to make money from them indefinitely and they are not charities.”
Can someone explain how a "bad each way" strategy works?
Short answer - bad for the bookie.
Longer answer - usually placing e-w bets on a clear second favourite in a situation where the favourite is big odds-on and the second-fav priced long. i.e. where the fav is 1/10 and the second fav 10/1 -for the win - but a fixed proportion of that for the e/w, in other words far too long for the place. Not that that should be the punter's problem of course.
I get it. Surely then bookies need to get their odds right rather than ban punters? Not that I bet on the horses much.
What are they talking about in terms of restrictions though? Had they closed it down / made his max bet tiny because he has been really successful? Or just increased his max bet as he "valued customer" because he asked to wager more? Or something else, like better odds, "rakeback", etc?
Mr Davies was brought up in a bookmaking family and has been a keen and informed gambler. He was practising a “bad each way” strategy that allows gamblers with a knowledge of racing to exploit the odds on second and third-placed horses over a series of races. Bookmakers monitor customers’ activity and close down or restrict accounts where they suspect that it is happening.
In 2006 Ladbrokes believed Mr Davies to be practising the strategy and placed restrictions on his account. On discovering this the MP wrote to a Ladbrokes director to complain. The restrictions were then lifted.
A source who worked at Ladbrokes at the time said that a customer’s account would need to be making the “low thousands of pounds” a year to trigger restrictions.
“In my experience it is almost unheard of for restrictions on an account to be lifted. Bookmakers don’t do that because it would effectively allow a punter to make money from them indefinitely and they are not charities.”
Can someone explain how a "bad each way" strategy works?
Short answer - bad for the bookie.
Longer answer - usually placing e-w bets on a clear second favourite in a situation where the favourite is big odds-on and the second-fav priced long. i.e. where the fav is 1/10 and the second fav 10/1 -for the win - but a fixed proportion of that for the e/w, in other words far too long for the place. Not that that should be the punter's problem of course.
I get it. Surely then bookies need to get their odds right rather than ban punters? Not that I bet on the horses much.
It's because they price for the win and then offer the fixed percentage odds for the place - there are a number of races where that concept just doesn't work, yet the bookies still offer them. The canny punter can spot these, which is what happened in this publicised case.
Another reason to bet anonymously on an exchange, at a shop or on the course, rather than online where they can profile you as a punter.
F1 - New Q1 session was the predictable chaos. Kvyat's Red Bull being the major victim knocked out.
What's your first impressions? Is it 'better' than the old format?
Nope, it's seriously crap. Q2 finished a minute early as no-one was on the track at the end. Bottas the victim this time. Q3 about to start, Toto Woolff already suggesting that there will be no-one running 3 or 4 mins from the end.
McLaren P12 and P13, which is about six places higher than last season.
F1 - New Q1 session was the predictable chaos. Kvyat's Red Bull being the major victim knocked out.
What's your first impressions? Is it 'better' than the old format?
Nope, it's seriously crap. Q3 about to start, Toto Woolff already thinking that there will be no-one running 3 or 4 mins from the end.
Ouch. I was very sceptical about it. A few years back - ten, fifteen? - we had the format change every year until we settled on the old format, which I liked. I can't see what the new format does aside from add some chance into it.
What happens with tyres? do they still need to start on the tyres they qualified on? Surely not, as that would really disadvantage the ones who go further in each session.
F1 - New Q1 session was the predictable chaos. Kvyat's Red Bull being the major victim knocked out.
What's your first impressions? Is it 'better' than the old format?
Nope, it's seriously crap. Q3 about to start, Toto Woolff already thinking that there will be no-one running 3 or 4 mins from the end.
Ouch. I was very sceptical about it. A few years back - ten, fifteen? - we had the format change every year until we settled on the old format, which I liked. I can't see what the new format does aside from add some chance into it.
What happens with tyres? do they still need to start on the tyres they qualified on? Surely not, as that would really disadvantage the ones who go further in each session.
They all start the race on the tyres they set their fastest time in Q2, same as last year.
The issue is that the super soft tyres only last one lap, if they lasted 4 or 5 laps the format would work much better. Watching someone get out of their car in the pits 3 minutes before their elimination time, because they can't get out and round twice is not what people are paying to watch. The commentators got confused enough, watching at the circuit it must make no sense at all.
Mercedes over a second quicker than Ferrari in Q2, now clear that they've been sandbagging all winter testing!!
F1 - New Q1 session was the predictable chaos. Kvyat's Red Bull being the major victim knocked out.
What's your first impressions? Is it 'better' than the old format?
Nope, it's seriously crap. Q3 about to start, Toto Woolff already thinking that there will be no-one running 3 or 4 mins from the end.
Ouch. I was very sceptical about it. A few years back - ten, fifteen? - we had the format change every year until we settled on the old format, which I liked. I can't see what the new format does aside from add some chance into it.
What happens with tyres? do they still need to start on the tyres they qualified on? Surely not, as that would really disadvantage the ones who go further in each session.
They all start the race on the tyres they set their fastest time in Q2, same as last year.
The issue is that the super soft tyres only last one lap, if they lasted 4 or 5 laps the format would work much better. Watching someone get out of their car in the pits 3 minutes before their elimination time, because they can't get out and round twice is not what people are paying to watch. The commentators got confused enough, watching at the circuit it must make no sense at all.
Mercedes over a second quicker than Ferrari in Q2, now clear that they've been sandbagging all winter testing!!
Thanks. It sounds awful.
However: good to see McLaren doing better, and of course Mercedes were sandbagging! They hardly used the supersoft tyres during testing, did they?
On another note: how come people at the top of F1 are complaining about Mercedes' dominance over two years when the same people were noticeable quieter during Red Bull's four-year dominance, or Ferrari's for five?
The good new this morning is that more and more people are agreeing with me on Mass Immigration:
(snip)
Do you have any original thoughts, or can you only copy out tweets? I ask as I've asked you questions about your views, and you don't answer.
You know my views on Mass immigration - I'm against it - and I see no need to spell it out further. Max Hastings article in the mail has stated most, but not all, of my forebodings on the matter.
The good new this morning is that more and more people are agreeing with me on Mass Immigration:
(snip)
Do you have any original thoughts, or can you only copy out tweets? I ask as I've asked you questions about your views, and you don't answer.
You know my views on Mass immigration - I'm against it - and I see no need to spell it out further. Max Hastings article in the mail has stated most, but not all, of my forebodings on the matter.
Strikingly - and honestly - Hastings offers no real solutions, except one that he acknowledges will not happen: the deployment of a 450,000-strong occupying force in the Middle East.
So what odds on the deficit being cleared by 2020 this morning? As others have observed, if it was so hugely important to tackle it fuel duty would have been raised and CGT would not have been cut.
Agree with that. He's put his hand in his department's budget to find cuts, and Osborne has used them in the wrong way.
This has been niggling for years - I suspect that Osborne using the Budget for Remain was just the final straw. IDS has never struck me as a very political man.
