politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Philip Hammond: worth backing at 28/1

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Philip Hammond: worth backing at 28/1

If asked for a role model, few aspiring politicians would opt for John Major. Unfashionable, uncharismatic, comprehensively battered at the 1997 election: why would they? Yet the travails of the 1992-7 parliament culminating in that electoral apocalypse overshadow what he achieved in his first 18 months:

Read the full story here

Anorak

First out of the trap...
(although it appears that anyone with a life is at the pub)

Agree with thrust of article. A quiet hand on the tiller would a good thing after the EU Ref, and would highlight the ongoing circus that is the opposition.

NickPalmer

He's a quiet, cool pair of hands - if that's what the Tories want after all the trauma, he could well be a good choice. I've no idea what his general views are, though, and doubt if many people have.

rcs1000

Check out this video that Paul Ryan has just released. It looks like he's going for it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECxH4uIswiA

FrancisUrquhart

FrankBooth said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

FrankBooth said:

rcs1000 said:

initforthemoney said:

foxinsoxuk said:

initforthemoney said:

Wanderer said:

kle4 said:

If I ever through hard work or luck, or both, become rich, I'd like to think I could waste my money on other things for ostentatious displays.

I think that's true of anything you can buy. There are diminishing returns as you pay more. But, dammit, you've got to spend your money on something.

Retiring as early as possible?

Only if you do not enjoy your job.

More than the best (set of) affordable alternative(s) to working. It's difficult to fathom how most jobs could beat that even if the best set of affordable alternatives involved living off £10k a year (for a single person).

I love working - both managing money and creating new companies. I can't see a time when I don't work because, basically, working is more fun than not working.

I suppose I ought to envy you as I've never enjoyed working at all. Still a bit puzzled by people who do.

That's a shame. Obviously for a lot of people that is true, perhaps like SeanT et al., I have been lucky in life to find things that I have genuinely enjoyed doing and willing to put 100hrs a week into (although without the sort of reward or recognition of being an international best seller).

100 hrs a week? Wow. What do you do?

I have a number of business interests that keep me very busy and I enjoy exploring new opportunities that pique my interest. Hence why I am on the net on a Friday night looking some stuff up (and keeping up with the wine willy waving on PB).

I do try and take a month off a year to compensate for the really long working weeks.

Anorak

rcs1000 said:

Check out this video that Paul Ryan has just released. It looks like he's going for it.

I now view everything I see in US politics through the lens of House of Cards. Cynical, huh.

Yeah, I know, it's fiction. I just can't help feel it's closer to the truth than most fiction. Murders excepted.

FrancisUrquhart

Anorak said:

rcs1000 said:

Check out this video that Paul Ryan has just released. It looks like he's going for it.

I now view everything I see in US politics through the lens of House of Cards. Cynical, huh.

Yeah, I know, it's fiction. I just can't help feel it's closer to the truth than most fiction. Murders excepted.

If you listen to conspiracy theory nuts on the internet e.g Alex Jones you can't exclude the murders ;-)

AlastairMeeks

I wouldn't bet against him. As David Herdson rightly says, many leaders get elected for who they are not, not who they are.

But he stands behind Theresa May in the "safe pair of hands" box. I'm not sure how he gets past her.

DavidL

Nah. Just too dull and uninspired.

Richard_Nabavi

AlastairMeeks said:

I wouldn't bet against him. As David Herdson rightly says, many leaders get elected for who they are not, not who they are.

But he stands behind Theresa May in the "safe pair of hands" box. I'm not sure how he gets past her.

I was just about to make exactly the same point.

Anorak

FrancisUrquhart said:

Anorak said:

rcs1000 said:

Check out this video that Paul Ryan has just released. It looks like he's going for it.

I now view everything I see in US politics through the lens of House of Cards. Cynical, huh.

Yeah, I know, it's fiction. I just can't help feel it's closer to the truth than most fiction. Murders excepted.

If you listen to conspiracy theory nuts on the internet e.g Alex Jones you can't exclude the murders ;-)

The internet is responsible for a great many evils, but corralling the lunatics into little, self-contained, self-reinforcing echo chambers is not one of them. Even those who escape usually do so temporarily, witness The Tap's vanishing, and the long Hunchman absences. Although they were probably abducted by aliens, come to think of it. And mercilessly probed.

DavidL

rcs1000 said:

Check out this video that Paul Ryan has just released. It looks like he's going for it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECxH4uIswiA

It does doesn't it? But the days when candidates were asked nicely to take on the burden are long past. I can't see a way for him now.

Anorak

Richard_Nabavi said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I wouldn't bet against him. As David Herdson rightly says, many leaders get elected for who they are not, not who they are.

But he stands behind Theresa May in the "safe pair of hands" box. I'm not sure how he gets past her.

I was just about to make exactly the same point.

May has more obviously, and publicly taken sides. That might be enough, if it came to a two-horse race.

kle4

I'd prefer dull to a maverick who crashes and burns, but I suppose I should hope for the best and that one of the more likely candidates proves up to the task should Leave win and Cameron is out this summer. If Remain wins or he someone manages to last the year if Leave win, and Cameron's time is clearly being cut a lot shorter than he intends (that is, around 2017ish), then the longer Cameron can drag it out the better for the candidates who are not chomping at the bit, more time for the others to trip up.

FrankBooth

NickPalmer said:

He's a quiet, cool pair of hands - if that's what the Tories want after all the trauma, he could well be a good choice. I've no idea what his general views are, though, and doubt if many people have.

People forget that Tory leaders have a tendency to emerge rather than be an established figure. There doesn't really seem to be anyone waiting in the wings though. I did earlier today suggest a bet on Ed Miliband as next Labour leader at 150/1. Sounds crazy I know but no-one else is really staking a claim right now. A lot of faith has been put in Dan Jarvis but he's hardly been high profile.

david_herdson

DavidL said:

rcs1000 said:

Check out this video that Paul Ryan has just released. It looks like he's going for it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECxH4uIswiA

It does doesn't it? But the days when candidates were asked nicely to take on the burden are long past. I can't see a way for him now.

Strikes me that it's early positioning for 2020.

Anorak

http://www.salon.com/2016/04/08/go_ahead_republicans_nominate_paul_ryan_why_this_brokered_convention_scheme_is_doomed_to_fail_spectacularly/

Some valid points.

kle4

rcs1000 said:

Check out this video that Paul Ryan has just released. It looks like he's going for it.

htps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECxH4uIswiA

It's a decent sentiment he expresses, although I don't believe a word of it. People often decry identity politics and the like, and then leap straight to it in the next breath, either because they were being disingenuous, or that's what their supporters like.

david_herdson

AlastairMeeks said:

I wouldn't bet against him. As David Herdson rightly says, many leaders get elected for who they are not, not who they are.

