Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The plan for a progressive alliance might have an itsy bitsy t

SystemSystem Posts: 11,016
edited December 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The plan for a progressive alliance might have an itsy bitsy teenie weenie flaw with it

How the 2015 general election result would look like under different voting systems by The @electoralreform Societyhttps://t.co/Gyvm8kJbyt pic.twitter.com/DPwiWsYk99

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • Options
    NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 703
    First?
  • Options
    NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 703
    That was a first for me! :-)

    FPT:
    NeilVW said:

    I'm sure political calculus had the replacement seat for morley and outwood going red again after the boundary changes. Think that was on GE2015 polling figures tho and corbyns probs affected those.

    That's right: Electoral Calculus have the new Batley and Morley as having a notional 2015 Labour majority of almost 5,000 (9.5 percentage points).

    http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/calcwork.py?seat=Batley and Morley

    Adjusting for the current national polling average makes it much closer - Labour are predicted to win the new seat by one percentage point or about 500 votes. It would be Labour's 170th-safest seat according to their calculations.

    http://tinyurl.com/glvrv9x
  • Options
    AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,869
    Thank you! It's arrived!

    No, not the AV thread - just the new thread: it wasn't showing up on my Vanilla index.

    Good evening, everyone.
  • Options
    MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584

    AV it.

  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,721
    They don't have enough in common to make a 'progressive' alliance meaningful in any case. Not being Tory is not enough to sway everyone to vote Lab or LD or SNP in various seats even if they did not vote Tory or UKIP.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,767
    We have no idea what we stand for - vote for us!
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,721
    I suspect coming up with policies more popular with the public will be a more successful route to power than changing the voting system or coming up with electoral pacts

    Crazy talk.

    In all seriousness, there are obvious partisan benefits to people like the LDs and UKIP especially to changing the voting system, but that doesn't mean it is not also a good idea regardless, and they should not shy away from proposing it as part of more popular policies just because it will, correctly, also be noted they would do better under such a system, even if it would not mean an electoral pact even under such a system would be successful.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    edited December 2016
    NeilVW said:

    I'm sure political calculus had the replacement seat for morley and outwood going red again after the boundary changes. Think that was on GE2015 polling figures tho and corbyns probs affected those.

    That's right: Electoral Calculus have the new Batley and Morley as having a notional 2015 Labour majority of almost 5,000 (9.5 percentage points).

    http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/calcwork.py?seat=Batley and Morley

    Adjusting for the current national polling average makes it much closer - Labour are predicted to win the new seat by one percentage point or about 500 votes. It would be Labour's 170th-safest seat according to their calculations.

    http://tinyurl.com/glvrv9x

    Or Labour's sixth most marginal seat, to put it another way. Which would still be their most devastating defeat since 1935 (and as they gained a hundred seats in that election, arguably since 1931).

    When was the last time a party had a net loss of seats at six successive general elections? Even the Liberals didn't have that long a losing streak.
  • Options
    AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,869
    kle4 said:

    I suspect coming up with policies more popular with the public will be a more successful route to power than changing the voting system or coming up with electoral pacts

    Crazy talk.

    In all seriousness, there are obvious partisan benefits to people like the LDs and UKIP especially to changing the voting system, but that doesn't mean it is not also a good idea regardless, and they should not shy away from proposing it as part of more popular policies just because it will, correctly, also be noted they would do better under such a system, even if it would not mean an electoral pact even under such a system would be successful.

    Agreed. It's quite possible that, having seen what a vote can do when each one counts, people in general will be more open to the idea of changing to a more proportional voting system.

    But I admit that I don't like any of the proportional systems I've seen proposed so far. I've said before on here, that it seems grotesque to rule out someone who's hugely second favourite just because s/he's no-one's first choice. That rejects someone everyone would be happy with in favour of someone nobody much wants.
  • Options
    NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 703
    Interesting that AV would have won the Lib Dems only one extra seat, according to the ERS/YouGov analysis.