I note DavidL's comments about IDS and the benefit changes on the previous thread but I think he has it fundamentally wrong. The impression I always got was that IDS had a vision of a complete transformation in the way welfare is dealt with that wasn't necessarily just about cuts. From his point of view it was about making benefits work properly. At the same time the Treasury has seen it as an opportunity continuously to impose cuts and save money.
That doesn't mean I don't think he has picked his time for political reasons but I do think that the underlying logic in terms of benefits is coherent and that he has long viewed Osborne and the Treasury as the enemy.
The good new this morning is that more and more people are agreeing with me on Mass Immigration:
(snip)
Do you have any original thoughts, or can you only copy out tweets? I ask as I've asked you questions about your views, and you don't answer.
You know my views on Mass immigration - I'm against it - and I see no need to spell it out further. Max Hastings article in the mail has stated most, but not all, of my forebodings on the matter.
Strikingly - and honestly - Hastings offers no real solutions, except one that he acknowledges will not happen: the deployment of a 450,000-strong occupying force in the Middle East.
Whether the new deal with Turkey will work on the Greece crossings will be crucial. It may just put back the emphasis on Italy or even Spain. Nonetheless it is the right sort of plan, and is a good example of acting in concert with our European neighbours.
I would like to see a similar deal on returns agreed between us and the French. It would be the best way of dealing with the Calais camp.
The good new this morning is that more and more people are agreeing with me on Mass Immigration:
(snip)
Do you have any original thoughts, or can you only copy out tweets? I ask as I've asked you questions about your views, and you don't answer.
You know my views on Mass immigration - I'm against it - and I see no need to spell it out further. Max Hastings article in the mail has stated most, but not all, of my forebodings on the matter.
Yet forgive me if you're wrong, but you're very against any help to Turkey (*), who have been struggling with the effects of mass migration (now 2-3 million people) for five years now, and have acted as a barrier against more people coming over. They cannot be expected to shoulder that burden alone. Everything you fear about the social consequences of mass migration has been true in Turkey for years now.
Do you think the international community has a role in helping migrants, especially refugees from war?
It's also interesting to ask why this crisis is happening now, at a time when apparently fewer people are dying in conflict than ever. Is it just a juxtaposition of sad events, better communications, or geography?
(*) Though similar help should also go to Lebanon and Jordan.
It's because they price for the win and then offer the fixed percentage odds for the place - there are a number of races where that concept just doesn't work, yet the bookies still offer them. The canny punter can spot these, which is what happened in this publicised case.
Another reason to bet anonymously on an exchange, at a shop or on the course, rather than online where they can profile you as a punter.
It's this sort of thing that has always made me feel that laymen punting on horses is a mug's game - it seems to be an arms race between bookies and punters trying to catch each other out by artificial means, and the money for both sides comes from the innocent who merely wants to back horses.
The good new this morning is that more and more people are agreeing with me on Mass Immigration:
(snip)
Do you have any original thoughts, or can you only copy out tweets? I ask as I've asked you questions about your views, and you don't answer.
You know my views on Mass immigration - I'm against it - and I see no need to spell it out further. Max Hastings article in the mail has stated most, but not all, of my forebodings on the matter.
Strikingly - and honestly - Hastings offers no real solutions, except one that he acknowledges will not happen: the deployment of a 450,000-strong occupying force in the Middle East.
Whether the new deal with Turkey will work on the Greece crossings will be crucial. It may just put back the emphasis on Italy or even Spain. Nonetheless it is the right sort of plan, and is a good example of acting in concert with our European neighbours.
It's too little, too late. Our European neighbours should be ashamed rather than patting themselves on their backs. Erdogan was right, and it's not often I say that:
"At a time when Turkey is hosting three million (migrants), those who are unable to find space for a handful of refugees, who in the middle of Europe keep these innocents in shameful conditions, must first to look at themselves," Recep Tayyip Erdogan said.
The good new this morning is that more and more people are agreeing with me on Mass Immigration:
(snip)
Do you have any original thoughts, or can you only copy out tweets? I ask as I've asked you questions about your views, and you don't answer.
You know my views on Mass immigration - I'm against it - and I see no need to spell it out further. Max Hastings article in the mail has stated most, but not all, of my forebodings on the matter.
Strikingly - and honestly - Hastings offers no real solutions, except one that he acknowledges will not happen: the deployment of a 450,000-strong occupying force in the Middle East.
Whether the new deal with Turkey will work on the Greece crossings will be crucial. It may just put back the emphasis on Italy or even Spain. Nonetheless it is the right sort of plan, and is a good example of acting in concert with our European neighbours.
I agree that the only chance of tackling this is for European countries to work together on it. But the only way to solve it for a level of peace and prosperity to emerge in the countries these people are fleeing from. That means committing levels of financial, military and human resource voters in Europe are not prepared to agree to. Until they are I can't see much changing.
Nadine Writes Books @NadineDorriesMP 5h5 hours ago Stunned at IDS resignation letter. I was about to vote against ESA cuts when he sought me out - he personally and angrily begged me not to.
Yes, this is an odd twist. OK, it's Nadine, but unless she actually made it up it doesn't make obvious sense.
The good new this morning is that more and more people are agreeing with me on Mass Immigration:
(snip)
Do you have any original thoughts, or can you only copy out tweets? I ask as I've asked you questions about your views, and you don't answer.
You know my views on Mass immigration - I'm against it - and I see no need to spell it out further. Max Hastings article in the mail has stated most, but not all, of my forebodings on the matter.
Yet forgive me if you're wrong, but you're very against any help to Turkey (*), who have been struggling with the effects of mass migration (now 2-3 million people) for five years now, and have acted as a barrier against more people coming over. They cannot be expected to shoulder that burden alone. Everything you fear about the social consequences of mass migration has been true in Turkey for years now.
Do you think the international community has a role in helping migrants, especially refugees from war?
It's also interesting to ask why this crisis is happening now, at a time when apparently fewer people are dying in conflict than ever. Is it just a juxtaposition of sad events, better communications, or geography?
(*) Though similar help should also go to Lebanon and Jordan.
Mass migration is the consequence of allowing the existence of failed states. Lack of leadership by, amongst others, Obama, Hollande and Cameron have all contributed. Pulling troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan was the first mistake.
All that said, Merkel's suggesting that migrants would be welcome in Germany was monumentally stupid. German people seem to have been very restrained as far as I can see!
The good new this morning is that more and more people are agreeing with me on Mass Immigration:
(snip)
Do you have any original thoughts, or can you only copy out tweets? I ask as I've asked you questions about your views, and you don't answer.
You know my views on Mass immigration - I'm against it - and I see no need to spell it out further. Max Hastings article in the mail has stated most, but not all, of my forebodings on the matter.
Strikingly - and honestly - Hastings offers no real solutions, except one that he acknowledges will not happen: the deployment of a 450,000-strong occupying force in the Middle East.
Whether the new deal with Turkey will work on the Greece crossings will be crucial. It may just put back the emphasis on Italy or even Spain. Nonetheless it is the right sort of plan, and is a good example of acting in concert with our European neighbours.
