Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Fingering the index. A proposed technical change that is hugel

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited September 8 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Fingering the index. A proposed technical change that is hugely important

Sir David Norgrove, Chair of @ukstatsauth, said: "We welcome the Chancellor’s intention to consult on resolving current issues with the RPI. We continue to urge the Government and others to cease to use the RPI." https://t.co/PmxWytJkal

Read the full story here


«1345678

Comments

  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 12,786
    Clever to hide the Brexit angle in paragraph five: the Consumer Prices Index, which is the EU’s standard way of calculating inflation.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,409
    Excellent thread - thank you for explaining it - I was aware of the change and a bit of the background - and as one of the extremely fortunate in receipt of an RPI linked final salary pension it will no doubt affect me - assuming I’m around long enough. But frankly if that’s all that affects me I’ll have got off very lightly. NI on Pensions, anyone?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 14,566
    Seems pretty sensible, and redefinition with plenty of notice hopefully avoids the need to rewrite or litigate a bazillion contracts.
    Though of course there will remain a bit of a difference between CPI and CPIH.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,833
    edited September 8
    Nigelb said:

    Seems pretty sensible, and redefinition with plenty of notice hopefully avoids the need to rewrite or litigate a bazillion contracts.
    Though of course there will remain a bit of a difference between CPI and CPIH.

    Its just an alternative way of removing cash benefits from pensioners. both in state and Co schemes. I think it stinks to high heaven.
    Mr Meeks will know how much it will reduce at the stroke of a pen, the deficits in Co pension schemes, but a lot one would think.
    How much it will save the Govt in terms of state schemes, well it must be massive sums.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,833

    Excellent thread - thank you for explaining it - I was aware of the change and a bit of the background - and as one of the extremely fortunate in receipt of an RPI linked final salary pension it will no doubt affect me - assuming I’m around long enough. But frankly if that’s all that affects me I’ll have got off very lightly. NI on Pensions, anyone?

    More likely NI on earnings post retirement....
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,409

    Excellent thread - thank you for explaining it - I was aware of the change and a bit of the background - and as one of the extremely fortunate in receipt of an RPI linked final salary pension it will no doubt affect me - assuming I’m around long enough. But frankly if that’s all that affects me I’ll have got off very lightly. NI on Pensions, anyone?

    More likely NI on earnings post retirement....
    Yes that’s probably the easiest to go after - affects fewer people (currently).
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 14,566
    Director of the MIT Media Lab falls victim to his involvement with Epstein:

    https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/how-an-elite-university-research-center-concealed-its-relationship-with-jeffrey-epstein
    Dozens of pages of e-mails and other documents obtained by The New Yorker reveal that, although Epstein was listed as “disqualified” in M.I.T.’s official donor database, the Media Lab continued to accept gifts from him, consulted him about the use of the funds, and, by marking his contributions as anonymous, avoided disclosing their full extent, both publicly and within the university. Perhaps most notably, Epstein appeared to serve as an intermediary between the lab and other wealthy donors...

    Interestingly, he is also on the board of the New York Times.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,404
    edited September 8

    Nigelb said:

    Seems pretty sensible, and redefinition with plenty of notice hopefully avoids the need to rewrite or litigate a bazillion contracts.
    Though of course there will remain a bit of a difference between CPI and CPIH.

    Its just an alternative way of removing cash benefits from pensioners. both in state and Co schemes. I think it stinks to high heaven.
    Mr Meeks will know how much it will reduce at the stroke of a pen, the deficits in Co pension schemes, but a lot one would think.
    How much it will save the Govt in terms of state schemes, well it must be massive sums.
    State schemes, other than the basic state pension, are already linked to CPI (and also now state retirement age)

    Until the Govt removes the triple lock the change won’t change the state pension either.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 50,988
    Good morning, everyone.

    F1: after all the faff yesterday nothing happened to the grid order beyond the penalties already known about (Gasly and some others). Had a few bets in mind and will shortly check the markets.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 1,571
    2019 and 2022 both drifting on the Year of Next UK GE market:

    2019 1/6
    2020 5/1
    2021 66/1
    2022 or later 40/1
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 1,571
    Yes shortening

    Best prices - Result of Next Independence Referendum

    For independence 5/6
    Against independence EVS
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 1,571
    I see that Tory membership fees are being well invested. They’ve just pulped tens of thousands of “Ruth Davidson’s Candidate” leaflets. 😆

    I wonder how many SCon PPCs are going to promote themselves as “BoZo the Clown’s Candidate”?
  • Thanks Alastair - very helpful and relevant.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,081
    Nigelb said:

    Director of the MIT Media Lab falls victim to his involvement with Epstein:

    https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/how-an-elite-university-research-center-concealed-its-relationship-with-jeffrey-epstein
    Dozens of pages of e-mails and other documents obtained by The New Yorker reveal that, although Epstein was listed as “disqualified” in M.I.T.’s official donor database, the Media Lab continued to accept gifts from him, consulted him about the use of the funds, and, by marking his contributions as anonymous, avoided disclosing their full extent, both publicly and within the university. Perhaps most notably, Epstein appeared to serve as an intermediary between the lab and other wealthy donors...

    Interestingly, he is also on the board of the New York Times.

    Joi Ito screwed up my virtual worlds learning system demo in about 2011, always knew he was a wrong 'un
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 14,566

    Nigelb said:

    Director of the MIT Media Lab falls victim to his involvement with Epstein:

    https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/how-an-elite-university-research-center-concealed-its-relationship-with-jeffrey-epstein
    Dozens of pages of e-mails and other documents obtained by The New Yorker reveal that, although Epstein was listed as “disqualified” in M.I.T.’s official donor database, the Media Lab continued to accept gifts from him, consulted him about the use of the funds, and, by marking his contributions as anonymous, avoided disclosing their full extent, both publicly and within the university. Perhaps most notably, Epstein appeared to serve as an intermediary between the lab and other wealthy donors...

    Interestingly, he is also on the board of the New York Times.

    Joi Ito screwed up my virtual worlds learning system demo in about 2011, always knew he was a wrong 'un
    Karma.

    As of today, no longer on NYT board, either. About it does make one wonder why we didn’t get to read more about Epstein sooner.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,409
    Nigelb said:
    If Theresa [May] had tried to get her deal through in the same way, she’d have expelled over 40, including Boris Johnson and several members of the current cabinet. But very wisely, Theresa didn’t do that. You’re breaking up the party once you start doing that.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 15,940

    Nigelb said:
    If Theresa [May] had tried to get her deal through in the same way, she’d have expelled over 40, including Boris Johnson and several members of the current cabinet. But very wisely, Theresa didn’t do that. You’re breaking up the party once you start doing that.
    Might have turned out better if she had, though!
  • As many of my friends, I've been following the interesting political developments of last weeks in the UK. I have only one question, and I thought somebody here could answer it.

