Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Just 16% tell ComRes that LAB-led JC likely to win GE compa

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited September 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Just 16% tell ComRes that LAB-led JC likely to win GE compared with 65% saying TMay-led CON will

politicalbetting.com is proudly powered by WordPress
with "Neat!" theme. Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • Finally someone polled on the GBBO
  • Ed Balls set to dance on Strictly right now.

    Switch it over to BBC1 this instance
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 38,291
    What do people know?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 38,291
    surbiton said:

    Omnium said:

    Does anyone else think that tomorrow morning could be interesting?

    It strikes me that it would be the appropriate time for people to leave Labour (although they should have just done so anyway as their credibility is damaged by leaving only when the result doesn't suit them)

    There may be no movers at all, but if there are then it will be interesting to see who goes for the first mover thing.

    (Didn't work for Angela Eagle though, but then there are limits)

    I think that there will be few if any defections at this point in the electoral cycle.

    Sitting as an Independent without party support would be difficult and few Labour MPs are in seats where a defection to the LDs would be viable.

    For present most will sit on the backbenches, giving the same loyalty to their leader that he gave to the last Labour government.
    There will be no defections worth talking about. This raises a serious point. The "coup" attempt was hilarious. I am not surprised since the highly incompetent Hilary Benn was involved.

    The only way the rebel MPs could have won was if they did not blink. There was no strategy.
    They had one huge weapon and their only one. Declare themselves the PLP and carry on.
    But they were too interested in brand names, party assets etc. In 2/3 years a lot of those things would have resolved themselves.

    The new Corbynites are a fickle lot. If their great leader was not the practical leader, they would have lost interest and gone back under the rock !

    Well, the MPs won't have to worry about those matters anyway since most of them will not be candidates in 2020. After all, the candidates should have the support of the members and the Blairites voted for war in Iraq, bombing Syria and cutting welfare. They deserve it.
    They didn't seem to know quite what they were dealing with, to be honest. I'm fond of the metaphor they were playing different games all along; the MPs thought they were playing chess, when they were actually playing Russian Roulette.

    As popular as the show is, I'm surprised the MPs weren't paying attention to one of Cersei's maxims from Game of Thrones, namely that when playing such games you win or die, there is no middle ground.
  • Cuckoo, cuckoo
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 49,433
    Ed Balls stepping onto the dance floor on Strictly on BBC1 now!
  • At 9:59pm on May 7th 2015 who could have predicted within 17 months, Corbyn would be elected TWICE as Lab leader & I'd be watching Ed Balls on Strictly Come Dancing.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 13,145
    Bang bang. Squawk. Thud. Silence.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 2,843
    IanB2 said:

    Bang bang. Squawk. Thud. Silence.

    Prescott sex tape?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 24,091
    Corbyn meeting Trump on official business would be an awkward encounter.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 49,433
    edited September 2016

    At 9:59pm on May 7th 2015 who could have predicted within 17 months, Corbyn would be elected TWICE as Lab leader & I'd be watching Ed Balls on Strictly Come Dancing.

    Balls did OK, even Len Goodman said he was 'pleasantly surprised', at the moment I think he has more chance of winning Strictly than Corbyn does of winning the next election!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 38,291
    AndyJS said:

    Corbyn meeting Trump on official business would be an awkward encounter.

    Not at all, they could just stand there ranting about their favourite topics and completely ignoring the other person, I'm sure they'd enjoy it.
  • HYUFD said:

    At 9:59pm on May 7th 2015 who could have predicted within 17 months, Corbyn would be elected TWICE as Lab leader & I'd be watching Ed Balls on Strictly Come Dancing.

    Balls did OK, even Len Goodman said he was 'pleasantly surprised', at the moment I think he has more chance of winning Strictly than Corbyn does of winning the next election!
    Still he'll get some poor scores from the judges
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 49,433

    HYUFD said:

    At 9:59pm on May 7th 2015 who could have predicted within 17 months, Corbyn would be elected TWICE as Lab leader & I'd be watching Ed Balls on Strictly Come Dancing.

    Balls did OK, even Len Goodman said he was 'pleasantly surprised', at the moment I think he has more chance of winning Strictly than Corbyn does of winning the next election!
    Still he'll get some poor scores from the judges
    Not great but 3 5s and a 6 is better than it could have been. Danny and Oti look the ones to beat so far!
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    Ed Balls set to dance on Strictly right now.

    Switch it over to BBC1 this instance

    Our next Prime Minister !
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,750
    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 13,145
    surbiton said:

    Ed Balls set to dance on Strictly right now.

    Switch it over to BBC1 this instance

    Our next Prime Minister !
    Could have been worse, a bit wooden. The Latin will be his undoing I fear.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 38,291
    SeanT said:



    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    Hear hear.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    edited September 2016
    kle4 said:

    surbiton said:

    Omnium said:

    Does anyone else think that tomorrow morning could be interesting?

    It strikes me that it would be the appropriate time for people to leave Labour (although they should have just done so anyway as their credibility is damaged by leaving only when the result doesn't suit them)

    There may be no movers at all, but if there are then it will be interesting to see who goes for the first mover thing.

    (Didn't work for Angela Eagle though, but then there are limits)

    I think that there will be few if any defections at this point in the electoral cycle.

    Sitting as an Independent without party support would be difficult and few Labour MPs are in seats where a defection to the LDs would be viable.

    For present most will sit on the backbenches, giving the same loyalty to their leader that he gave to the last Labour government.
    There will be no defections worth talking about. This raises a serious point. The "coup" attempt was hilarious. I am not surprised since the highly incompetent Hilary Benn was involved.

    The only way the rebel MPs could have won was if they did not blink. There was no strategy.
    They had one huge weapon and their only one. Declare themselves the PLP and carry on.
    But they were too interested in brand names, party assets etc. In 2/3 years a lot of those things would have resolved themselves.

    The new Corbynites are a fickle lot. If their great leader was not the practical leader, they would have lost interest and gone back under the rock !

    Well, the MPs won't have to worry about those matters anyway since most of them will not be candidates in 2020. After all, the candidates should have the support of the members and the Blairites voted for war in Iraq, bombing Syria and cutting welfare. They deserve it.
    They didn't seem to know quite what they were dealing with, to be honest. I'm fond of the metaphor they were playing different games all along; the MPs thought they were playing chess, when they were actually playing Russian Roulette.

    As popular as the show is, I'm surprised the MPs weren't paying attention to one of Cersei's maxims from Game of Thrones, namely that when playing such games you win or die, there is no middle ground.
    They believed like the "Establishment" does believe that Corbyn's position would have been "untenable" when 80% voted that they had no confidence in him.

    Stupid sods. Nowhere in the rule book does it say that the Leader has to resign. The Left does one thing always better than the Right. They know the Rules.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    The only policy where SeanT and I agree.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 22,057
    surbiton said:

    kle4 said:

    surbiton said:

    Omnium said:

    Does anyone else think that tomorrow morning could be interesting?

    It strikes me that it would be the appropriate time for people to leave Labour (although they should have just done so anyway as their credibility is damaged by leaving only when the result doesn't suit them)

    There may be no movers at all, but if there are then it will be interesting to see who goes for the first mover thing.

    (Didn't work for Angela Eagle though, but then there are limits)

    I think that there will be few if any defections at this point in the electoral cycle.

    Sitting as an Independent without party support would be difficult and few Labour MPs are in seats where a defection to the LDs would be viable.

    For present most will sit on the backbenches, giving the same loyalty to their leader that he gave to the last Labour government.
    There will be no defections worth talking about. This raises a serious point. The "coup" attempt was hilarious. I am not surprised since the highly incompetent Hilary Benn was involved.

    The only way the rebel MPs could have won was if they did not blink. There was no strategy.
    They had one huge weapon and their only one. Declare themselves the PLP and carry on.
    But they were too interested in brand names, party assets etc. In 2/3 years a lot of those things would have resolved themselves.

    The new Corbynites are a fickle lot. If their great leader was not the practical leader, they would have lost interest and gone back under the rock !

    Well, the MPs won't have to worry about those matters anyway since most of them will not be candidates in 2020. After all, the candidates should have the support of the members and the Blairites voted for war in Iraq, bombing Syria and cutting welfare. They deserve it.
    They didn't seem to know quite what they were dealing with, to be honest. I'm fond of the metaphor they were playing different games all along; the MPs thought they were playing chess, when they were actually playing Russian Roulette.

    As popular as the show is, I'm surprised the MPs weren't paying attention to one of Cersei's maxims from Game of Thrones, namely that when playing such games you win or die, there is no middle ground.
    They believed like the "Establishment" does believe that Corbyn's position would have been "untenable" when 80% voted that they had no confidence in him.