  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,861
    edited December 2016
    Is this the much trailed Magnum Opus AV Thread, or the AV Paragraph? ;)

    FPTP is a much better electoral system for a Parliament - there is a higher chance of a majority and the government can be held to account on their manifesto, rather than negotiating most of it away in negotiations *after* the election.
  • Options
    MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    Just because you fail under FPTP does not mean that it should be changed. Perhaps spending more time developing policies which actual appeal to voters would be a good place to start.
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    Is this the much trailed Magnum Opus AV Thread, or the AV Paragraph? ;)

    FPTP is a much better electoral system for a Parliament - there is a higher chance of a majority and the government can be held to account on their manifesto, rather than negotiating most of it away in negotiations *after* the election.

    A parvum opus
  • Options
    MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584

    Sandpit said:

    Is this the much trailed Magnum Opus AV Thread, or the AV Paragraph? ;)

    FPTP is a much better electoral system for a Parliament - there is a higher chance of a majority and the government can be held to account on their manifesto, rather than negotiating most of it away in negotiations *after* the election.

    A parvum opus

    A flaccid AV thread.

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,914
    Voted for Skelton, tiny winnings on Murray, slightly bigger on Brownlee, laying Farah (Both win & top 2)
  • Options

    Sandpit said:

    Is this the much trailed Magnum Opus AV Thread, or the AV Paragraph? ;)

    FPTP is a much better electoral system for a Parliament - there is a higher chance of a majority and the government can be held to account on their manifesto, rather than negotiating most of it away in negotiations *after* the election.

    A parvum opus

    A flaccid AV thread.

    This is my definitive AV thread of 2016

    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/06/17/the-euref-might-be-more-like-the-av-referendum-and-not-the-indyref/
  • Options
    paulyork64paulyork64 Posts: 2,461
    I say stick with FPTP but every second place candidate gets a seat in the replacement House or Lords. Which would be renamed House of Losers with similar powers to the current HoL. If a party scored a majority in the Commons there should be a counterbalancing Opposition majority in the other place.
  • Options

    I say stick with FPTP but every second place candidate gets a seat in the replacement House or Lords. Which would be renamed House of Losers with similar powers to the current HoL. If a party scored a majority in the Commons there should be a counterbalancing Opposition majority in the other place.

    So the likes of Ed Balls who were rejected by the electorate could block the will of the people in the Lords?

    No ta.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Any "progressive alliance" that contains the SNP (without which such a thing is unlikely to command a Parliamentary majority anyway) will cause a large number of otherwise sympathetic English voters to run away screaming. It's a non-starter. Labour will have to learn how to win again under the current rules - or make way for another party that can.
  • Options
    @Scott_P The SPECTRE reference was just for you.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    edited December 2016
    @seaningle: Tension in the SPOTY press room as every writer who has 'Murray wins' pieces ready to go sees Al Brownlee's odds creep in ...
  • Options
    MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,203
    Pulpstar said:

    Voted for Skelton, tiny winnings on Murray, slightly bigger on Brownlee, laying Farah (Both win & top 2)

    Threw three calls at Brownlee, Jason K and Skelton. Have Jason K and Vardy ew and Brownlee ftw but not expecting to collect.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,914
    According to my totally unscientific twitter analysis (140 vs 90 mentions since last refresh) it'll be

    1) Murray
    2) Brownlee
  • Options
    Have the pollsters got it wrong again?
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    @Scott_P The SPECTRE reference was just for you.

    There are 3 doors.

    Behind 2 of them are the worst Bond movie ever made.

    You bought a ticket for SPECTRE, but now you have the choice to swap it for any other Bond movie ever...
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,861
    edited December 2016
    Sports Awards - are they making reference to Murray being the winner last year and possibly the first person to win it three times? If so, might the voting TV audience think it's someone else's turn?