It's too little, too late. Our European neighbours should be ashamed rather than patting themselves on their backs. Erdogan was right, and it's not often I say that:
"At a time when Turkey is hosting three million (migrants), those who are unable to find space for a handful of refugees, who in the middle of Europe keep these innocents in shameful conditions, must first to look at themselves," Recep Tayyip Erdogan said.
I would disagree. Better late than never!
The Turks have denied the Kurds autonomy and have themselves been instrumental in creating much of the refugee problem on the Syrian border. I have more sympathy with Lebanon and Jordan. Nonetheless Turkey merits some asistance in dealing with its refugee crisis. Turkey itself was created by mass refugee movements and expulsions at the end of the Ottoman period. A bit of Ataturkism would not go amis now, rather than supping with the Islamist devil.
Nadine Writes Books @NadineDorriesMP 5h5 hours ago Stunned at IDS resignation letter. I was about to vote against ESA cuts when he sought me out - he personally and angrily begged me not to.
Yes, this is an odd twist. OK, it's Nadine, but unless she actually made it up it doesn't make obvious sense.
Some suggestion that IDS reluctantly agreed to support changes and to persuade colleagues to support them, only to find that George & Dave had hot cold feet and pulled the plug without telling him, thus leaving IDS exposed on a policy he did not agree with in the first place. In short, he feels he's been played. It's hard to believe emotions round the referendum did not also play a part. IDS is a genuine politician, but he's never struck me as being a particularly cute or calculating (or smart) one. Whatever way you look at it, though, the Tories are in a big mess. If only ... I'll leave the rest unsaid, Nick. I am going to try to be nicer on here :-)
Agree with that. He's put his hand in his department's budget to find cuts, and Osborne has used them in the wrong way.
This has been niggling for years - I suspect that Osborne using the Budget for Remain was just the final straw. IDS has never struck me as a very political man.
I note DavidL's comments about IDS and the benefit changes on the previous thread but I think he has it fundamentally wrong. The impression I always got was that IDS had a vision of a complete transformation in the way welfare is dealt with that wasn't necessarily just about cuts. From his point of view it was about making benefits work properly. At the same time the Treasury has seen it as an opportunity continuously to impose cuts and save money.
That doesn't mean I don't think he has picked his time for political reasons but I do think that the underlying logic in terms of benefits is coherent and that he has long viewed Osborne and the Treasury as the enemy.
On top of all that, Osborne's people had started briefing that a u turn would be the fault of IDS....
The good new this morning is that more and more people are agreeing with me on Mass Immigration:
(snip)
Do you have any original thoughts, or can you only copy out tweets? I ask as I've asked you questions about your views, and you don't answer.
You know my views on Mass immigration - I'm against it - and I see no need to spell it out further. Max Hastings article in the mail has stated most, but not all, of my forebodings on the matter.
Strikingly - and honestly - Hastings offers no real solutions, except one that he acknowledges will not happen: the deployment of a 450,000-strong occupying force in the Middle East.
Whether the new deal with Turkey will work on the Greece crossings will be crucial. It may just put back the emphasis on Italy or even Spain. Nonetheless it is the right sort of plan, and is a good example of acting in concert with our European neighbours.
I agree that the only chance of tackling this is for European countries to work together on it. But the only way to solve it for a level of peace and prosperity to emerge in the countries these people are fleeing from. That means committing levels of financial, military and human resource voters in Europe are not prepared to agree to. Until they are I can't see much changing.
The recent history of the Middle East is not an auspicious one for external military involvement. Containment is the only realistic option until the peoples of the Middle East come round to the conclusion that Islamist politics are a dead end, setting them back decades politically, economically and socially. The soft power of Western culture is far more likely to win people over than a few random drone attacks. Indeed it is despair at ever seeing a similar culture in their own countries that sends so many people our way.
Nadine Writes Books @NadineDorriesMP 5h5 hours ago Stunned at IDS resignation letter. I was about to vote against ESA cuts when he sought me out - he personally and angrily begged me not to.
Yes, this is an odd twist. OK, it's Nadine, but unless she actually made it up it doesn't make obvious sense.
Some suggestion that IDS reluctantly agreed to support changes and to persuade colleagues to support them, only to find that George & Dave had hot cold feet and pulled the plug without telling him, thus leaving IDS exposed on a policy he did not agree with in the first place. In short, he feels he's been played. It's hard to believe emotions round the referendum did not also play a part. IDS is a genuine politician, but he's never struck me as being a particularly cute or calculating (or smart) one. Whatever way you look at it, though, the Tories are in a big mess. If only ... I'll leave the rest unsaid, Nick. I am going to try to be nicer on here :-)
Well said about IDS. He strikes me as a genuine man rather than a hard political type, has devoted more than a dozen years of his life to looking seriously at social issues and how to fix them. I hope he leaves a good legacy in DWP.
@david_herdson I think your logic on Henderson is flawed. He was leader of a small party in a national coalition that was badly divided in itself. He was not from the party leading it (Liberal) or dominating it (Unionist). If we are to take his resignation as the benchmark we have to include that of Samuel over the 1932 budget as well.
The last time I can think of that a party leader (1) agreed to serve under his successor and (2) resigned on a point of principle was Lord Hartington as part of the Home Rule crisis. The first is a rare event but the second is nearly unheard of since coalition governments led by amiable nonentities went out of fashion with the 1867 Reform Act.
If you know of a more recent example, I'd be interested to know what it is.
Nadine Writes Books @NadineDorriesMP 5h5 hours ago Stunned at IDS resignation letter. I was about to vote against ESA cuts when he sought me out - he personally and angrily begged me not to.
Yes, this is an odd twist. OK, it's Nadine, but unless she actually made it up it doesn't make obvious sense.
Some suggestion that IDS reluctantly agreed to support changes and to persuade colleagues to support them, only to find that George & Dave had hot cold feet and pulled the plug without telling him, thus leaving IDS exposed on a policy he did not agree with in the first place. In short, he feels he's been played. It's hard to believe emotions round the referendum did not also play a part. IDS is a genuine politician, but he's never struck me as being a particularly cute or calculating (or smart) one. Whatever way you look at it, though, the Tories are in a big mess. If only ... I'll leave the rest unsaid, Nick. I am going to try to be nicer on here :-)
Nadine Writes Books @NadineDorriesMP 5h5 hours ago Stunned at IDS resignation letter. I was about to vote against ESA cuts when he sought me out - he personally and angrily begged me not to.
Yes, this is an odd twist. OK, it's Nadine, but unless she actually made it up it doesn't make obvious sense.
Some suggestion that IDS reluctantly agreed to support changes and to persuade colleagues to support them, only to find that George & Dave had hot cold feet and pulled the plug without telling him, thus leaving IDS exposed on a policy he did not agree with in the first place. In short, he feels he's been played. It's hard to believe emotions round the referendum did not also play a part. IDS is a genuine politician, but he's never struck me as being a particularly cute or calculating (or smart) one. Whatever way you look at it, though, the Tories are in a big mess. If only ... I'll leave the rest unsaid, Nick. I am going to try to be nicer on here :-)
Well said about IDS. He strikes me as a genuine man rather than a hard political type, has devoted more than a dozen years of his life to looking seriously at social issues and how to fix them. I hope he leaves a good legacy in DWP.