    Stupid sods. Nowhere in the rule book does it say that the Leader has to resign. The Left does one thing always better than the Right. They know the Rules.
    Their own rulebook, maybe. But they seem utterly clueless about the rules the voters will follow....
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 24,091
    edited September 2016
    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    There could be a by-election in Richmond Park if she does.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,750
    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    The only policy where SeanT and I agree.
    I suspect we agree on a few others, too. I can be surprisingly lefty, at times.

    Anyway we agree on Heathrow. T May has enormous capital right now. she should spend it on LHR3. Because it will earn interest over time.

    Fuck Sadiq and Boris and LUDICROUS Gatwick.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 22,057
    45% still feel they have a good understanding of what the Labour Party stands for.

    Just 32% for the LibDems.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 13,145
    kle4 said:

    SeanT said:



    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    Hear hear.
    Agree. And not often you see anything resembling a logical argument from SeanT, as well.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 20,316
    LOL! The people seem to agree somewhat with Betfair on this.
    Next GE:
    Con most seats 1.26, Lab most seats 5.7
    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/#/politics/event/27456523/market?marketId=1.119040697
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,750
    AndyJS said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    There could be a by-election in Richmond Park if she does.
    She'll cope. It would go Lib Dem (maybe). Who cares.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    surbiton said:

    kle4 said:

    surbiton said:

    Omnium said:

    Does anyone else think that tomorrow morning could be interesting?





    (Didn't work for Angela Eagle though, but then there are limits)

    I think that there will be few if any defections at this point in the electoral cycle.

    Sitting as an Independent without party support would be difficult and few Labour MPs are in seats where a defection to the LDs would be viable.

    For present most will sit on the backbenches, giving the same loyalty to their leader that he gave to the last Labour government.
    There will be no defections worth talking about. This raises a serious point. The "coup" attempt was hilarious. I am not surprised since the highly incompetent Hilary Benn was involved.

    The only way the rebel MPs could have won was if they did not blink. There was no strategy.
    They had one huge weapon and their only one. Declare themselves the PLP and carry on.
    But they were too interested in brand names, party assets etc. In 2/3 years a lot of those things would have resolved themselves.

    The new Corbynites are a fickle lot. If their great leader was not the practical leader, they would have lost interest and gone back under the rock !

    Well, the MPs won't have to worry about those matters anyway since most of them will not be candidates in 2020. After all, the candidates should have the support of the members and the Blairites voted for war in Iraq, bombing Syria and cutting welfare. They deserve it.
    They didn't seem to know quite what they were dealing with, to be honest. I'm fond of the metaphor they were playing different games all along; the MPs thought they were playing chess, when they were actually playing Russian Roulette.

    As popular as the show is, I'm surprised the MPs weren't paying attention to one of Cersei's maxims from Game of Thrones, namely that when playing such games you win or die, there is no middle ground.
    They believed like the "Establishment" does believe that Corbyn's position would have been "untenable" when 80% voted that they had no confidence in him.

    Stupid sods. Nowhere in the rule book does it say that the Leader has to resign. The Left does one thing always better than the Right. They know the Rules.
    Their own rulebook, maybe. But they seem utterly clueless about the rules the voters will follow....
    I really don't think even they believe they could win in 2020. For them the important thing is to take over and now they are in situ. They believe the revolution has started.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 20,316
    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    Go on Theresa, announce it next week!

    If Britain is open for business then we need more runways. JFDI.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    The only policy where SeanT and I agree.
    I suspect we agree on a few others, too. I can be surprisingly lefty, at times.

    Anyway we agree on Heathrow. T May has enormous capital right now. she should spend it on LHR3. Because it will earn interest over time.

    Fuck Sadiq and Boris and LUDICROUS Gatwick.

    I don't think Sadiq is actually anti-Heathrow. It was not a position to hang on to in the campaign. I am not sure about Boris either since I am not sure he actually believes in anything.
  • SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    They should give the green light to Heathrow and gatwick I reckon. Too much dithering now.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 22,057
    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    kle4 said:

    surbiton said:

    Omnium said:

    Does anyone else think that tomorrow morning could be interesting?





    (Didn't work for Angela Eagle though, but then there are limits)

    I think that there will be few if any defections at this point in the electoral cycle.

    Sitting as an Independent without party support would be difficult and few Labour MPs are in seats where a defection to the LDs would be viable.

    For present most will sit on the backbenches, giving the same loyalty to their leader that he gave to the last Labour government.
    There will be no defections worth talking about. This raises a serious point. The "coup" attempt was hilarious. I am not surprised since the highly incompetent Hilary Benn was involved.
    They didn't seem to know quite what they were dealing with, to be honest. I'm fond of the metaphor they were playing different games all along; the MPs thought they were playing chess, when they were actually playing Russian Roulette.

    As popular as the show is, I'm surprised the MPs weren't paying attention to one of Cersei's maxims from Game of Thrones, namely that when playing such games you win or die, there is no middle ground.
    They believed like the "Establishment" does believe that Corbyn's position would have been "untenable" when 80% voted that they had no confidence in him.

    Stupid sods. Nowhere in the rule book does it say that the Leader has to resign. The Left does one thing always better than the Right. They know the Rules.
    Their own rulebook, maybe. But they seem utterly clueless about the rules the voters will follow....
    I really don't think even they believe they could win in 2020. For them the important thing is to take over and now they are in situ. They believe the revolution has started.
    Nothing more embarrassing than a revolution that nobody turns up for.

    Corbyn is close to having signed up as Labour members the totality of people who will vote for him as PM.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 3,749
    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    It is really worth reading the risk assessment on Heathrow by an all-party group of MPs.

    http://www.heathrowappg.com/heathrow-expansion-a-risk-assessment-2/

    It is damning.

    Here I'm quoting Zac Goldsmith:

    "For years, senior staff from Heathrow have taken up senior roles in Government, and vice versa. For example last year our Infrastructure Minister switched over to become the Chairman of Heathrow. The Head of Communications at the Department for Transport went over to become the Head of Communications at Heathrow, and the Head of Communications at Heathrow has become the Head of Communications at the Department for Transport!

    As a result Heathrow expansion has undoubtedly been the default position of Government officials for many years.

    Institutional bias is a major problem for us. But there is a silver lining, and that is our new Prime Minister. Theresa May once described herself as a 'bloody difficult woman'. And I am confident that she won't simply be spoon-fed a line by entrenched officials. She starts from a position of scepticism about Heathrow expansion, and will look at the evidence before taking a view. If she really does, then it is hard to imagine her backing Heathrow."

    http://www.prweek.com/article/1332084/department-transport-hires-heathrow-pr-director-simon-baugh

    Foreign owned Heathrow owns the Department of Transport. If this happened in Zimbabwe we would shrug our shoulders. But this is the UK. This swopping of top jobs between the Civil Service and major companies is a disgrace.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,182
    "The bosses of several of America’s biggest banks and corporations have warned Theresa May they will pre-emptively shift operations into Europe unless she can provide early clarity on the future shape of EU-UK relations.

    According to an account of the meeting obtained by The Telegraph, Mrs May declined to provide information about how the British government would approach the Brexit negotiations, other than pursuing a deal that was “in the national interest”.

    There followed “frank exchanges” in which bosses warned they could not wait to discover the final outcome of the two-year Article 50 negotiations before making major investment decisions that could see thousands of UK jobs shift to Europe....

    Downing Street’s uncompromising line on curbing EU migration has caused friction between Mr Hammond and Mrs May’s political team which is dominated by former Home Office officials who “understand the politics of migration rather better than the economy”, the source said....

    Financial services generate more than £60bn pounds a year in tax, a quarter of which comes from foreign-owned banks, revenues that the Treasury fears will now be put in jeopardy."

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/24/brexit-warning-us-bank-bosses-from-goldman-sachs-morgan-stanley/
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,750
    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    The only policy where SeanT and I agree.
    I suspect we agree on a few others, too. I can be surprisingly lefty, at times.

    Anyway we agree on Heathrow. T May has enormous capital right now. she should spend it on LHR3. Because it will earn interest over time.

    Fuck Sadiq and Boris and LUDICROUS Gatwick.

    I don't think Sadiq is actually anti-Heathrow. It was not a position to hang on to in the campaign. I am not sure about Boris either since I am not sure he actually believes in anything.
    tim, late of this parish, had a good angle on Heathrow. Ask the (complaining) locals, if they hate LHR so much, whether they want to CLOSE Heathrow, with all of its jobs, and move it to a new airport on Canvey Island.

    Most of them will say No Way, of course not. Yet they don't want it to expand either??

    They want it to stay exactly as it is, no bigger, no smaller, for the rest of time.