But he stands behind Theresa May in the "safe pair of hands" box. I'm not sure how he gets past her.

May has a problem with immigration. Also, Hammond is 28/1 whereas the best odds on May are just 8/1. Is she three times as likely a winner?

DavidL

Hammond has not been a particularly good Foreign Secretary. He tidied up a bit of a mess in defence without inspiring there either. He has been invisible on the renegotiation with the EU, a bit player in Syria and in respect of refugees. What has he done to make him a player at all?

Richard_Nabavi

FPT (as it's my specialist subject!)

SeanT said:

What we're disputing is that, of the wines discussed tonight, Chateau Mouton-Rothschild 45 is literally 1000 times better than a bottle of Jacob's Creek, which is what the price difference implies.

Clearly it isn't. It's about ten times nicer, at most. Which is why you shouldn't pay more than £50 for a bottle of wine.

This is wrong, or at least incomplete. You can't divorce the question of worth from the question of who is paying. If you can hardly afford any bottle of wine, then even if you're a bit of a wine buff you might question whether one evening of bliss outweighs three years of decent but not very distinguished stuff.

Conversely, if you're wealthy enough, the Jacob's Creek is worth nothing to you, in the sense that you are paying for pleasure, and it adds nothing.

Personally, I'm by no means mega rich but I have a modest cellar, adequate for my needs. If it came to the choice of which would most enhance my pleasure, it would be the one bottle of Mouton Rothschild rather than 1000 of Jacob's Creek. Why would I want 1000 bottles of stuff which is not as good as what I drink every day?

This is not to say Jacob's Creek is bad; it's not (although you can do better even at that price).

david_herdson

FrankBooth said:

NickPalmer said:

He's a quiet, cool pair of hands - if that's what the Tories want after all the trauma, he could well be a good choice. I've no idea what his general views are, though, and doubt if many people have.

People forget that Tory leaders have a tendency to emerge rather than be an established figure. There doesn't really seem to be anyone waiting in the wings though. I did earlier today suggest a bet on Ed Miliband as next Labour leader at 150/1. Sounds crazy I know but no-one else is really staking a claim right now. A lot of faith has been put in Dan Jarvis but he's hardly been high profile.

If we're looking at a change in 2018/19, that may well be the case. However, there's a decent chance that it'll be this summer, in which case there's no time for anyone to emerge.

TheScreamingEagles

I did back him a few years ago at 33/1.

I suspect his backing of Remain and his position as Foreign Secretary who backed Remain during the referendum are going to pee off those Tory MPs who consider anyone backing Remain as Traitorous Pig Dogs and bugger up his chances.

But 28/1 is still value.

kle4

DavidL said:

He has been invisible on the renegotiation with the EU, a bit player in Syria and in respect of refugees. What has he done to make him a player at all?

Being invisible. The way the Tories look like they are gearing up to tear chunks off each other, aiming to be the last man standing might be his strategy. Unlikely to succeed, but lacking much else to go with, it's a plan.

staceyj

The author is trying to be clever and "think outside the box" . 28-1 is very poor value . He should be a 150-1 shot really . There can only be 1 remainer on the ballot of 2, highly unlikely to be hammo . He has no power base amongst the membership or the Parliamentary party

FrankBooth

Is Ryan actually as extreme a candidate as Trump in his way. You'd get former establishment republicans like David Frum denouncing the infamous 'Ryan Plan' as draconian.

FrancisUrquhart

Well if the Tories need a boring steady as she goes candidate, Hammond's your man. He is also incredibly intelligent, has real world success, a self made millionaire and very considered in his opinions. TBH he really should be CoE, the country would be far better having him than Gordon Brown distant cousin Osborne.

However, I doubt he is or would be very popular with the public.

Sunil_Prasannan

Hammond? May?

More of a Clarkson person myself!


BTW good to meet Mike and a good few other PBers at the Shooting Star tonight.
Thanks again go to Fat Steve for organising things.

FrancisUrquhart

Oh wow, Bryson DeChambeau now joint 2nd in the Masters. A man determined to shatter the conventional wisdom when it comes to golf clubs.

Richard_Nabavi

TheScreamingEagles said:

I suspect his backing of Remain and his position as Foreign Secretary who backed Remain during the referendum are going to pee off those Tory MPs who consider anyone backing Remain as Traitorous Pig Dogs and bugger up his chances.

Are there any such MPs? I don't think so, other perhaps than the handful of usual suspects. In any case, the candidate only needs to get more than one third of the votes.

kle4

staceyj said:

The author is trying to be clever and "think outside the box" . 28-1 is very poor value . He should be a 150-1 shot really . There can only be 1 remainer on the ballot of 2, highly unlikely to be hammo . He has no power base amongst the membership or the Parliamentary party

Given the most likely chance of a leadership contest arises from a Leave win, will there even be space for 1 Remainer on the ballot of 2 do you think? Mr Herdson suggests his low profile may save him, but I have my doubts on that.

TheScreamingEagles

The Archbishop of Canterbury has discovered he is the illegitimate son of Sir Winston Churchill’s last private secretary after taking a DNA test to prove his paternity, The Telegraph can disclose.

The Most Reverend Justin Welby had until now believed his father to be Gavin Welby, a whisky salesman and son of a Jewish immigrant, who was married briefly to his mother, Jane.


But the Telegraph pieced together evidence that suggested Archbishop Welby’s father was actually the late Sir Anthony Montague Browne, who served Churchill in Downing Street and during his retirement.

After this newspaper discussed its research with the Archbishop, he decided to take a DNA test to settle the matter. His mouth swabs were compared with hair samples from Sir Anthony and showed a 99.9779 per cent probability that they were father and son.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/08/justin-welby-dna-test-reveals-my-secret-father-was-sir-winston-c/

FrancisUrquhart

TheScreamingEagles said:

The Archbishop of Canterbury has discovered he is the illegitimate son of Sir Winston Churchill’s last private secretary after taking a DNA test to prove his paternity, The Telegraph can disclose.

The Most Reverend Justin Welby had until now believed his father to be Gavin Welby, a whisky salesman and son of a Jewish immigrant, who was married briefly to his mother, Jane.


But the Telegraph pieced together evidence that suggested Archbishop Welby’s father was actually the late Sir Anthony Montague Browne, who served Churchill in Downing Street and during his retirement.

After this newspaper discussed its research with the Archbishop, he decided to take a DNA test to settle the matter. His mouth swabs were compared with hair samples from Sir Anthony and showed a 99.9779 per cent probability that they were father and son.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/08/justin-welby-dna-test-reveals-my-secret-father-was-sir-winston-c/

And not a super injunction in sight ;-)

TheScreamingEagles

Richard_Nabavi said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I suspect his backing of Remain and his position as Foreign Secretary who backed Remain during the referendum are going to pee off those Tory MPs who consider anyone backing Remain as Traitorous Pig Dogs and bugger up his chances.

