Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Tories’ current odds-on status in Copeland doesn’t square

SystemSystem Posts: 11,006
edited January 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Tories’ current odds-on status in Copeland doesn’t square with the party’s rubbish performances since GE2015

This latest betting move has been sparked off by press reports of LAB party canvas data. That, if true, came presumably from information gleaned before the candidate, was selected. Now that a local doctor and anti-Corbynite has been given the job then things could be different.

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • Options
    First???
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,217
    edited January 2017
    Second like Farron
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,011
    Third like Corbyn.
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,287
    Can't see LDs on that chart, yellow on white never easy to find.
  • Options
    dr_spyn said:

    Can't see LDs on that chart, yellow on white never easy to find.

    They're half and inch or so below UKIP. No further comment...

  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382

    dr_spyn said:

    Can't see LDs on that chart, yellow on white never easy to find.

    They're half and inch or so below UKIP. No further comment...

    Farrron has indicated that the priority will be Stoke
  • Options
    Via Politicshome.com

    Labour are on course to lose in the upcoming Copeland by-election.

    According to their own canvass returns, Labour support has dropped by a third in the Cumbrian seat.

    Internal documents seen by the Daily Telegraph show dwindling support for Jeremy Corbyn is behind the drop.

    Support for Labour is believed to have dropped by a third since the 2015 general election.

    A senior Labour source said Mr Corbyn’s “incompetence” as a party leader was repeatedly coming up as a concern for voters on the doorstep.

    The returns suggest that the Tories will take Copeland – a seat held by Labour for 80 years – when voters pick their new MP next month.

    It would be the first time the Government has won a seat off the official opposition since the Tories took Mitcham and Morden, London, in 1982
  • Options
    I agree with everyone on the previous thread who said that free movement between Britain and Australia is fanciful. The Aussies would bitterly dismiss it as an attempt at re-colonization and resist it tooth and nail. There was also talk of creating a kind of British Israel in the Australian desert. I think that would only be viable if you worked out a way of fencing the British settlers in.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,573
    Have Con even selected a candidate yet? Yes, the odds are ridiculous - Labour have chosen a sensible local candidate who should hold the seat fairly comfortably - just like Oldham West.
  • Options

    dr_spyn said:

    Can't see LDs on that chart, yellow on white never easy to find.

    They're half and inch or so below UKIP. No further comment...

    Farrron has indicated that the priority will be Stoke

    Wrong choice when he has a big majority in the constituency next to Copeland.
  • Options

    Via Politicshome.com

    Labour are on course to lose in the upcoming Copeland by-election.

    According to their own canvass returns, Labour support has dropped by a third in the Cumbrian seat.

    Internal documents seen by the Daily Telegraph show dwindling support for Jeremy Corbyn is behind the drop.

    Support for Labour is believed to have dropped by a third since the 2015 general election.

    A senior Labour source said Mr Corbyn’s “incompetence” as a party leader was repeatedly coming up as a concern for voters on the doorstep.

    The returns suggest that the Tories will take Copeland – a seat held by Labour for 80 years – when voters pick their new MP next month.

    It would be the first time the Government has won a seat off the official opposition since the Tories took Mitcham and Morden, London, in 1982

    It doesn't dwindle any more if your repeat yourself, David - though I understand the temptation where JC is involved :o
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    It's intriguing, because the result will be a big deal for whichever party wins. Not always the case with by-elections.
  • Options

    First???


    America first.

    Abroad last.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,789
    I think the Conservatives' performance in by-elections has been pretty much par for the course for a governing party, but they certainly shouldn't be favourites in Copeland, given how rare it is for a government to make a gain.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    I wonder if a Lib Dem focus on Stoke increases the chance of a Nuttall triumph. Hard to imagine he and the Lib Dems will be fishing in the same pools, if the EU remains the overriding factor in politics. On the other hand, they're both None of the Above parties, being neither Government nor Opposition [official].
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,789

    dr_spyn said:

    Can't see LDs on that chart, yellow on white never easy to find.

    They're half and inch or so below UKIP. No further comment...

    Farrron has indicated that the priority will be Stoke

    Wrong choice when he has a big majority in the constituency next to Copeland.
    30% could be enough to win Stoke, so Farron is probably correct.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,448
    What has Oldham, Tooting and Richmond Park got to do with Copeland? Pointless comparisons IMO.
  • Options
    tysontyson Posts: 6,049
    @malcolmG

    Why don't we just live in Italy?

    All our joint assets are in the UK. If I died the tax implications for my wife would be horrendous. I cannot allow my wife to be exposed to that kind of uncertainty.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,822

    dr_spyn said:

    Can't see LDs on that chart, yellow on white never easy to find.

    They're half and inch or so below UKIP. No further comment...