    It has been suggested, that if the Prime Minister got the general election he wants, he could then postpone the election over October 31, so that the Brexit without a deal would happen by default. Can he do the same with the prorogation? Can he postpone the Queen's speach over October 31, so that the parliament will be on recess while the Brexit happens?
  • Excellent article. I take the simple view that pensioners who accrued pension benefits which were promised to be inflation linked to rpi specifically are being robbed if the linkage is then altered to a new version of it. Turning to index linked gilts, retire them at maturity and issue new ones linked to cpi or whatever bit don't rig the rpi stat instead. That is what is happening with nsi index linked savings certificates on maturity, the investor can either encash or roll over to a new issue but now linked to cpi. That's fairer at least.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,409

    Nigelb said:
    If Theresa [May] had tried to get her deal through in the same way, she’d have expelled over 40, including Boris Johnson and several members of the current cabinet. But very wisely, Theresa didn’t do that. You’re breaking up the party once you start doing that.
    Might have turned out better if she had, though!
    May was trying to get a deal through and hold the party together,

    Johnson is not trying to get a deal through and rend the party asunder.
  • As many of my friends, I've been following the interesting political developments of last weeks in the UK. I have only one question, and I thought somebody here could answer it.

    It has been suggested, that if the Prime Minister got the general election he wants, he could then postpone the election over October 31, so that the Brexit without a deal would happen by default. Can he do the same with the prorogation? Can he postpone the Queen's speach over October 31, so that the parliament will be on recess while the Brexit happens?

    Welcome, Watcher.

    I think this has been covered here and the answer is no, he cannot tinker with proroguation in the way you suggest.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 2,470
    Interesting Deltapoll .

    I wonder how much of that drop was due to yesterday’s news coverage of Bozo ignoring the law .

  • Some real time news on Lib Dem membership figures and an interesting report on how their new ' Registered Supporter ' scheme is doing. https://www.libdemvoice.org/news-from-the-membership-department-60k-people-joined-us-this-year-and-how-to-get-a-replacement-membership-card-61954.html
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 10,549
    Sleight of hand by the government. Also buried by the weeks news was Pence and Bibi putting the squeeze on us to join in against Iran.

    But back to Brexit and BoZo, what does Canada's best selling paper make of this week in British politics?

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 15,940
    edited September 8

    As many of my friends, I've been following the interesting political developments of last weeks in the UK. I have only one question, and I thought somebody here could answer it.

    It has been suggested, that if the Prime Minister got the general election he wants, he could then postpone the election over October 31, so that the Brexit without a deal would happen by default. Can he do the same with the prorogation? Can he postpone the Queen's speach over October 31, so that the parliament will be on recess while the Brexit happens?

    Welcome. A view from abroad is always useful.
    To answer your questions, once a date is decided, that's the date. A PM could announce a date quite a way in the future; Major did in 1997.
    Prorogation's different; the Monarch decides when it should start, or the range of dates when it should start, and IIRC, how long it can be, or when it should finish.
    It's all a bit cloudy though; we've never been in this situation before. Certainly since 1800 or so, although someone will tell me if I'm wrong.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 1,188
    edited September 8
    "'The coming collapse' - How Dominic Cummings has a plan to 'rebuild' the UK's future

    Dominic Cummings has revolutionary designs for the way government policies are devised, decided and delivered, where "flawed" human decision making is mended by big data modelling and machine intelligence.

    The Government advisor, currently war-gaming the next move for Mr Johnson, sees gaping errors in the state of political affairs suggesting they currently rely on idealistic human narratives and personal authorities prone to “systemic dysfunction and the influence of grotesque incompetents."

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1174863/dominic-cummings-brexit-news-latest-boris-johnson-eu-tory-rebels-artificial-intelligence

    This sounds like something from the early 1950s US.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 10,549

    As many of my friends, I've been following the interesting political developments of last weeks in the UK. I have only one question, and I thought somebody here could answer it.

    It has been suggested, that if the Prime Minister got the general election he wants, he could then postpone the election over October 31, so that the Brexit without a deal would happen by default. Can he do the same with the prorogation? Can he postpone the Queen's speach over October 31, so that the parliament will be on recess while the Brexit happens?

    Welcome. A view from abroad is always useful.
    To answer your questions, once a date is decided, that's the date. A PM could announce a date quite a way in the future; Major did in 1997.
    Prorogation's different; the Monarch decides when it should start, or the range of dates when it should start, and IIRC, how long it can be, or when it should finish.
    It's all a bit cloudy though; we've never been in this situation before. Certainly since 1800 or so, although someone will tell me if I'm wrong.
    But isn't the GE date the one posted by HRH?

    In theory, an unscrupulous and mendacious PM could name one date in the Commons, and another one in audience with the Queen.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,404

    As many of my friends, I've been following the interesting political developments of last weeks in the UK. I have only one question, and I thought somebody here could answer it.

    It has been suggested, that if the Prime Minister got the general election he wants, he could then postpone the election over October 31, so that the Brexit without a deal would happen by default. Can he do the same with the prorogation? Can he postpone the Queen's speach over October 31, so that the parliament will be on recess while the Brexit happens?

    Welcome. A view from abroad is always useful.
    To answer your questions, once a date is decided, that's the date. A PM could announce a date quite a way in the future; Major did in 1997.
    Prorogation's different; the Monarch decides when it should start, or the range of dates when it should start, and IIRC, how long it can be, or when it should finish.
    It's all a bit cloudy though; we've never been in this situation before. Certainly since 1800 or so, although someone will tell me if I'm wrong.
    Yes, but that was prior to the request for prorogation having been made and approved. Now the dates are set in stone, I think - ie. sometime between 9th/12th September and October 14th. These can't be retrospectively changed.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,409
    Foxy said:

    As many of my friends, I've been following the interesting political developments of last weeks in the UK. I have only one question, and I thought somebody here could answer it.

    It has been suggested, that if the Prime Minister got the general election he wants, he could then postpone the election over October 31, so that the Brexit without a deal would happen by default. Can he do the same with the prorogation? Can he postpone the Queen's speach over October 31, so that the parliament will be on recess while the Brexit happens?

    Welcome. A view from abroad is always useful.
    To answer your questions, once a date is decided, that's the date. A PM could announce a date quite a way in the future; Major did in 1997.
    Prorogation's different; the Monarch decides when it should start, or the range of dates when it should start, and IIRC, how long it can be, or when it should finish.
    It's all a bit cloudy though; we've never been in this situation before. Certainly since 1800 or so, although someone will tell me if I'm wrong.
    But isn't the GE date the one posted by HRH?

    In theory, an unscrupulous and mendacious PM could name one date in the Commons, and another one in audience with the Queen.
    Tut! Tut! HM thankyouverymuch!
  • Good morning Mr Meeks. Great header. More importantly, when are the odds for the November election going to move to the one in twelve chance? :) I laid it £500 on the back of your article. I know, DYOR etc..
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 10,549

    "'The coming collapse' - How Dominic Cummings has a plan to 'rebuild' the UK's future

    Dominic Cummings has revolutionary designs for the way government policies are devised, decided and delivered, where "flawed" human decision making is mended by big data modelling and machine intelligence.