Are there any such MPs? I don't think so, other perhaps than the handful of usual suspects. In any case, the candidate only needs to get more than one third of the votes.

What they lack in number they make up in fervour and noise. They could damage him with Tory members who have the ultimate say on our next Leader

foxinsoxuk

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

He has been invisible on the renegotiation with the EU, a bit player in Syria and in respect of refugees. What has he done to make him a player at all?

Being invisible. The way the Tories look like they are gearing up to tear chunks off each other, aiming to be the last man standing might be his strategy. Unlikely to succeed, but lacking much else to go with, it's a plan.

He is, as the header suggests, the John Major Compromise candidate.

I have him backed quite well.

He also has the advantage of being older,:so a legitimate transition to the next generation.

May is awful, with no redeeming features whatsoever.

initforthemoney

rcs1000 said:

I was given some advice at 20 that rings true today: remember that you will spend a lot more time working than you ever will with your family or friends. So make sure that you enjoy what you do.

I'm doing my best to prove that supposed truism false!

FrancisUrquhart

foxinsoxuk said:

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

He has been invisible on the renegotiation with the EU, a bit player in Syria and in respect of refugees. What has he done to make him a player at all?

Being invisible. The way the Tories look like they are gearing up to tear chunks off each other, aiming to be the last man standing might be his strategy. Unlikely to succeed, but lacking much else to go with, it's a plan.

He is, as the header suggests, the John Major Compromise candidate.

I have him backed quite well.

He also has the advantage of being older,:so a legitimate transition to the next generation.

May is awful, with no redeeming features whatsoever.

I would be even more shocked than Major / Currie if Hammond is ever found to have been bonking another minister.

initforthemoney

FPT

rcs1000 said:

I love working - both managing money and creating new companies. I can't see a time when I don't work because, basically, working is more fun than not working.

I can't relate to this, but it appears rational. Being your own boss (which it sounds like you might be) certainly makes work more tolerable. Although I've made a modest living from gambling for more than a decade (only dabbling in politics), I'm very risk averse. The risk presumably inherent in creating new businesses seems to make for far more stressful activity than all of the more or less free leisure options in front of me.

TheScreamingEagles

I still think Michael Fallon can be the John Major de nos jour

gettingbetter

david_herdson said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I wouldn't bet against him. As David Herdson rightly says, many leaders get elected for who they are not, not who they are.

But he stands behind Theresa May in the "safe pair of hands" box. I'm not sure how he gets past her.

May has a problem with immigration. Also, Hammond is 28/1 whereas the best odds on May are just 8/1. Is she three times as likely a winner?

Indeed immigration policy has been applied cruelly and harshly with over pedantic aplication of the rules hurting families and causing unnecessary stress. All because of a stupid commitment to reduce the numbers when it is as impossible to control the net migration to the UK as it is impossible to control ol the net migration to Lincolnshire. It's not the general rules themselves that I object to but the cruel and inflexible way in which they are often applied.

kle4

TheScreamingEagles said:

The Archbishop of Canterbury has discovered he is the illegitimate son of Sir Winston Churchill’s last private secretary after taking a DNA test to prove his paternity, The Telegraph can disclose.

The Most Reverend Justin Welby had until now believed his father to be Gavin Welby, a whisky salesman and son of a Jewish immigrant, who was married briefly to his mother, Jane.


But the Telegraph pieced together evidence that suggested Archbishop Welby’s father was actually the late Sir Anthony Montague Browne, who served Churchill in Downing Street and during his retirement.

After this newspaper discussed its research with the Archbishop, he decided to take a DNA test to settle the matter. His mouth swabs were compared with hair samples from Sir Anthony and showed a 99.9779 per cent probability that they were father and son.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/08/justin-welby-dna-test-reveals-my-secret-father-was-sir-winston-c/

The discovery gave Lambeth Palace cause to check canon law, as men born illegitimately were for centuries barred from becoming archbishops. A little-known change in the law dating to the Fifties removed that bar, leaving Archbishop Welby safe in his post.

I am curious as to why they felt the need to make that change at the time - it's the sort of thing I'd think the Church would not expect to come up, and so even if no one minded making the change it would not get around to being made.

Richard_Nabavi

TheScreamingEagles said:

What they lack in number they make up in fervour and noise. They could damage him with Tory members who have the ultimate say on our next Leader

It would depend on the other candidate.

Hammond vs Boris: Hammond

TheScreamingEagles

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The Archbishop of Canterbury has discovered he is the illegitimate son of Sir Winston Churchill’s last private secretary after taking a DNA test to prove his paternity, The Telegraph can disclose.

The Most Reverend Justin Welby had until now believed his father to be Gavin Welby, a whisky salesman and son of a Jewish immigrant, who was married briefly to his mother, Jane.


But the Telegraph pieced together evidence that suggested Archbishop Welby’s father was actually the late Sir Anthony Montague Browne, who served Churchill in Downing Street and during his retirement.

After this newspaper discussed its research with the Archbishop, he decided to take a DNA test to settle the matter. His mouth swabs were compared with hair samples from Sir Anthony and showed a 99.9779 per cent probability that they were father and son.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/08/justin-welby-dna-test-reveals-my-secret-father-was-sir-winston-c/

The discovery gave Lambeth Palace cause to check canon law, as men born illegitimately were for centuries barred from becoming archbishops. A little-known change in the law dating to the Fifties removed that bar, leaving Archbishop Welby safe in his post.

I am curious as to why they felt the need to make that change at the time - it's the sort of thing I'd think the Church would not expect to come up, and so even if no one minded making the change it would not get around to being made.

War babies from oversexed Americans. Plus with men away there were more affairs conducted than usual.

TheScreamingEagles

Richard_Nabavi said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

What they lack in number they make up in fervour and noise. They could damage him with Tory members who have the ultimate say on our next Leader

It would depend on the other candidate.

Hammond vs Boris: Hammond

I've asked Shadsy to put up a market on will Boris make the final two.

I will be backing No on that market.

FrancisUrquhart

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/718553629704220672

Richard_Nabavi

TheScreamingEagles said:

War babies from oversexed Americans. Plus with men away there were more affairs conducted than usual.

Yebbut surely they could source an Archbish without having to resort to changing the rules?

kle4

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The Archbishop of Canterbury has discovered he is the illegitimate son of Sir Winston Churchill’s last private secretary after taking a DNA test to prove his paternity, The Telegraph can disclose.

The Most Reverend Justin Welby had until now believed his father to be Gavin Welby, a whisky salesman and son of a Jewish immigrant, who was married briefly to his mother, Jane.


But the Telegraph pieced together evidence that suggested Archbishop Welby’s father was actually the late Sir Anthony Montague Browne, who served Churchill in Downing Street and during his retirement.