    Farron has indicated that the priority will be Stoke

    Wrong choice when he has a big majority in the constituency next to Copeland.
    Of course not. Farron will be well aware of the Party's actual strength in Copeland - I believe there are a couple of Wards in Allerdale which might be prospects.

    As for Stoke, the Party has had Councillors there in the past and finished second in the Parliamentary seat (I believe). It's also well placed for London and Birmingham activists to attend.

    Stoke looks a four sided race - no reason why the Conservatives might not end up fourth.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961
    edited January 2017

    I agree with everyone on the previous thread who said that free movement between Britain and Australia is fanciful. The Aussies would bitterly dismiss it as an attempt at re-colonization and resist it tooth and nail. There was also talk of creating a kind of British Israel in the Australian desert. I think that would only be viable if you worked out a way of fencing the British settlers in.

    Polling suggests it is quite a popular idea, with 70% in favour.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-13/australia-canada-nz-support-eu-style-free-movement-poll-says/7242634
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited January 2017
    rubbish performance??? at least 10% ahead in the polls...opposition useless. scraping the barrel drawing anything as a conclusion from by elections.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961
    tyson said:

    @malcolmG

    Why don't we just live in Italy?

    All our joint assets are in the UK. If I died the tax implications for my wife would be horrendous. I cannot allow my wife to be exposed to that kind of uncertainty.

    Can't your wife apply for UK citizenship by virtue of your marriage?
  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382

    rubbish performance??? at least 10% ahead in the polls...opposition useless. scraping the barrel drawing anything from by elections.

    Touchy touchy. I'm not talking about polls which may or may not be giving us a good picture. I'm talking about real elections where the Tories have been doing rubbish even in LEAVE areas
  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Andy_JS said:

    What has Oldham, Tooting and Richmond Park got to do with Copeland? Pointless comparisons IMO.

    Why? The Tories are doing appallingly at local by-elections hence the numbers of seats lost -even in LEAVE areas. The "CON" campaign also piss-poor even though UKIP didn't stand & backed Zac.

  • Options
    rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 2,038
    tyson said:

    @malcolmG

    Why don't we just live in Italy?

    All our joint assets are in the UK. If I died the tax implications for my wife would be horrendous. I cannot allow my wife to be exposed to that kind of uncertainty.

    *******************
    NB I am not a lawyer. But ...
    would the UK govt. behaviour breach the Human Rights Act and the right to family life, if the govt. forces your wife to spend time away from her father in order to safeguard her right to live with you?

    The right-wing press has tried hard to discredit the HRA, but it will still be there after the UK leaves the EU. OTOH someone in the same boat may already have tried this avenue. My sympathies go out to you ...
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    Mr. Smithson, not sure Goldsmith's a good example as he's a sample size of one. He'd run a poor mayoral campaign, resigned over an issue where there was agreement, and was in the minority (of the constituency) when it came to his EU stance. Daft sod.

    [Ahem, that's Goldsmith, not you :p ].
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,448
    edited January 2017
    "Tom Newton Dunn Verified account
    @tnewtondunn

    Senior Labour figures fear they could come 4th in Copeland by-election"
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961
    Regarding the spending note in the header - surely it is the opposite in this case? They know exactly how much they can spend, and they that everything they do spend is charged against that one limit? There is no distinction between national and local spend in this case.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    Mr. JS, in Copeland? I thought that was a red-blue tussle, with Stoke being the scene of four-way action? [Ahem].
  • Options
    brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352
    Andy_JS said:

    "Tom Newton Dunn Verified account
    @tnewtondunn

    Senior Labour figures fear they could come 4th in Copeland by-election"

    Rubbish
  • Options
    RobD said:

    I agree with everyone on the previous thread who said that free movement between Britain and Australia is fanciful. The Aussies would bitterly dismiss it as an attempt at re-colonization and resist it tooth and nail. There was also talk of creating a kind of British Israel in the Australian desert. I think that would only be viable if you worked out a way of fencing the British settlers in.

    Polling suggests it is quite a popular idea, with 70% in favour.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-13/australia-canada-nz-support-eu-style-free-movement-poll-says/7242634
    Interesting, but have they published the actual wording (my brief Googling revealed nothing)? My suspicion is that they only asked about the X-to-Britain flow of immigration. If not, then it's frankly astonishing that only 58% of Britons believe they should be allowed free movement to Aus/NZ/Canada.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,811
    edited January 2017
    tyson said:

    @malcolmG

    Why don't we just live in Italy?

    All our joint assets are in the UK. If I died the tax implications for my wife would be horrendous. I cannot allow my wife to be exposed to that kind of uncertainty.