    The Government advisor, currently war-gaming the next move for Mr Johnson, sees gaping errors in the state of political affairs suggesting they currently rely on idealistic human narratives and personal authorities prone to “systemic dysfunction and the influence of grotesque incompetents."

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1174863/dominic-cummings-brexit-news-latest-boris-johnson-eu-tory-rebels-artificial-intelligence

    This sounds like something from the early 1950s US.

    Let's put SkyNet in control. What could possibly go wrong?

  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 1,188
    edited September 8
    Why is the Deltapoll so different from the others, and is there any difference in the time period for sampling ?
  • ChrisChris Posts: 4,213
    edited September 8
    So can the Brexiteer oracles tell me - on the basis of those polls, how reliable is Boris's lead?

    (1) Pretty reliable.
    (2) Extremely reliable.
    (3) Azbantium. Four hundred times harder than diamond. Twenty feet thick.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,404

    "'The coming collapse' - How Dominic Cummings has a plan to 'rebuild' the UK's future

    Dominic Cummings has revolutionary designs for the way government policies are devised, decided and delivered, where "flawed" human decision making is mended by big data modelling and machine intelligence.

    The Government advisor, currently war-gaming the next move for Mr Johnson, sees gaping errors in the state of political affairs suggesting they currently rely on idealistic human narratives and personal authorities prone to “systemic dysfunction and the influence of grotesque incompetents."

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1174863/dominic-cummings-brexit-news-latest-boris-johnson-eu-tory-rebels-artificial-intelligence

    This sounds like something from the early 1950s US.

    As per the famous quote - democracy is the worst form of Government, except for all the others (although in the modern media age this is being sorely tested).

    In many ways Cummings summary analyses of government failure are highly to the point and accurate. But they are largely features of democracy, and cannot be got rid of without getting rid of democracy itself. And that is a necessary, not a sufficient, requirement of what he claims to desire. Because even removing the electorate from the equation, human failings (both benign and malicious) will still be manifest within the system.

    It is also ironic that he claims things like the EU referendum campaign as evidence that he is right. A campaign that wasn't about taking the right decisions, but taking decisions that ultimately were designed to do no more than maximise popular (human) support for a proposition on a single day in history.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 10,549

    Why is the Deltapoll so different from the others, and is there any difference in the time period for sampling ?

    It is hard tomake accurate measurements during such a volatile period?

    A bit like trying to predict how far the wreckage will scatter when a car goes off a cliff.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 50,988
    Betting Post

    F1: backed Bottas at 9.5 (with boost), each way (third the odds top 2) to win. I think he's very close and the Mercedes looks closer than the Ferrari than last week.

    If you've got a pound spare, Albon at 376 likewise could be worth a little. Odds against but I think the sheer length of the odds on Ladbrokes (301 basic, 376 with boost) are just excessive.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 2,470

    Why is the Deltapoll so different from the others, and is there any difference in the time period for sampling ?

    The others finished sampling on Thursday or Friday whereas the Deltapoll finished yesterday .

    Yesterday was a poor news cycle for Bozo . Ignoring the law isn’t a good look.

    So that might have had an impact .
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 1,188
    edited September 8
    Foxy said:

    Why is the Deltapoll so different from the others, and is there any difference in the time period for sampling ?

    It is hard tomake accurate measurements during such a volatile period?

    A bit like trying to predict how far the wreckage will scatter when a car goes off a cliff.
    Definitely, but it seems the only one with a possible move from the Tories to Labour - or at least reversals in their fortunes - and I wondered whether the inclusion of a later date was anywhere significant in that.
  • "'The coming collapse' - How Dominic Cummings has a plan to 'rebuild' the UK's future

    Dominic Cummings has revolutionary designs for the way government policies are devised, decided and delivered, where "flawed" human decision making is mended by big data modelling and machine intelligence.

    The Government advisor, currently war-gaming the next move for Mr Johnson, sees gaping errors in the state of political affairs suggesting they currently rely on idealistic human narratives and personal authorities prone to “systemic dysfunction and the influence of grotesque incompetents."

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1174863/dominic-cummings-brexit-news-latest-boris-johnson-eu-tory-rebels-artificial-intelligence

    This sounds like something from the early 1950s US.

    Well, he should know when it comes to grotesque incompetents...
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,445
    Scott_P said:
    Aside from YouGov which is showing something like 14% Tory leads the recent polls don't look too bad for during Johnson's honeymoon period from a Labour perspective. Every reason to think we could make up a few percent before an election and a few percent during it.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 4,377
    edited September 8
    Love a bit of stats and I will be back to say something relevant and insightful on the header after I've had a banana.

    But for now a quickie on the political crisis -

    The Queen's Speech is a farce it seems to me. The 'government' cannot get anything remotely serious through. So this event should surely be cancelled until a new government is formed, whether that be after an election or otherwise. If it goes ahead in these circumstances, the Queen is having the piss taken out of her.

    You could go further. Make a 93 year old lady sit for hours, wearing punishment clothes, reading out stuff on live prime time TV that everyone and his dog knows is utter bullshit - is this not abuse?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,696
    kinabalu said:

    Love a bit of stats and I will be back to say something relevant and insightful on the header after I've had a banana.

    But for now a quickie on the political crisis -

    The Queen's Speech is a farce it seems to me. The 'government' cannot get anything remotely serious through. So this event should surely be cancelled until a new government is formed, whether that after an election or otherwise. If it goes ahead in these circumstances, the Queen is having the piss taken out of her.

    You could go further. Make a 93 year old lady sit for hours, wearing punishment clothes, reading out stuff on live prime time TV that everyone and his dog knows is complete and utter bullshit - is this not abuse?

    No, it is not abuse. Get a grip.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,696

    "'The coming collapse' - How Dominic Cummings has a plan to 'rebuild' the UK's future

    Dominic Cummings has revolutionary designs for the way government policies are devised, decided and delivered, where "flawed" human decision making is mended by big data modelling and machine intelligence.

    The Government advisor, currently war-gaming the next move for Mr Johnson, sees gaping errors in the state of political affairs suggesting they currently rely on idealistic human narratives and personal authorities prone to “systemic dysfunction and the influence of grotesque incompetents."

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1174863/dominic-cummings-brexit-news-latest-boris-johnson-eu-tory-rebels-artificial-intelligence

    This sounds like something from the early 1950s US.

    Well, he should know when it comes to grotesque incompetents...
    This past few weeks has demonstrated to the wider public that he might just be spot on in his diagnosis. How about an election to find out how many our MPs enjoy the faith of their voters?
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,404
    kinabalu said:

    Love a bit of stats and I will be back to say something relevant and insightful on the header after I've had a banana.