I don't doubt his intentions, but I do doubt his capabilities. His legacy at the DWP is not one of competence, so I do not expect his successor to find a well sorted department.
It is a post that needs a competent administrator to sort out, not someone whose mind is on other things. Someone like Steve Webb!
Agree with that. He's put his hand in his department's budget to find cuts, and Osborne has used them in the wrong way.
This has been niggling for years - I suspect that Osborne using the Budget for Remain was just the final straw. IDS has never struck me as a very political man.
I note DavidL's comments about IDS and the benefit changes on the previous thread but I think he has it fundamentally wrong. The impression I always got was that IDS had a vision of a complete transformation in the way welfare is dealt with that wasn't necessarily just about cuts. From his point of view it was about making benefits work properly. At the same time the Treasury has seen it as an opportunity continuously to impose cuts and save money.
That doesn't mean I don't think he has picked his time for political reasons but I do think that the underlying logic in terms of benefits is coherent and that he has long viewed Osborne and the Treasury as the enemy.
On top of all that, Osborne's people had started briefing that a u turn would be the fault of IDS....
How much is the EU contribution this year?
They found £500m down the back of the sofa to fund a migrant swap between Turkey and Greece the other day.
Nadine Writes Books @NadineDorriesMP 5h5 hours ago Stunned at IDS resignation letter. I was about to vote against ESA cuts when he sought me out - he personally and angrily begged me not to.
Yes, this is an odd twist. OK, it's Nadine, but unless she actually made it up it doesn't make obvious sense.
Some suggestion that IDS reluctantly agreed to support changes and to persuade colleagues to support them, only to find that George & Dave had hot cold feet and pulled the plug without telling him, thus leaving IDS exposed on a policy he did not agree with in the first place. In short, he feels he's been played. It's hard to believe emotions round the referendum did not also play a part. IDS is a genuine politician, but he's never struck me as being a particularly cute or calculating (or smart) one. Whatever way you look at it, though, the Tories are in a big mess. If only ... I'll leave the rest unsaid, Nick. I am going to try to be nicer on here :-)
Well said about IDS. He strikes me as a genuine man rather than a hard political type, has devoted more than a dozen years of his life to looking seriously at social issues and how to fix them. I hope he leaves a good legacy in DWP.
I don't doubt his intentions, but I do doubt his capabilities. His legacy at the DWP is not one of competence, so I do not expect his successor to find a well sorted department.
It is a post that needs a competent administrator to sort out, not someone whose mind is on other things. Someone like Steve Webb!
Neither party is exactly blessed with outstanding administrators at present (as opposed to politicians) are they? The last really good one was D Miliband and he was rubbish at politics.
Nadine Writes Books @NadineDorriesMP 5h5 hours ago Stunned at IDS resignation letter. I was about to vote against ESA cuts when he sought me out - he personally and angrily begged me not to.
Yes, this is an odd twist. OK, it's Nadine, but unless she actually made it up it doesn't make obvious sense.
Some suggestion that IDS reluctantly agreed to support changes and to persuade colleagues to support them, only to find that George & Dave had hot cold feet and pulled the plug without telling him, thus leaving IDS exposed on a policy he did not agree with in the first place. In short, he feels he's been played. It's hard to believe emotions round the referendum did not also play a part. IDS is a genuine politician, but he's never struck me as being a particularly cute or calculating (or smart) one. Whatever way you look at it, though, the Tories are in a big mess. If only ... I'll leave the rest unsaid, Nick. I am going to try to be nicer on here :-)
Well said about IDS. He strikes me as a genuine man rather than a hard political type, has devoted more than a dozen years of his life to looking seriously at social issues and how to fix them. I hope he leaves a good legacy in DWP.
Agree with that. He's put his hand in his department's budget to find cuts, and Osborne has used them in the wrong way.
This has been niggling for years - I suspect that Osborne using the Budget for Remain was just the final straw. IDS has never struck me as a very political man.
I note DavidL's comments about IDS and the benefit changes on the previous thread but I think he has it fundamentally wrong. The impression I always got was that IDS had a vision of a complete transformation in the way welfare is dealt with that wasn't necessarily just about cuts. From his point of view it was about making benefits work properly. At the same time the Treasury has seen it as an opportunity continuously to impose cuts and save money.
That doesn't mean I don't think he has picked his time for political reasons but I do think that the underlying logic in terms of benefits is coherent and that he has long viewed Osborne and the Treasury as the enemy.
On top of all that, Osborne's people had started briefing that a u turn would be the fault of IDS....
Nadine Writes Books @NadineDorriesMP 5h5 hours ago Stunned at IDS resignation letter. I was about to vote against ESA cuts when he sought me out - he personally and angrily begged me not to.
Yes, this is an odd twist. OK, it's Nadine, but unless she actually made it up it doesn't make obvious sense.
Some suggestion that IDS reluctantly agreed to support changes and to persuade colleagues to support them, only to find that George & Dave had hot cold feet and pulled the plug without telling him, thus leaving IDS exposed on a policy he did not agree with in the first place. In short, he feels he's been played. It's hard to believe emotions round the referendum did not also play a part. IDS is a genuine politician, but he's never struck me as being a particularly cute or calculating (or smart) one. Whatever way you look at it, though, the Tories are in a big mess. If only ... I'll leave the rest unsaid, Nick. I am going to try to be nicer on here :-)
Oh they;re in a mess alright, and its because of nothing more complicated than they're not very good at at governing. When you have no principles, no start point beyond winning elections it all falls down, Cameron is Blair in a different rosette.
The front page of the Telegraph has him delaying Chilcott, my word Cameron's legacy is crumbling, just as some of us predicted amid much abuse from his sycophants. I bet secretly Cameron was longing for another coalition with the comfort blanket o of Clegg, less than a year on his own and its all falling apart.
Nadine Writes Books @NadineDorriesMP 5h5 hours ago Stunned at IDS resignation letter. I was about to vote against ESA cuts when he sought me out - he personally and angrily begged me not to.
Yes, this is an odd twist. OK, it's Nadine, but unless she actually made it up it doesn't make obvious sense.
Some suggestion that IDS reluctantly agreed to support changes and to persuade colleagues to support them, only to find that George & Dave had hot cold feet and pulled the plug without telling him, thus leaving IDS exposed on a policy he did not agree with in the first place. In short, he feels he's been played. It's hard to believe emotions round the referendum did not also play a part. IDS is a genuine politician, but he's never struck me as being a particularly cute or calculating (or smart) one. Whatever way you look at it, though, the Tories are in a big mess. If only ... I'll leave the rest unsaid, Nick. I am going to try to be nicer on here :-)
Well said about IDS. He strikes me as a genuine man rather than a hard political type, has devoted more than a dozen years of his life to looking seriously at social issues and how to fix them. I hope he leaves a good legacy in DWP.