    If I was you I would be selling my assets and moving. This country is going / has gone to the dogs.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,267
    Andy_JS said:

    "Tom Newton Dunn Verified account
    @tnewtondunn

    Senior Labour figures fear they could come 4th in Copeland by-election"

    That seems overly pessimistic.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961
    edited January 2017

    RobD said:

    I agree with everyone on the previous thread who said that free movement between Britain and Australia is fanciful. The Aussies would bitterly dismiss it as an attempt at re-colonization and resist it tooth and nail. There was also talk of creating a kind of British Israel in the Australian desert. I think that would only be viable if you worked out a way of fencing the British settlers in.

    Polling suggests it is quite a popular idea, with 70% in favour.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-13/australia-canada-nz-support-eu-style-free-movement-poll-says/7242634
    Interesting, but have they published the actual wording (my brief Googling revealed nothing)? My suspicion is that they only asked about the X-to-Britain flow of immigration. If not, then it's frankly astonishing that only 58% of Britons believe they should be allowed free movement to Aus/NZ/Canada.
    The article implies they asked about a free movement area between the four countries. The lack of appetite for the UK is probably due to attitudes towards EU freedom of movement.

    Edit: posted the press release above
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,936
    Govt can point to Labour weakness in both seats:

    Stoke - On Brexit/On past leadership positions re: Ireland
    Copeland - On Nuclear

    Entirely possible to see two Labour losses here. Entirely possible to see two Govt gains. Though the latter VERY unlikely.
  • Options
    tyson said:

    @malcolmG

    Why don't we just live in Italy?

    All our joint assets are in the UK. If I died the tax implications for my wife would be horrendous. I cannot allow my wife to be exposed to that kind of uncertainty.

    Why don't you seek advice from a tax lawyer to eliminate the tax uncertainty of both living in Italy? Better climate. Cheaper housing.
  • Options
    Mortimer said:

    Govt can point to Labour weakness in both seats:

    Stoke - On Brexit/On past leadership positions re: Ireland
    Copeland - On Nuclear

    Entirely possible to see two Labour losses here. Entirely possible to see two Govt gains. Though the latter VERY unlikely.

    I'll settle for one Tory and one UKIP gain on 23 Feb. :)
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,843
    RobD said:

    tyson said:

    @malcolmG

    Why don't we just live in Italy?

    All our joint assets are in the UK. If I died the tax implications for my wife would be horrendous. I cannot allow my wife to be exposed to that kind of uncertainty.

    Can't your wife apply for UK citizenship by virtue of your marriage?
    If she's a currently a UK taxpayer or owns significant UK assets she should be fine, any deal between UK and EU isn't going to stop higher-rate taxpayers from moving around.

    That said, I suggest Mr @tyson talks to a good immigration lawyer or two before he does anything drastic. It's not the time for amateur advice and anecdote on a politics blog. Hope things work out for the best Sir.
  • Options
    malcolmg said:

    tyson said:

    @malcolmG

    Why don't we just live in Italy?

    All our joint assets are in the UK. If I died the tax implications for my wife would be horrendous. I cannot allow my wife to be exposed to that kind of uncertainty.

    If I was you I would be selling my assets and moving. This country is going / has gone to the dogs.
    The UK isn't doing great but compared to Italy... lololol
  • Options

    Andy_JS said:

    "Tom Newton Dunn Verified account
    @tnewtondunn

    Senior Labour figures fear they could come 4th in Copeland by-election"

    That seems overly pessimistic.
    Or overly optimistic if you are not Labour.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    I agree with everyone on the previous thread who said that free movement between Britain and Australia is fanciful. The Aussies would bitterly dismiss it as an attempt at re-colonization and resist it tooth and nail. There was also talk of creating a kind of British Israel in the Australian desert. I think that would only be viable if you worked out a way of fencing the British settlers in.

    Polling suggests it is quite a popular idea, with 70% in favour.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-13/australia-canada-nz-support-eu-style-free-movement-poll-says/7242634
    Interesting, but have they published the actual wording (my brief Googling revealed nothing)? My suspicion is that they only asked about the X-to-Britain flow of immigration. If not, then it's frankly astonishing that only 58% of Britons believe they should be allowed free movement to Aus/NZ/Canada.
    The article implies they asked about a free movement area between the four countries. The lack of appetite for the UK is probably due to attitudes towards EU freedom of movement.
    Edit:

    Here's the Canadian question:

    The Canadian question example: Currently British citizens have the right to live and work in other European Union (EU) countries and EU citizens have the right to come and live and work in Britain. Would you support or oppose Canadian citizens having similar freedom of movement rules with Britain, New Zealand and Australia if adopted Canadians citizens would be able to live and work in Britain, New Zealand, and Australia and their citizens would have the right to come and live and work in Canada.

    https://www.thercs.org/assets/Press-Releases/UK-polling-release-embargoed-13.03.16-1.pdf
  • Options

    Andy_JS said:

    "Tom Newton Dunn Verified account
    @tnewtondunn

    Senior Labour figures fear they could come 4th in Copeland by-election"

    That seems overly pessimistic.
    It's expectations management for 2nd!
  • Options

    Andy_JS said:

    "Tom Newton Dunn Verified account
    @tnewtondunn

    Senior Labour figures fear they could come 4th in Copeland by-election"

    That seems overly pessimistic.
    It is possible though if enough left-Remainers go Lib Dem, UKIP maintain their numbers, and the Tories sweep up the electorate otherwise.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961
    Sandpit said:

    RobD said:

    tyson said:

    @malcolmG

    Why don't we just live in Italy?