After this newspaper discussed its research with the Archbishop, he decided to take a DNA test to settle the matter. His mouth swabs were compared with hair samples from Sir Anthony and showed a 99.9779 per cent probability that they were father and son.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/08/justin-welby-dna-test-reveals-my-secret-father-was-sir-winston-c/

The discovery gave Lambeth Palace cause to check canon law, as men born illegitimately were for centuries barred from becoming archbishops. A little-known change in the law dating to the Fifties removed that bar, leaving Archbishop Welby safe in his post.

I am curious as to why they felt the need to make that change at the time - it's the sort of thing I'd think the Church would not expect to come up, and so even if no one minded making the change it would not get around to being made.

War babies from oversexed Americans. Plus with men away there were more affairs conducted than usual.

More bastards maybe, but the 1950s Church was forward thinking enough to know they might want to appoint a bastard as Archbishop?

kle4

On illegitimacy, what's the ruling if, say, you were conceived when your parents were married, but they had divorced before your birth? Or divorced, and later had a liaison which conceived you?

Come to that, I don't actually know a lot of the rules on this issue - I assume it's based off when you are born, not conceived, hence quickfire weddings - and I seem to recall the Church in ancient ages past getting a lot of nobles annoyed by declaring certain levels of distant cousinship marriages and the births thereof as illegitimate.

Given that the archbishop has no reason to be upset, so he says, I therefore appreciate this story making a break from the rather less fun stories otherwise out there.

RobD

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The Archbishop of Canterbury has discovered he is the illegitimate son of Sir Winston Churchill’s last private secretary after taking a DNA test to prove his paternity, The Telegraph can disclose.

The Most Reverend Justin Welby had until now believed his father to be Gavin Welby, a whisky salesman and son of a Jewish immigrant, who was married briefly to his mother, Jane.


But the Telegraph pieced together evidence that suggested Archbishop Welby’s father was actually the late Sir Anthony Montague Browne, who served Churchill in Downing Street and during his retirement.

After this newspaper discussed its research with the Archbishop, he decided to take a DNA test to settle the matter. His mouth swabs were compared with hair samples from Sir Anthony and showed a 99.9779 per cent probability that they were father and son.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/08/justin-welby-dna-test-reveals-my-secret-father-was-sir-winston-c/

The discovery gave Lambeth Palace cause to check canon law, as men born illegitimately were for centuries barred from becoming archbishops. A little-known change in the law dating to the Fifties removed that bar, leaving Archbishop Welby safe in his post.

I am curious as to why they felt the need to make that change at the time - it's the sort of thing I'd think the Church would not expect to come up, and so even if no one minded making the change it would not get around to being made.

War babies from oversexed Americans. Plus with men away there were more affairs conducted than usual.

More bastards maybe, but the 1950s Church was forward thinking enough to know they might want to appoint a bastard as Archbishop?

The worry may have been they might accidentally appoint one. As happened

MyBurningEars

initforthemoney said:

rcs1000 said:

I was given some advice at 20 that rings true today: remember that you will spend a lot more time working than you ever will with your family or friends. So make sure that you enjoy what you do.

I'm doing my best to prove that supposed truism false!

It's clearly not something that is certainly true - a small number of folk retire by 40, and plenty more by 50, and they clearly will spend more time with family, friends or solitary hobbies than they do at work (over the course of a lifetime, anyhow).

I think the moral might well be "if you hate what you do, pour cash into the retirement fund pronto".

MyBurningEars

Incidentally @initforthemoney (hello, by the way, not sure we have crossed paths on here before) you sound very much like a fan of Mr Money Mustache. Has his fanclub crossed the Atlantic?

TheScreamingEagles

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The Archbishop of Canterbury has discovered he is the illegitimate son of Sir Winston Churchill’s last private secretary after taking a DNA test to prove his paternity, The Telegraph can disclose.

The Most Reverend Justin Welby had until now believed his father to be Gavin Welby, a whisky salesman and son of a Jewish immigrant, who was married briefly to his mother, Jane.


But the Telegraph pieced together evidence that suggested Archbishop Welby’s father was actually the late Sir Anthony Montague Browne, who served Churchill in Downing Street and during his retirement.

After this newspaper discussed its research with the Archbishop, he decided to take a DNA test to settle the matter. His mouth swabs were compared with hair samples from Sir Anthony and showed a 99.9779 per cent probability that they were father and son.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/08/justin-welby-dna-test-reveals-my-secret-father-was-sir-winston-c/

The discovery gave Lambeth Palace cause to check canon law, as men born illegitimately were for centuries barred from becoming archbishops. A little-known change in the law dating to the Fifties removed that bar, leaving Archbishop Welby safe in his post.

I am curious as to why they felt the need to make that change at the time - it's the sort of thing I'd think the Church would not expect to come up, and so even if no one minded making the change it would not get around to being made.

War babies from oversexed Americans. Plus with men away there were more affairs conducted than usual.

More bastards maybe, but the 1950s Church was forward thinking enough to know they might want to appoint a bastard as Archbishop?

Yeah. In that era Lord Mountbatten and Harold MacMillan were famously cuckcolded.

david_herdson

TheScreamingEagles said:

I did back him a few years ago at 33/1.

I suspect his backing of Remain and his position as Foreign Secretary who backed Remain during the referendum are going to pee off those Tory MPs who consider anyone backing Remain as Traitorous Pig Dogs and bugger up his chances.

But 28/1 is still value.

True about the TPD faction but they're a relatively small group. Most Con MPs are supporting Remain anyway (just) and quite a lot of Leavers won't take an identity out of it. Besides, just a third of the parliamentary party is enough to guarantee a place on the ballot and it could be done with less, though at the expense of conceding a large lead.

Edit - Just seen that RichardN said all this a while ago. Ah well.

Estobar

Hammond comes over as a hard-liner right in the Nasty Party ilk but as David Herdson points out, this isn't about the public. It's about Tory MPs.

28/1 is ridiculously good value. Thanks: a very good tip.

NickPalmer

By the way, the tip the other day to back Cameron as likely to leave before Corbyn at 11-10 at William Hill was good value - still a good shot at the current 4-6.

a) He's said he's going, Corbyn's said he's not going.
b) If the referendum is lost, he'll almost certainly go at once.
c) He's now less popular than Corbyn, and clearly weaker on the central issue at the moment (whatever Corbyn's other drawbacks, nobody suspects him of having a secret fund in Panama).

I'd have thought it ought to be about 2-5, though I'm talking my book so DYOR...

perdix

david_herdson said:

AlastairMeeks said:

I wouldn't bet against him. As David Herdson rightly says, many leaders get elected for who they are not, not who they are.

But he stands behind Theresa May in the "safe pair of hands" box. I'm not sure how he gets past her.