    1.14ish might be worth a lay?

    Edit: Betfair have suspended with Murray at 1.24/1.29, definitely no value in laying that!
  • Options
    AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,869

    I say stick with FPTP but every second place candidate gets a seat in the replacement House or Lords. Which would be renamed House of Losers with similar powers to the current HoL. If a party scored a majority in the Commons there should be a counterbalancing Opposition majority in the other place.

    I love your new name: people would be proud of being Losers after all. But in a hung parliament situation both Houses would likely be hung, wouldn't they? Sounds like the country would be hung out to dry.
  • Options
    MURRAY!
  • Options
    Bloody Jocks, denying a Yorkshireman the SPOTY

    #YorkshireSecessionNow
  • Options
    MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,203
    Scott_P said:

    @Scott_P The SPECTRE reference was just for you.

    There are 3 doors.

    Behind 2 of them are the worst Bond movie ever made.

    You bought a ticket for SPECTRE, but now you have the choice to swap it for any other Bond movie ever...
    SPECTRE was a shocker, but then I seem to be alone in liking Quantum of Solace.

    Boring, Murray wins again. Shouldn't have won it last year.
  • Options
    AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,869
    Scott_P said:

    @seaningle: Tension in the SPOTY press room as every writer who has 'Murray wins' pieces ready to go sees Al Brownlee's odds creep in ...

    Well, this is 2016.
  • Options
    MrsBMrsB Posts: 574
    a progressive alliance is not going to happen. The left of centre parties are not all the same you know. Lib Dems and Labour are as different as UKIP and the Tories - except that hard core Labour hate the Lib Dems more than the Tories do UKIP, and that's saying something.
    We may share some values (at least with some members of the Labour party - not sure what the party as a whole stands for any more, which is part of the reason why no progressive alliance) but function entirely differently and our outlook is also entirely different.

    More likely that more parties will split than come together.
  • Options
    MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584

    Scott_P said:

    @Scott_P The SPECTRE reference was just for you.

    There are 3 doors.

    Behind 2 of them are the worst Bond movie ever made.

    You bought a ticket for SPECTRE, but now you have the choice to swap it for any other Bond movie ever...
    SPECTRE was a shocker, but then I seem to be alone in liking Quantum of Solace.

    Boring, Murray wins again. Shouldn't have won it last year.

    That's 3 wins now?

  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,807
    A Progressive Alliance (Lab, SNP, Plaid, Lib Dem, Green) vs a Con/UKIP alliance would give a gain of about 30 seats for the right.
  • Options
    MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,203

    Scott_P said:

    @Scott_P The SPECTRE reference was just for you.

    There are 3 doors.

    Behind 2 of them are the worst Bond movie ever made.

    You bought a ticket for SPECTRE, but now you have the choice to swap it for any other Bond movie ever...
    SPECTRE was a shocker, but then I seem to be alone in liking Quantum of Solace.

    Boring, Murray wins again. Shouldn't have won it last year.

    That's 3 wins now?

    Yep..
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,282
    Funny Murray joke.

    Great for equitators that Skelton came third.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181

    MURRAY!

    The second least surprising election result of 2016.

    There had to be one other time everyone was right.
  • Options
    NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 703
    edited December 2016
    @ydoethur

    Technically a net loss of seats at five successive GEs? ('01, '05, '10, '15, '20?)
  • Options
    paulyork64paulyork64 Posts: 2,461
    TSE - might Ed Balls have won his seat under AV and thus be able to block the will of the people from the HoC instead? I don't know the answer in that specific case but presumably the point of AV is that some candidates who come second on first preference votes win the seat after reallocations etc?
  • Options
    MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    Scott_P said:

    twitter.com/hendopolis/status/810592784239489025

    FT BREXIT LEAD: Fear....
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    NeilVW said:

    @ydoethur

    Technically a net loss of seats at five successive GEs? ('01, '05, '10, '15, '20?)

