So you are relying upon the possibility of a redevelopment that is not even being planned and may well never happen to deal with a congestion issue which will happen and is already being planned.
And you are relying on Internet speeds halting the rise in passenger travel that has been happening since the Internet first became popular. Which, from what we've seen so far, seems a rather forlorn hope.
Besides, I'm not relying on anything: I'm saying let's wait for details of the plans, rather than Gilligan's spin on them. I've already said many times that HS2's future depends on Euston, and it's quite possible that it will kill the project. You're just getting the funeral shroud out a trifle early.
Whilst you are here, Mr. Jessup, may I thank you for pointing us earlier to that jolly interesting article on ERTMS. Fascinating stuff, especially when it came to the section on the business case.
Oh, I didn't actually think anyone would read it. The question about whether this massive and costly technological change is worth the cost is another matter.
It's the sort of thing that's relatively easy to implement on a new line, but an order of magnitude more complex and expensive to retrofit to existing lines and trains.
For anybody else who might be interested, it covers the EU-mandated way forwards for railway signalling and operations, with basic aims to allow interoperabilty between countries and (eventually) increase capacity: http://www.railengineer.uk/2015/08/28/ertms-a-reality-check/
Surely the poster is responsible, not the blog? Moderation being required is an overstep on freedom in my opinion - where are the libdems when I need them...
So you are relying upon the possibility of a redevelopment that is not even being planned and may well never happen to deal with a congestion issue which will happen and is already being planned.
And you are relying on Internet speeds halting the rise in passenger travel that has been happening since the Internet first became popular. Which, from what we've seen so far, seems a rather forlorn hope.
Besides, I'm not relying on anything: I'm saying let's wait for details of the plans, rather than Gilligan's spin on them. I've already said many times that HS2's future depends on Euston, and it's quite possible that it will kill the project. You're just getting the funeral shroud out a trifle early.
Whilst you are here, Mr. Jessup, may I thank you for pointing us earlier to that jolly interesting article on ERTMS. Fascinating stuff, especially when it came to the section on the business case.
Was looking on the wikipedia page: "21 February: Full commissioning of West Dalarna Line (Repbäcken-Malung) in Dalarna, Sweden, under ERTMS level 3 without lineside signals or track detection devices"
Literally no signals on the track? Barmy!
Lineside signals are so 19th century, Mr. D., and, as the article made clear, keeping such signalling systems together with ERTMS makes a viable business case for the latter impossible.
So you are relying upon the possibility of a redevelopment that is not even being planned and may well never happen to deal with a congestion issue which will happen and is already being planned.
And you are relying on Internet speeds halting the rise in passenger travel that has been happening since the Internet first became popular. Which, from what we've seen so far, seems a rather forlorn hope.
Besides, I'm not relying on anything: I'm saying let's wait for details of the plans, rather than Gilligan's spin on them. I've already said many times that HS2's future depends on Euston, and it's quite possible that it will kill the project. You're just getting the funeral shroud out a trifle early.
Whilst you are here, Mr. Jessup, may I thank you for pointing us earlier to that jolly interesting article on ERTMS. Fascinating stuff, especially when it came to the section on the business case.
Was looking on the wikipedia page: "21 February: Full commissioning of West Dalarna Line (Repbäcken-Malung) in Dalarna, Sweden, under ERTMS level 3 without lineside signals or track detection devices"
Literally no signals on the track? Barmy!
Yep, that's level 3, which has proven rather hard to implement. It should be noted that that line is now freight-only, as it proved too costly to install the equipment into passenger trains.
This means ERTMS Level 3's only achievement so far is to reduce passenger services ...
Many thought the Coalition would not last, but I thought it would (should have put money on it, Im sure it was offereed). Corbyn, I'm not as sure about, I think if it gets tough, or looks dire for the party, he would jump rather than be pushed. If it were an option I've go 500-800 days
While our leaders should probably face challenges more than they do, Australia seems to show the problems that it can cause. There's ruthless, and then there's a recipe for disloyalty at the first sign of trouble (though this has not happened at the first sign, people start thinking about ir from the first sign)
So you are relying upon the possibility of a redevelopment that is not even being planned and may well never happen to deal with a congestion issue which will happen and is already being planned.
And you are relying on Internet speeds halting the rise in passenger travel that has been happening since the Internet first became popular. Which, from what we've seen so far, seems a rather forlorn hope.
Besides, I'm not relying on anything: I'm saying let's wait for details of the plans, rather than Gilligan's spin on them. I've already said many times that HS2's future depends on Euston, and it's quite possible that it will kill the project. You're just getting the funeral shroud out a trifle early.
Whilst you are here, Mr. Jessup, may I thank you for pointing us earlier to that jolly interesting article on ERTMS. Fascinating stuff, especially when it came to the section on the business case.
Oh, I didn't actually think anyone would read it. The question about whether this massive and costly technological change is worth the cost is another matter.
It's the sort of thing that's relatively easy to implement on a new line, but an order of magnitude more complex and expensive to retrofit to existing lines and trains.
For anybody else who might be interested, it covers the EU-mandated way forwards for railway signalling and operations, with basic aims to allow interoperabilty between countries and (eventually) increase capacity: http://www.railengineer.uk/2015/08/28/ertms-a-reality-check/
A European project too far?
It certainly fits the classic European Project profile. It is a seemingly spiffing idea, it is hugely complex to implement, the costs are unknown and nobody actually knows how, or even if, it will work in practice, but everyone has signed up for it.
Aside from the obvious by-election losses that could bring down Cameron before 2020: remember, it may only take 5 losses to fell him, there's another possibility.
Suppose Corbyn does campaign for NO together with a sizeable chunk of the new Corbynistas. Allied with UKIP and the Tory eurosceptics this makes the NO vote suddenly a very attractive betting option.
It also makes for another route whereby Cameron could be forced out. Can you imagine him campaigning to stay in, losing the vote and staying on?