May has a problem with immigration. Also, Hammond is 28/1 whereas the best odds on May are just 8/1. Is she three times as likely a winner?

If May could convince that she would boost the budget for border controls and would repeal the HRA she would be a strong candidate.

justin124

It must be a bit of a blow to Justin Welby to have discovered that his mother was a fornicating tart - premarital sex was not the norm in the 1950s!

Sunil_Prasannan

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The Archbishop of Canterbury has discovered he is the illegitimate son of Sir Winston Churchill’s last private secretary after taking a DNA test to prove his paternity, The Telegraph can disclose.

The Most Reverend Justin Welby had until now believed his father to be Gavin Welby, a whisky salesman and son of a Jewish immigrant, who was married briefly to his mother, Jane.


But the Telegraph pieced together evidence that suggested Archbishop Welby’s father was actually the late Sir Anthony Montague Browne, who served Churchill in Downing Street and during his retirement.

After this newspaper discussed its research with the Archbishop, he decided to take a DNA test to settle the matter. His mouth swabs were compared with hair samples from Sir Anthony and showed a 99.9779 per cent probability that they were father and son.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/08/justin-welby-dna-test-reveals-my-secret-father-was-sir-winston-c/

The discovery gave Lambeth Palace cause to check canon law, as men born illegitimately were for centuries barred from becoming archbishops. A little-known change in the law dating to the Fifties removed that bar, leaving Archbishop Welby safe in his post.

I am curious as to why they felt the need to make that change at the time - it's the sort of thing I'd think the Church would not expect to come up, and so even if no one minded making the change it would not get around to being made.

War babies from oversexed Americans. Plus with men away there were more affairs conducted than usual.

More bastards maybe, but the 1950s Church was forward thinking enough to know they might want to appoint a bastard as Archbishop?

Yeah. In that era Lord Mountbatten and Harold MacMillan were famously cuckcolded.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/09/25/article-1216186-0696884D000005DC-200_468x552.jpg

Sunil_Prasannan

justin124 said:

It must be a bit of a blow to Justin Welby to have discovered that his mother was a fornicating tart -

More lefty misogyny!

justin124

Sunil_Prasannan said:

justin124 said:

It must be a bit of a blow to Justin Welby to have discovered that his mother was a fornicating tart -

More lefty misogyny!

Not really - it was not socially acceptable for blokes to behave like that in the 1950s!

CarlottaVance

WARRING Tory ministers paused hostilities in the Brexit battle to rally round David Cameron over his tax troubles.

Eurosceptic ministers Chris Grayling, Dominic Raab, Priti Patel and Julian Brazier all rallied round the PM amid an increasingly hysterical reaction from Labour – including calls for him to go jail.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/7061001/Tories-put-their-bitter-Brexit-spats-to-one-side-to-defend-Cameron-from-Labour-attacks.html

CarlottaVance

On topic - as other have observed, Theresa May is the 'safe pair of hands' candidate - Hammond has pursued dullness to the point of destruction - so unless May does not want the job......Gove vs May would be interesting......

CarlottaVance

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The Archbishop of Canterbury has discovered he is the illegitimate son of Sir Winston Churchill’s last private secretary after taking a DNA test to prove his paternity, The Telegraph can disclose.

The Most Reverend Justin Welby had until now believed his father to be Gavin Welby, a whisky salesman and son of a Jewish immigrant, who was married briefly to his mother, Jane.


But the Telegraph pieced together evidence that suggested Archbishop Welby’s father was actually the late Sir Anthony Montague Browne, who served Churchill in Downing Street and during his retirement.

After this newspaper discussed its research with the Archbishop, he decided to take a DNA test to settle the matter. His mouth swabs were compared with hair samples from Sir Anthony and showed a 99.9779 per cent probability that they were father and son.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/08/justin-welby-dna-test-reveals-my-secret-father-was-sir-winston-c/

And not a super injunction in sight ;-)

The Handy Pob Bitch Guide to 'spotting the injunction':

http://popbitch.com/home/2016/03/31/up-the-injunction/

RobD

On the topic of tax avoiders, here is one who just called for the PM to go to prison:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/london-mayor-election/mayor-of-london/9136015/How-Ken-Livingstone-funnelled-238000-through-tax-avoidance-scheme.html

RobD

CarlottaVance said:

On topic - as other have observed, Theresa May is the 'safe pair of hands' candidate - Hammond has pursued dullness to the point of destruction - so unless May does not want the job......Gove vs May would be interesting......

This PB Tory is rooting for May (despite her remain leanings).

CarlottaVance

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:

On topic - as other have observed, Theresa May is the 'safe pair of hands' candidate - Hammond has pursued dullness to the point of destruction - so unless May does not want the job......Gove vs May would be interesting......

This PB Tory is rooting for May (despite her remain leanings).

I know May from University days and rate her too (the bonkers immigration pledge was Cameron's stupidity) - but May as PM and Gove as CoE would be a powerful team....

CarlottaVance

Corbyn attacks the Tories SNP over austerity:

http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/jeremy-corbyn-snp-has-betrayed-promise-to-combat-austerity-1-4095247

JosiasJessop

It looks like the Telegraph did some interesting research to get the Welby story, and the whole thing has been handled with that looks like unusual sensitivity. It's some good reporting, although I do wonder how they'd have handled it if Welby hadn't been so cooperative.

RobD

CarlottaVance said:

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:

On topic - as other have observed, Theresa May is the 'safe pair of hands' candidate - Hammond has pursued dullness to the point of destruction - so unless May does not want the job......Gove vs May would be interesting......

This PB Tory is rooting for May (despite her remain leanings).

I know May from University days and rate her too (the bonkers immigration pledge was Cameron's stupidity) - but May as PM and Gove as CoE would be a powerful team....

Now now, don't get me all excited.

RobD

JosiasJessop said:

It looks like the Telegraph did some interesting research to get the Welby story, and the whole thing has been handled with that looks like unusual sensitivity. It's some good reporting, although I do wonder how they'd have handled it if Welby hadn't been so cooperative.

If they had any class they woulnd't have ran it if he hadn't cooperated.

I agree with you that it has been handled well, I enjoyed reading the various articles on the way home, but did feel quite sorry for Lady Williams.

JosiasJessop

RobD said:

JosiasJessop said:

It looks like the Telegraph did some interesting research to get the Welby story, and the whole thing has been handled with that looks like unusual sensitivity. It's some good reporting, although I do wonder how they'd have handled it if Welby hadn't been so cooperative.

If they had any class they woulnd't have ran it if he hadn't cooperated.

I agree with you that it has been handled well, I enjoyed reading the various articles on the way home, but did feel quite sorry for Lady Williams.

I don't think they could have run it without cooperation, depending on what evidence they initially found. What set them on the path of Anthony Browne?