    Sorry, you don't get to make that choice, not in the real world. You can't choose eternal stasis.

    Build it.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 13,145
    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    The only policy where SeanT and I agree.
    I suspect we agree on a few others, too. I can be surprisingly lefty, at times.

    Anyway we agree on Heathrow. T May has enormous capital right now. she should spend it on LHR3. Because it will earn interest over time.

    Fuck Sadiq and Boris and LUDICROUS Gatwick.

    I don't think Sadiq is actually anti-Heathrow. It was not a position to hang on to in the campaign. I am not sure about Boris either since I am not sure he actually believes in anything.
    There are a number of positions Sadiq took because he genuinely thought it might be close. Whereas in reality he won comfortably, and with the demographic change and post-Brexit mood in London, where Corbyn has genuine appeal, he is probably sitting safe for as long as he wants the job. I have heard he is working through his pledges thinking out how best to deal with them; the promised tube fare freeze for all didn't last more than a few weeks.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 49,433
    JonathanD said:

    "The bosses of several of America’s biggest banks and corporations have warned Theresa May they will pre-emptively shift operations into Europe unless she can provide early clarity on the future shape of EU-UK relations.

    According to an account of the meeting obtained by The Telegraph, Mrs May declined to provide information about how the British government would approach the Brexit negotiations, other than pursuing a deal that was “in the national interest”.

    There followed “frank exchanges” in which bosses warned they could not wait to discover the final outcome of the two-year Article 50 negotiations before making major investment decisions that could see thousands of UK jobs shift to Europe....

    Downing Street’s uncompromising line on curbing EU migration has caused friction between Mr Hammond and Mrs May’s political team which is dominated by former Home Office officials who “understand the politics of migration rather better than the economy”, the source said....

    Financial services generate more than £60bn pounds a year in tax, a quarter of which comes from foreign-owned banks, revenues that the Treasury fears will now be put in jeopardy."

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/24/brexit-warning-us-bank-bosses-from-goldman-sachs-morgan-stanley/

    May knows that the public want migration controlled above all and though she does want a free trade deal too that has to come first. In any case, even if some banks do move operations to Frankfurt, Paris and Dublin, London will still remain comfortably the largest financial centre in Europe.
  • Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

    It is a no brainer. Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,750
    IanB2 said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    The only policy where SeanT and I agree.
    I suspect we agree on a few others, too. I can be surprisingly lefty, at times.

    Anyway we agree on Heathrow. T May has enormous capital right now. she should spend it on LHR3. Because it will earn interest over time.

    Fuck Sadiq and Boris and LUDICROUS Gatwick.

    I don't think Sadiq is actually anti-Heathrow. It was not a position to hang on to in the campaign. I am not sure about Boris either since I am not sure he actually believes in anything.
    There are a number of positions Sadiq took because he genuinely thought it might be close. Whereas in reality he won comfortably, and with the demographic change and post-Brexit mood in London, where Corbyn has genuine appeal, he is probably sitting safe for as long as he wants the job. I have heard he is working through his pledges thinking out how best to deal with them; the promised tube fare freeze for all didn't last more than a few weeks.
    May is on record as wanting to apply Britain's proven Olympics strategy to other projects: i.e. invest in success.

    Heathrow is the UK's only world class airport, only global hub, and it's a massive success. So you build at Heathrow.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 24,091
    I'm in favour of the full monty: third runway at Heathrow, Boris Island, Gatwick expansion, etc. The more airports and runways the better.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 3,749
    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    The only policy where SeanT and I agree.
    I suspect we agree on a few others, too. I can be surprisingly lefty, at times.

    Anyway we agree on Heathrow. T May has enormous capital right now. she should spend it on LHR3. Because it will earn interest over time.

    Fuck Sadiq and Boris and LUDICROUS Gatwick.

    I don't think Sadiq is actually anti-Heathrow. It was not a position to hang on to in the campaign. I am not sure about Boris either since I am not sure he actually believes in anything.
    tim, late of this parish, had a good angle on Heathrow. Ask the (complaining) locals, if they hate LHR so much, whether they want to CLOSE Heathrow, with all of its jobs, and move it to a new airport on Canvey Island.

    Most of them will say No Way, of course not. Yet they don't want it to expand either??

    They want it to stay exactly as it is, no bigger, no smaller, for the rest of time.

    Sorry, you don't get to make that choice, not in the real world. You can't choose eternal stasis.

    Build it.
    Have you read the risk analysis?

    It is easy to say "Build it". It is much more difficult to actually build LHR3 without going bust, staying within the law, keeping passengers with the highest airport charges in the world etc. The risk falls on the Government (i.e. the taxpayer) and it is massive.

    If we need to build another London airport quickly (and we do) Gatwick is the only option.

    I think some of the passion for Heathrow is driven by "sod the complaining locals". Facile.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 49,433
    edited September 2016
    AndyJS said:

    I'm in favour of the full monty: third runway at Heathrow, Boris Island, Gatwick expansion, etc. The more airports and runways the better.

    I presume you do not live on an airline flightpath! We certainly need to expand one airport but a third runway at Heathrow should be it
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 24,091
    edited September 2016
    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    I'm in favour of the full monty: third runway at Heathrow, Boris Island, Gatwick expansion, etc. The more airports and runways the better.

    I presume you do not live in an airline flightpath! We certainly need to expand one airport but a third runway at Heathrow should be it
    The new Airbus double-decker is amazingly quiet, as I found out on a flight from Dubai to Sydney a few weeks ago.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,750
    edited September 2016

    Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

    lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

    Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

    If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

    I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 7,965
    The objection to Heathrow
    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    The only policy where SeanT and I agree.
    I suspect we agree on a few others, too. I can be surprisingly lefty, at times.

    Anyway we agree on Heathrow. T May has enormous capital right now. she should spend it on LHR3. Because it will earn interest over time.

    Fuck Sadiq and Boris and LUDICROUS Gatwick.

    I don't think Sadiq is actually anti-Heathrow. It was not a position to hang on to in the campaign. I am not sure about Boris either since I am not sure he actually believes in anything.
    tim, late of this parish, had a good angle on Heathrow. Ask the (complaining) locals, if they hate LHR so much, whether they want to CLOSE Heathrow, with all of its jobs, and move it to a new airport on Canvey Island.

    Most of them will say No Way, of course not. Yet they don't want it to expand either??

    They want it to stay exactly as it is, no bigger, no smaller, for the rest of time.

    Sorry, you don't get to make that choice, not in the real world. You can't choose eternal stasis.

    Build it.
    The objection to Heathrow expansion is the noise. But runways don't make noise; aeroplanes do. There's an obvious deal to be done here. Agree one or two additional runways in exchange for reducing the noise impact. They can do this by limiting the types of aircraft that land, adjusting flight paths and glideslopes and so on. Then go back to the neighbours. What do you prefer? More runways or more noise?
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    edited September 2016
    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    The only policy where SeanT and I agree.
    I suspect we agree on a few others, too. I can be surprisingly lefty, at times.

    Anyway we agree on Heathrow. T May has enormous capital right now. she should spend it on LHR3. Because it will earn interest over time.

    Fuck Sadiq and Boris and LUDICROUS Gatwick.

    I don't think Sadiq is actually anti-Heathrow. It was not a position to hang on to in the campaign. I am not sure about Boris either since I am not sure he actually believes in anything.
    tim, late of this parish, had a good angle on Heathrow. Ask the (complaining) locals, if they hate LHR so much, whether they want to CLOSE Heathrow, with all of its jobs, and move it to a new airport on Canvey Island.

    Most of them will say No Way, of course not. Yet they don't want it to expand either??

    They want it to stay exactly as it is, no bigger, no smaller, for the rest of time.

    Sorry, you don't get to make that choice, not in the real world. You can't choose eternal stasis.

    Build it.
    The only people who have a strong case against Heathrow are those who bought their houses before 1946.

    After that any buyer knew exactly where Heathrow was situated and planes were much noisier than now.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 4,715
    Junior Doctors strikes all cancelled.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 3,749
    HYUFD said:

    JonathanD said:

    "The bosses of several of America’s biggest banks and corporations have warned Theresa May they will pre-emptively shift operations into Europe unless she can provide early clarity on the future shape of EU-UK relations.

    According to an account of the meeting obtained by The Telegraph, Mrs May declined to provide information about how the British government would approach the Brexit negotiations, other than pursuing a deal that was “in the national interest”.

    There followed “frank exchanges” in which bosses warned they could not wait to discover the final outcome of the two-year Article 50 negotiations before making major investment decisions that could see thousands of UK jobs shift to Europe....