Mr. Paris, are you suggesting Labour's just leapt out of a plane without a parachute, whilst flying over a minefield on a monster-infested island in the middle of the Pacific?
Middle ut specific? Luxury! Wen Ah weralad wid tek off in a plane wi no wings flah tu't moon 'n back un crash on ter'top o'mount Everist 'n then affert run alt way wom wi'a sherpa van on y'back o'er brok'n glass wi no'but a fruit pastel 'un a slice o'yerown liver f'dinner.
Here is Labour MP Simon Danczuk talking about how he may not vote with his party in the future. He was a strong supporter of Liz Kendall and has been very critical of Jeremy Corbyn.
'McDonnell, a radical socialist and long-time ally of Jeremy Corbyn, wants to nationalise all the banks, railways and utility companies, hike taxes on companies and increase national insurance payments by 7 per cent for anyone earning more than £50,000.'
Aside from the obvious by-election losses that could bring down Cameron before 2020: remember, it may only take 5 losses to fell him, there's another possibility.
Suppose Corbyn does campaign for NO together with a sizeable chunk of the new Corbynistas. Allied with UKIP and the Tory eurosceptics this makes the NO vote suddenly a very attractive betting option.
It also makes for another route whereby Cameron could be forced out. Can you imagine him campaigning to stay in, losing the vote and staying on?
Cameron personally staying on in such circumstances seems very unlikely, but the present government will not fall, why should it? As Cameron has already said he will resign during the lifetime of this parliament the question I ask about your idea is, "Yes and?"
Aside from the obvious by-election losses that could bring down Cameron before 2020: remember, it may only take 5 losses to fell him, there's another possibility.
8 losses for a tie actually.
Govt majority = 16 - not my figure but per Parliament website.
(FPT) JEO said: "Has the shadow minister for Jews, Muslims and other assorted non-Christians been announced yet?"
Err, hello. The biggest minority faith in Britain is Catholicism. We're not going to be lumped in with CoE types, thank you very much. We want - DEMAND - our own Minister to make sure that our particular views on transubstantiation, original sin, the Nicene creed and the price of fish are properly taken into account in government policy. Plus we want a special law saying that we mustn't be offended and a special monitoring team to make sure that rude things said about us are recorded and people told off for being Catholicophobic.
Oh and the price of incense should be lowered and we need to have lots of money given to us for all the babies we have. Lots of money. Lots and lots. Because if you don't you are being "authoritarian" (copyright: H Manson, the Labour Party (currently in receivership)).
So you want a Minister for Popery AND a Minister for Potpourri?
Joe Murphy So that's the ;leader, the shadow chancellor and the shad foreign sec who have all pulled out of i/vs today. #chaos https://t.co/9uNFNuxi5r
I've just watched the Walk of Silence (couldn't get it to load before). I've never seen anything so extraordinary.
Obviously planned in advance. Obviously the young man who met him was primed to behave similarly.
My initial reaction is: just who is pulling the strings behind the scenes?
The Unions?
They're clearly attempting to discredit SKY as a reputable media organisation, and paint them as a friend of the Tories. Hence the refusal by 3 Shadow Cabinet members to give interviews to them.
The Labour party has a problem with women, it seems. In its favour it's not as bad as the Lib Dems. Maybe one day it will catch up with the Tories.
Come on, be fair, Miss C. The Lib Dems did try to get more female Lib Dem MPs at the last election.
Just that their efforts were underminded by the weight of Tory money, manipulation of the voters by foreign mercenaries, and five years of smears from the Labour Party.
Many thought the Coalition would not last, but I thought it would (should have put money on it, Im sure it was offereed). Corbyn, I'm not as sure about, I think if it gets tough, or looks dire for the party, he would jump rather than be pushed. If it were an option I've go 500-800 days
Depends how long it takes to mold the Labour Party into a self reinforcing left wing activist orientated and run organisation.
Joe Murphy So that's the ;leader, the shadow chancellor and the shad foreign sec who have all pulled out of i/vs today. #chaos https://t.co/9uNFNuxi5r
I've just watched the Walk of Silence (couldn't get it to load before). I've never seen anything so extraordinary.
Obviously planned in advance. Obviously the young man who met him was primed to behave similarly.
My initial reaction is: just who is pulling the strings behind the scenes?
The Unions?
They're clearly attempting to discredit SKY as a reputable media organisation, and paint them as a friend of the Tories. Hence the refusal by 3 Shadow Cabinet members to give interviews to them.
They are also not giving interviews to the BBC. so not so much trying to discredit Sky, instead they are just afraid of scrutiny.
What I find so strange - and apparently deliberate, is booking in to do an intv - then pulling out with minutes to spare before going live. We've had 5 examples so far - Marr, Today, WatO, Sky.
It's almost as if a campaign of disruption is being carried out.
Corbyn is not a politician, he is an evangelical. That makes him brilliant at talking to supporters and those looking for salvation; but totally impenetrable and a little bit peculiar to everyone else. It also means he is not able to see the world in any way apart form his own. And he knows that does not matter because he knows his own way is the true way.
The last 36 hours have been a glorious clusterfook, but they really should not surprise anyone. In their grief, their despair, their anger and their desire for something different his electorate projected stuff onto Corbyn that just was not there. What is there is an out-of-touch class warrior with a selection of very dubious friends. And because of that he is not going to last. He'll also drag others like McDonnell and Abbott down with him.
The Labour party has a problem with women, it seems. In its favour it's not as bad as the Lib Dems. Maybe one day it will catch up with the Tories.
Come on, be fair, Miss C. The Lib Dems did try to get more female Lib Dem MPs at the last election.
Just that their efforts were underminded by the weight of Tory money, manipulation of the voters by foreign mercenaries, and five years of smears from the Labour Party.
I assume by foreign mercenaries you mean the american campaign advisers, but to my mind, if people allow themselves to be 'manipulated' by campaigns then that is their own fault.. It's also the whole point of campaigns, to convince people who don't pay attention to politics of your view based off broad brush strokes of what you believe.