    All our joint assets are in the UK. If I died the tax implications for my wife would be horrendous. I cannot allow my wife to be exposed to that kind of uncertainty.

    Can't your wife apply for UK citizenship by virtue of your marriage?
    If she's a currently a UK taxpayer or owns significant UK assets she should be fine, any deal between UK and EU isn't going to stop higher-rate taxpayers from moving around.

    That said, I suggest Mr @tyson talks to a good immigration lawyer or two before he does anything drastic. It's not the time for amateur advice and anecdote on a politics blog. Hope things work out for the best Sir.
    I thought the issue was she isn't actually resident in the UK.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    I agree with everyone on the previous thread who said that free movement between Britain and Australia is fanciful. The Aussies would bitterly dismiss it as an attempt at re-colonization and resist it tooth and nail. There was also talk of creating a kind of British Israel in the Australian desert. I think that would only be viable if you worked out a way of fencing the British settlers in.

    They didn't ask for free movement. They asked for easier access for Australians travelling on business.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,936

    Andy_JS said:

    "Tom Newton Dunn Verified account
    @tnewtondunn

    Senior Labour figures fear they could come 4th in Copeland by-election"

    That seems overly pessimistic.
    It is possible though if enough left-Remainers go Lib Dem, UKIP maintain their numbers, and the Tories sweep up the electorate otherwise.
    Labour really are the party with nothing going for them apart from the 'social norm' anymore.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Sean_F said:

    dr_spyn said:

    Can't see LDs on that chart, yellow on white never easy to find.

    They're half and inch or so below UKIP. No further comment...

    Farrron has indicated that the priority will be Stoke

    Wrong choice when he has a big majority in the constituency next to Copeland.
    30% could be enough to win Stoke, so Farron is probably correct.
    Also the Lab candidate in Copeland is the sort of candidate that Farron himself would like. I could see a tacit agreement where the LDs concentate on the tory wards.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,692
    edited January 2017
    RobD said:

    tyson said:

    @malcolmG

    Why don't we just live in Italy?

    All our joint assets are in the UK. If I died the tax implications for my wife would be horrendous. I cannot allow my wife to be exposed to that kind of uncertainty.

    Can't your wife apply for UK citizenship by virtue of your marriage?
    This stuff is complicated. I _THINK_ you can only qualify for UK citizenship through marriage if you have been been in an Indefinite Leave to Remain status for at least two years. To qualify for ILR through marriage, your UK. partner needs already to be residing in the UK and you need to be ordinarily resident for five years. So seven years residence in total and whether you can get to the UK in the first place is entirely at the whim of the immigration official who interviews you. He is working to informal quotas. If he has already allowed a certain number under a particular status he will find spurious grounds to refuse your application even of your case is a good one. The number of refusals is high. When I went through this twenty five years ago in a muchmore relaxed regime, over half were refused.
  • Options
    Mortimer said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Tom Newton Dunn Verified account
    @tnewtondunn

    Senior Labour figures fear they could come 4th in Copeland by-election"

    That seems overly pessimistic.
    It is possible though if enough left-Remainers go Lib Dem, UKIP maintain their numbers, and the Tories sweep up the electorate otherwise.
    Labour really are the party with nothing going for them apart from the 'social norm' anymore.
    It's a long, slow death that started with the Iraq War and Tuition Fees.

    Will probably end around 2024 with the creation of a new centrist party.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961
    FF43 said:

    RobD said:

    tyson said:

    @malcolmG

    Why don't we just live in Italy?

    All our joint assets are in the UK. If I died the tax implications for my wife would be horrendous. I cannot allow my wife to be exposed to that kind of uncertainty.

    Can't your wife apply for UK citizenship by virtue of your marriage?
    This stuff is complicated. I _THINK_ you can only qualify for UK citizenship through marriage if you have been been in an Indefinite Leave to Remain status for at least two years. To qualify for ILR through marriage, your UK. partner needs already to be residing in the UK and you need to be ordinarily resident for five years. So seven years residence in total and whether you can get to the UK in the first place is entirely at the whim of the immigration official who interviews you. He is working to informal quotas. If he has already allowed a certain number under a particular status he will find spurious grounds to refuse your application. The number of refusals it's high. When I went through this twenty cuber years ago in a muchmore relaxed regime, it was over half.
    That last bit about informal quotas sounds pretty illegal.
  • Options
    SeanT said:

    tyson said:

    @malcolmG

    Why don't we just live in Italy?