    Downing Street’s uncompromising line on curbing EU migration has caused friction between Mr Hammond and Mrs May’s political team which is dominated by former Home Office officials who “understand the politics of migration rather better than the economy”, the source said....

    Financial services generate more than £60bn pounds a year in tax, a quarter of which comes from foreign-owned banks, revenues that the Treasury fears will now be put in jeopardy."

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/24/brexit-warning-us-bank-bosses-from-goldman-sachs-morgan-stanley/

    May knows that the public want migration controlled above all and though she does want a free trade deal too that has to come first. In any case, even if some banks do move operations to Frankfurt, Paris and Dublin, London will still remain comfortably the largest financial centre in Europe.
    Not true. Nearly half (49%) of leave voters said the biggest single reason for wanting to leave the EU was "the principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK". One third (33%) said the main reason was that leaving "offered the best chance for the UK to regain control over immigration and its own borders."

    That is 33% of 52% i,e about 17% said the main reason was immigration.

    http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2016-06-30/poll-shows-brexit-vote-was-about-british-sovereignty-not-anti-immigration
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    FF43 said:

    The objection to Heathrow

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    The only policy where SeanT and I agree.
    I suspect we agree on a few others, too. I can be surprisingly lefty, at times.

    Anyway we agree on Heathrow. T May has enormous capital right now. she should spend it on LHR3. Because it will earn interest over time.

    Fuck Sadiq and Boris and LUDICROUS Gatwick.

    I don't think Sadiq is actually anti-Heathrow. It was not a position to hang on to in the campaign. I am not sure about Boris either since I am not sure he actually believes in anything.
    tim, late of this parish, had a good angle on Heathrow. Ask the (complaining) locals, if they hate LHR so much, whether they want to CLOSE Heathrow, with all of its jobs, and move it to a new airport on Canvey Island.

    Most of them will say No Way, of course not. Yet they don't want it to expand either??

    They want it to stay exactly as it is, no bigger, no smaller, for the rest of time.

    Sorry, you don't get to make that choice, not in the real world. You can't choose eternal stasis.

    Build it.
    The objection to Heathrow expansion is the noise. But runways don't make noise; aeroplanes do. There's an obvious deal to be done here. Agree one or two additional runways in exchange for reducing the noise impact. They can do this by limiting the types of aircraft that land, adjusting flight paths and glideslopes and so on. Then go back to the neighbours. What do you prefer? More runways or more noise?
    Better still, don't ask them. Get on with it. T May is the MP for Maidenhead - so I am not sure.
  • I'm with Sean and the others - build Heathrow. But I also think May should give the green light to Gatwick and Stansted. Of course in that scenario only Heathrow will happen because the competitive economics for Gatwick don't work. Why is precisely why it has to be Heathrow. But agreeing all of them would be an astute political way ahead and demonstrate we are open for trade.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 20,316
    surbiton said:

    Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

    It is a no brainer. Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted.
    Two more at LHR, the report was sensible enough to think ahead and include four-runway plans. Get it all out of he way now for another 30 or 40 years.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 38,291
    Barnesian said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    The only policy where SeanT and I agree.
    I suspect we agree on a few others, too. I can be surprisingly lefty, at times.

    Anyway we agree on Heathrow. T May has enormous capital right now. she should spend it on LHR3. Because it will earn interest over time.

    Fuck Sadiq and Boris and LUDICROUS Gatwick.

    I don't think Sadiq is actually anti-Heathrow. It was not a position to hang on to in the campaign. I am not sure about Boris either since I am not sure he actually believes in anything.
    tim, late of this parish, had a good angle on Heathrow. Ask the (complaining) locals, if they hate LHR so much, whether they want to CLOSE Heathrow, with all of its jobs, and move it to a new airport on Canvey Island.

    Most of them will say No Way, of course not. Yet they don't want it to expand either??

    They want it to stay exactly as it is, no bigger, no smaller, for the rest of time.

    Sorry, you don't get to make that choice, not in the real world. You can't choose eternal stasis.

    Build it.
    I think some of the passion for Heathrow is driven by "sod the complaining locals". Facile.
    And 'sod the dithering'. Sure, I haven't read the risk analyses of either proposal. I don't mind which one is built. But this has been looked into for long enough for decision makers to have been confident of which decision is best by now, and it keeps getting delayed for political convenience.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,750
    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    The only policy where SeanT and I agree.
    I suspect we agree on a few others, too. I can be surprisingly lefty, at times.

    Anyway we agree on Heathrow. T May has enormous capital right now. she should spend it on LHR3. Because it will earn interest over time.

    Fuck Sadiq and Boris and LUDICROUS Gatwick.

    I don't think Sadiq is actually anti-Heathrow. It was not a position to hang on to in the campaign. I am not sure about Boris either since I am not sure he actually believes in anything.
    tim, late of this parish, had a good angle on Heathrow. Ask the (complaining) locals, if they hate LHR so much, whether they want to CLOSE Heathrow, with all of its jobs, and move it to a new airport on Canvey Island.

    Most of them will say No Way, of course not. Yet they don't want it to expand either??

    They want it to stay exactly as it is, no bigger, no smaller, for the rest of time.

    Sorry, you don't get to make that choice, not in the real world. You can't choose eternal stasis.

    Build it.
    The only people who have a strong case against Heathrow are those who bought their houses before 1946.

    After that any buyer knew exactly where Heathrow was situated and planes were much noisier than now.
    Indeed. I was in Kew Gardens today, on a pleasant mild September afternoon with me eldest daughter and her mum, A nice day out.

    At one point I looked up and was astonished to see a plane so close it looked like it was about to land on Richmond Green (of course it was headed for Heathrow). 30 years ago the noise would have made conversation inaudible.

    http://theconversation.com/whisper-it-jet-engines-are-getting-quieter-44331


    Planes are much quieter than they were. Build LHR3, and hurry up about it.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 13,145
    surbiton said:

    FF43 said:

    The objection to Heathrow

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    The only policy where SeanT and I agree.
    I suspect we agree on a few others, too. I can be surprisingly lefty, at times.

    Anyway we agree on Heathrow. T May has enormous capital right now. she should spend it on LHR3. Because it will earn interest over time.

    Fuck Sadiq and Boris and LUDICROUS Gatwick.

    I don't think Sadiq is actually anti-Heathrow. It was not a position to hang on to in the campaign. I am not sure about Boris either since I am not sure he actually believes in anything.
    tim, late of this parish, had a good angle on Heathrow. Ask the (complaining) locals, if they hate LHR so much, whether they want to CLOSE Heathrow, with all of its jobs, and move it to a new airport on Canvey Island.

    Most of them will say No Way, of course not. Yet they don't want it to expand either??

    They want it to stay exactly as it is, no bigger, no smaller, for the rest of time.

    Sorry, you don't get to make that choice, not in the real world. You can't choose eternal stasis.

    Build it.
    The objection to Heathrow expansion is the noise. But runways don't make noise; aeroplanes do. There's an obvious deal to be done here. Agree one or two additional runways in exchange for reducing the noise impact. They can do this by limiting the types of aircraft that land, adjusting flight paths and glideslopes and so on. Then go back to the neighbours. What do you prefer? More runways or more noise?
    Better still, don't ask them. Get on with it. T May is the MP for Maidenhead - so I am not sure.
    The solution is to move the runways to the west, out by the M25 and the reservoirs, which would increase the altitude of landing planes over west London and significnatly reduce the noise impact on the western suburbs.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 6,831
    SeanT said:

    AndyJS said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    There could be a by-election in Richmond Park if she does.
    She'll cope. It would go Lib Dem (maybe). Who cares.
    Sean

    Ref Lascaux and cave paintings, I got the spelling wrong on the cave where you can see the originals - Fond de Gaumme:

    http://www.sites-les-eyzies.fr/en/

    Les Eyzies de Tayac is not a bad little town either to base yourself in for a few days. We did a day trip from there to see Simon de Montfort's castle (the one who persecuted the Cathars, not the Magna Carta one). IIRC, Mr Morris Dancer would love it - a stonking big trebuchet is set up in the grounds.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 20,316
    AndyJS said:

    I'm in favour of the full monty: third runway at Heathrow, Boris Island, Gatwick expansion, etc. The more airports and runways the better.