MikeK

OFF Thread.
Saw this poor joke from Obama which may come to describe his whole presidency:
https://twitter.com/politico/status/718603348371443712

richardDodd

Justin124..Get real..everybody was at it.. Your generation did not invent sex or morals.

blackburn63

NickPalmer said:

By the way, the tip the other day to back Cameron as likely to leave before Corbyn at 11-10 at William Hill was good value - still a good shot at the current 4-6.

a) He's said he's going, Corbyn's said he's not going.
b) If the referendum is lost, he'll almost certainly go at once.
c) He's now less popular than Corbyn, and clearly weaker on the central issue at the moment (whatever Corbyn's other drawbacks, nobody suspects him of having a secret fund in Panama).

I'd have thought it ought to be about 2-5, though I'm talking my book so DYOR...

Good post Nick, just because something or someone is a long price doesn't make it "value", in order to establish if a price is "value" you first must ascertain what price you would lay it at. The exchanges mean that "value" is virtually non existent, most of the shrewdies are on the laying side.

btw to small stakes back Silviniaco Conti in the National for no other reason than he's the best horse in the race where weight has become less important. No idea if its "value" its about 9 minutes of fun.

blackburn63

JosiasJessop said:

It looks like the Telegraph did some interesting research to get the Welby story, and the whole thing has been handled with that looks like unusual sensitivity. It's some good reporting, although I do wonder how they'd have handled it if Welby hadn't been so cooperative.

Good points but the whole thing is bizarre, the CoE is an irrelevance, Welby's father even more so.

CarlottaVance

JosiasJessop said:

RobD said:

JosiasJessop said:

It looks like the Telegraph did some interesting research to get the Welby story, and the whole thing has been handled with that looks like unusual sensitivity. It's some good reporting, although I do wonder how they'd have handled it if Welby hadn't been so cooperative.

If they had any class they woulnd't have ran it if he hadn't cooperated.

I agree with you that it has been handled well, I enjoyed reading the various articles on the way home, but did feel quite sorry for Lady Williams.

I don't think they could have run it without cooperation, depending on what evidence they initially found. What set them on the path of Anthony Browne?

Its an interesting contrast with the other story Only England and Wales are not allowed to talk about - in the Welby case I suspect most reaction will be 'well, that's intriguing - I do home his Mum's ok' unlike the celebrity (sic) story where the Streisand effect is growing by the day....

CarlottaVance

richardDodd said:

Justin124..Get real..everybody was at it.. Your generation did not invent sex or morals.

Digging into the family tree I discovered my great grandmother & father did 'not observe standard leadtimes' when it came to parenting and marriage - either that, or my grandmother was born very early after they married.....in another town......

tlg86

So here's what has appeared on my Facebook thread the last two days:

http://tinyurl.com/zdno8u9

If Britain leaves Europe, the cost of importing goods could go up by £11bn - meaning prices would rise on everyday good.

Use our quick calculator to find out how much more you and your family could end up paying

How much could you be out of pocket if we leave Europe?


Obviously I think this is nonsense, but I wonder how effective this sort of thing will be? I've yet to see anything from the leave campaigns.

richardDodd

Carlotta Vance..So was I ..born very early...almost made the wedding as a guest. And during my teens, sex was almost on request. My mother would have been amused to be described as a fornicating tart...

DecrepitJohnL

TheScreamingEagles said:

The Archbishop of Canterbury has discovered he is the illegitimate son of Sir Winston Churchill’s last private secretary after taking a DNA test to prove his paternity, The Telegraph can disclose.

The Most Reverend Justin Welby had until now believed his father to be Gavin Welby, a whisky salesman and son of a Jewish immigrant, who was married briefly to his mother, Jane.


But the Telegraph pieced together evidence that suggested Archbishop Welby’s father was actually the late Sir Anthony Montague Browne, who served Churchill in Downing Street and during his retirement.

After this newspaper discussed its research with the Archbishop, he decided to take a DNA test to settle the matter. His mouth swabs were compared with hair samples from Sir Anthony and showed a 99.9779 per cent probability that they were father and son.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/08/justin-welby-dna-test-reveals-my-secret-father-was-sir-winston-c/

The URL amounts to click-bait, given where it cuts off. But why this story? Are Telegraph reporters conducting genetic tests on random clergymen and stumbled across the Archbishop?

foxinsoxuk

tlg86 said:

So here's what has appeared on my Facebook thread the last two days:

http://tinyurl.com/zdno8u9

If Britain leaves Europe, the cost of importing goods could go up by £11bn - meaning prices would rise on everyday good.

Use our quick calculator to find out how much more you and your family could end up paying

How much could you be out of pocket if we leave Europe?


Obviously I think this is nonsense, but I wonder how effective this sort of thing will be? I've yet to see anything from the leave campaigns.

Yes, Remains Facebook campaign is really quite active.

No more nonsensical than the other side though, just better presented.

An erudite and well mannered campaign without lasting animosity in the Conservative party does not seem to be on the cards.

Casino_Royale

I'm not seeing the path for Hammond. In addition to his dull and uninspiring nature (pointed out downthread) he seems to have been tail-end Charlie for a reshuffle for months - we know his job was already offered to Boris, and he has seriously unimpressed in office.

Also Hammond has irritated Leavers with his full-on pronouncements for Remain in recent weeks, despite being previously a wink-wink, nudge-nudge eurosceptic.

Major won because he wasn't Heseltine in a two-horse race, and had good career trajectory after going from Chief Secretary to Foreign Secretary to Chancellor in just 3 years. Hurd was never a serious contender.

Neither is Hammond.

ydoethur

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The Archbishop of Canterbury has discovered he is the illegitimate son of Sir Winston Churchill’s last private secretary after taking a DNA test to prove his paternity, The Telegraph can disclose.

The Most Reverend Justin Welby had until now believed his father to be Gavin Welby, a whisky salesman and son of a Jewish immigrant, who was married briefly to his mother, Jane.


But the Telegraph pieced together evidence that suggested Archbishop Welby’s father was actually the late Sir Anthony Montague Browne, who served Churchill in Downing Street and during his retirement.

After this newspaper discussed its research with the Archbishop, he decided to take a DNA test to settle the matter. His mouth swabs were compared with hair samples from Sir Anthony and showed a 99.9779 per cent probability that they were father and son.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/08/justin-welby-dna-test-reveals-my-secret-father-was-sir-winston-c/

The discovery gave Lambeth Palace cause to check canon law, as men born illegitimately were for centuries barred from becoming archbishops. A little-known change in the law dating to the Fifties removed that bar, leaving Archbishop Welby safe in his post.

I am curious as to why they felt the need to make that change at the time - it's the sort of thing I'd think the Church would not expect to come up, and so even if no one minded making the change it would not get around to being made.