    But for now a quickie on the political crisis -

    The Queen's Speech is a farce it seems to me. The 'government' cannot get anything remotely serious through. So this event should surely be cancelled until a new government is formed, whether that be after an election or otherwise. If it goes ahead in these circumstances, the Queen is having the piss taken out of her.

    You could go further. Make a 93 year old lady sit for hours, wearing punishment clothes, reading out stuff on live prime time TV that everyone and his dog knows is utter bullshit - is this not abuse?

    Won't she send Charles to do it? He's done it before I think? Or in this case might she just be a bit concerned about the historical precedent...
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,404
    I wonder how much thought the Government have actually put into the contents of the Queens speech? A load of spending pledges is not a legislative programme for Government...
  • DruttDrutt Posts: 648
    Honestly, you put the kids to bed and by the time you wake up Rudd and Mann have both quit. Any news on Charlie Falconer?

    Good thread header.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 4,377

    No, it is not abuse. Get a grip.

    Er, that was the joke bit! I'm sure HM will get through it just fine.

    But one can certainly argue that it is an abuse of process.

    In fact I would. I just have.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,404
    Any news on the new Work and Pensions Secretary? An opening for the return of IDS?
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 11,392
    Chris said:

    So can the Brexiteer oracles tell me - on the basis of those polls, how reliable is Boris's lead?

    (1) Pretty reliable.
    (2) Extremely reliable.
    (3) Azbantium. Four hundred times harder than diamond. Twenty feet thick.

    I can say at the current time period Boris's lead is reliable. How big it is I don't know but definetly Cons are ahead of Labour.

    How the lead will respond to "events dear boy events" I have no idea (and anyone who claims they do know is a liar and a knave) and is why I have not placed any bets of any sort on a forthcoming election.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 4,713
    alex. said:

    Any news on the new Work and Pensions Secretary? An opening for the return of IDS?

    A man of IDS’s talents surely cannot be left to rot on the back-benches.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,404
    Is there anything that the Republican right won't put up with?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-49624132
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 4,377

    Aside from YouGov which is showing something like 14% Tory leads the recent polls don't look too bad for during Johnson's honeymoon period from a Labour perspective. Every reason to think we could make up a few percent before an election and a few percent during it.

    But when are we having it, I wonder?
  • timmotimmo Posts: 1,084
    The MSM and left are acting as though BJ has broken the law already..can i remind everybody he hasnt.
    This is all part of the demonization of Boris that seems to be at the forefront of any radio phone in or forum chat.
    There is obviously extreme concern within that cohort that Boris can still reach the voters that other voters can not reach.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,404
    Alistair said:

    Chris said:

    So can the Brexiteer oracles tell me - on the basis of those polls, how reliable is Boris's lead?

    (1) Pretty reliable.
    (2) Extremely reliable.
    (3) Azbantium. Four hundred times harder than diamond. Twenty feet thick.

    I can say at the current time period Boris's lead is reliable. How big it is I don't know but definetly Cons are ahead of Labour.

    How the lead will respond to "events dear boy events" I have no idea (and anyone who claims they do know is a liar and a knave) and is why I have not placed any bets of any sort on a forthcoming election.
    And of course a lead with low-mid 30s of the vote is by no means guaranteed to translate into electoral success when opponents are strongly motivated against you and are prepared to vote tactically for each other. Somewhat different to the circumstances under eg. Blair in 2005 I think, where he had little to fear in the latter respect.
  • Foxy said:

    Sleight of hand by the government. Also buried by the weeks news was Pence and Bibi putting the squeeze on us to join in against Iran.

    But back to Brexit and BoZo, what does Canada's best selling paper make of this week in British politics?

    My daughter in law text me from Vancouver last night to ask what is happening to the UK. I replied it was impossible to explain to any rational person and all 650 mps need to be swept out of our bankrupt HOC but labour and independent mps are resisting a GE, due to their own self interest as many of them would be out of ofice

    And on another subject I sail from Southampton on Saturday for Nova Scotia and the Atlantic Coast. It was hit yesterday by the same hurricane that hit the Bahamas and it centred on Halifax. Ever so pleased we were not moored in Halifax last night as we will be in two weeks
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,833
    kinabalu said:

    Aside from YouGov which is showing something like 14% Tory leads the recent polls don't look too bad for during Johnson's honeymoon period from a Labour perspective. Every reason to think we could make up a few percent before an election and a few percent during it.

    But when are we having it, I wonder?
    The public really have made up their mind about Corbyn and his cronies. They are unelectable.
  • Now THIS is my sort of header on a Sunday morning and a refreshing change from the relentless hysteria.

    Good work.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,404
    edited September 8
    timmo said:

    The MSM and left are acting as though BJ has broken the law already..can i remind everybody he hasnt.
    This is all part of the demonization of Boris that seems to be at the forefront of any radio phone in or forum chat.
    There is obviously extreme concern within that cohort that Boris can still reach the voters that other voters can not reach.

    I think for many a statement of willingness to break the law (notwithstanding the arguments that he has said he is prepared to defy the instruction to extend, because he doesn't think he would be actually breaking the law in so doing) is sufficient.

    Can you think of any other circumstances where a Prime Minister (especially a Conservative Prime Minister) has argued from such a position - whether in relation to themselves or the actions of others? There's a big difference between expressing sympathy for a cause (eg. pursued by those breaking the law) and expressing support for/potentially encouraging the lawbreaking itself.

    (It could be pointed out that this is a line oft put forward by the current Labour leadership, and I think a major part of where they find themselves today - Europe issue notwithstanding)
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,409

    alex. said:

    Any news on the new Work and Pensions Secretary? An opening for the return of IDS?

    A man of IDS’s talents surely cannot be left to rot on the back-benches.
    He might put the current cabinet in the shade.....
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,696
    edited September 8
    kinabalu said:

    No, it is not abuse. Get a grip.

    Er, that was the joke bit! I'm sure HM will get through it just fine.

    But one can certainly argue that it is an abuse of process.

    In fact I would. I just have.
    Or...the abuse was that May not calling a prorogation, leaving us with the longest Parliamentary session for nearly 400 years. But that was because the Queen really would have had nothing to say if May had. Just one of the many ways that May left an enormous floater in the pan of our national politics.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 4,377
    alex. said:

    Won't she send Charles to do it? He's done it before I think? Or in this case might she just be a bit concerned about the historical precedent...

    I don't think anyone should do it. It should be cancelled. A meaningful QS can only be set out by a functioning government with the ability to enact the contents, or at least most of them.

    In this case, the contents will be not a programme for government but essentially the highlights of what the Tory manifesto under Johnson will be if there is an election.

    Therefore the correct place for these policies is that Tory manifesto. If they do appear there, and the party wins an election, THEN we can and must have a QS which turns them into government policy.

    That is the correct sequence of events.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,404

    kinabalu said:

    No, it is not abuse. Get a grip.

    Er, that was the joke bit! I'm sure HM will get through it just fine.