    The business case for BI is dependent on LHR being closed and the land sold off. It's never going to happen, way too much opposition from the M3 and M4 corridor business who don't want to cross London to catch a plane.
  • SeanT said:

    Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

    lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

    Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

    If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

    I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.
    Expand City airport. Demolish Canary Wharf - we won't need it after the financial industry decamps to the Eurozone.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    AndyJS said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    There could be a by-election in Richmond Park if she does.
    I don't think Zac will resign. He promised this in 2010.
  • Interesting polling - it seems that more damage is being done to Labour because of the splits, divisions and uncertainty over what the party now stands for, than by the underwhelming general public support for Corbyn and his project. Not sure whether that'll be enough to persuade right-leaning Labour MPs to shut up for a while - though that might just be enough to save a few of them their seats, even if it isn't a route to victory.
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,079
    AndyJS said:

    I'm in favour of the full monty: third runway at Heathrow, Boris Island, Gatwick expansion, etc. The more airports and runways the better.

    Pah! There should be 4 runways at Heathrow to make it future proof plus expand the rest.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,750
    MTimT said:

    SeanT said:

    AndyJS said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    There could be a by-election in Richmond Park if she does.
    She'll cope. It would go Lib Dem (maybe). Who cares.
    Sean

    Ref Lascaux and cave paintings, I got the spelling wrong on the cave where you can see the originals - Fond de Gaumme:

    http://www.sites-les-eyzies.fr/en/

    Les Eyzies de Tayac is not a bad little town either to base yourself in for a few days. We did a day trip from there to see Simon de Montfort's castle (the one who persecuted the Cathars, not the Magna Carta one). IIRC, Mr Morris Dancer would love it - a stonking big trebuchet is set up in the grounds.
    Thankee kindly! They're booking me into Font de Gaume, as it happens. I get to see the lot, apparently.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 2,843
    SeanT said:

    Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

    lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

    Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

    If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

    I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.
    Boris island (or something similar) is the right long-term choice. Evacuated underground train lines are the right choice in the long term too. (And possibly if really good make the former redundant). Kent needs a boost, the area near Heathrow could be gentrified, and HS2's budget could be used for proper trains.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 3,749
    edited September 2016
    FF43 said:

    The objection to Heathrow

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    The only policy where SeanT and I agree.

    Fuck Sadiq and Boris and LUDICROUS Gatwick.

    I don't think Sadiq is actually anti-Heathrow. It was not a position to hang on to in the campaign. I am not sure about Boris either since I am not sure he actually believes in anything.
    tim, late of this parish, had a good angle on Heathrow. Ask the (complaining) locals, if they hate LHR so much, whether they want to CLOSE Heathrow, with all of its jobs, and move it to a new airport on Canvey Island.

    Most of them will say No Way, of course not. Yet they don't want it to expand either??

    They want it to stay exactly as it is, no bigger, no smaller, for the rest of time.

    Sorry, you don't get to make that choice, not in the real world. You can't choose eternal stasis.

    Build it.
    The objection to Heathrow expansion is the noise. But runways don't make noise; aeroplanes do. There's an obvious deal to be done here. Agree one or two additional runways in exchange for reducing the noise impact. They can do this by limiting the types of aircraft that land, adjusting flight paths and glideslopes and so on. Then go back to the neighbours. What do you prefer? More runways or more noise?
    It is not just the noise and pollution and the risk of flying thousands of planes over London , it is the cost, risk, legality and do-ability. It won't happen even if it is approved. We need an new runway. Gatwick is the only pragmatic option.

    "The Airports Commission preference for Heathrow expansion over alternatives rests heavily on claims of substantially higher economic benefits at Heathrow. This differential rests on a report produced by PwC, as equivalent numbers produced under the normally accepted government methodology (WebTAG) show minimal variance between the Heathrow and Gatwick schemes. The use of numbers generated by the PwC report has been criticised by the Airports Commission’s own economic advisers, Professor Peter Mackie and Brian Pearce. "

    http://www.heathrowappg.com/heathrow-expansion-a-risk-assessment-2/

    It is very easy to sit at your keyboard on a Saturday night with a glass of wine and and bang the table and say "damn it - just build it".
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 49,433

    SeanT said:

    Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

    lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

    Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

    If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

    I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.
    Expand City airport. Demolish Canary Wharf - we won't need it after the financial industry decamps to the Eurozone.
    The whole financial industry is not going to decamp to the Eurozone (assuming of course 5* don't win the next Italian elections and the Euro collapses anyway). Canary Wharf and the regeneration of Docklands was one of the great British success stories of the last century
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 13,145
    surbiton said:

    AndyJS said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    There could be a by-election in Richmond Park if she does.
    I don't think Zac will resign. He promised this in 2010.
    He was asked just recently and said that, whilst he regretted the promise (or, in other words, he can see what is coming) he would nevertheless keep it. The more interesting question is whether he will re-stand (which was his original intention). After his unsavoury mayoral campaign he is now tarnished goods in London politics.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,750
    Omnium said:

    SeanT said:

    Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

    lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

    Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

    If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

    I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.
    Boris island (or something similar) is the right long-term choice. Evacuated underground train lines are the right choice in the long term too. (And possibly if really good make the former redundant). Kent needs a boost, the area near Heathrow could be gentrified, and HS2's budget could be used for proper trains.
    It we're going totally blue sky, then Luton is the right choice. By the M25, and M1. 15 minutes from St Pancras and the Eurostar (with a high speed train). Best side of London for 90% of the UK. Surrounded by poor people who want the jobs and won't complain

    But to scale up Luton you have to level a couple of hills apparently. So it won't be Luton. It will be LHR if Theresa has any cullions.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    edited September 2016
    SeanT said:

    Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

    lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

    Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

    If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

    I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.
    But Gatwick can serve Northern France with good connections !! Oh, we have left the EU !

    I went to Belfast two weeks ago. Not only is there a City Airport, there is also an "International" airport. Excuse me, how many people actually live here !

    And, I thought Dublin had become the Irish hub.
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,079
    Would Zac be missed if he resigned?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 13,145
    edited September 2016
    Omnium said:

    SeanT said:

    Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

    lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

    Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

    If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

    I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.
    Boris island (or something similar) is the right long-term choice. Evacuated underground train lines are the right choice in the long term too. (And possibly if really good make the former redundant). Kent needs a boost, the area near Heathrow could be gentrified, and HS2's budget could be used for proper trains.
    Boris island is idiotic. Its only purpose was to give Boris something to argue for that didn't impact on west London. There is nothing there except birds. Birds and planes don't mix, at all. There is no workforce, and no housing for the huge workforce a new airport would need. And not too many passengers coming from south east of London. All the supporting industry and infrastructure (catering, engineering, postage, shipping, car hire, hotels, you name it) is in west London. And it would cost a fortune. As well as put half of west Londoners out of a job.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    Would Zac be missed if he resigned?

    Lib Dems could win with their second referendum pledge. Zac will be told not to resign.
  • MikeL said:

    Junior Doctors strikes all cancelled.

    They were meeting today to consider a leadership challenge and the large feedback they had received from their members. Assume the support for strikes has greatly reduced and they are now hoping the Courts will intervene next week
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 49,433
    edited September 2016
    Barnesian said:

    HYUFD said:

    JonathanD said:

    "The bosses of several of America’s biggest banks and corporations have warned Theresa May they will pre-emptively shift operations into Europe unless she can provide early clarity on the future shape of EU-UK relations.

    According to an account of the meeting obtained by The Telegraph, Mrs May declined to provide information about how the British government would approach the Brexit negotiations, other than pursuing a deal that was “in the national interest”.

    There followed “frank exchanges” in which bosses warned they could not wait to discover the final outcome of the two-year Article 50 negotiations before making major investment decisions that could see thousands of UK jobs shift to Europe....

    Downing Street’s uncompromising line on curbing EU migration has caused friction between Mr Hammond and Mrs May’s political team which is dominated by former Home Office officials who “understand the politics of migration rather better than the economy”, the source said....

    Financial services generate more than £60bn pounds a year in tax, a quarter of which comes from foreign-owned banks, revenues that the Treasury fears will now be put in jeopardy."

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/24/brexit-warning-us-bank-bosses-from-goldman-sachs-morgan-stanley/

    May knows that the public want migration controlled above all and though she does want a free trade deal too that has to come first. In any case, even if some banks do move operations to Frankfurt, Paris and Dublin, London will still remain comfortably the largest financial centre in Europe.
    Not true. Nearly half (49%) of leave voters said the biggest single reason for wanting to leave the EU was "the principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK". One third (33%) said the main reason was that leaving "offered the best chance for the UK to regain control over immigration and its own borders."

    That is 33% of 52% i,e about 17% said the main reason was immigration.

    http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2016-06-30/poll-shows-brexit-vote-was-about-british-sovereignty-not-anti-immigration
    Yes true. 52% of voters as a whole, 76% of leave voters, prioritise controlling immigration over 28% of all voters and 8% of leave voters who prioritise access to the single market. If they were voting simply for more decisions to be taken in the UK they would be happy to leave the EU but stay in the single market. Of course having more decisions taken in the UK is connected to regaining control over UK borders anyway
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 3,749
    surbiton said:

    Would Zac be missed if he resigned?