The Labour party has a problem with women, it seems. In its favour it's not as bad as the Lib Dems. Maybe one day it will catch up with the Tories.
Come on, be fair, Miss C. The Lib Dems did try to get more female Lib Dem MPs at the last election.
Just that their efforts were underminded by the weight of Tory money, manipulation of the voters by foreign mercenaries, and five years of smears from the Labour Party.
Gods, they've gone from little movement pre election (on average), to shifting to recognise the GE type levels, with afew extra points, but again very little movement. Move, damnit, move!
Aside from the obvious by-election losses that could bring down Cameron before 2020: remember, it may only take 5 losses to fell him, there's another possibility.
8 losses for a tie actually.
Govt majority = 16 - not my figure but per Parliament website.
It is surely certain that a deal would be done with the DUP before the Govt actually fell - especially with Lab led by Corbyn.
Surely you're double counting the Sinn Fein there? If they don't sit then it only makes a difference of 2? My brain's fuddled. Mind you, given Corbyn's views and those of the shadow Chancellor that would set the cat among the proverbial if Sinn Fein decided to take up the oath to bring down the Conservatives
Most websites I've seen give the majority as between 9 and 12. It's complicated because the speaker is also included in the 650.
OMFG - Sajid Javid has quoted The Wrath of Khan in the House of Commons.
Sod making him PM, make him King.
Do you have the quote!
We (he and Corbyn) both share the same goals, more fairer, more just society, where the needs of the many are not outweighed by the wants of a few
Nice and subtle!
I'm now the SPAD for Sajid Javid
You are so fickle, Mr. Eagles. Earlier on today you were telling us that the housetrained Justine Greening would be the next PM. Now, because of a few come-on words you have thrown her over for another. What are we to make of such behaviour?
Mind you, I think you are correct to change sides. Sajid Javid has a very good chance of being the next PM but he needs to see off the other very strong challenger, Liz Truss. Just you wait until she turns those dazzling blue eyes on you and gives you one of her knowing, half-mocking smiles. You will be like wet sauerkraut in her hands.
He's against HS2, and was one of the few Labour MPs to rebel the whip and vote against it.
JJ, any thoughts on the revelations that HS2 is going to actually reduce capacity on the existing services rather than increasing it because of losing platforms and lines at Euston? Surely this kind of kills one of the last arguments in favour of the scheme.
OMFG - Sajid Javid has quoted The Wrath of Khan in the House of Commons.
Sod making him PM, make him King.
Do you have the quote!
We (he and Corbyn) both share the same goals, more fairer, more just society, where the needs of the many are not outweighed by the wants of a few
Nice and subtle!
I'm now the SPAD for Sajid Javid
You are so fickle, Mr. Eagles. Earlier on today you were telling us that the housetrained Justine Greening would be the next PM. Now, because of a few come-on words you have thrown her over for another. What are we to make of such behaviour?
Mind you, I think you are correct to change sides. Sajid Javid has a very good chance of being the next PM but he needs to see off the other very strong challenger, Liz Truss. Just you wait until she turns those dazzling blue eyes on you and gives you one of her knowing, half-mocking smiles. You will be like wet sauerkraut in her hands.
I've always been on team Sajid. I tipped him I think at 50/1 last year as our next PM
Corbyn is not a politician, he is an evangelical. That makes him brilliant at talking to supporters and those looking for salvation; but totally impenetrable and a little bit peculiar to everyone else. It also means he is not able to see the world in any way apart form his own. And he knows that does not matter because he knows his own way is the true way.
It's also how he and other extremists (not exclusively on the Left, but definitely them) can be so utterly convinced 'the people' are with them, even though they never show it at General Elections. The people are duped, or bullied (this has been outright claimed by some, so they've gone from duped and bullied to defiant and voting the way they want in months), never choosing to vote other than them. At least with his victory in the leadership campaign there is some actual proof of support for once, that isn't a few thousand people marching somewhere.
The Labour party has a problem with women, it seems. In its favour it's not as bad as the Lib Dems. Maybe one day it will catch up with the Tories.
Come on, be fair, Miss C. The Lib Dems did try to get more female Lib Dem MPs at the last election.
Just that their efforts were underminded by the weight of Tory money, manipulation of the voters by foreign mercenaries, and five years of smears from the Labour Party.
And by the LibDems being utterly useless shits.
They were in Coalition with you Tories. Not easy, Mr Mark. It contaminated the one, and decontaminated the other. Clegg got it wrong.
Anybody who uses the term 'Zionist' reveals more about themselves than any point they are trying to make.
I don't think louise mensch was far off the mark when she suggested people with a hatred for zionists or call themself anti-zionist have an underlying aura of anti-semitism.
So you can't criticise Israel and pro-Israeli American/British foreign policy despite repeated serial human rights atrocities? Tsk.
Of course you can. And plenty of us do.
I'm probably wasting time here but let me try anyway.
Not all criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic and it is wrong to claim that it is or to claim that one must not criticise Israel in general or particular Israeli governments in particular because to do so would be anti-Semitic. That is an attempt to shut down debate. Just because Jews have been the victims of the worst case of genocide we have known and repeated attacks over centuries does not mean that they are immune from bad behaviour themselves. Being a victim does not imbue one with some sort of automatic moral superiority.
Equally, it is also the case that there are people who are anti-Semitic and who mask this by claiming to be anti-Zionist and use the anti-Zionist label in order to make anti-Semitic attacks on Israel and on Jews. The Zionist label has been a gift to such people. And it is one reason why people are sensitive to the use of such a term.
There is also something quite troubling and disturbing about the viciousness with which Jews ae attacked for somehow betraying the moral superiority they are meant to have as a result of being victims, almost as if they are being attacked for being victims.