I don't doubt his intentions, but I do doubt his capabilities. His legacy at the DWP is not one of competence, so I do not expect his successor to find a well sorted department.
It is a post that needs a competent administrator to sort out, not someone whose mind is on other things. Someone like Steve Webb!
Competence is almost impossible to judge in the present government. The tentacles of Osborne, it appears, interfere incessantly; but any failures are blamed on ministers and departments.
Agree with that. He's put his hand in his department's budget to find cuts, and Osborne has used them in the wrong way.
This has been niggling for years - I suspect that Osborne using the Budget for Remain was just the final straw. IDS has never struck me as a very political man.
I note DavidL's comments about IDS and the benefit changes on the previous thread but I think he has it fundamentally wrong. The impression I always got was that IDS had a vision of a complete transformation in the way welfare is dealt with that wasn't necessarily just about cuts. From his point of view it was about making benefits work properly. At the same time the Treasury has seen it as an opportunity continuously to impose cuts and save money.
That doesn't mean I don't think he has picked his time for political reasons but I do think that the underlying logic in terms of benefits is coherent and that he has long viewed Osborne and the Treasury as the enemy.
On top of all that, Osborne's people had started briefing that a u turn would be the fault of IDS....
How much is the EU contribution this year?
They found £500m down the back of the sofa to fund a migrant swap between Turkey and Greece the other day.
Agree with that. He's put his hand in his department's budget to find cuts, and Osborne has used them in the wrong way.
This has been niggling for years - I suspect that Osborne using the Budget for Remain was just the final straw. IDS has never struck me as a very political man.
I note DavidL's comments about IDS and the benefit changes on the previous thread but I think he has it fundamentally wrong. The impression I always got was that IDS had a vision of a complete transformation in the way welfare is dealt with that wasn't necessarily just about cuts. From his point of view it was about making benefits work properly. At the same time the Treasury has seen it as an opportunity continuously to impose cuts and save money.
That doesn't mean I don't think he has picked his time for political reasons but I do think that the underlying logic in terms of benefits is coherent and that he has long viewed Osborne and the Treasury as the enemy.
On top of all that, Osborne's people had started briefing that a u turn would be the fault of IDS....
Yep. Osborne has would him up one time too many.
IDS is fed up of even trying to defend the Budget decisions after years of battles with No.11, is walking the plank in the most public way possible to embarrass the leadership. Expect him to be front and centre of the Leave campaign now, before retiring from politics at the next GE.
Agree with that. He's put his hand in his department's budget to find cuts, and Osborne has used them in the wrong way.
This has been niggling for years - I suspect that Osborne using the Budget for Remain was just the final straw. IDS has never struck me as a very political man.
I note DavidL's comments about IDS and the benefit changes on the previous thread but I think he has it fundamentally wrong. The impression I always got was that IDS had a vision of a complete transformation in the way welfare is dealt with that wasn't necessarily just about cuts. From his point of view it was about making benefits work properly. At the same time the Treasury has seen it as an opportunity continuously to impose cuts and save money.
That doesn't mean I don't think he has picked his time for political reasons but I do think that the underlying logic in terms of benefits is coherent and that he has long viewed Osborne and the Treasury as the enemy.
On top of all that, Osborne's people had started briefing that a u turn would be the fault of IDS....
I get it. Surely then bookies need to get their odds right rather than ban punters? Not that I bet on the horses much.
It's just a consequence of offering a simple each way bet at a fraction of the win odds.
The each way concept is simple to understand and - averaged across races - profitable for the bookmakers. The problem (at least for the bookies) is when punters specifically target the selections/races with each way arbs and bet with very large stakes.
Most bookies these days will either automatically lower limits to all punters on those individual EW arbs - or intentionally offer awful odds on the win bet (making the ew part not an arb)
A decade ago the bookies weren't quite so sophisticated.
The bottom line is - if you withdraw more than you deposit from a bookie, their risk department will go through your bets one by one and if they suspect your future bets won't regress toward the mean, you'll get limited to peanuts or told to take your trade elsewhere.
That's their business - it's what the law allows them to do.
Lots of companies actively discriminate against unprofitable customers.
Nadine Writes Books @NadineDorriesMP 5h5 hours ago Stunned at IDS resignation letter. I was about to vote against ESA cuts when he sought me out - he personally and angrily begged me not to.
Yes, this is an odd twist. OK, it's Nadine, but unless she actually made it up it doesn't make obvious sense.
Some suggestion that IDS reluctantly agreed to support changes and to persuade colleagues to support them, only to find that George & Dave had hot cold feet and pulled the plug without telling him, thus leaving IDS exposed on a policy he did not agree with in the first place. In short, he feels he's been played. It's hard to believe emotions round the referendum did not also play a part. IDS is a genuine politician, but he's never struck me as being a particularly cute or calculating (or smart) one. Whatever way you look at it, though, the Tories are in a big mess. If only ... I'll leave the rest unsaid, Nick. I am going to try to be nicer on here :-)
Well said about IDS. He strikes me as a genuine man rather than a hard political type, has devoted more than a dozen years of his life to looking seriously at social issues and how to fix them. I hope he leaves a good legacy in DWP.
I don't doubt his intentions, but I do doubt his capabilities. His legacy at the DWP is not one of competence, so I do not expect his successor to find a well sorted department.
It is a post that needs a competent administrator to sort out, not someone whose mind is on other things. Someone like Steve Webb!
Neither party is exactly blessed with outstanding administrators at present (as opposed to politicians) are they? The last really good one was D Miliband and he was rubbish at politics.
Arguably administration is the role of the Civil Service rather than the politicians, but I think we are seeing the legacy of decades of politicisation of the higher reaches of the Civil Service.
The Acadamy schools business is a similar mess waiting to happen. Painted as a freeing of of schools, it is actually a centralisation with the DoE taking over the roles of the LEA's without the capability to administer them.
Nadine Writes Books @NadineDorriesMP 5h5 hours ago Stunned at IDS resignation letter. I was about to vote against ESA cuts when he sought me out - he personally and angrily begged me not to.
Yes, this is an odd twist. OK, it's Nadine, but unless she actually made it up it doesn't make obvious sense.
Some suggestion that IDS reluctantly agreed to support changes and to persuade colleagues to support them, only to find that George & Dave had hot cold feet and pulled the plug without telling him, thus leaving IDS exposed on a policy he did not agree with in the first place. In short, he feels he's been played. It's hard to believe emotions round the referendum did not also play a part. IDS is a genuine politician, but he's never struck me as being a particularly cute or calculating (or smart) one. Whatever way you look at it, though, the Tories are in a big mess. If only ... I'll leave the rest unsaid, Nick. I am going to try to be nicer on here :-)
Well said about IDS. He strikes me as a genuine man rather than a hard political type, has devoted more than a dozen years of his life to looking seriously at social issues and how to fix them. I hope he leaves a good legacy in DWP.
One can't help feeling that religion was discovered as the barriers to entry are lower that that of being an excellent politician. Religion normally welcomes, and preys on, the dim and that suits Duncan Smith. From what I understand the legacy will involve his successor taking a JCB to the Augean stables.