    But one can certainly argue that it is an abuse of process.

    In fact I would. I just have.
    Or...the abuse was that May not calling a prorogation, leaving us with the longest Parliamentary session for nearly 400 years. But that was because the Queen really would have had nothing to say if May had. Just one of the many ways that May left an enormous floater in the pan of our national politics.
    What do you anticipate from Johnson's legislative programme?
  • booksellerbookseller Posts: 291
    alex. said:

    "'The coming collapse' - How Dominic Cummings has a plan to 'rebuild' the UK's future

    Dominic Cummings has revolutionary designs for the way government policies are devised, decided and delivered, where "flawed" human decision making is mended by big data modelling and machine intelligence.

    The Government advisor, currently war-gaming the next move for Mr Johnson, sees gaping errors in the state of political affairs suggesting they currently rely on idealistic human narratives and personal authorities prone to “systemic dysfunction and the influence of grotesque incompetents."

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1174863/dominic-cummings-brexit-news-latest-boris-johnson-eu-tory-rebels-artificial-intelligence

    This sounds like something from the early 1950s US.

    As per the famous quote - democracy is the worst form of Government, except for all the others (although in the modern media age this is being sorely tested).

    In many ways Cummings summary analyses of government failure are highly to the point and accurate. But they are largely features of democracy, and cannot be got rid of without getting rid of democracy itself. And that is a necessary, not a sufficient, requirement of what he claims to desire. Because even removing the electorate from the equation, human failings (both benign and malicious) will still be manifest within the system.

    It is also ironic that he claims things like the EU referendum campaign as evidence that he is right. A campaign that wasn't about taking the right decisions, but taking decisions that ultimately were designed to do no more than maximise popular (human) support for a proposition on a single day in history.
    +1

    Over-reliance on computing power to predict and inform policy-making in complex, messy human scenarios? The Soviets were big on that (Read 'Red Plenty' by Francis Spufford) but the apocryphal US 'Victory Index' is also a good warning from history on the dangers of using big data: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/10/the-computer-that-predicted-the-us-would-win-the-vietnam-war/542046/

    And if you think "But we have more sophisticated computers now, and AI to tidy everything up", it's still a force-multiplier for a flawed philosophy that at the heart of it has a citizen sticking their fingers up at being told to do something 'cos it's the overwhelmingly 'logical' thing to do.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,696
    kinabalu said:

    Aside from YouGov which is showing something like 14% Tory leads the recent polls don't look too bad for during Johnson's honeymoon period from a Labour perspective. Every reason to think we could make up a few percent before an election and a few percent during it.

    But when are we having it, I wonder?
    This week will amply demonstrate that we really must have an election. Those seen to be blocking it will have a difficult week. MPs who can be painted as in fear of the voters is not a good look.
  • timmotimmo Posts: 1,084
    alex. said:

    timmo said:

    The MSM and left are acting as though BJ has broken the law already..can i remind everybody he hasnt.
    This is all part of the demonization of Boris that seems to be at the forefront of any radio phone in or forum chat.
    There is obviously extreme concern within that cohort that Boris can still reach the voters that other voters can not reach.

    I think for many a statement of willingness to break the law (notwithstanding the arguments that he has said he is prepared to defy the instruction to extend, because he doesn't think he would be actually breaking the law in so doing) is sufficient.

    Can you think of any other circumstances where a Prime Minister (especially a Conservative Prime Minister) has argued from such a position - whether in relation to themselves or the actions of others? There's a big difference between expressing sympathy for a cause (eg. pursued by those breaking the law) and expressing support for/potentially encouraging the lawbreaking itself.

    (It could be pointed out that this is a line oft put forward by the current Labour leadership, and I think a major part of where they find themselves today - Europe issue notwithstanding)
    Where has he actually said he will break the law?
    Thats your and their interpretation of what he has said.
    Last time i checked you havent broken any law until you have. Now the "remainers" want to have a court case because in their view he may break the law...
    This is quite mad and people are seeing through it.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,404
    I wonder when the Attorney General is programmed to resign?

  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 4,538
    kinabalu said:

    Love a bit of stats and I will be back to say something relevant and insightful on the header after I've had a banana.

    But for now a quickie on the political crisis -

    The Queen's Speech is a farce it seems to me. The 'government' cannot get anything remotely serious through. So this event should surely be cancelled until a new government is formed, whether that be after an election or otherwise. If it goes ahead in these circumstances, the Queen is having the piss taken out of her.

    You could go further. Make a 93 year old lady sit for hours, wearing punishment clothes, reading out stuff on live prime time TV that everyone and his dog knows is utter bullshit - is this not abuse?

    HM should send Andrew to do it.
  • "'The coming collapse' - How Dominic Cummings has a plan to 'rebuild' the UK's future

    Dominic Cummings has revolutionary designs for the way government policies are devised, decided and delivered, where "flawed" human decision making is mended by big data modelling and machine intelligence.

    The Government advisor, currently war-gaming the next move for Mr Johnson, sees gaping errors in the state of political affairs suggesting they currently rely on idealistic human narratives and personal authorities prone to “systemic dysfunction and the influence of grotesque incompetents."

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1174863/dominic-cummings-brexit-news-latest-boris-johnson-eu-tory-rebels-artificial-intelligence

    This sounds like something from the early 1950s US.

    I for one welcome our robot overlords.

    They can't do a worse at running the country than Dominic Cummings.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 2,548
    timmo said:

    The MSM and left are acting as though BJ has broken the law already..can i remind everybody he hasnt.
    This is all part of the demonization of Boris that seems to be at the forefront of any radio phone in or forum chat.
    There is obviously extreme concern within that cohort that Boris can still reach the voters that other voters can not reach.

    It was mooted here yesterday that he may already be verging on breaking the law in that conspiring to ‘abuse his public office’ (wrong terminology) carries the same penalties as actually doing it. It would also include the likes of his advisor and other ministers.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 4,713
    Amber Rudd is now another vote for a putative GONU, though presumably a Clarke-led one, not a Corbyn-led one.

    The Parliamentary numbers are now totally confusing to me.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 26,253
    edited September 8
    RPI should have been abolished for CPI some years ago

    On Boris he is on course to destroy the one nation section which includes myself and requires each mp to sign a no deal pledge. Any conservative refusing will be deselected but the problem is that there is an army of TBP MEPs who could be used in an agreement between Farage and Boris. Farage has already announced he will not stand his candidates in the 28 spartan seats and is looking at an agreement that his party will be given free run in Doncaster to take on Ed Miliband

    It also looks as if Boris is to seek a judicial review on the no deal act and no doubt John Bercow will be at the heart of the case on the grounds he failed to act impartially and assisted one side of the argument, rather than being even handed

    When a GE comes around it raises a huge issue for me. In almost every case I would not vote conservative but if by doing so I put Corbyn in no 10 that would be a step too far. I suspect many thousands of conservatives face the same difficult decision.