    Lib Dems could win with their second referendum pledge. Zac will be told not to resign.
    Zac isn't going to resign. If he did, he would win the by-election.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 6,831
    JonathanD said:

    "The bosses of several of America’s biggest banks and corporations have warned Theresa May they will pre-emptively shift operations into Europe unless she can provide early clarity on the future shape of EU-UK relations.

    According to an account of the meeting obtained by The Telegraph, Mrs May declined to provide information about how the British government would approach the Brexit negotiations, other than pursuing a deal that was “in the national interest”.

    There followed “frank exchanges” in which bosses warned they could not wait to discover the final outcome of the two-year Article 50 negotiations before making major investment decisions that could see thousands of UK jobs shift to Europe....

    Downing Street’s uncompromising line on curbing EU migration has caused friction between Mr Hammond and Mrs May’s political team which is dominated by former Home Office officials who “understand the politics of migration rather better than the economy”, the source said....

    Financial services generate more than £60bn pounds a year in tax, a quarter of which comes from foreign-owned banks, revenues that the Treasury fears will now be put in jeopardy."

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/24/brexit-warning-us-bank-bosses-from-goldman-sachs-morgan-stanley/

    Seems to me from this that the banks really, really don't want to set up European offices and are begging May to tell them they don't need to.

    Of course May cannot tell them at this point whether they'll have to. Even is she was prepared to bend over backwards to protect passporting, it is not within her power to guarantee it. If I were on the executive team of one of those banks, I wouldn't be waiting for May to tell me what the negotiating position would be. I'd just open an office in the EU, but hold off on incurring larger costs of a move of certain operations until the situation clarified. Not sure what the problem is with that.

    Unless getting information was never the banks' real reason for the meeting, but rather they were there to lobby May to guarantee passporting.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,750
    Barnesian said:

    FF43 said:

    The objection to Heathrow

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    The only policy where SeanT and I agree.

    Fuck Sadiq and Boris and LUDICROUS Gatwick.

    I don't think Sadiq is actually anti-Heathrow. It was not a position to hang on to in the campaign. I am not sure about Boris either since I am not sure he actually believes in anything.
    tim, late of this parish, had a good angle on Heathrow. Ask the (complaining) locals, if they hate LHR so much, whether they want to CLOSE Heathrow, with all of its jobs, and move it to a new airport on Canvey Island.

    Most of them will say No Way, of course not. Yet they don't want it to expand either??

    They want it to stay exactly as it is, no bigger, no smaller, for the rest of time.

    Sorry, you don't get to make that choice, not in the real world. You can't choose eternal stasis.

    Build it.
    The objection to Heathrow expansion is the noise. But runways don't make noise; aeroplanes do. There's an obvious deal to be done here. Agree one or two additional runways in exchange for reducing the noise impact. They can do this by limiting the types of aircraft that land, adjusting flight paths and glideslopes and so on. Then go back to the neighbours. What do you prefer? More runways or more noise?
    It is n2/

    It is very easy to sit at your keyboard on a Saturday night with a glass of wine and and bang the table and say "damn it - just build it".
    Well, I'm not just sitting at my table sipping wine, I'm going by the multi-million quid Davies Commission which was very expensively employed by the prime minister to exhaustively analyse all the various options pertaining to this exact question - Gatwick, Stansted, Heathrow, Boris Island? - and which decided, with great fanfare, and after much elaborate deliberation, that we should build a new runway at Heathrow.

    So I think, in this instance, we are allowed to say, FFS, just do it already

    http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-3671565/We-build-new-runway-world-aren-t-turning-inwards-warns-Airports-Commission-boss.html
  • SeanT said:


    Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

    30 mins to London Victoria, also direct trains to Bedford, Luton and the south coast.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 49,433
    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    I'm in favour of the full monty: third runway at Heathrow, Boris Island, Gatwick expansion, etc. The more airports and runways the better.

    I presume you do not live in an airline flightpath! We certainly need to expand one airport but a third runway at Heathrow should be it
    The new Airbus double-decker is amazingly quiet, as I found out on a flight from Dubai to Sydney a few weeks ago.
    Maybe but that is one flight and you were flying in it, not underneath it
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 2,459
    Back from trip to London. Just been reading through a LauraK piece from the BBC news site earlier today, and this caught my eye:

    *****

    It's possible this will embolden Jeremy Corbyn to further change his party and its policies.

    When I spoke to him just before his first leadership victory last year I asked him what lessons he had learned from his election to Parliament in 1983, when Labour went down to a disastrous defeat under Michael Foot.

    Jeremy Corbyn draws some clear lessons from Michael Foot's defeat in 1983.

    He told me: "It taught me the formation of the SDP was catastrophic to the election chances of Labour.

    'The Conservative so-called triumph in 1983 owed more to the division of the opposition vote than a move to the left."

    He certainly didn't share Gerald Kaufman's analysis that the anti-nuclear weapons and anti-EU manifesto was "the longest suicide note in history".

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37449631

    *****

    This strongly suggests, unsurprisingly, that Corbyn attributes the crushing of Labour in the same election in which he entered Parliament to the SDP, taking no account of the fact that the 1983 manifesto platform wasn't particularly popular with the electorate.

    The Far Left has learned nothing, and forgotten nothing. Expect defeat in the next election to be blamed entirely on boat rocking by the moderates, before the leadership passes seamlessly on to a Far Left successor (if JC doesn't fancy simply staying in post for another few years, of course.)

    Labour is over as a centre-left party. It's not coming back.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 6,831
    SeanT said:

    MTimT said:

    SeanT said:

    AndyJS said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    There could be a by-election in Richmond Park if she does.
    She'll cope. It would go Lib Dem (maybe). Who cares.
    Sean

    Ref Lascaux and cave paintings, I got the spelling wrong on the cave where you can see the originals - Fond de Gaumme:

    http://www.sites-les-eyzies.fr/en/

    Les Eyzies de Tayac is not a bad little town either to base yourself in for a few days. We did a day trip from there to see Simon de Montfort's castle (the one who persecuted the Cathars, not the Magna Carta one). IIRC, Mr Morris Dancer would love it - a stonking big trebuchet is set up in the grounds.
    Thankee kindly! They're booking me into Font de Gaume, as it happens. I get to see the lot, apparently.
    Excellent! Font de Gaumme is awesome, in the true sense of the word. I was struck with awe.
  • surbiton said:



    Their own rulebook, maybe. But they seem utterly clueless about the rules the voters will follow....

    I really don't think even they believe they could win in 2020. For them the important thing is to take over and now they are in situ. They believe the revolution has started.
    As David Herdson keeps pointing out - it is a battle over the structures and the succession, for now.

    Think of Corbyn as the John the Baptist figure for them. He has preached in the wilderness and ultimately prepared the ground. Then it is a matter of holding on to it long enough for the Messiah to come...

    FWIW if there is one - some left-wing version of Tony Blair, a British and more socialist-leaning version of Trudeau Jr or one of the Kennedies - then it'd probably be next but one. Imagine whoever is anointed next, say Lisa Nandy, seems more likely in the gameplan to be a "steadying the ship" candidate until The One comes along.
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    I'm in favour of the full monty: third runway at Heathrow, Boris Island, Gatwick expansion, etc. The more airports and runways the better.

    I presume you do not live in an airline flightpath! We certainly need to expand one airport but a third runway at Heathrow should be it
    The new Airbus double-decker is amazingly quiet, as I found out on a flight from Dubai to Sydney a few weeks ago.
    I hate to sound picky but being "on a flight" on the relevant plane is surely the worst possible position in the world from which to make this judgment.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 3,749
    IanB2 said:

    surbiton said:

    AndyJS said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    It's also popular in parts of the country - the north, Scotland, Wales - where Tories are weak and need support. Meanwhile, the Tories of Kingston, Henley, Berks and Bucks aren't switching to Corbyn any time soon.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    There could be a by-election in Richmond Park if she does.
    I don't think Zac will resign. He promised this in 2010.
    He was asked just recently and said that, whilst he regretted the promise (or, in other words, he can see what is coming) he would nevertheless keep it. The more interesting question is whether he will re-stand (which was his original intention). After his unsavoury mayoral campaign he is now tarnished goods in London politics.
    He is fourth favorite behind Johnson, Hammond and Osborne as next Tory Leader (on 14). Hammond has said he doesn't want the job. I was talking with Zac yesterday. He is firing on all cylinders.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 3,749
    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    I'm in favour of the full monty: third runway at Heathrow, Boris Island, Gatwick expansion, etc. The more airports and runways the better.