    Good spot, had miscounted. But that would still beat the Liberals 35, 45, 50, and 51.

    Mind you, if Labour continue like this I can see them making further losses in 2025 and even 2030. No party has a God-given right to exist but I've never come across a party with such a ferocious death wish before, not even the American Whigs.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,721
    edited December 2016
    I say if we keep FPTP, retain an appointed HoL, but ban anyone who has held or stood for elected office within the last 15 years - so it is not stuffed with people who just lost or were unable to ever get elected. Nothing wrong with some elder statesman down the line, but some limitation seems reasonable.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,767
    @MarkHopkins

    Megabank won't go first because their top people will just move to Gigabank.

    It will be all or none. I think we're well shy of that line.
  • Options
    mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    I'd have thought that assuming that people will vote the same way when the effects can be materially different is little more than garbage in, garbage out.

    Is there a subtlety that I'm missing?
  • Options
    chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    edited December 2016
    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,721
    edited December 2016
    I'd have thought that assuming that people will vote the same way when the effects can be materially different is little more than garbage in, garbage out.

    Is there a subtlety that I'm missing?


    It's not perfect, admittedly. If we assume people generally vote the way they want regardless there will not be a significant difference from a new voting system. It at least comes from definitive proof people have voted this way before, and guessing it might change a bit will not be too extreme, rather than complete speculation that there is a huge groundswell that people will vote differently under a different voting system.

    It could be true that people would vote differently, in fact most of us presume it would be to some extent, but is the likelihood it would be so much different that we cannot take a general guess?
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Just found I had Alistair Brownlee E/W at 100/1, 1/5 odds for top 3.

    Nice!
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
  • Options
    Scott_P said:
    There was a discussion on BBC's wake up to money programme last week with a representative from Germany who confirmed they were attempting to poach banks from London but when it was pointed out that Frankfurt's red tape was burdensome, the lack of English, and importantly German corporation tax north of 30% he admitted that talks were only exploratory

    With UK corporation tax going down to 17% why would banks accept an increase in excess of 13% in their corporation tax.

    Furthermore the FT are avid remain and are just part of the continuing project fear
  • Options
    NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 703
    edited December 2016
    matt said:

    I'd have thought that assuming that people will vote the same way when the effects can be materially different is little more than garbage in, garbage out.

    Is there a subtlety that I'm missing?

    The ERS commissioned a YouGov poll that asked people to imagine the voting system asked them to rank parties in order (so they could simulate AV and STV). Obviously not an exact science though.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,861
    Scott_P said:

    Just found I had Alistair Brownlee E/W at 100/1, 1/5 odds for top 3.

    Nice!

    Well done, that was a great bet!
  • Options
    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
    Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for us
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    Scott_P said:
    There was a discussion on BBC's wake up to money programme last week with a representative from Germany who confirmed they were attempting to poach banks from London but when it was pointed out that Frankfurt's red tape was burdensome, the lack of English, and importantly German corporation tax north of 30% he admitted that talks were only exploratory

    With UK corporation tax going down to 17% why would banks accept an increase in excess of 13% in their corporation tax.

    Furthermore the FT are avid remain and are just part of the continuing project fear
    Because many of them hardly pay any tax ?
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Sandpit said:

    Well done, that was a great bet!

    It was. Better yet, I posted it here too...

    http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/1265984/#Comment_1265984
  • Options
    surbiton said:

    Scott_P said:
    There was a discussion on BBC's wake up to money programme last week with a representative from Germany who confirmed they were attempting to poach banks from London but when it was pointed out that Frankfurt's red tape was burdensome, the lack of English, and importantly German corporation tax north of 30% he admitted that talks were only exploratory

    With UK corporation tax going down to 17% why would banks accept an increase in excess of 13% in their corporation tax.