    All our joint assets are in the UK. If I died the tax implications for my wife would be horrendous. I cannot allow my wife to be exposed to that kind of uncertainty.

    You have my sympathies, tyson. Brexit is going to be difficult for many. Though when you start talking about "tax implications" being the main factor, you possibly might lose a few poorer voters.

    Moreover, spare a thought for us sovereigntist Brexiteers. For 40 years we felt our country was taken away from us. I know a liberal internationalist like you simply won't understand the mindset, but to me this was an abomination.

    I am a student of English history. I think English democracy and common law are singular and marvellous. I saw all this ripped apart, casually, by elitist liberal fuckers (like you) over decades, and with a sneer and a chortle from your kind, to boot.

    I remember during the Lisbon Treaty betrayal, realising that I could see how citizens take up arms against their own government.

    Consider me mad, by all means. But now WE have our country back, and our English democracy. And the liberal elitist fuckers will suffer and whine. So be it.
    Do you mean the mad people "have got their country back"?

  • Options
    Mortimer said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Tom Newton Dunn Verified account
    @tnewtondunn

    Senior Labour figures fear they could come 4th in Copeland by-election"

    That seems overly pessimistic.
    It is possible though if enough left-Remainers go Lib Dem, UKIP maintain their numbers, and the Tories sweep up the electorate otherwise.
    Labour really are the party with nothing going for them apart from the 'social norm' anymore.
    Just because you have wished it so for a lifetime doesn't make it true.

  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,011
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-38704311

    Brexit will destroy the Good Friday Agreement says Gerry Adams.
  • Options
    CornishBlueCornishBlue Posts: 840
    edited January 2017
    SeanT said:


    Moreover, spare a thought for us sovereigntist Brexiteers. For 40 years we felt our country was taken away from us. I know a liberal internationalist like you simply won't understand the mindset, but to me this was an abomination.

    I am a student of English history. I think English democracy and common law are singular and marvellous. I saw all this ripped apart, casually, by elitist liberal fuckers (like you) over decades, and with a sneer and a chortle from your kind, to boot.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VP7xTQf_qI

    A "hear hear" just wasn't enough! :D
  • Options

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-38704311

    Brexit will destroy the Good Friday Agreement says Gerry Adams.

    Sinn Fein really do want it all to unravel so that they can return to the good ol' days... they must be bored with the politics.
  • Options
    Why would I or anyone even click on a weblink (let alone read its content) from that electronic rag?
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,936

    Mortimer said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Tom Newton Dunn Verified account
    @tnewtondunn

    Senior Labour figures fear they could come 4th in Copeland by-election"

    That seems overly pessimistic.
    It is possible though if enough left-Remainers go Lib Dem, UKIP maintain their numbers, and the Tories sweep up the electorate otherwise.
    Labour really are the party with nothing going for them apart from the 'social norm' anymore.
    Just because you have wished it so for a lifetime doesn't make it true.

    Not at all. I'm all for strong opposition.

    But Labour are now neither strong or a decent opposition.

  • Options
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    I agree with everyone on the previous thread who said that free movement between Britain and Australia is fanciful. The Aussies would bitterly dismiss it as an attempt at re-colonization and resist it tooth and nail. There was also talk of creating a kind of British Israel in the Australian desert. I think that would only be viable if you worked out a way of fencing the British settlers in.

    Polling suggests it is quite a popular idea, with 70% in favour.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-13/australia-canada-nz-support-eu-style-free-movement-poll-says/7242634
    Interesting, but have they published the actual wording (my brief Googling revealed nothing)? My suspicion is that they only asked about the X-to-Britain flow of immigration. If not, then it's frankly astonishing that only 58% of Britons believe they should be allowed free movement to Aus/NZ/Canada.
    The article implies they asked about a free movement area between the four countries. The lack of appetite for the UK is probably due to attitudes towards EU freedom of movement.
    Edit:

    Here's the Canadian question:

    The Canadian question example: Currently British citizens have the right to live and work in other European Union (EU) countries and EU citizens have the right to come and live and work in Britain. Would you support or oppose Canadian citizens having similar freedom of movement rules with Britain, New Zealand and Australia if adopted Canadians citizens would be able to live and work in Britain, New Zealand, and Australia and their citizens would have the right to come and live and work in Canada.

    https://www.thercs.org/assets/Press-Releases/UK-polling-release-embargoed-13.03.16-1.pdf
    That all seems cut and dry. Let's go for it!
  • Options
    Mortimer said:

    Govt can point to Labour weakness in both seats:

    Stoke - On Brexit/On past leadership positions re: Ireland
    Copeland - On Nuclear

    Entirely possible to see two Labour losses here. Entirely possible to see two Govt gains. Though the latter VERY unlikely.