    I presume you do not live in an airline flightpath! We certainly need to expand one airport but a third runway at Heathrow should be it
    The new Airbus double-decker is amazingly quiet, as I found out on a flight from Dubai to Sydney a few weeks ago.
    That's funny. :-)
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 24,091
    Barnesian said:

    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS said:

    I'm in favour of the full monty: third runway at Heathrow, Boris Island, Gatwick expansion, etc. The more airports and runways the better.

    I presume you do not live in an airline flightpath! We certainly need to expand one airport but a third runway at Heathrow should be it
    The new Airbus double-decker is amazingly quiet, as I found out on a flight from Dubai to Sydney a few weeks ago.
    That's funny. :-)
    https://www.wired.com/2008/12/a380-is-so-quie/
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    surbiton said:



    Their own rulebook, maybe. But they seem utterly clueless about the rules the voters will follow....

    I really don't think even they believe they could win in 2020. For them the important thing is to take over and now they are in situ. They believe the revolution has started.
    As David Herdson keeps pointing out - it is a battle over the structures and the succession, for now.

    Think of Corbyn as the John the Baptist figure for them. He has preached in the wilderness and ultimately prepared the ground. Then it is a matter of holding on to it long enough for the Messiah to come...

    FWIW if there is one - some left-wing version of Tony Blair, a British and more socialist-leaning version of Trudeau Jr or one of the Kennedies - then it'd probably be next but one. Imagine whoever is anointed next, say Lisa Nandy, seems more likely in the gameplan to be a "steadying the ship" candidate until The One comes along.
    Nandy didn't look too happy with Jezza on This Week.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 24,091
    edited September 2016

    SeanT said:

    Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

    lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

    Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

    If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

    I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.
    Expand City airport. Demolish Canary Wharf - we won't need it after the financial industry decamps to the Eurozone.
    Have you been to Canary Wharf recently? It's difficult to move sometimes due to the high volumes of people working there.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 49,433
    edited September 2016

    surbiton said:



    Their own rulebook, maybe. But they seem utterly clueless about the rules the voters will follow....

    I really don't think even they believe they could win in 2020. For them the important thing is to take over and now they are in situ. They believe the revolution has started.
    As David Herdson keeps pointing out - it is a battle over the structures and the succession, for now.

    Think of Corbyn as the John the Baptist figure for them. He has preached in the wilderness and ultimately prepared the ground. Then it is a matter of holding on to it long enough for the Messiah to come...

    FWIW if there is one - some left-wing version of Tony Blair, a British and more socialist-leaning version of Trudeau Jr or one of the Kennedies - then it'd probably be next but one. Imagine whoever is anointed next, say Lisa Nandy, seems more likely in the gameplan to be a "steadying the ship" candidate until The One comes along.
    The 'One' seems to be Clive Lewis, Lisa Nandy of course backed Owen Smith and so is really a Tory! A more likely 'steadying the ship' candidate is John McDonnell. However Trudeau Jr and the Kennedies, Obama and Blair were all reasonably centrist, not full on socialist like Corbyn and his acolytes. For Corbynism to win we would need something like the 25% unemployment rate Greece had when Syriza won in January 2015 rather than the 5% unemployment rate we have now
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 13,145
    AndyJS said:

    SeanT said:

    Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

    lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

    Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

    If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

    I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.
    Expand City airport. Demolish Canary Wharf - we won't need it after the financial industry decamps to the Eurozone.
    Have you been to Canary Wharf recently? It's difficult to move due to the high volumes of people working there.
    If they were working, they would all be closeted away at their desks tapping at their keyboards. The crowds are people shopping, not working!
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 3,749
    edited September 2016
    SeanT said:

    Barnesian said:

    FF43 said:

    The objection to Heathrow

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    The only policy where SeanT and I agree.

    Fuck Sadiq and Boris and LUDICROUS Gatwick.

    I don't think Sadiq is actually anti-Heathrow. It was not a position to hang on to in the campaign. I am not sure about Boris either since I am not sure he actually believes in anything.
    tim, late of this parish, had a good angle on Heathrow. Ask the (complaining) locals, if they hate LHR so much, whether they want to CLOSE Heathrow, with all of its jobs, and move it to a new airport on Canvey Island.

    Most of them will say No Way, of course not. Yet they don't want it to expand either??

    They want it to stay exactly as it is, no bigger, no smaller, for the rest of time.

    Sorry, you don't get to make that choice, not in the real world. You can't choose eternal stasis.

    Build it.
    ?
    It is n2/

    It is very easy to sit at your keyboard on a Saturday night with a glass of wine and and bang the table and say "damn it - just build it".
    Well, I'm not just sitting at my table sipping wine, I'm going by the multi-million quid Davies Commission which was very expensively employed by the prime minister to exhaustively analyse all the various options pertaining to this exact question - Gatwick, Stansted, Heathrow, Boris Island? - and which decided, with great fanfare, and after much elaborate deliberation, that we should build a new runway at Heathrow.

    So I think, in this instance, we are allowed to say, FFS, just do it already

    http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-3671565/We-build-new-runway-world-aren-t-turning-inwards-warns-Airports-Commission-boss.html
    The Airports Commission preference for Heathrow expansion over alternatives rests heavily on claims of substantially higher economic benefits at Heathrow. This differential rests on a report produced by PwC. It is in the technical notes. I have read it.

    Equivalent numbers produced under the normally accepted government methodology (WebTAG) show minimal variance between the Heathrow and Gatwick schemes.

    The use of numbers generated by the PwC report has been criticised by the Airports Commission’s own economic advisers, Professor Peter Mackie and Brian Pearce.

    "Experts" can be wrong or have an agenda,

    http://www.prweek.com/article/1332084/department-transport-hires-heathrow-pr-director-simon-baugh
  • IanB2 said:

    AndyJS said:

    SeanT said:

    Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

    lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

    Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

    If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

    I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.
    Expand City airport. Demolish Canary Wharf - we won't need it after the financial industry decamps to the Eurozone.
    Have you been to Canary Wharf recently? It's difficult to move due to the high volumes of people working there.
    If they were working, they would all be closeted away at their desks tapping at their keyboards. The crowds are people shopping, not working!
    Shoppers need people to serve them in the, er, shops :)
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    SeanT said:

    Omnium said:

    SeanT said:

    Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

    lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

    Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

    If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

    I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.
    Boris island (or something similar) is the right long-term choice. Evacuated underground train lines are the right choice in the long term too. (And possibly if really good make the former redundant). Kent needs a boost, the area near Heathrow could be gentrified, and HS2's budget could be used for proper trains.
    It we're going totally blue sky, then Luton is the right choice. By the M25, and M1. 15 minutes from St Pancras and the Eurostar (with a high speed train). Best side of London for 90% of the UK. Surrounded by poor people who want the jobs and won't complain

    But to scale up Luton you have to level a couple of hills apparently. So it won't be Luton. It will be LHR if Theresa has any cullions.
    Admittedly, whose idea it was 70 years ago, it was barmy. To build your major airport west of the most populous city where the prevailing winds are from the west was a mad decision.

    Gatwick, Luton, Stansted in that sense are better locations.

    Gatwick and Stansted are sadly in the wrong place. Luton could do it but a place that would be ideal would be somewhere between the M4 and M40, east of Oxford.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 20,316
    edited September 2016
    MTimT said:

    JonathanD said:

    "The bosses of several of America’s biggest banks and corporations have warned Theresa May they will pre-emptively shift operations into Europe unless she can provide early clarity on the future shape of EU-UK relations.

    According to an account of the meeting obtained by The Telegraph, Mrs May declined to provide information about how the British government would approach the Brexit negotiations, other than pursuing a deal that was “in the national interest”.

    There followed “frank exchanges” in which bosses warned they could not wait to discover the final outcome of the two-year Article 50 negotiations before making major investment decisions that could see thousands of UK jobs shift to Europe....

    Downing Street’s uncompromising line on curbing EU migration has caused friction between Mr Hammond and Mrs May’s political team which is dominated by former Home Office officials who “understand the politics of migration rather better than the economy”, the source said....

    Financial services generate more than £60bn pounds a year in tax, a quarter of which comes from foreign-owned banks, revenues that the Treasury fears will now be put in jeopardy."

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/24/brexit-warning-us-bank-bosses-from-goldman-sachs-morgan-stanley/

    Seems to me from this that the banks really, really don't want to set up European offices and are begging May to tell them they don't need to.

    Of course May cannot tell them at this point whether they'll have to. Even is she was prepared to bend over backwards to protect passporting, it is not within her power to guarantee it. If I were on the executive team of one of those banks, I wouldn't be waiting for May to tell me what the negotiating position would be. I'd just open an office in the EU, but hold off on incurring larger costs of a move of certain operations until the situation clarified. Not sure what the problem is with that.