    I would say I could vote lib dem and quite like Jo Swinson and in any election I hope she does well but in Aberconwy it is a straight conservative-labour marginal
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,404
    timmo said:

    alex. said:

    timmo said:

    The MSM and left are acting as though BJ has broken the law already..can i remind everybody he hasnt.
    This is all part of the demonization of Boris that seems to be at the forefront of any radio phone in or forum chat.
    There is obviously extreme concern within that cohort that Boris can still reach the voters that other voters can not reach.

    I think for many a statement of willingness to break the law (notwithstanding the arguments that he has said he is prepared to defy the instruction to extend, because he doesn't think he would be actually breaking the law in so doing) is sufficient.

    Can you think of any other circumstances where a Prime Minister (especially a Conservative Prime Minister) has argued from such a position - whether in relation to themselves or the actions of others? There's a big difference between expressing sympathy for a cause (eg. pursued by those breaking the law) and expressing support for/potentially encouraging the lawbreaking itself.

    (It could be pointed out that this is a line oft put forward by the current Labour leadership, and I think a major part of where they find themselves today - Europe issue notwithstanding)
    Where has he actually said he will break the law?
    Thats your and their interpretation of what he has said.
    Last time i checked you havent broken any law until you have. Now the "remainers" want to have a court case because in their view he may break the law...
    This is quite mad and people are seeing through it.
    You must have failed to read the bit where I said : notwithstanding the arguments that he has said he is prepared to defy the instruction to extend, because he doesn't think he would be actually breaking the law in so doing

    He has said he is prepared to defy a law passed by Parliament. He has also said "in theory" he would be breaking the law by so doing.

    It is pushing it to say that people are "seeing through" false arguments that he is saying he is prepared to break the law. People backing him are those accepting him of the idea of him breaking the law (because of their views on Brexit), not because they are looking into the nuances of whether he is actually prepared to do so.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 4,377

    Or...the abuse was that May not calling a prorogation, leaving us with the longest Parliamentary session for nearly 400 years. But that was because the Queen really would have had nothing to say if May had. Just one of the many ways that May left an enormous floater in the pan of our national politics.

    Sure. But that is a separate point to mine.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 12,993
    Interesting article, thanks Alastair. On a partisan note, it's kind of the Conservatives to prepare for an election for the second time running with a proposal to undermine pensioners.

    Yes, yes, technically there's a strong case for it (although one can debate whether consumers trading down to cheaper goods isn't in principle a genuine loss of value). I wonder if the technical discussion will feature prominently in Labour and LibDem leaflets, rather than just JOHNSON TO ATTACK YOUR PENSION?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,696
    edited September 8
    The polls might be a tad confusing at the moment, but they agree on one thing - no outpouring of sympathy for those MPs who have been removed. Maybe it's because they value their own opinions more than those of the voters?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,409

    Foxy said:

    Sleight of hand by the government. Also buried by the weeks news was Pence and Bibi putting the squeeze on us to join in against Iran.

    But back to Brexit and BoZo, what does Canada's best selling paper make of this week in British politics?

    And on another subject I sail from Southampton on Saturday for Nova Scotia and the Atlantic Coast. It was hit yesterday by the same hurricane that hit the Bahamas and it centred on Halifax. Ever so pleased we were not moored in Halifax last night as we will be in two weeks
    Bon Voyage! Looks like you’ve dodged the bad weather! Old advice for a cruise - take half the stuff and twice the money! Mind you, the sea air does tend to make clothes shrink...
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,633
    alex. said:

    kinabalu said:

    No, it is not abuse. Get a grip.

    Er, that was the joke bit! I'm sure HM will get through it just fine.

    But one can certainly argue that it is an abuse of process.

    In fact I would. I just have.
    Or...the abuse was that May not calling a prorogation, leaving us with the longest Parliamentary session for nearly 400 years. But that was because the Queen really would have had nothing to say if May had. Just one of the many ways that May left an enormous floater in the pan of our national politics.
    What do you anticipate from Johnson's legislative programme?
    Going by present form I anticipate a complete break with convention and Boris's first Queen's Speech will have Her Majesty read out from the throne in the Lords :

    "My Lords and members of the House of Commons. My government will legislate in the interests of everyone in our country. My government policy is Bollocks to the European Union. No other measures will be laid before you.

    My Lords and members of the House of Commons

    I pray that the blessing of almighty God may rest upon your counsels. Fat chance".

  • timmotimmo Posts: 1,084
    alex. said:

    timmo said:

    alex. said:

    timmo said:

    The MSM and left are acting as though BJ has broken the law already..can i remind everybody he hasnt.
    This is all part of the demonization of Boris that seems to be at the forefront of any radio phone in or forum chat.
    There is obviously extreme concern within that cohort that Boris can still reach the voters that other voters can not reach.

    I think for many a statement of willingness to break the law (notwithstanding the arguments that he has said he is prepared to defy the instruction to extend, because he doesn't think he would be actually breaking the law in so doing) is sufficient.

    Can you think of any other circumstances where a Prime Minister (especially a Conservative Prime Minister) has argued from such a position - whether in relation to themselves or the actions of others? There's a big difference between expressing sympathy for a cause (eg. pursued by those breaking the law) and expressing support for/potentially encouraging the lawbreaking itself.

    (It could be pointed out that this is a line oft put forward by the current Labour leadership, and I think a major part of where they find themselves today - Europe issue notwithstanding)
    Where has he actually said he will break the law?
    Thats your and their interpretation of what he has said.
    Last time i checked you havent broken any law until you have. Now the "remainers" want to have a court case because in their view he may break the law...
    This is quite mad and people are seeing through it.
    You must have failed to read the bit where I said : notwithstanding the arguments that he has said he is prepared to defy the instruction to extend, because he doesn't think he would be actually breaking the law in so doing

    He has said he is prepared to defy a law passed by Parliament. He has also said "in theory" he would be breaking the law by so doing.

    It is pushing it to say that people are "seeing through" false arguments that he is saying he is prepared to break the law. People backing him are those accepting him of the idea of him breaking the law (because of their views on Brexit), not because they are looking into the nuances of whether he is actually prepared to do so.
    But you are now wanting to effectively bring in a prosecution for "thought"..
    I say again in this country you have not broken the law until you have no matter what you say.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 2,548
    timmo said:

    alex. said:

    timmo said:

    alex. said:

    timmo said:

    The MSM and left are acting as though BJ has broken the law already..can i remind everybody he hasnt.
    This is all part of the demonization of Boris that seems to be at the forefront of any radio phone in or forum chat.
    There is obviously extreme concern within that cohort that Boris can still reach the voters that other voters can not reach.

    I think for many a statement of willingness to break the law (notwithstanding the arguments that he has said he is prepared to defy the instruction to extend, because he doesn't think he would be actually breaking the law in so doing) is sufficient.