They didn't. Parliament changed the law on inheritance/office holding, which affected the CofE as the Established Church. I don't think it's something they would have done off their own bat.

I must confess I was amused by @justin124's comments, for two reasons;

1) He's straightforwardly wrong (a quick look at Duff Cooper, Oswald Mosley, John Mortimer reveals that);

2) he's confused premarital and extra marital sex. The first was not merely normal, it was often quietly encouraged so men could be assured their brides were suitably - ahem - fertile. Extra marital sex by women was however rather frowned upon, for reasons that must be obvious at this moment.

ydoethur

Casino_Royale said:

I'm not seeing the path for Hammond. In addition to his dull and uninspiring nature (pointed out downthread) he seems to have been tail-end Charlie for a reshuffle for months - we know his job was already offered to Boris, and he has seriously unimpressed in office.

Also Hammond has irritated Leavers with his full-on pronouncements for Remain in recent weeks, despite being previously a wink-wink, nudge-nudge eurosceptic.

Major won because he wasn't Heseltine in a two-horse race, and had good career trajectory after going from Chief Secretary to Foreign Secretary to Chancellor in just 3 years. Hurd was never a serious contender.

Neither is Hammond.

The path for him is if he's the one who emerges as the Stop George candidate. At the moment, despite Osborne doing his damndest to disqualify himself, there is no one standout alternative. That gives other senior Tories a twelve month window to be that alternative if they are clever, careful and lucky. Hammond does have those three qualities.

I agree however that he is a long shot.

JackW

On the Jeremy Kyle Show this morning :

Did my cheating alcoholic mother turn me into a religious nutjob?

We have the answers .. the DNA, the all important lie detectors results and after the break Justin is on the show and he wants the gods honest truth ....

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

Mr. W, rather good. [Except that lie detectors only exist in science fiction].

Hammond's a credible leader, as is May (who probably has the advantage). Clarkson's got no chance, though.

Plato_Says

Another regular viewer

JackW said:

On the Jeremy Kyle Show this morning :

Did my cheating alcoholic mother turn me into a religious nutjob?

We have the answers .. the DNA, the all important lie detectors results and after the break Justin is on the show and he wants the gods honest truth ....

not_on_fire

I don't endorse the Greens in any way, but their PPB is brilliant

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/apr/07/greens-advert-causes-social-media-storm-as-kids-play-politicians

Plato_Says

I see the Belgians have arrested that bloke again, will it actually be him this time?

david_herdson

Casino_Royale said:

I'm not seeing the path for Hammond. In addition to his dull and uninspiring nature (pointed out downthread) he seems to have been tail-end Charlie for a reshuffle for months - we know his job was already offered to Boris, and he has seriously unimpressed in office.

Also Hammond has irritated Leavers with his full-on pronouncements for Remain in recent weeks, despite being previously a wink-wink, nudge-nudge eurosceptic.

Major won because he wasn't Heseltine in a two-horse race, and had good career trajectory after going from Chief Secretary to Foreign Secretary to Chancellor in just 3 years. Hurd was never a serious contender.

Neither is Hammond.

Nor was IDS but he still got the job.

The mechanics are different from in 1990 (had they used the current system, it's highly likely that Heseltine would have become PM - a VoNC in Thatcher without the need for an alternative candidate wouldn't have tarnished him as it did in our timeline).

That works the other way too. Who is the stop-Boris/stop-Osborne candidate? May is one option but she too is Remain and more vocally so than Hammond. If there is a leadership change this year, there won't be many unifying figures on offer but Hammond is one of them. I'm not saying he'd win but I think his chances are rather better than the odds suggest.

Casino_Royale

How about some National tips then?

david_herdson

ydoethur said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The Archbishop of Canterbury has discovered he is the illegitimate son of Sir Winston Churchill’s last private secretary after taking a DNA test to prove his paternity, The Telegraph can disclose.

The Most Reverend Justin Welby had until now believed his father to be Gavin Welby, a whisky salesman and son of a Jewish immigrant, who was married briefly to his mother, Jane.


But the Telegraph pieced together evidence that suggested Archbishop Welby’s father was actually the late Sir Anthony Montague Browne, who served Churchill in Downing Street and during his retirement.

After this newspaper discussed its research with the Archbishop, he decided to take a DNA test to settle the matter. His mouth swabs were compared with hair samples from Sir Anthony and showed a 99.9779 per cent probability that they were father and son.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/08/justin-welby-dna-test-reveals-my-secret-father-was-sir-winston-c/

The discovery gave Lambeth Palace cause to check canon law, as men born illegitimately were for centuries barred from becoming archbishops. A little-known change in the law dating to the Fifties removed that bar, leaving Archbishop Welby safe in his post.

I am curious as to why they felt the need to make that change at the time - it's the sort of thing I'd think the Church would not expect to come up, and so even if no one minded making the change it would not get around to being made.

They didn't. Parliament changed the law on inheritance/office holding, which affected the CofE as the Established Church. I don't think it's something they would have done off their own bat.

I must confess I was amused by @justin124's comments, for two reasons;

1) He's straightforwardly wrong (a quick look at Duff Cooper, Oswald Mosley, John Mortimer reveals that);

2) he's confused premarital and extra marital sex. The first was not merely normal, it was often quietly encouraged so men could be assured their brides were suitably - ahem - fertile. Extra marital sex by women was however rather frowned upon, for reasons that must be obvious at this moment.

My understanding (from reading Duff Cooper and the likes), was that extra-marital sex was far from unusual for the upper- and upper-middle classes once the couple had their own legitimate children, providing that it was kept tactful. Cooper may have been unusually prolific in that regard (and did come from a generation earlier than Welby's parents) but I doubt the morals of his world were all that different from those of his class in the 1950s.

Jonathan

No one is that grey. Major had Edwina Currie and his love of versatile peas. Wonder what Hammond does to balance things out.

Casino_Royale

david_herdson said:

Casino_Royale said:

I'm not seeing the path for Hammond. In addition to his dull and uninspiring nature (pointed out downthread) he seems to have been tail-end Charlie for a reshuffle for months - we know his job was already offered to Boris, and he has seriously unimpressed in office.

Also Hammond has irritated Leavers with his full-on pronouncements for Remain in recent weeks, despite being previously a wink-wink, nudge-nudge eurosceptic.

Major won because he wasn't Heseltine in a two-horse race, and had good career trajectory after going from Chief Secretary to Foreign Secretary to Chancellor in just 3 years. Hurd was never a serious contender.

Neither is Hammond.

Nor was IDS but he still got the job.

The mechanics are different from in 1990 (had they used the current system, it's highly likely that Heseltine would have become PM - a VoNC in Thatcher without the need for an alternative candidate wouldn't have tarnished him as it did in our timeline).