There are others who, while being hyper-sensitive to the perception which some minority groups have to statements made about them which may be seen to be stereotypical or too broad brush or offensive or just plain insensitive, seem surprisingly insensitive to the perception which Jews have of how they are described even though they are good historical reasons why Jews would be sensitive to the portrayal of them in the media and by politicians.
And now I await the bucketloads of abuse which will surely be the fate of anyone treading on such delicate ground.
Aside from the obvious by-election losses that could bring down Cameron before 2020: remember, it may only take 5 losses to fell him, there's another possibility.
Suppose Corbyn does campaign for NO together with a sizeable chunk of the new Corbynistas. Allied with UKIP and the Tory eurosceptics this makes the NO vote suddenly a very attractive betting option.
It also makes for another route whereby Cameron could be forced out. Can you imagine him campaigning to stay in, losing the vote and staying on?
Corbyn campaigning to leave might cause more problems for the Labour Party than it would for Cameron and the Conservatives. Far more Labour MPs and supporters are wedded to the European project than Conservative MPs.
I mean, it might even force thoroughly pro-EU Nick to divert from the party line. Or, given his recent behaviour, perhaps not ...
Aside from the obvious by-election losses that could bring down Cameron before 2020: remember, it may only take 5 losses to fell him, there's another possibility.
8 losses for a tie actually.
Govt majority = 16 - not my figure but per Parliament website.
It is surely certain that a deal would be done with the DUP before the Govt actually fell - especially with Lab led by Corbyn.
Surely you're double counting the Sinn Fein there? If they don't sit then it only makes a difference of 2? My brain's fuddled. Mind you, given Corbyn's views and those of the shadow Chancellor that would set the cat among the proverbial if Sinn Fein decided to take up the oath to bring down the Conservatives
Most websites I've seen give the majority as between 9 and 12. It's complicated because the speaker is also included in the 650.
@SouthamObserver - He might last longer than you expect, because he'll have people around him - McDonnell, Meacher, Abott, Ken Livingstone, and most important Len McCluskey - who will be telling him that he got a huge mandate (which is true enough), and that all the criticism is just unfair attacks from capitalists, Zionists, racists, Tories, big business, neo-cons, the Murdoch press, the Daily Mail, and, lowest of all low-life, Blairites.
I think that he really does believe that the nutty causes he espouses do in fact amount to a great popular movement which the aforementioned elite vested interests have oppressed, and he'll try to connect with this non-existent popular movement. He'll even get some superficial support from rallies and Twitter which will convince him that it's for real. Why wouldn't he believe this? He's believed it all his life, but only now has a chance to do anything about it.
Aside from the obvious by-election losses that could bring down Cameron before 2020: remember, it may only take 5 losses to fell him, there's another possibility.
8 losses for a tie actually.
Govt majority = 16 - not my figure but per Parliament website.
It is surely certain that a deal would be done with the DUP before the Govt actually fell - especially with Lab led by Corbyn.
Surely you're double counting the Sinn Fein there? If they don't sit then it only makes a difference of 2? My brain's fuddled. Mind you, given Corbyn's views and those of the shadow Chancellor that would set the cat among the proverbial if Sinn Fein decided to take up the oath to bring down the Conservatives
Most websites I've seen give the majority as between 9 and 12. It's complicated because the speaker is also included in the 650.
No it's not double-counted, the 4 belong to the opposition numbers so increase the majority from 12 to 16. However seat losses (or rebels) count double so it is 8 losses to turn a majority of 16 to a tie.
That cuts both ways though. If the DUP and UUP (10 altogether) are effectively on the Conservatives side against Corbyn then the majority increases to 36.
If Carswell and the Lib Dems decide not to side with Corbyn then that puts a potential anti-Corbyn majority at 54.
A few observations about the Walk of Silence; harassment when you're walking to your car at midnight with people pointing phones in your face doesn't reflect well on the press; Corbyn needs to develop strategies for dealing with the press- he obviously is unprepared for the trials and tribulations of leadership, including this type of invasive intrusion into his life.
At the outset of the leadership election, the press went for the wrong man- Chukka, and left Jeremy alone thinking he was some hopeless non runner. Perhaps, if Corbyn had been subjected Corbyn to the same press barrage that Chukka was exposed to at the start, he would have run a mile too.
Corbyn is not a politician, he is an evangelical. That makes him brilliant at talking to supporters and those looking for salvation; but totally impenetrable and a little bit peculiar to everyone else. It also means he is not able to see the world in any way apart form his own. And he knows that does not matter because he knows his own way is the true way.
The last 36 hours have been a glorious clusterfook, but they really should not surprise anyone. In their grief, their despair, their anger and their desire for something different his electorate projected stuff onto Corbyn that just was not there. What is there is an out-of-touch class warrior with a selection of very dubious friends. And because of that he is not going to last. He'll also drag others like McDonnell and Abbott down with him.
A lot of the comments here are too melodramatic IMO - he certainly polarises us politics nerds, but lots of people are simply reserving judgment till they see a bit more - the reported ICM poll with the modest Tory lead is probably best summarised as the electorate saying "Hmm". The media strategy is unusual, but I assume they're anxious not to go off at sixes and sevens before they've had a chance to talk through the lines they'll take. I suspect we won't see that much more concrete before Conference week.
The Labour party has a problem with women, it seems. In its favour it's not as bad as the Lib Dems. Maybe one day it will catch up with the Tories.
Come on, be fair, Miss C. The Lib Dems did try to get more female Lib Dem MPs at the last election.
Just that their efforts were underminded by the weight of Tory money, manipulation of the voters by foreign mercenaries, and five years of smears from the Labour Party.
And by the LibDems being utterly useless shits.
They were in Coalition with you Tories. Not easy, Mr Mark. It contaminated the one, and decontaminated the other. Clegg got it wrong.
Your whole party played it extremely badly. And it was so predictable. If you are in Coalition, you have to express belief in that Coalition. Not pick and choose when to express some support for it, and when to say "nothing to do with me, Guv..."