    Can you think of any other circumstances where a Prime Minister (especially a Conservative Prime Minister) has argued from such a position - whether in relation to themselves or the actions of others? There's a big difference between expressing sympathy for a cause (eg. pursued by those breaking the law) and expressing support for/potentially encouraging the lawbreaking itself.

    (It could be pointed out that this is a line oft put forward by the current Labour leadership, and I think a major part of where they find themselves today - Europe issue notwithstanding)
    Where has he actually said he will break the law?
    Thats your and their interpretation of what he has said.
    Last time i checked you havent broken any law until you have. Now the "remainers" want to have a court case because in their view he may break the law...
    This is quite mad and people are seeing through it.
    You must have failed to read the bit where I said : notwithstanding the arguments that he has said he is prepared to defy the instruction to extend, because he doesn't think he would be actually breaking the law in so doing

    He has said he is prepared to defy a law passed by Parliament. He has also said "in theory" he would be breaking the law by so doing.

    It is pushing it to say that people are "seeing through" false arguments that he is saying he is prepared to break the law. People backing him are those accepting him of the idea of him breaking the law (because of their views on Brexit), not because they are looking into the nuances of whether he is actually prepared to do so.
    But you are now wanting to effectively bring in a prosecution for "thought"..
    I say again in this country you have not broken the law until you have no matter what you say.
    Conspiracy to break a law is an offence
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,404
    edited September 8
    timmo said:

    alex. said:

    timmo said:

    alex. said:

    timmo said:

    The MSM and left are acting as though BJ has broken the law already..can i remind everybody he hasnt.
    This is all part of the demonization of Boris that seems to be at the forefront of any radio phone in or forum chat.
    There is obviously extreme concern within that cohort that Boris can still reach the voters that other voters can not reach.

    I think for many a statement of willingness to break the law (notwithstanding the arguments that he has said he is prepared to defy the instruction to extend, because he doesn't think he would be actually breaking the law in so doing) is sufficient.

    Can you think of any other circumstances where a Prime Minister (especially a Conservative Prime Minister) has argued from such a position - whether in relation to themselves or the actions of others? There's a big difference between expressing sympathy for a cause (eg. pursued by those breaking the law) and expressing support for/potentially encouraging the lawbreaking itself.

    (It could be pointed out that this is a line oft put forward by the current Labour leadership, and I think a major part of where they find themselves today - Europe issue notwithstanding)
    Where has he actually said he will break the law?
    Thats your and their interpretation of what he has said.
    Last time i checked you havent broken any law until you have. Now the "remainers" want to have a court case because in their view he may break the law...
    This is quite mad and people are seeing through it.
    You must have failed to read the bit where I said : notwithstanding the arguments that he has said he is prepared to defy the instruction to extend, because he doesn't think he would be actually breaking the law in so doing

    He has said he is prepared to defy a law passed by Parliament. He has also said "in theory" he would be breaking the law by so doing.

    It is pushing it to say that people are "seeing through" false arguments that he is saying he is prepared to break the law. People backing him are those accepting him of the idea of him breaking the law (because of their views on Brexit), not because they are looking into the nuances of whether he is actually prepared to do so.
    But you are now wanting to effectively bring in a prosecution for "thought"..
    I say again in this country you have not broken the law until you have no matter what you say.
    No i'm not - I thought I was commenting on the parliamentary and public reaction to what he has been saying. Not that he should be thrown in jail for doing so. And I don't think that anyone has said the latter either. Merely speculated about the way forward if he reacts as he has suggested he might.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 4,713

    RPI should have been abolished for CPI some years ago

    On Boris he is on course to destroy the one nation section which includes myself and requires each mp to sign a no deal pledge. Any conservative refusing will be deselected but the problem is that there is an army of TBP MEPs who could be used in an agreement between Farage and Boris. Farage has already announced he will not stand his candidates in the 28 spartan seats and is looking at an agreement that his party will be given free run in Doncaster to take on Ed Miliband

    It also looks as if Boris is to seek a judicial review on the no deal act and no doubt John Bercow will be at the heart of the case on the grounds he failed to act impartially and assisted one side of the argument, rather than being even handed

    When a GE comes around it raises a huge issue for me. In almost every case I would not vote conservative but if by doing so I put Corbyn in no 10 that would be a step too far. I suspect many thousands of conservatives face the same difficult decision.

    I would say I could vote lib dem and quite like Jo Swinson and in any election I hope she does well but in Aberconwy it is a straight conservative-labour marginal

    You will have to hold your nose and vote Labour.
  • kinabalu said:

    alex. said:

    Won't she send Charles to do it? He's done it before I think? Or in this case might she just be a bit concerned about the historical precedent...

    I don't think anyone should do it. It should be cancelled. A meaningful QS can only be set out by a functioning government with the ability to enact the contents, or at least most of them.

    In this case, the contents will be not a programme for government but essentially the highlights of what the Tory manifesto under Johnson will be if there is an election.

    Therefore the correct place for these policies is that Tory manifesto. If they do appear there, and the party wins an election, THEN we can and must have a QS which turns them into government policy.

    That is the correct sequence of events.
    Tell that to the MPs that decided not to vote for an election then.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 4,377
    Barnesian said:

    HM should send Andrew to do it.

    Given that if it goes ahead it will be an event of superficial authority but essentially a tacky and worthless distraction, then yes, Prince Andrew would be the perfect choice.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 2,013
    alex. said:

    Any news on the new Work and Pensions Secretary? An opening for the return of IDS?

    Kit Malthouse.
  • RPI should have been abolished for CPI some years ago

    On Boris he is on course to destroy the one nation section which includes myself and requires each mp to sign a no deal pledge. Any conservative refusing will be deselected but the problem is that there is an army of TBP MEPs who could be used in an agreement between Farage and Boris. Farage has already announced he will not stand his candidates in the 28 spartan seats and is looking at an agreement that his party will be given free run in Doncaster to take on Ed Miliband

    It also looks as if Boris is to seek a judicial review on the no deal act and no doubt John Bercow will be at the heart of the case on the grounds he failed to act impartially and assisted one side of the argument, rather than being even handed

    When a GE comes around it raises a huge issue for me. In almost every case I would not vote conservative but if by doing so I put Corbyn in no 10 that would be a step too far. I suspect many thousands of conservatives face the same difficult decision.

    I would say I could vote lib dem and quite like Jo Swinson and in any election I hope she does well but in Aberconwy it is a straight conservative-labour marginal

    You will have to hold your nose and vote Labour.
    That will not happen under Corbyn under any circumstances
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 4,713
    edited September 8

    Interesting article, thanks Alastair. On a partisan note, it's kind of the Conservatives to prepare for an election for the second time running with a proposal to undermine pensioners.

    Yes, yes, technically there's a strong case for it (although one can debate whether consumers trading down to cheaper goods isn't in principle a genuine loss of value). I wonder if the technical discussion will feature prominently in Labour and LibDem leaflets, rather than just JOHNSON TO ATTACK YOUR PENSION?