    Unless getting information was never the banks' real reason for the meeting, but rather they were there to lobby May to guarantee passporting.
    How easy would it be for the financial services houses to set up a shell company in Dublin, from which they can trade into the EU if it's not allowed directly from the UK? Underwritten by the British government if necessary, with most of the actual work continuing to be done in London.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 24,091
    IanB2 said:

    AndyJS said:

    SeanT said:

    Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

    lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

    Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

    If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

    I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.
    Expand City airport. Demolish Canary Wharf - we won't need it after the financial industry decamps to the Eurozone.
    Have you been to Canary Wharf recently? It's difficult to move due to the high volumes of people working there.
    If they were working, they would all be closeted away at their desks tapping at their keyboards. The crowds are people shopping, not working!
    It was the lunch hour IIRC.
  • Paul_BedfordshirePaul_Bedfordshire Posts: 3,632
    edited September 2016
    SeanT said:

    Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

    Uu
    lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

    Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

    If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

    I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.
    Its all of about 7 miles along the M23 from the M25

    Gatwick is on Thameslink as well as the entire Brighton Line service. About 20 trains an hour each way with through trains to Hastings, Brighton, Portsmouth, Southampton, Reading, Croydon, Clapham, London Victoria, London Bridge, London Blackfriars, London City, London Farringdon, London Kings Cross and St Pancras, Luton, Stevenage, Bedford, Peterborough and Cambridge

    Heathrow will just get 4 an hour to Abbey Wood on Crossrail. 4 an hour to Londons worst located terminus Paddington or an interminable grind on the picc line. Big Deal.


    Im 50 miles north of London and I would chose Gatwick every time. Heathrow is an overcrowded inaccessible dump.
  • AndyJS said:

    SeanT said:

    Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

    lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

    Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

    If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

    I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.
    Expand City airport. Demolish Canary Wharf - we won't need it after the financial industry decamps to the Eurozone.
    Have you been to Canary Wharf recently? It's difficult to move sometimes due to the high volumes of people working there.
    I'm disturbed that it was taken as a serious suggestion. :)
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    edited September 2016
    Barnesian said:

    SeanT said:

    Barnesian said:

    FF43 said:

    The objection to Heathrow

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Most interesting part of this poll is the "expand Heathrow" question. It's popular AND the right thing to do for the nation.

    Build the damn thing. Give it the green light, Theresa. Do it.

    The only policy where SeanT and I agree.

    Fuck Sadiq and Boris and LUDICROUS Gatwick.

    .
    tim, late of this parish, had a good angle on Heathrow. Ask the (complaining) locals, if they hate LHR so much, whether they want to CLOSE Heathrow, with all of its jobs, and move it to a new airport on Canvey Island.

    Most of them will say No Way, of course not. Yet they don't want it to expand either??

    They want it to stay exactly as it is, no bigger, no smaller, for the rest of time.

    Sorry, you don't get to make that choice, not in the real world. You can't choose eternal stasis.

    Build it.
    ?
    It is n2/

    It is very easy to sit at your keyboard on a Saturday night with a glass of wine and and bang the table and say "damn it - just build it".
    Well, I'm not just sitting at my table sipping wine, I'm going by the multi-million quid Davies Commission which was very expensively employed by the prime minister to exhaustively analyse all the various options pertaining to this exact question - Gatwick, Stansted, Heathrow, Boris Island? - and which decided, with great fanfare, and after much elaborate deliberation, that we should build a new runway at Heathrow.

    So I think, in this instance, we are allowed to say, FFS, just do it already

    http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-3671565/We-build-new-runway-world-aren-t-turning-inwards-warns-Airports-Commission-boss.html
    The Airports Commission preference for Heathrow expansion over alternatives rests heavily on claims of substantially higher economic benefits at Heathrow. This differential rests on a report produced by PwC. It is in the technical notes. I have read it.

    Equivalent numbers produced under the normally accepted government methodology (WebTAG) show minimal variance between the Heathrow and Gatwick schemes.

    The use of numbers generated by the PwC report has been criticised by the Airports Commission’s own economic advisers, Professor Peter Mackie and Brian Pearce.

    "Experts" can be wrong or have an agenda,

    http://www.prweek.com/article/1332084/department-transport-hires-heathrow-pr-director-simon-baugh
    Let's build both then.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,368
    edited September 2016
    SeanT said:

    Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

    lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

    Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

    If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

    I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.
    It takes an hour less to get from Cannock to Gatwick than to Heathrow by train although it isn't much cheaper. By road there is very little in it.

    Luton and Stansted are both more convenient although no London airport is as convenient as Manchester or Nottingham, or even Birmingham.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 24,091
    surbiton said:

    SeanT said:

    Omnium said:

    SeanT said:

    Gatwick has got space for another runway without demolishing an entire town, it has got a main railway line running right through the airport and a motorway serving it that isnt jammed solid the whole time. Its a no brainer. Gatwick.

    lol. It's on entirely the wrong side of London for 80% of the country. It's nowhere near the M25, nor any other major motorways - unlike Heathrow which is on the M4, M5, M25, etc. Heathrow has peerless connections to central London and Paddington and, crucially, is on Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line). Gatwick is a slow crawl to south London, and won't be on Crossrail.

    Gatwick is a not a world class hub, and will never be; Heathrow already is, and can get even better.

    If we choose Gatwick, we are choosing to be a 2nd class trading nation with 2nd class transport links.

    I don't think we can afford that choice, not after Brexit.
    Boris island (or something similar) is the right long-term choice. Evacuated underground train lines are the right choice in the long term too. (And possibly if really good make the former redundant). Kent needs a boost, the area near Heathrow could be gentrified, and HS2's budget could be used for proper trains.
    It we're going totally blue sky, then Luton is the right choice. By the M25, and M1. 15 minutes from St Pancras and the Eurostar (with a high speed train). Best side of London for 90% of the UK. Surrounded by poor people who want the jobs and won't complain

    But to scale up Luton you have to level a couple of hills apparently. So it won't be Luton. It will be LHR if Theresa has any cullions.
    Admittedly, whose idea it was 70 years ago, it was barmy. To build your major airport west of the most populous city where the prevailing winds are from the west was a mad decision.

    Gatwick, Luton, Stansted in that sense are better locations.

    Gatwick and Stansted are sadly in the wrong place. Luton could do it but a place that would be ideal would be somewhere between the M4 and M40, east of Oxford.
    A typical British quick-fix, like the decision to build the M5 with only two lanes, and then having to spend millions 20 years later to widen it to three lanes because all the bridges had to be demolished.

    "Worcestershire County Council, the Police and particularly the County Surveyor of Worcestershire made repeated representations that a dual 3-lane standard motorway was appropriate, however the Ministry of Transport insisted that a dual 2-lane motorway would be built at a cost of around £8 million. When the decision became necessary to widen the Worcestershire section of M5, it cost £123 million."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M5_motorway#Construction
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,750
    MTimT said:

    JonathanD said:

    "The bosses of several of America’s biggest banks and corporations have warned Theresa May they will pre-emptively shift operations into Europe unless she can provide early clarity on the future shape of EU-UK relations.



    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/24/brexit-warning-us-bank-bosses-from-goldman-sachs-morgan-stanley/

    Seems to me from this that the banks really, really don't want to set up European offices and are begging May to tell them they don't need to.

    Of course May cannot tell them at this point whether they'll have to. Even is she was prepared to bend over backwards to protect passporting, it is not within her power to guarantee it. If I were on the executive team of one of those banks, I wouldn't be waiting for May to tell me what the negotiating position would be. I'd just open an office in the EU, but hold off on incurring larger costs of a move of certain operations until the situation clarified. Not sure what the problem is with that.

    Unless getting information was never the banks' real reason for the meeting, but rather they were there to lobby May to guarantee passporting.
    Walking back from Kew Gardens to Kew Station, this sweet early autumn evening, past the multimillion quid houses of the bankers (and lawyers and art dealers and software moguls and lucky inheritors) who live in lovely Kew, with its organic butchers and chattering wine bars and dinky little bookshops and beautiful Georgian houses, it struck me just how intensely desirable London is, IF YOU ARE RICH

    No European city comes close. Frankfurt is a laughable comparison, Berlin is eerily provincial, Amsterdam is tiny, even Paris seems a bit stiff and dull and annoying. And French speaking. And which self respecting trillionaire would happily move to... Dublin?

    Those London bankers REALLY don't want to move. They have glorious lifestyles in London. Of course they WILL move in the end, if needs be, and the money demands. But the UK govt has inertia on its side. An intriguing battle.
This discussion has been closed.