    Furthermore the FT are avid remain and are just part of the continuing project fear
    Because many of them hardly pay any tax ?
    Where does the City get its billions from then
  • Options
    NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 703
    edited December 2016

    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
    Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for us
    And the chances are we'll get a decent amount of free-trade access to the EU, in any case, as it's in their interests too.

    The Australian High Commissioner made the point that in our case, we start from a position of free trade (albeit the single market in services has never been fully completed) and it would be the UK and EU deciding if we should erect new barriers.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,282
    edited December 2016
    Good prog on R4 about farming post-Brexit.

    Not sure I'd want to be a farmer right now with my fate in the hands of the three clowns.
  • Options
    MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,203
    edited December 2016

    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
    Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for us
    So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?
  • Options
    chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    So we have Australia, Canada, the US, Argentina, India, South Korea etc etc now saying let's get on with it, and people are pining for Latvia?
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
    Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for us
    So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?
    Because we will employ 300,000 people in a super-trade ministry to make deals with every country of the world.

  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,861
    Scott_P said:

    Sandpit said:

    Well done, that was a great bet!

    It was. Better yet, I posted it here too...

    http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/1265984/#Comment_1265984
    Double well done, especially to note the e/w option. I'm amazed that bookies continue to take e/w bets when there's a 1/10 favourite, all they ever do is complain at paying out of the clear second fav who gets placed ;)
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,597
    Lay Murray for 2017 - he can only go downhill from here.
  • Options

    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
    Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for us
    So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?
    How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade deals

    And we will still trade with the EU

    Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    surbiton said:

    Scott_P said:
    There was a discussion on BBC's wake up to money programme last week with a representative from Germany who confirmed they were attempting to poach banks from London but when it was pointed out that Frankfurt's red tape was burdensome, the lack of English, and importantly German corporation tax north of 30% he admitted that talks were only exploratory

    With UK corporation tax going down to 17% why would banks accept an increase in excess of 13% in their corporation tax.

    Furthermore the FT are avid remain and are just part of the continuing project fear
    Because many of them hardly pay any tax ?
    Where does the City get its billions from then
    For multi-nationals through PAYE . But you were talking about corporation tax.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    edited December 2016
    TOPPING said:

    Good prog on R4 about farming post-Brexit.

    Not sure I'd want to be a farmer right now with my fate in the hands of the three clowns.

    I suspect that most of them will feel that after 45 years of being mucked about by the EU and CAP, almost anything is likely to be an improvement.

    In this they are of course probably wrong, as most of CAP's dismal failures in this country were caused by the extraordinary incompetence of first MAFF and later DEFRA (for example TB, RPA, Milk Marque etc). The BSE crisis being a notable exception where the EU were deliberately responsible for maliciously damaging British farming, hugely assisted by the incompetence of the Ministry of Health and the hysteria of Harriet Harman.
  • Options
    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    Scott_P said:
    There was a discussion on BBC's wake up to money programme last week with a representative from Germany who confirmed they were attempting to poach banks from London but when it was pointed out that Frankfurt's red tape was burdensome, the lack of English, and importantly German corporation tax north of 30% he admitted that talks were only exploratory

    With UK corporation tax going down to 17% why would banks accept an increase in excess of 13% in their corporation tax.

    Furthermore the FT are avid remain and are just part of the continuing project fear
    Because many of them hardly pay any tax ?
    Where does the City get its billions from then
    For multi-nationals through PAYE . But you were talking about corporation tax.
    Do you know the amount of corporation tax paid by the City as a matter of interest
  • Options
    MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,203

    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
    Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for us
    So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?
    How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade deals

    And we will still trade with the EU

    Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
    We all know trade deals take years. And given the rest of the world will perceive our desperation, it's a fair call that at least in the short to medium term any deals we do strike will be less advantageous than what we have now. All I hear from leavers is head in the sand Pollyanna, pollyanna, pollyanna.