"The publication of the long-awaited Chilcot inquiry is to be delayed until after the EU referendum, it was reported last night. David Cameron’s decision to postpone the report into the Iraq War sparked accusations that he was deliberately deferring controversial announcements. The delay comes despite the fact that ministers will be given the report – expected to condemn senior political figures – next month. Government sources told The Daily Telegraph it was unlikely to be published until after the June 23 vote. The PM had suggested his plans were to publish the report within two weeks of receiving it. Reg Keys, whose son Lance Corporal Thomas Keys, 20, died in the war, said the delays were causing further pain. "
Paul Waugh I know for a fact IDS wrote resignation letter at least TWICE b4 in protest at Treasury cuts Had one in pocket on night of taxcredits U-turn
Agree with that. He's put his hand in his department's budget to find cuts, and Osborne has used them in the wrong way.
This has been niggling for years - I suspect that Osborne using the Budget for Remain was just the final straw. IDS has never struck me as a very political man.
I note DavidL's comments about IDS and the benefit changes on the previous thread but I think he has it fundamentally wrong. The impression I always got was that IDS had a vision of a complete transformation in the way welfare is dealt with that wasn't necessarily just about cuts. From his point of view it was about making benefits work properly. At the same time the Treasury has seen it as an opportunity continuously to impose cuts and save money.
That doesn't mean I don't think he has picked his time for political reasons but I do think that the underlying logic in terms of benefits is coherent and that he has long viewed Osborne and the Treasury as the enemy.
On top of all that, Osborne's people had started briefing that a u turn would be the fault of IDS....
I did not view it about the EU . Just Osborne trying to save Project Osborne. As always.
Re: "He never expected IDS to press the red button. Pushing someone too far, especially a long suffering loyal one never ends well. " Absolutely right.
I get it. Surely then bookies need to get their odds right rather than ban punters? Not that I bet on the horses much.
It's just a consequence of offering a simple each way bet at a fraction of the win odds.
The each way concept is simple to understand and - averaged across races - profitable for the bookmakers. The problem (at least for the bookies) is when punters specifically target the selections/races with each way arbs and bet with very large stakes.
Most bookies these days will either automatically lower limits to all punters on those individual EW arbs - or intentionally offer awful odds on the win bet (making the ew part not an arb)
A decade ago the bookies weren't quite so sophisticated.
The bottom line is - if you withdraw more than you deposit from a bookie, their risk department will go through your bets one by one and if they suspect your future bets won't regress toward the mean, you'll get limited to peanuts or told to take your trade elsewhere.
That's their business - it's what the law allows them to do.
I expect to have limitations slapped on my accounts when Leicester win the League.
My 3000/1 quid each way is not my only bet on the Foxes. I have other potential payoffs in the thousands in related markets.
In the past I have made a modest loss on football betting, and a modest profit thanks to this site on political betting. Hopefully those will offset my season betting.
I would tip Okazaki to score against Palace today fwiw.
@theobertram: IDS is a victory over Blairites & vindication of JC4PM, apparently. A breathless Paul Mason has gone full Momentum. https://t.co/rjC7cBe71P
Agree with that. He's put his hand in his department's budget to find cuts, and Osborne has used them in the wrong way.
This has been niggling for years - I suspect that Osborne using the Budget for Remain was just the final straw. IDS has never struck me as a very political man.
I note DavidL's comments about IDS and the benefit changes on the previous thread but I think he has it fundamentally wrong. The impression I always got was that IDS had a vision of a complete transformation in the way welfare is dealt with that wasn't necessarily just about cuts. From his point of view it was about making benefits work properly. At the same time the Treasury has seen it as an opportunity continuously to impose cuts and save money.
That doesn't mean I don't think he has picked his time for political reasons but I do think that the underlying logic in terms of benefits is coherent and that he has long viewed Osborne and the Treasury as the enemy.
On top of all that, Osborne's people had started briefing that a u turn would be the fault of IDS....
I did not view it about the EU . Just Osborne trying to save Project Osborne. As always.
Re: "He never expected IDS to press the red button. Pushing someone too far, especially a long suffering loyal one never ends well. " Absolutely right.
Wasn't IDS one of the disloyal "bastards" that made Major's premiership so difficult? The leopard does not change his spots.
Miss Plato, that just shows what a tosser Danny Cohen is. Clarkson also had a donkey he called Kristin Scott Donkey [and, as regular viewers know, Clarkson really rather likes Kristin Scott Thomas].
Tim Shipman Just as there has not, in my 15 yrs of political hackery, been a resignation letter like IDS's, there hasn't been as snippy a PM's response
So what odds on the deficit being cleared by 2020 this morning? As others have observed, if it was so hugely important to tackle it fuel duty would have been raised and CGT would not have been cut.
Practically zero chance of it happening. Ids is saying the cuts are ideological if you also have giveawAys to others, he and others would go nuts if taxes are raised, so it'll have to be borrowing forevermore,
The Turks have denied the Kurds autonomy and have themselves been instrumental in creating much of the refugee problem on the Syrian border. I have more sympathy with Lebanon and Jordan. Nonetheless Turkey merits some asistance in dealing with its refugee crisis. Turkey itself was created by mass refugee movements and expulsions at the end of the Ottoman period. A bit of Ataturkism would not go amis now, rather than supping with the Islamist devil.
"Better late than never."
Tell that to the people who have died trying to cross illegally!
The Kurdish situation is more complex than simply offering them autonomy, especially given the Kurds' geographical spread. And how have Turkey been 'instrumental' in creating much of the refugee problem? It was happening, and it's a devil of a problem to deal with, especially when terrorism gets involved.
Europe has reacted terribly to the crisis; it turned its back and left poorer countries to deal with it. Slapping themselves on the back for this deal now is sickening. The EU should be ashamed, and Merkel in particular has blood on her hands.
I agree with your last line. But the memories of the troubles of the late 1800s and early 1900s rest heavily on Turkish minds and consciences. At least when the state is not in official-denial mode ...
What's great about this Tory catastrophe is that it is totally self inflicted. They were under no economic or political pressure at all. And they conspire to implode.
I suspect they spent all their effort trying to win the GE, but neglected to figure out why.
Late last night I heard a journalist (one among many commentators) say on radio that IDS had been refusing to allow his departmental papers to be made public and just that day after a civil service enquiry the ruling went against him and they are indeed going to be made public.
Apparently they will show a department in complete shambles. Their answers to parliametary questions were lies and half truths and their use of statistics made up on the back of an envelope. The journalist speculated that this was the real reason for his resignation as we would discover in the next few days
There are two possibilities; Either the no 10 dirty tricks department have friendly journalists working late at night or it's accurate and IDS's rehabillitated political career is going to end in ignominy.
What's great about this Tory catastrophe is that it is totally self inflicted. They were under no economic or political pressure at all. And they conspire to implode.
I suspect they spent all their effort trying to win the GE, but neglected to figure out why.