You had to rip into Labour for being the irresponsible Left. You would now be reaping a huge bonus for that. Continuing to try and ride two horses going in two different directions was fine when you were just on your hobby horses. Not so much when strapped to a couple of thoroughbreds....
Aside from the obvious by-election losses that could bring down Cameron before 2020: remember, it may only take 5 losses to fell him, there's another possibility.
Suppose Corbyn does campaign for NO together with a sizeable chunk of the new Corbynistas. Allied with UKIP and the Tory eurosceptics this makes the NO vote suddenly a very attractive betting option.
It also makes for another route whereby Cameron could be forced out. Can you imagine him campaigning to stay in, losing the vote and staying on?
Corbyn campaigning to leave might cause more problems for the Labour Party than it would for Cameron and the Conservatives. Far more Labour MPs and supporters are wedded to the European project than Conservative MPs.
I mean, it might even force thoroughly pro-EU Nick to divert from the party line. Or, given his recent behaviour, perhaps not ...
No, I agree with that except that for Corbyn it's not a do or die issue for him and his party. It's not him that has stuck his neck on the block over a European vote. If Corbyn's true to his word, that people can say what the hell they like (wtf?!! Yay!) then it won't matter to Labour. Those who want to campaign No can, those who don't, won't. But for Cameron, losing the vote would mean stepping down I think?
I do like Javid's urbane welcome: "He started by congratulating Corbyn on his election. He said he and Corbyn had two things in common. First, they would never be seen eating a bacon sandwich. And, second, they both went into politics to improve the lives of their constituents."
Aside from the obvious by-election losses that could bring down Cameron before 2020: remember, it may only take 5 losses to fell him, there's another possibility.
8 losses for a tie actually.
Govt majority = 16 - not my figure but per Parliament website.
It is surely certain that a deal would be done with the DUP before the Govt actually fell - especially with Lab led by Corbyn.
Surely you're double counting the Sinn Fein there? If they don't sit then it only makes a difference of 2? My brain's fuddled. Mind you, given Corbyn's views and those of the shadow Chancellor that would set the cat among the proverbial if Sinn Fein decided to take up the oath to bring down the Conservatives
Most websites I've seen give the majority as between 9 and 12. It's complicated because the speaker is also included in the 650.
It's set out very clearly on the Parliament website - on the link I supplied.
There are 4 SF MPs - if they don't sit that increases the majority by 4.
If SF did take their seats, the majority would be 12.
As they don't, it's 16.
Re the Speaker - the Speaker doesn't vote, nor do the 3 Deputy Speakers. It is all on the official Parliament website.
What I find so strange - and apparently deliberate, is booking in to do an intv - then pulling out with minutes to spare before going live. We've had 5 examples so far - Marr, Today, WatO, Sky.
It's almost as if a campaign of disruption is being carried out.
Joe Murphy So that's the ;leader, the shadow chancellor and the shad foreign sec who have all pulled out of i/vs today. #chaos https://t.co/9uNFNuxi5r
I've just watched the Walk of Silence (couldn't get it to load before). I've never seen anything so extraordinary.
Obviously planned in advance. Obviously the young man who met him was primed to behave similarly.
My initial reaction is: just who is pulling the strings behind the scenes?
The sound-track seemed to be just footsteps & the one reporter's voice, until the young man greeted Mr Corbyn. Don't know whether other reporters' voices were being screened out somehow, meaning Mr Corbyn was actually walking in a clamour of voices.
Mr Corbyn's quavering voice saying - 'bothering me' - sounded so pathetic, but really, why couldn't he just make a statement to start with? If he had, he'd have had reason to complain about persistent reporters.
A few observations about the Walk of Silence; harassment when you're walking to your car at midnight with people pointing phones in your face doesn't reflect well on the press; Corbyn needs to develop strategies for dealing with the press- he obviously is unprepared for the trials and tribulations of leadership, including this type of invasive intrusion into his life.
At the outset of the leadership election, the press went for the wrong man- Chukka, and left Jeremy alone thinking he was some hopeless non runner. Perhaps, if Corbyn had been subjected Corbyn to the same press barrage that Chukka was exposed to at the start, he would have run a mile too.
Joe Murphy So that's the ;leader, the shadow chancellor and the shad foreign sec who have all pulled out of i/vs today. #chaos https://t.co/9uNFNuxi5r
I've just watched the Walk of Silence (couldn't get it to load before). I've never seen anything so extraordinary.
Obviously planned in advance. Obviously the young man who met him was primed to behave similarly.
My initial reaction is: just who is pulling the strings behind the scenes?
A small point, but I think the reporter should have addressed him as Mr Corbyn. Consistently talking to him as "Jeremy" was disrespectful both to Corbyn himself and also to the official office he now holds. Cameron would not have been addressed as "David".
The actual shadow cabinet doesn't have a majority of women: it's 13 each. Only if you include the 5 people "also attending cabinet" do you get a female majority since the 5 people in that category are split 3 women, 2 men.
A few observations about the Walk of Silence; harassment when you're walking to your car at midnight with people pointing phones in your face doesn't reflect well on the press; Corbyn needs to develop strategies for dealing with the press- he obviously is unprepared for the trials and tribulations of leadership, including this type of invasive intrusion into his life.
At the outset of the leadership election, the press went for the wrong man- Chukka, and left Jeremy alone thinking he was some hopeless non runner. Perhaps, if Corbyn had been subjected Corbyn to the same press barrage that Chukka was exposed to at the start, he would have run a mile too.
Joe Murphy So that's the ;leader, the shadow chancellor and the shad foreign sec who have all pulled out of i/vs today. #chaos https://t.co/9uNFNuxi5r
I've just watched the Walk of Silence (couldn't get it to load before). I've never seen anything so extraordinary.
Obviously planned in advance. Obviously the young man who met him was primed to behave similarly.
My initial reaction is: just who is pulling the strings behind the scenes?