    Let's hope so, wouldn't want you frotted into an early grave.
  • Options
    SeanT said:

    malcolmg said:

    tyson said:

    @malcolmG

    Why don't we just live in Italy?

    All our joint assets are in the UK. If I died the tax implications for my wife would be horrendous. I cannot allow my wife to be exposed to that kind of uncertainty.

    If I was you I would be selling my assets and moving. This country is going / has gone to the dogs.
    The UK isn't doing great but compared to Italy... lololol
    The UK is the fastest growing economy in the G7.

    What is this desolating despair about the UK? We are a wildly resourceful nation of 65m people, soon to be 70m as another 5m panicked Italians move here before Brexit.

    We invented democracy, devised human rights, conjured up the industrial revolution, gave the world its global language, conquered every single nation on earth, brought into being the world's largest empire, established world cities like Hong Kong and Sydney, Singapore and Toronto, we invented all the world's major sports, we defeated the Nazis when all others quailed and failed, we came second in the last Olympics, we came up with the idea of Celebrity Masterchef, and our most famous authoress, Cornish mystery writer S K Tremayne, has TWO books in the German top ten bestseller list, simultaneously.

    For fuck's sake, we can handle "Brexit"
    Of course we can handle Brexit - but there are still many huge domestic economic/social issues to sort out, which will take decades even if the right decisions are made.

    But my point is that compared to Italy (or indeed most EU members) we're doing much better in most areas.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,573
    edited January 2017
    @tobyharnden: White House confirms that U.K. PM @theresa_may will visit Washington next week & meet with President @realDonaldTrump
  • Options
    Has it been brought up here yet about how May will perhaps tie in triggering A.50 with the two by-elections?

    If I were her I'd get the Commons to vote on the one-liner bill about a week before the Thursday.
  • Options

    Why would I or anyone even click on a weblink (let alone read its content) from that electronic rag Failing Fake News outlet ?
    Fixed for you via the Trump filter...
  • Options
    NormNorm Posts: 1,251
    .

    Sean_F said:

    dr_spyn said:

    Can't see LDs on that chart, yellow on white never easy to find.

    They're half and inch or so below UKIP. No further comment...

    Farrron has indicated that the priority will be Stoke

    Wrong choice when he has a big majority in the constituency next to Copeland.
    30% could be enough to win Stoke, so Farron is probably correct.
    Also the Lab candidate in Copeland is the sort of candidate that Farron himself would like. I could see a tacit agreement where the LDs concentate on the tory wards.
    First and foremost the Lib Dems are suspect on nuclear power and the nuclear deterrent to boot. Secondly most remainer Tories have a pragmatic view on Brexit and accept the need to make it work unlike Lib Dems who enjoy waffling on about it all day on social media. I'd expect any self respecting Tory in Copeland would actually prefer Lib Dem canvassers to sling their hook although they'd be too polite to say so.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,692
    RobD said:

    FF43 said:

    RobD said:

    tyson said:

    @malcolmG

    Why don't we just live in Italy?

    All our joint assets are in the UK. If I died the tax implications for my wife would be horrendous. I cannot allow my wife to be exposed to that kind of uncertainty.

    Can't your wife apply for UK citizenship by virtue of your marriage?
    This stuff is complicated. I _THINK_ you can only qualify for UK citizenship through marriage if you have been been in an Indefinite Leave to Remain status for at least two years. To qualify for ILR through marriage, your UK. partner needs already to be residing in the UK and you need to be ordinarily resident for five years. So seven years residence in total and whether you can get to the UK in the first place is entirely at the whim of the immigration official who interviews you. He is working to informal quotas. If he has already allowed a certain number under a particular status he will find spurious grounds to refuse your application. The number of refusals it's high. When I went through this twenty cuber years ago in a muchmore relaxed regime, it was over half.
    That last bit about informal quotas sounds pretty illegal.
    Which is why they are not explicit. Immigration officials can always find a reason to refuse admittance. Knowing how to play the system helps. Being well connected helps. But they are no guarantee. If you are just two ordinary people who happen to be in love and want to live together, it's pretty galling to be told you won't be able to do that, in Britain at least, because you didn't think to bring your wedding photos to the interview, and weren't requested to do so and, no, going back to collect them won't make any difference.
  • Options

    SeanT said:

    tyson said:

    @malcolmG

    Why don't we just live in Italy?

    All our joint assets are in the UK. If I died the tax implications for my wife would be horrendous. I cannot allow my wife to be exposed to that kind of uncertainty.