  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,273
    edited December 2016

    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
    Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for us
    So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?
    How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade deals

    And we will still trade with the EU

    Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
    We all know trade deals take years. And given the rest of the world will perceive our desperation, it's a fair call that at least in the short to medium term any deals we do strike will be less advantageous than what we have now. All I hear from leavers is head in the sand Pollyanna, pollyanna, pollyanna.

    Remind me - do we have a trade balance with the EU if so how much is it
  • Options
    chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341

    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
    Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for us
    So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?
    How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade deals

    And we will still trade with the EU

    Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
    We all know trade deals take years.

    Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.

    "Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.

  • Options
    chestnut said:

    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
    Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for us
    So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?
    How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade deals

    And we will still trade with the EU

    Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
    We all know trade deals take years.

    Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.

    "Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.

    Trump has already stated he is coming out of NAFTA and wants it to be converted to a trade deal with Canada and for the UK to join on our exit from the EU
  • Options
    MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,203
    chestnut said:

    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
    Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for us
    So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?
    How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade deals

    And we will still trade with the EU

    Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
    We all know trade deals take years.

    Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.

    "Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.

    Depends on the terms doesn't it? Don't expect the Aussies to bend over for us just because they were once our client state. The harder the bargain, the longer it'll take. We'll need it more than they do, and they know that.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052
    chestnut said:

    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
    Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for us
    So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?
    How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade deals

    And we will still trade with the EU

    Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
    We all know trade deals take years.

    Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.

    "Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.

    How many trade deals has the Australian High Commissioner negotiated?
  • Options
    numbercrunchernumbercruncher Posts: 136
    edited December 2016
  • Options
    @williamglenn

    How many referenda have the SNP lost?
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Golfers don't vote in SPOTY, it seems. Equestrians do though.
  • Options

    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
    Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for us
    So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?
    How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade deals

    And we will still trade with the EU

    Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
    We all know trade deals take years. And given the rest of the world will perceive our desperation, it's a fair call that at least in the short to medium term any deals we do strike will be less advantageous than what we have now. All I hear from leavers is head in the sand Pollyanna, pollyanna, pollyanna.

    Years is something we have. We need to make long term arrangements for the future and not just now-now-now.
  • Options
    NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 703
    edited December 2016

    chestnut said:

    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
    Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for us
    So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?
    How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade deals

    And we will still trade with the EU

    Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
    We all know trade deals take years.

    Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.

    "Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.

    How many trade deals has the Australian High Commissioner negotiated?
    Well he happened to be the minister in charge of foreign affairs and trade from 1996 to 2007, so he would have overseen the US-Oz trade deal he mentioned which took about 15 months IIRC. So at least one, and quite a biggie.
  • Options
    NeilVW said:

    chestnut said:

    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
    Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for us
    So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?
    How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade deals

    And we will still trade with the EU

    Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
    We all know trade deals take years.

    Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.

    "Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.

    How many trade deals has the Australian High Commissioner negotiated?
    Well he happened to be the minister in charge of foreign affairs and trade from 1996 to 2007, so he would have overseen the US-Oz trade deal he mentioned which took about 15 months IIRC. So at least one, and quite a biggie.
    LOL! Something tells me not the answer William was expecting when he wrote that.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,861
    NeilVW said:

    chestnut said:

    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
    Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for us
    So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?
    How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade deals

    And we will still trade with the EU

    Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
    We all know trade deals take years.

    Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.

    "Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.

    How many trade deals has the Australian High Commissioner negotiated?
    Well he happened to be the minister in charge of foreign affairs and trade from 1996 to 2007, so he would have overseen the US-Oz trade deal he mentioned which took about 15 months IIRC. So at least one, and quite a biggie.
    Ha ha, so he does know a little about trade deals then!
  • Options
    NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 703
    Sandpit said:

    NeilVW said:

    chestnut said:

    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
    Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for us
    So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?
    How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade deals

    And we will still trade with the EU

    Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
    We all know trade deals take years.

    Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.

    "Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.