    There is also the proposal to increase retirement age to 75 floating around. The “Work Till You Drop” policy.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,404

    The polls might be a tad confusing at the moment, but they agree on one thing - no outpouring of sympathy for those MPs who have been removed. Maybe it's because they value their own opinions more than those of the voters?
    Given the evidence of lack of support for no deal, it's difficult to argue that they aren't reflecting voter opinion (in that everyone is against courses of action but nobody is in favour, and there is little attempt to try to work out what outcomes might be acceptable compromises).
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 4,713

    RPI should have been abolished for CPI some years ago

    On Boris he is on course to destroy the one nation section which includes myself and requires each mp to sign a no deal pledge. Any conservative refusing will be deselected but the problem is that there is an army of TBP MEPs who could be used in an agreement between Farage and Boris. Farage has already announced he will not stand his candidates in the 28 spartan seats and is looking at an agreement that his party will be given free run in Doncaster to take on Ed Miliband

    It also looks as if Boris is to seek a judicial review on the no deal act and no doubt John Bercow will be at the heart of the case on the grounds he failed to act impartially and assisted one side of the argument, rather than being even handed

    When a GE comes around it raises a huge issue for me. In almost every case I would not vote conservative but if by doing so I put Corbyn in no 10 that would be a step too far. I suspect many thousands of conservatives face the same difficult decision.

    I would say I could vote lib dem and quite like Jo Swinson and in any election I hope she does well but in Aberconwy it is a straight conservative-labour marginal

    You will have to hold your nose and vote Labour.
    That will not happen under Corbyn under any circumstances
    Yep.

    If Jeremy Corbyn were to be ousted, Boris and Brexit would be flushed away in moments.

    I am not sure who I detest more.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 26,253
    edited September 8

    Foxy said:

    Sleight of hand by the government. Also buried by the weeks news was Pence and Bibi putting the squeeze on us to join in against Iran.

    But back to Brexit and BoZo, what does Canada's best selling paper make of this week in British politics?

    And on another subject I sail from Southampton on Saturday for Nova Scotia and the Atlantic Coast. It was hit yesterday by the same hurricane that hit the Bahamas and it centred on Halifax. Ever so pleased we were not moored in Halifax last night as we will be in two weeks
    Bon Voyage! Looks like you’ve dodged the bad weather! Old advice for a cruise - take half the stuff and twice the money! Mind you, the sea air does tend to make clothes shrink...
    Good advice we learned years ago and thank you.

    My wife and I have had a lifetime love of the sea and we have been fortunate to sail the seven seas over the last 10 years
  • TabmanTabman Posts: 779

    Interesting article, thanks Alastair. On a partisan note, it's kind of the Conservatives to prepare for an election for the second time running with a proposal to undermine pensioners.

    Yes, yes, technically there's a strong case for it (although one can debate whether consumers trading down to cheaper goods isn't in principle a genuine loss of value). I wonder if the technical discussion will feature prominently in Labour and LibDem leaflets, rather than just JOHNSON TO ATTACK YOUR PENSION?

    There is also the proposal to increase retirement age to 75 floating around. The “Work Till You Drop” policy.
    That will have to happen. Only way the boomers get to keep their benefits is if we Gen Xers work to pay for them.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,696

    Amber Rudd is now another vote for a putative GONU, though presumably a Clarke-led one, not a Corbyn-led one.

    The Parliamentary numbers are now totally confusing to me.

    Can't decide what is the greater mystery: why Boris invited Rudd into his Cabinet, or why she thought she could sign up to a No Deal option required of that Cabinet. She was the obvious choice for being the next out of Cabinet.

    Anyway, when Boris does decide to call a vote of No Confidence in his Government, even harder to imagine Rudd now voting to keep it in place. Which will suit Boris just fine, as he side-steps the FTPA.....
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 3,020

    I would say I could vote lib dem and quite like Jo Swinson and in any election I hope she does well but in Aberconwy it is a straight conservative-labour marginal

    You have my sympathy. My local Tory has a huge majority (he survived the Blair landslides,) so I can put my little cross next to the plump pigeon of PR without being too concerned that I'm enabling the Marxist Jew-baiting Front.

    A great many constituents in Con-Lab marginals now find themselves in a most invidious position.

    Amber Rudd is now another vote for a putative GONU, though presumably a Clarke-led one, not a Corbyn-led one.

    I can't see an alternative Government that can command a majority coalescing around anyone. There's no majority for Corbyn as PM, and no incentive for Corbyn to back anyone other than himself.

    Why is the Deltapoll so different from the others, and is there any difference in the time period for sampling ?

    The polls are all over the shop. Presumably the pollsters are all implementing different models for trying to understand the current state of chaos - though, in any event, none of their results tell us anything useful. We've no idea if they bear any relation to present reality, and we know from the 2017 vote that they'll almost certainly bear no relation whatsoever to reality on polling day itself.

    Personally, I'm therefore inclined not to get too excited about any of them.
  • timmotimmo Posts: 1,084
    nichomar said:

    timmo said:

    alex. said:

    timmo said:

    alex. said:

    timmo said:

    The MSM and left are acting as though BJ has broken the law already..can i remind everybody he hasnt.
    This is all part of the demonization of Boris that seems to be at the forefront of any radio phone in or forum chat.
    There is obviously extreme concern within that cohort that Boris can still reach the voters that other voters can not reach.

    I think for many a statement of willingness to break the law (notwithstanding the arguments that he has said he is prepared to defy the instruction to extend, because he doesn't think he would be actually breaking the law in so doing) is sufficient.

    Can you think of any other circumstances where a Prime Minister (especially a Conservative Prime Minister) has argued from such a position - whether in relation to themselves or the actions of others? There's a big difference between expressing sympathy for a cause (eg. pursued by those breaking the law) and expressing support for/potentially encouraging the lawbreaking itself.

    (It could be pointed out that this is a line oft put forward by the current Labour leadership, and I think a major part of where they find themselves today - Europe issue notwithstanding)
    Where has he actually said he will break the law?
    Thats your and their interpretation of what he has said.
    Last time i checked you havent broken any law until you have. Now the "remainers" want to have a court case because in their view he may break the law...
    This is quite mad and people are seeing through it.
    You must have failed to read the bit where I said : notwithstanding the arguments that he has said he is prepared to defy the instruction to extend, because he doesn't think he would be actually breaking the law in so doing

    He has said he is prepared to defy a law passed by Parliament. He has also said "in theory" he would be breaking the law by so doing.

    It is pushing it to say that people are "seeing through" false arguments that he is saying he is prepared to break the law. People backing him are those accepting him of the idea of him breaking the law (because of their views on Brexit), not because they are looking into the nuances of whether he is actually prepared to do so.
    But you are now wanting to effectively bring in a prosecution for "thought"..
    I say again in this country you have not broken the law until you have no matter what you say.
    Conspiracy to break a law is an offence
    A law that has notbyet received Royal assent?
This discussion has been closed.