    You have my sympathies, tyson. Brexit is going to be difficult for many. Though when you start talking about "tax implications" being the main factor, you possibly might lose a few poorer voters.

    Moreover, spare a thought for us sovereigntist Brexiteers. For 40 years we felt our country was taken away from us. I know a liberal internationalist like you simply won't understand the mindset, but to me this was an abomination.

    I am a student of English history. I think English democracy and common law are singular and marvellous. I saw all this ripped apart, casually, by elitist liberal fuckers (like you) over decades, and with a sneer and a chortle from your kind, to boot.

    I remember during the Lisbon Treaty betrayal, realising that I could see how citizens take up arms against their own government.

    Consider me mad, by all means. But now WE have our country back, and our English democracy. And the liberal elitist fuckers will suffer and whine. So be it.
    Do you mean the mad people "have got their country back"?

    I have two University degrees
    I have been to over 35 countries
    Lived overseas for 3 years on 2 different continents
    I worked for a French firm for nearly 5 years and whilst not fluent could give a 10 minute presentation in French
    Oh and I am the son of an immigrant.

    Yes, ALL of us Leavers are Racist, Xenophobic, ignorant, Little Englanders.

    Keep telling yourself you are superior in thought and deed, if you do it often enough you will believe it-but it doesn't make it true.

    The truly ignorant people are those, like you, who cannot and will not contemplate that others hold views different to your own for what they regard are reasonable and principled reasons.

  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,789

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-38704311

    Brexit will destroy the Good Friday Agreement says Gerry Adams.

    If they want war, turn the Loyalists loose on them.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,011

    @tobyharnden: White House confirms that U.K. PM @theresa_may will visit Washington next week & meet with President @realDonaldTrump

    Fools rush in. Merkel is sensibly biding her time.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,573
    Charles said:

    I agree with everyone on the previous thread who said that free movement between Britain and Australia is fanciful. The Aussies would bitterly dismiss it as an attempt at re-colonization and resist it tooth and nail. There was also talk of creating a kind of British Israel in the Australian desert. I think that would only be viable if you worked out a way of fencing the British settlers in.

    They didn't ask for free movement. They asked for easier access for Australians travelling on business.
    You and your facts......

    Alexander Downer, Australia's high commissioner to the UK, said the country would want better access for business people working in the UK before reaching a post-Brexit deal.

    Mr Downer told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that Australia's access for businesses had often been a part of its free trade negotiations.
    "It might just make it a bit simpler actually," he said.

    "For example, an Australian company that invests in the UK might want to bring some of its executives to the UK.

    "That can be done with what are called tier 2 visas, but maybe that could be made a little bit easier.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38704325
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961

    @tobyharnden: White House confirms that U.K. PM @theresa_may will visit Washington next week & meet with President @realDonaldTrump

    Fools rush in. Merkel is sensibly biding her time.
    I doubt you'd be saying the same thing if it were reversed!
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,940
    edited January 2017
    The Tories did not have an official candidate in Richmond Park and it was strong Remain, Witney also backed Remain, May is generally polling stronger than Cameron is and Sleaford was a strong Tory hold in a strong Leave area and Copeland is also a strong Leave area. The Tories are also coordinating phone banks from across the country targeting Copeland given its distance from most Tory activists
    https://www.conservatives.com/copelandlocal
  • Options

    @tobyharnden: White House confirms that U.K. PM @theresa_may will visit Washington next week & meet with President @realDonaldTrump

    Is there a list of which world leader is going and when?
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503

    Charles said:

    I agree with everyone on the previous thread who said that free movement between Britain and Australia is fanciful. The Aussies would bitterly dismiss it as an attempt at re-colonization and resist it tooth and nail. There was also talk of creating a kind of British Israel in the Australian desert. I think that would only be viable if you worked out a way of fencing the British settlers in.

    They didn't ask for free movement. They asked for easier access for Australians travelling on business.
    You and your facts......

    Alexander Downer, Australia's high commissioner to the UK, said the country would want better access for business people working in the UK before reaching a post-Brexit deal.

    Mr Downer told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that Australia's access for businesses had often been a part of its free trade negotiations.
    "It might just make it a bit simpler actually," he said.

    "For example, an Australian company that invests in the UK might want to bring some of its executives to the UK.