That works the other way too. Who is the stop-Boris/stop-Osborne candidate? May is one option but she too is Remain and more vocally so than Hammond. If there is a leadership change this year, there won't be many unifying figures on offer but Hammond is one of them. I'm not saying he'd win but I think his chances are rather better than the odds suggest.

I'm afraid I don't agree Hammond is a unifying figure. Not with how he's been fully on the Remain bus over the last two months, and been willing to be Reek/Camerons' lackey for now, up until the point they finally decide to get rid of him.

He might be competent and interview well, but he's no leadership material.

In the absence of Boris/Osborne, I'd put Gove, May, Hunt and Crabb all ahead of him.

No bet for me.

david_herdson

JackW said:

On the Jeremy Kyle Show this morning :

Did my cheating alcoholic mother turn me into a religious nutjob?

We have the answers .. the DNA, the all important lie detectors results and after the break Justin is on the show and he wants the gods honest truth ....

He'd be in good company. God Himself has form on cuckolding.

foxinsoxuk

Plato_Says said:

I see the Belgians have arrested that bloke again, will it actually be him this time?

I suppose that like any other justice system in the democratic world they need some evidence.

That bloke looks fishy - off to the gulag - is not how it works here either.

Casino_Royale

david_herdson said:

ydoethur said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The Archbishop of Canterbury has discovered he is the illegitimate son of Sir Winston Churchill’s last private secretary after taking a DNA test to prove his paternity, The Telegraph can disclose.

The Most Reverend Justin Welby had until now believed his father to be Gavin Welby, a whisky salesman and son of a Jewish immigrant, who was married briefly to his mother, Jane.


But the Telegraph pieced together evidence that suggested Archbishop Welby’s father was actually the late Sir Anthony Montague Browne, who served Churchill in Downing Street and during his retirement.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/08/justin-welby-dna-test-reveals-my-secret-father-was-sir-winston-c/

The discovery gave Lambeth Palace cause to check canon law, as men born illegitimately were for centuries barred from becoming archbishops. A little-known change in the law dating to the Fifties removed that bar, leaving Archbishop Welby safe in his post.

I am curious as to why they felt the need to make that change at the time - it's the sort of thing I'd think the Church would not expect to come up, and so even if no one minded making the change it would not get around to being made.

They didn't. Parliament changed the law on inheritance/office holding, which affected the CofE as the Established Church. I don't think it's something they would have done off their own bat.

I must confess I was amused by @justin124's comments, for two reasons;

1) He's straightforwardly wrong (a quick look at Duff Cooper, Oswald Mosley, John Mortimer reveals that);

2) he's confused premarital and extra marital sex. The first was not merely normal, it was often quietly encouraged so men could be assured their brides were suitably - ahem - fertile. Extra marital sex by women was however rather frowned upon, for reasons that must be obvious at this moment.

My understanding (from reading Duff Cooper and the likes), was that extra-marital sex was far from unusual for the upper- and upper-middle classes once the couple had their own legitimate children, providing that it was kept tactful. Cooper may have been unusually prolific in that regard (and did come from a generation earlier than Welby's parents) but I doubt the morals of his world were all that different from those of his class in the 1950s.

Of course, that goes down for monarchs and the aristocracy down the ages.

Marriage was about business and politics (be it familial, or national) and not love.

Appearances needed to be kept up in public, but everyone (including a lot of domestic staff) turned a blind eye to what would have been an open secret.

SquareRoot

I think Welby deserves a certain sympathy in that he lost a young child which must have had a profound effect on him, so I think I have been rather harsh on him and his wealth. Nonetheless the attempt to influence the way people voted at GE 2015 with the Church's document was disgraceful.

I am surprised at Jack W, flippancy tbh.

foxinsoxuk

Casino_Royale said:

david_herdson said:

ydoethur said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The Archbishop of Canterbury has discovered he is the illegitimate son of Sir Winston Churchill’s last private secretary after taking a DNA test to prove his paternity, The Telegraph can disclose.

The Most Reverend Justin Welby had until now believed his father to be Gavin Welby, a whisky salesman and son of a Jewish immigrant, who was married briefly to his mother, Jane.


But the Telegraph pieced together evidence that suggested Archbishop Welby’s father was actually the late Sir Anthony Montague Browne, who served Churchill in Downing Street and during his retirement.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/08/justin-welby-dna-test-reveals-my-secret-father-was-sir-winston-c/

The discovery gave Lambeth Palace cause to check canon law, as men born illegitimately were for centuries barred from becoming archbishops. A little-known change in the law dating to the Fifties removed that bar, leaving Archbishop Welby safe in his post.

I am curious as to why they felt the need to make that change at the time - it's the sort of thing I'd think the Church would not expect to come up, and so even if no one minded making the change it would not get around to being made.

They didn't. Parliament changed the law on inheritance/office holding, which affected the CofE as the Established Church. I don't think it's something they would have done off their own bat.

I must confess I was amused by @justin124's comments, for two reasons;

1) He's straightforwardly wrong (a quick look at Duff Cooper, Oswald Mosley, John Mortimer reveals that);

2) he's confused premarital and extra marital sex. The first was not merely normal, it was often quietly encouraged so men could be assured their brides were suitably - ahem - fertile. Extra marital sex by women was however rather frowned upon, for reasons that must be obvious at this moment.

My understanding (from reading Duff Cooper and the likes), was that extra-marital sex was s.

Of course, that goes down for monarchs and the aristocracy down the ages.

Marriage was about business and politics (be it familial, or national) and not love.

Appearances needed to be kept up in public, but everyone (including a lot of domestic staff) turned a blind eye to what would have been an open secret.

An heir and a spare and then do as you please, but keep it discrete and anything goes.

Though perhaps less tolerated in the respectable classes than the social extremes.

Brief Encounter strikes a chord on the subject, which is why it has worn so well.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Root, it's quite surprising to think the PM, previous PM and Archbishop of Canterbury have all lost children.

Agree entirely on the political nonsense. The Archbishop's parentage is irrelevant. Socialist sermons are another matter.

Speaking of sermons, have Yvette Cooper, Geldof et al. invited migrants into their homes yet?

Indigo

david_herdson said:

That works the other way too. Who is the stop-Boris/stop-Osborne candidate? May is one option but she too is Remain and more vocally so than Hammond. If there is a leadership change this year, there won't be many unifying figures on offer but Hammond is one of them. I'm not saying he'd win but I think his chances are rather better than the odds suggest.

May won't be forgiven for coining the term "The Nasty Party", plus she has the liberal sensibilities of Attila the Hun. Her handling of immigration, both in term of illegal migrants, and the shameful treatment way the earnings thresholds for legal migrants, and especially family visa, are breaking up families is a disgrace. She sees the solution to all security issues as more reductions in civil liberties and increases in spying and police powers. After a ten year hiatus in my party membership I would rejoin just to vote AGAINST Mrs May.