A small point, but I think the reporter should have addressed him as Mr Corbyn. Consistently talking to him as "Jeremy" was disrespectful both to Corbyn himself and also to the official office he now holds. Cameron would not have been addressed as "David".
A few observations about the Walk of Silence; harassment when you're walking to your car at midnight with people pointing phones in your face doesn't reflect well on the press; Corbyn needs to develop strategies for dealing with the press- he obviously is unprepared for the trials and tribulations of leadership, including this type of invasive intrusion into his life.
At the outset of the leadership election, the press went for the wrong man- Chukka, and left Jeremy alone thinking he was some hopeless non runner. Perhaps, if Corbyn had been subjected Corbyn to the same press barrage that Chukka was exposed to at the start, he would have run a mile too.
Joe Murphy So that's the ;leader, the shadow chancellor and the shad foreign sec who have all pulled out of i/vs today. #chaos https://t.co/9uNFNuxi5r
I've just watched the Walk of Silence (couldn't get it to load before). I've never seen anything so extraordinary.
Obviously planned in advance. Obviously the young man who met him was primed to behave similarly.
My initial reaction is: just who is pulling the strings behind the scenes?
A small point, but I think the reporter should have addressed him as Mr Corbyn. Consistently talking to him as "Jeremy" was disrespectful both to Corbyn himself and also to the official office he now holds. Cameron would not have been addressed as "David".
I do like Javid's urbane welcome: "He started by congratulating Corbyn on his election. He said he and Corbyn had two things in common. First, they would never be seen eating a bacon sandwich. And, second, they both went into politics to improve the lives of their constituents."
I thought Javid claimed to no longer being a practicing Muslim. Is he practicing again?
I do like Javid's urbane welcome: "He started by congratulating Corbyn on his election. He said he and Corbyn had two things in common. First, they would never be seen eating a bacon sandwich. And, second, they both went into politics to improve the lives of their constituents."
Someone said yesterday that Javid wasn't a practising Muslim. Maybe he's just a vegetarian.
A lot of the comments here are too melodramatic IMO - he certainly polarises us politics nerds, but lots of people are simply reserving judgment till they see a bit more
Of course, but the politics nerds know what is going to happen. Anyway it's a bit disingenuous to talk of 'the comments here', it's the comments by the most experienced Labour politicians which are the real indicator.
Cyclefree that's a really thoughtful and well-expressed post. I hope responses are equally considerate.
In truth, and not playing here (which I am a tiny touch today), there are evils on both, or rather, all, sides in the Middle East. I don't exempt Israel from that but neither do I exempt some of the others. Where I agree with Corbyn, and passionately disagree with Cameron, is that the only solution is to bring together as many moderate voices as possible into an agreement. What we must NOT do is yet more bombing.
If 40 years ago you'd have suggested the same approach to Northern Ireland you'd have been accused of being a threat to national security.
I do like Javid's urbane welcome: "He started by congratulating Corbyn on his election. He said he and Corbyn had two things in common. First, they would never be seen eating a bacon sandwich. And, second, they both went into politics to improve the lives of their constituents."
I thought Javid claimed to no longer being a practicing Muslim. Is he practicing again?
I'm not a practising Muslim, but I don't eat bacon.
Mostly down to the fact it would upset my Mum and Dad.
Anybody who uses the term 'Zionist' reveals more about themselves than any point they are trying to make.
I don't think louise mensch was far off the mark when she suggested people with a hatred for zionists or call themself anti-zionist have an underlying aura of anti-semitism.
So you can't criticise Israel and pro-Israeli American/British foreign policy despite repeated serial human rights atrocities? Tsk.
Of course you can. And plenty of us do.
I'm probably wasting time here but let me try anyway.
Not all criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic and it is wrong to claim that it is or to claim that one must not criticise Israel in general or particular Israeli governments in particular because to do so would be anti-Semitic. That is an attempt to shut down debate. Just because Jews have been the victims of the worst case of genocide we have known and repeated attacks over centuries does not mean that they are immune from bad behaviour themselves. Being a victim does not imbue one with some sort of automatic moral superiority.
Equally, it is also the case that there are people who are anti-Semitic and who mask this by claiming to be anti-Zionist and use the anti-Zionist label in order to make anti-Semitic attacks on Israel and on Jews. The Zionist label has been a gift to such people. And it is one reason why people are sensitive to the use of such a term.
There is also something quite troubling and disturbing about the viciousness with which Jews ae attacked for somehow betraying the moral superiority they are meant to have as a result of being victims, almost as if they are being attacked for being victims.
There are others who, while being hyper-sensitive to the perception which some minority groups have to statements made about them which may be seen to be stereotypical or too broad brush or offensive or just plain insensitive, seem surprisingly insensitive to the perception which Jews have of how they are described even though they are good historical reasons why Jews would be sensitive to the portrayal of them in the media and by politicians.
And now I await the bucketloads of abuse which will surely be the fate of anyone treading on such delicate ground.
I think you would be a clear contender for Poster of the Year; it's always a pleasure to read your very lucid posts. DavidL is another who makes me ashamed of my own poor writing skills.
Aside from the obvious by-election losses that could bring down Cameron before 2020: remember, it may only take 5 losses to fell him, there's another possibility.
Suppose Corbyn does campaign for NO together with a sizeable chunk of the new Corbynistas. Allied with UKIP and the Tory eurosceptics this makes the NO vote suddenly a very attractive betting option.
It also makes for another route whereby Cameron could be forced out. Can you imagine him campaigning to stay in, losing the vote and staying on?
Corbyn campaigning to leave might cause more problems for the Labour Party than it would for Cameron and the Conservatives. Far more Labour MPs and supporters are wedded to the European project than Conservative MPs.
I mean, it might even force thoroughly pro-EU Nick to divert from the party line. Or, given his recent behaviour, perhaps not ...