I'm of the view that Osborne's time is up. Cameron should do a reshuffle and move him elsewhere. Perhaps a good time for it is right after the EU referendum.
Is it too cynical to think the whole strategy was designed to get rid of IDS without having to sack him.. Very Yes Prime Minister if so. Man overboard in fact
Agree with that. He's put his hand in his department's budget to find cuts, and Osborne has used them in the wrong way.
This has been niggling for years - I suspect that Osborne using the Budget for Remain was just the final straw. IDS has never struck me as a very political man.
I note DavidL's comments about IDS and the benefit changes on the previous thread but I think he has it fundamentally wrong. The impression I always got was that IDS had a vision of a complete transformation in the way welfare is dealt with that wasn't necessarily just about cuts. From his point of view it was about making benefits work properly. At the same time the Treasury has seen it as an opportunity continuously to impose cuts and save money.
That doesn't mean I don't think he has picked his time for political reasons but I do think that the underlying logic in terms of benefits is coherent and that he has long viewed Osborne and the Treasury as the enemy.
On top of all that, Osborne's people had started briefing that a u turn would be the fault of IDS....
I did not view it about the EU . Just Osborne trying to save Project Osborne. As always.
Re: "He never expected IDS to press the red button. Pushing someone too far, especially a long suffering loyal one never ends well. " Absolutely right.
Wasn't IDS one of the disloyal "bastards" that made Major's premiership so difficult? The leopard does not change his spots.
IIRC the 'bastards' were inside the cabinet at the time.
@theobertram: IDS is a victory over Blairites & vindication of JC4PM, apparently. A breathless Paul Mason has gone full Momentum. https://t.co/rjC7cBe71P
Scott - your chap GO has become a serious liability.
Mass migration is the consequence of allowing the existence of failed states. Lack of leadership by, amongst others, Obama, Hollande and Cameron have all contributed. Pulling troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan was the first mistake.
All that said, Merkel's suggesting that migrants would be welcome in Germany was monumentally stupid. German people seem to have been very restrained as far as I can see!
Perhaps. But I wonder how much communications - both physical (vehicles) and electronic have caused the problem.
In the case of refugees, vehicles allow them to move more quickly and easily through countries (via smugglers). They have a major push factor to leave, but not necessarily a big pull factor, which is why most remain in the camps as near as possible to their homes.
Then there are the economic migrants. Poor conditions at home push them, but there have been poor countries, and vehicles, for many decades. So why the problem now?
I put it down to electronic communications. They make the world appear smaller, and make it easy for poor people to see a world of almost unimanageable wealth, even if that world is often a myth. That's a massive pull factor.
So refugess are mainly pushed, and economic migrants mostly pulled.
But yes, we need to try to improve those countries to reduce the push and pull factors. But that requires cash, both directly in forms of aid and bribery of important people, and often boots on the ground.
What's great about this Tory catastrophe is that it is totally self inflicted. They were under no economic or political pressure at all. And they conspire to implode.
I suspect they spent all their effort trying to win the GE, but neglected to figure out why.
I'm of the view that Osborne's time is up. Cameron should do a reshuffle and move him elsewhere. Perhaps a good time for it is right after the EU referendum.
If he wins, maybe foreign secretary would be a good move?
Is it too cynical to think the whole strategy was designed to get rid of IDS without having to sack him.. Very Yes Prime Minister if so. Man overboard in fact
Given that are, like that episode, apparently planning to do what he wants - in this case not going ahead with the changes - the temptation is there. But I don't buy it. I think he's probably been unhappy for a while, and even if this is not primarily about Europe, fact is he is already in open opposition to the ruling clique, so the time was right to take off.
Comments
Stunned at IDS resignation letter. I was about to vote against ESA cuts when he sought me out - he personally and angrily begged me not to.
Look forward to the day you will look back...
Imagine being so far to the right that even Iain Duncan Smith can't support you. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/mar/18/iain-duncan-smith-resignation-letter-in-full?CMP=twt_a-politics_b-gdnukpolitics …
Any resemblance to persons, living or dead, is entirely coincidental...
Not a lot of change from last year evident so far, qualy session two hours from now at 06:00GMT, the format is rather confusing and could be chaos!
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/576325-b-738-crash-russia-rostov-don.html
Happened very quickly and is giving succour to the opposition narrative regarding the changes - which were for an INCREASE in PIP spending. Since when did a Cabinet minister resign over an increase to his department's spending during a period of tightening?
It all suggests that something happened behind the scenes between IDS and Osborne, with Cameron failing to intervene in time to keep them on the same page. The PM now has the big headache of an unwanted reshuffle at a sensitive department while also trying to get the Budget passed.
What chance that IDS, a long career now behind him, decides to campaign for Leave?
Longer answer - usually placing e-w bets on a clear second favourite in a situation where the favourite is big odds-on and the second-fav priced long. i.e. where the fav is 1/10 and the second fav 10/1 -for the win - but a fixed proportion of that for the e/w, in other words far too long for the place. Not that that should be the punter's problem of course.
I get it. Surely then bookies need to get their odds right rather than ban punters? Not that I bet on the horses much.
Another reason to bet anonymously on an exchange, at a shop or on the course, rather than online where they can profile you as a punter.
Q2 finished a minute early as no-one was on the track at the end. Bottas the victim this time.
Q3 about to start, Toto Woolff already suggesting that there will be no-one running 3 or 4 mins from the end.
McLaren P12 and P13, which is about six places higher than last season.
What happens with tyres? do they still need to start on the tyres they qualified on? Surely not, as that would really disadvantage the ones who go further in each session.
The issue is that the super soft tyres only last one lap, if they lasted 4 or 5 laps the format would work much better. Watching someone get out of their car in the pits 3 minutes before their elimination time, because they can't get out and round twice is not what people are paying to watch. The commentators got confused enough, watching at the circuit it must make no sense at all.
Mercedes over a second quicker than Ferrari in Q2, now clear that they've been sandbagging all winter testing!!
https://twitter.com/2tweetaboutit/status/710990635097055232
However: good to see McLaren doing better, and of course Mercedes were sandbagging! They hardly used the supersoft tyres during testing, did they?
On another note: how come people at the top of F1 are complaining about Mercedes' dominance over two years when the same people were noticeable quieter during Red Bull's four-year dominance, or Ferrari's for five?
Mercedes hadn't used the SS tyres before P3 this morning.
Hamilton's 50th pole, only Senna and Schumacher have more.
Still a minute on the clock and Lewis has been weighed and going to the press conference. What a mess.
This has been niggling for years - I suspect that Osborne using the Budget for Remain was just the final straw. IDS has never struck me as a very political man.
I would like to see a similar deal on returns agreed between us and the French. It would be the best way of dealing with the Calais camp.
Do you think the international community has a role in helping migrants, especially refugees from war?
It's also interesting to ask why this crisis is happening now, at a time when apparently fewer people are dying in conflict than ever. Is it just a juxtaposition of sad events, better communications, or geography?
(*) Though similar help should also go to Lebanon and Jordan.