    How many trade deals has the Australian High Commissioner negotiated?
    Well he happened to be the minister in charge of foreign affairs and trade from 1996 to 2007, so he would have overseen the US-Oz trade deal he mentioned which took about 15 months IIRC. So at least one, and quite a biggie.
    Ha ha, so he does know a little about trade deals then!
    Worth a donation to Wikipedia, I reckon. ;-)
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    edited December 2016
    On topic, STV is a pretty good system, and the Scottish style top up system also effective.

    It is noticeable that the populist discontent with the established order is particularly evident where FPTP shuts out minority views: UK, USA and France,

    In practice a "Progressive Alliance" in the UK works by tactical voting rather than by explicit pacts. I can see that already happening again.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052
    edited December 2016
    NeilVW said:

    Sandpit said:

    NeilVW said:

    chestnut said:

    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
    Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for us
    So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?
    How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade deals

    And we will still trade with the EU

    Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
    We all know trade deals take years.

    Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.

    "Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.

    How many trade deals has the Australian High Commissioner negotiated?
    Well he happened to be the minister in charge of foreign affairs and trade from 1996 to 2007, so he would have overseen the US-Oz trade deal he mentioned which took about 15 months IIRC. So at least one, and quite a biggie.
    Ha ha, so he does know a little about trade deals then!
    Worth a donation to Wikipedia, I reckon. ;-)
    It happens to be a lie. The Minister For Trade is a different position which has never been held by Alexander Downer - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minister_for_Trade,_Tourism_and_Investment

    The Australians have been mocking Mr Downer's enthusiasm for Brexit - http://www.smh.com.au/world/alexander-downers-bizarre-bbc-video-urging-britain-to-get-on-with-leaving-the-eu-20161218-gtdrq7.html
  • Options
    NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 703

    NeilVW said:

    Sandpit said:

    NeilVW said:

    chestnut said:

    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
    Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for us
    So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?
    How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade deals

    And we will still trade with the EU

    Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
    We all know trade deals take years.

    Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.

    "Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.

    How many trade deals has the Australian High Commissioner negotiated?
    Well he happened to be the minister in charge of foreign affairs and trade from 1996 to 2007, so he would have overseen the US-Oz trade deal he mentioned which took about 15 months IIRC. So at least one, and quite a biggie.
    Ha ha, so he does know a little about trade deals then!
    Worth a donation to Wikipedia, I reckon. ;-)
    It happens to be a lie. The Minister For Trade is a different position which has never been held by Alexander Downer - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minister_for_Trade,_Tourism_and_Investment

    Read the article more closely:

    "In the Government of Australia, the Minister administers the portfolio through the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade jointly with the Minister for Foreign Affairs, although prior to 1987 there was a separate Department of Trade. "
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052
    NeilVW said:

    NeilVW said:

    Sandpit said:

    NeilVW said:

    chestnut said:

    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
    Do you really think that. The EU represents 7% of world trade, so there is 93% left for us
    So how will our trade opportunities with the 93% be better under WTO rules than now G?
    How do you know the rules of yet to be agreed trade deals

    And we will still trade with the EU

    Those wanting to remain have no vision of the opportunities available to us
    We all know trade deals take years.

    Not according to the Australian High Commissioner.

    "Trade deals take years" appears to be a piece of EU conditioning rather than a global fact.

    How many trade deals has the Australian High Commissioner negotiated?
    Well he happened to be the minister in charge of foreign affairs and trade from 1996 to 2007, so he would have overseen the US-Oz trade deal he mentioned which took about 15 months IIRC. So at least one, and quite a biggie.
    Ha ha, so he does know a little about trade deals then!
    Worth a donation to Wikipedia, I reckon. ;-)
    It happens to be a lie. The Minister For Trade is a different position which has never been held by Alexander Downer - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minister_for_Trade,_Tourism_and_Investment

    Read the article more closely:

    "In the Government of Australia, the Minister administers the portfolio through the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade jointly with the Minister for Foreign Affairs, although prior to 1987 there was a separate Department of Trade. "
    The department is shared but the ministers have different responsibilities - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_of_Foreign_Affairs_and_Trade_(Australia)

    Downer was not responsible for trade.
  • Options
    NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 703
    Ok fair enough, but in the same Department and pretty close to the action at the relevant time.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,713
    Scott_P said:

    There are 3 doors.