No, I agree with that except that for Corbyn it's not a do or die issue for him and his party. It's not him that has stuck his neck on the block over a European vote. If Corbyn's true to his word, that people can say what the hell they like (wtf?!! Yay!) then it won't matter to Labour. Those who want to campaign No can, those who don't, won't. But for Cameron, losing the vote would mean stepping down I think?
Yes, Cameron would in all probability go. However, I ask again so what? It will not cause the government to fall. If cameron resigns a few months earlier than he planned and does so in circumstances that he would not have wished, what actually changes?
@SouthamObserver - He might last longer than you expect, because he'll have people around him - McDonnell, Meacher, Abott, Ken Livingstone, and most important Len McCluskey - who will be telling him that he got a huge mandate (which is true enough), and that all the criticism is just unfair attacks from capitalists, Zionists, racists, Tories, big business, neo-cons, the Murdoch press, the Daily Mail, and, lowest of all low-life, Blairites.
I think that he really does believe that the nutty causes he espouses do in fact amount to a great popular movement which the aforementioned elite vested interests have oppressed, and he'll try to connect with this non-existent popular movement. He'll even get some superficial support from rallies and Twitter which will convince him that it's for real. Why wouldn't he believe this? He's believed it all his life, but only now has a chance to do anything about it.
I am not sure it will be up to them though. He did not get most of his vote from the hard left, he got it from the grief stricken and the angry. People like Nick Palmer who, in the end, do actually want a Labour government. They'll put on a brave face for a while as Jezza combusts, but it will not last. He has already started to lose some of them with his appointments - McDonnell and the lack of women.
Aside from the obvious by-election losses that could bring down Cameron before 2020: remember, it may only take 5 losses to fell him, there's another possibility.
Suppose Corbyn does campaign for NO together with a sizeable chunk of the new Corbynistas. Allied with UKIP and the Tory eurosceptics this makes the NO vote suddenly a very attractive betting option.
It also makes for another route whereby Cameron could be forced out. Can you imagine him campaigning to stay in, losing the vote and staying on?
Corbyn campaigning to leave might cause more problems for the Labour Party than it would for Cameron and the Conservatives. Far more Labour MPs and supporters are wedded to the European project than Conservative MPs.
I mean, it might even force thoroughly pro-EU Nick to divert from the party line. Or, given his recent behaviour, perhaps not ...
No, I agree with that except that for Corbyn it's not a do or die issue for him and his party. It's not him that has stuck his neck on the block over a European vote. If Corbyn's true to his word, that people can say what the hell they like (wtf?!! Yay!) then it won't matter to Labour. Those who want to campaign No can, those who don't, won't. But for Cameron, losing the vote would mean stepping down I think?
I think you're underestimating the affection within Labour, and particularly the PLP, for Europe.
As for Cameron: I can see why some on the left might have wet dreams over Cameron resigning over a lost EU referendum, but it might not happen - it would depend on how it is played. And as I said the other day, there's always the chance that Cameron recommends a 'leave' vote.
The only parties not particularly endangered by the referendum are the Lib Dems - who are consistently for staying in - and the SNP. There are dragons awaiting everyone else.
Comments
It's the sort of thing that's relatively easy to implement on a new line, but an order of magnitude more complex and expensive to retrofit to existing lines and trains.
For anybody else who might be interested, it covers the EU-mandated way forwards for railway signalling and operations, with basic aims to allow interoperabilty between countries and (eventually) increase capacity:
http://www.railengineer.uk/2015/08/28/ertms-a-reality-check/
A European project too far?
Thanks for the amendment.
With respect Mr TSE Mr Murdoch's company did not do what JEO said they did.
There is surely a huge difference between tap and hack and that post is potentially defamatory.
Thanks TSE for clearing things up.
This means ERTMS Level 3's only achievement so far is to reduce passenger services ...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/11863004/Australian-PM-Tony-Abbott-faces-challenge-from-Malcolm-Turnbull-for-party-leadership.html
Suppose Corbyn does campaign for NO together with a sizeable chunk of the new Corbynistas. Allied with UKIP and the Tory eurosceptics this makes the NO vote suddenly a very attractive betting option.
It also makes for another route whereby Cameron could be forced out. Can you imagine him campaigning to stay in, losing the vote and staying on?
Luxury!
Wen Ah weralad wid tek off in a plane wi no wings flah tu't moon 'n back un crash on ter'top o'mount Everist 'n then affert run alt way wom wi'a sherpa van on y'back o'er brok'n glass wi no'but a fruit pastel 'un a slice o'yerown liver f'dinner.
Here is Labour MP Simon Danczuk talking about how he may not vote with his party in the future. He was a strong supporter of Liz Kendall and has been very critical of Jeremy Corbyn.
Prominent Labour MP warns Corbyn off "crazy left-wing policies" http://audioboom.com/boos/3568695-prominent-labour-mp-warns-corbyn-off-crazy-left-wing-policies?utm_campaign=embed&utm_content=retweet&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter via @audioBoom
'McDonnell, a radical socialist and long-time ally of Jeremy Corbyn, wants to nationalise all the banks, railways and utility companies, hike taxes on companies and increase national insurance payments by 7 per cent for anyone earning more than £50,000.'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3233993/The-overthrow-capitalism-Corbyn-s-new-shadow-chancellor-unveils-economic-plan-seizing-control-banks-energy-firms-7-tax-hike-50-000.html
An interesting and pertinent question.
Another broken promise
Sod making him PM, make him King.
Very funny
Titters
Govt majority = 16 - not my figure but per Parliament website.
http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/mps/current-state-of-the-parties/
(NB. 12 + 4 SF not take seats = 16)
It is surely certain that a deal would be done with the DUP before the Govt actually fell - especially with Lab led by Corbyn.
I doubt Carswell would vote for a GE either.
Obviously planned in advance. Obviously the young man who met him was primed to behave similarly.
My initial reaction is: just who is pulling the strings behind the scenes?
Brilliant squared.
They're clearly attempting to discredit SKY as a reputable media organisation, and paint them as a friend of the Tories. Hence the refusal by 3 Shadow Cabinet members to give interviews to them.