All that said, Merkel's suggesting that migrants would be welcome in Germany was monumentally stupid. German people seem to have been very restrained as far as I can see!
The Turks have denied the Kurds autonomy and have themselves been instrumental in creating much of the refugee problem on the Syrian border. I have more sympathy with Lebanon and Jordan. Nonetheless Turkey merits some asistance in dealing with its refugee crisis. Turkey itself was created by mass refugee movements and expulsions at the end of the Ottoman period. A bit of Ataturkism would not go amis now, rather than supping with the Islamist devil.
The last time I can think of that a party leader (1) agreed to serve under his successor and (2) resigned on a point of principle was Lord Hartington as part of the Home Rule crisis. The first is a rare event but the second is nearly unheard of since coalition governments led by amiable nonentities went out of fashion with the 1867 Reform Act.
If you know of a more recent example, I'd be interested to know what it is.
It is a post that needs a competent administrator to sort out, not someone whose mind is on other things. Someone like Steve Webb!
They found £500m down the back of the sofa to fund a migrant swap between Turkey and Greece the other day.
The Tories seem to be tearing themselves apart over the budget as well as Europe. They were on the slide before this, I wonder if it will affect the May elections.
http://ukgeneralelection2020.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/council-by-election-results-17th-march.html
He never expected IDS to press the red button. Pushing someone too far, especially a long suffering loyal one never ends well.
The front page of the Telegraph has him delaying Chilcott, my word Cameron's legacy is crumbling, just as some of us predicted amid much abuse from his sycophants. I bet secretly Cameron was longing for another coalition with the comfort blanket o
of Clegg, less than a year on his own and its all falling apart.
IDS is fed up of even trying to defend the Budget decisions after years of battles with No.11, is walking the plank in the most public way possible to embarrass the leadership. Expect him to be front and centre of the Leave campaign now, before retiring from politics at the next GE.
The each way concept is simple to understand and - averaged across races - profitable for the bookmakers. The problem (at least for the bookies) is when punters specifically target the selections/races with each way arbs and bet with very large stakes.
Most bookies these days will either automatically lower limits to all punters on those individual EW arbs - or intentionally offer awful odds on the win bet (making the ew part not an arb)
A decade ago the bookies weren't quite so sophisticated.
The bottom line is - if you withdraw more than you deposit from a bookie, their risk department will go through your bets one by one and if they suspect your future bets won't regress toward the mean, you'll get limited to peanuts or told to take your trade elsewhere.
That's their business - it's what the law allows them to do.
Lots of companies actively discriminate against unprofitable customers.
The Acadamy schools business is a similar mess waiting to happen. Painted as a freeing of of schools, it is actually a centralisation with the DoE taking over the roles of the LEA's without the capability to administer them.
Michael Deacon
Jeremy Clarkson was told off by the BBC over the name of his dog. https://t.co/emB0fZCMYh https://t.co/xTwSWIHZlj
Shocked, appalled, frankly astounded by this turn of events. But that's enough about qualifying.
I'll probably put the pre-race piece up in the early afternoon. Not sure when the Channel 4 highlights are, and unsure if I'll watch.
On topic: I was surprised IDS quit.
"The publication of the long-awaited Chilcot inquiry is to be delayed until after the EU referendum, it was reported last night.
David Cameron’s decision to postpone the report into the Iraq War sparked accusations that he was deliberately deferring controversial announcements.
The delay comes despite the fact that ministers will be given the report – expected to condemn senior political figures – next month.
Government sources told The Daily Telegraph it was unlikely to be published until after the June 23 vote.
The PM had suggested his plans were to publish the report within two weeks of receiving it.
Reg Keys, whose son Lance Corporal Thomas Keys, 20, died in the war, said the delays were causing further pain. "
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3499819/Fury-Iraq-war-report-faces-delayed-EU-referendum-despite-ministers-given-month.html#ixzz43Kj5STIy
I know for a fact IDS wrote resignation letter at least TWICE b4 in protest at Treasury cuts Had one in pocket on night of taxcredits U-turn
Re: "He never expected IDS to press the red button. Pushing someone too far, especially a long suffering loyal one never ends well. " Absolutely right.
I expect to have limitations slapped on my accounts when Leicester win the League.
My 3000/1 quid each way is not my only bet on the Foxes. I have other potential payoffs in the thousands in related markets.
In the past I have made a modest loss on football betting, and a modest profit thanks to this site on political betting. Hopefully those will offset my season betting.
I would tip Okazaki to score against Palace today fwiw.
Ben
Michael Fallon has been deployed to speak to the media..
#r4Today
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/12198284/David-Cameron-to-delay-publication-of-Iraq-War-inquiry-until-after-EU-referendum.html
The story of IDS' resignation began a long time ago, in the Treasury. https://t.co/ziSQN9h5Nt
Just as there has not, in my 15 yrs of political hackery, been a resignation letter like IDS's, there hasn't been as snippy a PM's response
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/576325-b-738-crash-russia-rostov-don-4.html
Mr. Sandpit, hopefully they can clear up the cause quickly.
Tell that to the people who have died trying to cross illegally!
The Kurdish situation is more complex than simply offering them autonomy, especially given the Kurds' geographical spread. And how have Turkey been 'instrumental' in creating much of the refugee problem? It was happening, and it's a devil of a problem to deal with, especially when terrorism gets involved.
Europe has reacted terribly to the crisis; it turned its back and left poorer countries to deal with it. Slapping themselves on the back for this deal now is sickening. The EU should be ashamed, and Merkel in particular has blood on her hands.
I agree with your last line. But the memories of the troubles of the late 1800s and early 1900s rest heavily on Turkish minds and consciences. At least when the state is not in official-denial mode ...
What's great about this Tory catastrophe is that it is totally self inflicted. They were under no economic or political pressure at all. And they conspire to implode.
I suspect they spent all their effort trying to win the GE, but neglected to figure out why.
Apparently they will show a department in complete shambles. Their answers to parliametary questions were lies and half truths and their use of statistics made up on the back of an envelope. The journalist speculated that this was the real reason for his resignation as we would discover in the next few days
There are two possibilities; Either the no 10 dirty tricks department have friendly journalists working late at night or it's accurate and IDS's rehabillitated political career is going to end in ignominy.
Or, to rephrase, is this a Peloponnesian War, or a Jugurthine War?
Number 10 code for livid.
In the case of refugees, vehicles allow them to move more quickly and easily through countries (via smugglers). They have a major push factor to leave, but not necessarily a big pull factor, which is why most remain in the camps as near as possible to their homes.
Then there are the economic migrants. Poor conditions at home push them, but there have been poor countries, and vehicles, for many decades. So why the problem now?
I put it down to electronic communications. They make the world appear smaller, and make it easy for poor people to see a world of almost unimanageable wealth, even if that world is often a myth. That's a massive pull factor.
So refugess are mainly pushed, and economic migrants mostly pulled.
But yes, we need to try to improve those countries to reduce the push and pull factors. But that requires cash, both directly in forms of aid and bribery of important people, and often boots on the ground.
Neither of which we will do.