    Behind 2 of them are the worst Bond movie ever made.

    You bought a ticket for SPECTRE, but now you have the choice to swap it for any other Bond movie ever...

    CoughcoughGoldenEyecoughcough

  • Options
    mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    edited December 2016
    NeilVW said:

    Ok fair enough, but in the same Department and pretty close to the action at the relevant time.

    There's nothing to be gained in arguing with hairsplitters.

    I'd suggest that Downer has more locus standi than an anonymous permaposter on the internet.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052
    edited December 2016
    matt said:

    NeilVW said:

    Ok fair enough, but in the same Department and pretty close to the action at the relevant time.

    There's nothing to be gained in arguing with hairsplitters.

    I'd suggest that Downer has more locus standi than an anonymous permaposter on the internet.
    One thing Downer says is pretty damning of the UK:

    "I was the Australian foreign minister for nearly 12 years. Not once in that period did a British foreign secretary visit Australia."

    We should do much more to nurture bilateral relations with Australia. Leaving the EU was never a necessary condition to making a start. If anything it was the delusion of the 'special relationship' with the US which made us forget our much closer ties with the Commonwealth.
  • Options
    @viewcode

    From Russia with Love
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,713

    ...

    From Russia with Love

    No, no, stop getting Bond wrong!... :)
  • Options
    Seems like the posting button is still AWOl
  • Options
    mattmatt Posts: 3,789

    matt said:

    NeilVW said:

    Ok fair enough, but in the same Department and pretty close to the action at the relevant time.

    There's nothing to be gained in arguing with hairsplitters.

    I'd suggest that Downer has more locus standi than an anonymous permaposter on the internet.
    One thing Downer says is pretty damning of the UK:

    "I was the Australian foreign minister for nearly 12 years. Not once in that period did a British foreign secretary visit Australia."

    We should do much more to nurture bilateral relations with Australia. Leaving the EU was never a necessary condition to making a start. If anything it was the delusion of the 'special relationship' with the US which made us forget our much closer ties with the Commonwealth.
    For the love of god, give it a rest.
  • Options
    Scott_P said:
    Miss Gabor, how many husbands have you had?

    What do you mean dahlink? My own, or other people's?
  • Options

    matt said:

    NeilVW said:

    Ok fair enough, but in the same Department and pretty close to the action at the relevant time.

    There's nothing to be gained in arguing with hairsplitters.

    I'd suggest that Downer has more locus standi than an anonymous permaposter on the internet.
    One thing Downer says is pretty damning of the UK:

    "I was the Australian foreign minister for nearly 12 years. Not once in that period did a British foreign secretary visit Australia."
    Eleven of them with a Labour government in the UK......
  • Options
    mattmatt Posts: 3,789

    Scott_P said:
    Miss Gabor, how many husbands have you had?

    What do you mean dahlink? My own, or other people's?
    For people younger than perhaps 80 she falls into 2 categories:

    A. Wasn't she dead already; and

    B. What was she famous for in the first place?
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,987
    surbiton said:

    chestnut said:

    Any possibility of a FT twitter link of the Australian High Commissioner saying that a Free Trade Deal will be a doddle on today's SP/DP?

    Great ! Leave a free trade area of 450m to embrace one of 22m.
    Also free trade agreements are currently a political toxin in Australia and the Liberals don't have control of the Senate. If the ALP oppose (which they would at the behest of their beetle browed and tattooed paymasters in the unions) then it can't happen.
This discussion has been closed.