Just that their efforts were underminded by the weight of Tory money, manipulation of the voters by foreign mercenaries, and five years of smears from the Labour Party.
It's almost as if a campaign of disruption is being carried out.
Con 38
Lab 32
LD 8
Kippah 13
gNat 5
The last 36 hours have been a glorious clusterfook, but they really should not surprise anyone. In their grief, their despair, their anger and their desire for something different his electorate projected stuff onto Corbyn that just was not there. What is there is an out-of-touch class warrior with a selection of very dubious friends. And because of that he is not going to last. He'll also drag others like McDonnell and Abbott down with him.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next_Australian_federal_election#Poll_results
Link please.
@martinboon: @ICMResearch @guardian sept poll: @Conservatives 38% (-2) @UKLabour 32% (+1) @LibDems 8% (+1) @UKIP 13% (+3) Grn 3% (-1) SNP 5% PC 1% Oth 1%
Most websites I've seen give the majority as between 9 and 12. It's complicated because the speaker is also included in the 650.
Mind you, I think you are correct to change sides. Sajid Javid has a very good chance of being the next PM but he needs to see off the other very strong challenger, Liz Truss. Just you wait until she turns those dazzling blue eyes on you and gives you one of her knowing, half-mocking smiles. You will be like wet sauerkraut in her hands.
I'm probably wasting time here but let me try anyway.
Not all criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic and it is wrong to claim that it is or to claim that one must not criticise Israel in general or particular Israeli governments in particular because to do so would be anti-Semitic. That is an attempt to shut down debate. Just because Jews have been the victims of the worst case of genocide we have known and repeated attacks over centuries does not mean that they are immune from bad behaviour themselves. Being a victim does not imbue one with some sort of automatic moral superiority.
Equally, it is also the case that there are people who are anti-Semitic and who mask this by claiming to be anti-Zionist and use the anti-Zionist label in order to make anti-Semitic attacks on Israel and on Jews. The Zionist label has been a gift to such people. And it is one reason why people are sensitive to the use of such a term.
There is also something quite troubling and disturbing about the viciousness with which Jews ae attacked for somehow betraying the moral superiority they are meant to have as a result of being victims, almost as if they are being attacked for being victims.
There are others who, while being hyper-sensitive to the perception which some minority groups have to statements made about them which may be seen to be stereotypical or too broad brush or offensive or just plain insensitive, seem surprisingly insensitive to the perception which Jews have of how they are described even though they are good historical reasons why Jews would be sensitive to the portrayal of them in the media and by politicians.
And now I await the bucketloads of abuse which will surely be the fate of anyone treading on such delicate ground.
Cameron -33 (+1)
Sturgeon +39 (-16)
Dugdale -15
Davidson =
7-10 Sep
N=1,110
sleazy, broken Krankies on the slide.
I mean, it might even force thoroughly pro-EU Nick to divert from the party line. Or, given his recent behaviour, perhaps not ...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-northern-ireland-32650765
I think that he really does believe that the nutty causes he espouses do in fact amount to a great popular movement which the aforementioned elite vested interests have oppressed, and he'll try to connect with this non-existent popular movement. He'll even get some superficial support from rallies and Twitter which will convince him that it's for real. Why wouldn't he believe this? He's believed it all his life, but only now has a chance to do anything about it.
That cuts both ways though. If the DUP and UUP (10 altogether) are effectively on the Conservatives side against Corbyn then the majority increases to 36.
If Carswell and the Lib Dems decide not to side with Corbyn then that puts a potential anti-Corbyn majority at 54.
harassment when you're walking to your car at midnight with people pointing phones in your face doesn't reflect well on the press;
Corbyn needs to develop strategies for dealing with the press- he obviously is unprepared for the trials and tribulations of leadership, including this type of invasive intrusion into his life.
At the outset of the leadership election, the press went for the wrong man- Chukka, and left Jeremy alone thinking he was some hopeless non runner. Perhaps, if Corbyn had been subjected Corbyn to the same press barrage that Chukka was exposed to at the start, he would have run a mile too.
You had to rip into Labour for being the irresponsible Left. You would now be reaping a huge bonus for that. Continuing to try and ride two horses going in two different directions was fine when you were just on your hobby horses. Not so much when strapped to a couple of thoroughbreds....
There are 4 SF MPs - if they don't sit that increases the majority by 4.
If SF did take their seats, the majority would be 12.
As they don't, it's 16.
Re the Speaker - the Speaker doesn't vote, nor do the 3 Deputy Speakers. It is all on the official Parliament website.
Mr Corbyn's quavering voice saying - 'bothering me' - sounded so pathetic, but really, why couldn't he just make a statement to start with? If he had, he'd have had reason to complain about persistent reporters.
Who goes first: Cameron or Corbyn?
And that presumably assumes every single labour MP votes with Corbyn.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_Opposition_Shadow_Cabinet_(United_Kingdom)
Corbyn 4/6
Anyone else 11/10
Nick Boles' response a question from @wesstreeting http://t.co/aRIY3pj0Qt
In truth, and not playing here (which I am a tiny touch today), there are evils on both, or rather, all, sides in the Middle East. I don't exempt Israel from that but neither do I exempt some of the others. Where I agree with Corbyn, and passionately disagree with Cameron, is that the only solution is to bring together as many moderate voices as possible into an agreement. What we must NOT do is yet more bombing.
If 40 years ago you'd have suggested the same approach to Northern Ireland you'd have been accused of being a threat to national security.
Mostly down to the fact it would upset my Mum and Dad.
As for Cameron: I can see why some on the left might have wet dreams over Cameron resigning over a lost EU referendum, but it might not happen - it would depend on how it is played. And as I said the other day, there's always the chance that Cameron recommends a 'leave' vote.
The only parties not particularly endangered by the referendum are the Lib Dems - who are consistently for staying in - and the SNP. There are dragons awaiting everyone else.