    "That can be done with what are called tier 2 visas, but maybe that could be made a little bit easier.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38704325
    'A little bit easier'. Unfettered freedom of movement by any other name. Riot! We really are in danger of losing the plot completely.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,267

    Andy_JS said:

    "Tom Newton Dunn Verified account
    @tnewtondunn

    Senior Labour figures fear they could come 4th in Copeland by-election"

    That seems overly pessimistic.
    It is possible though if enough left-Remainers go Lib Dem, UKIP maintain their numbers, and the Tories sweep up the electorate otherwise.
    If it is a Tory win in Copeland, I suspect it will be put down both to Corbyn and to May's choice of a "hard" Brexit.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,789
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    I agree with everyone on the previous thread who said that free movement between Britain and Australia is fanciful. The Aussies would bitterly dismiss it as an attempt at re-colonization and resist it tooth and nail. There was also talk of creating a kind of British Israel in the Australian desert. I think that would only be viable if you worked out a way of fencing the British settlers in.

    Polling suggests it is quite a popular idea, with 70% in favour.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-13/australia-canada-nz-support-eu-style-free-movement-poll-says/7242634
    Interesting, but have they published the actual wording (my brief Googling revealed nothing)? My suspicion is that they only asked about the X-to-Britain flow of immigration. If not, then it's frankly astonishing that only 58% of Britons believe they should be allowed free movement to Aus/NZ/Canada.
    The article implies they asked about a free movement area between the four countries. The lack of appetite for the UK is probably due to attitudes towards EU freedom of movement.

    Edit: posted the press release above
    Ideally, the UK, Canada, Australia, and Canada would form one nation, but that ship has sailed.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961
    John_M said:

    Charles said:

    I agree with everyone on the previous thread who said that free movement between Britain and Australia is fanciful. The Aussies would bitterly dismiss it as an attempt at re-colonization and resist it tooth and nail. There was also talk of creating a kind of British Israel in the Australian desert. I think that would only be viable if you worked out a way of fencing the British settlers in.

    They didn't ask for free movement. They asked for easier access for Australians travelling on business.
    You and your facts......

    Alexander Downer, Australia's high commissioner to the UK, said the country would want better access for business people working in the UK before reaching a post-Brexit deal.

    Mr Downer told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that Australia's access for businesses had often been a part of its free trade negotiations.
    "It might just make it a bit simpler actually," he said.

    "For example, an Australian company that invests in the UK might want to bring some of its executives to the UK.

    "That can be done with what are called tier 2 visas, but maybe that could be made a little bit easier.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38704325
    'A little bit easier'. Unfettered freedom of movement by any other name. Riot! We really are in danger of losing the plot completely.
    A bit of difference between loosening some visa restrictions and freedom of movement!
  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Norm said:

    .

    Sean_F said:

    dr_spyn said:

    Can't see LDs on that chart, yellow on white never easy to find.

    They're half and inch or so below UKIP. No further comment...

    Farrron has indicated that the priority will be Stoke

    Wrong choice when he has a big majority in the constituency next to Copeland.
    30% could be enough to win Stoke, so Farron is probably correct.
    Also the Lab candidate in Copeland is the sort of candidate that Farron himself would like. I could see a tacit agreement where the LDs concentate on the tory wards.
    First and foremost the Lib Dems are suspect on nuclear power and the nuclear deterrent to boot. Secondly most remainer Tories have a pragmatic view on Brexit and accept the need to make it work unlike Lib Dems who enjoy waffling on about it all day on social media. I'd expect any self respecting Tory in Copeland would actually prefer Lib Dem canvassers to sling their hook although they'd be too polite to say so.
    Not all CON GE2015 voters are self respecting Tories and can you explain why the blues are being hammered by the yellows in local election after local election?
  • Options
    Richmond Park shouldn't count because Zac resigned the Tory whip.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,267
    SeanT said:

    malcolmg said:

    tyson said:

    @malcolmG

    Why don't we just live in Italy?

    All our joint assets are in the UK. If I died the tax implications for my wife would be horrendous. I cannot allow my wife to be exposed to that kind of uncertainty.

    If I was you I would be selling my assets and moving. This country is going / has gone to the dogs.
    The UK isn't doing great but compared to Italy... lololol
    The UK is the fastest growing economy in the G7.

    What is this desolating despair about the UK? We are a wildly resourceful nation of 65m people, soon to be 70m as another 5m panicked Italians move here before Brexit.

    We invented democracy, devised human rights, conjured up the industrial revolution, gave the world its global language, conquered every single nation on earth, brought into being the world's largest empire, established world cities like Hong Kong and Sydney, Singapore and Toronto, we invented all the world's major sports, we defeated the Nazis when all others quailed and failed, we came second in the last Olympics, we came up with the idea of Celebrity Masterchef, and our most famous authoress, Cornish mystery writer S K Tremayne, has TWO books in the German top ten bestseller list, simultaneously.

    For fuck's sake, we can handle "Brexit"
    I think Brexit will turn out to be a success.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,306
    John_M said:

    Charles said:

    I agree with everyone on the previous thread who said that free movement between Britain and Australia is fanciful. The Aussies would bitterly dismiss it as an attempt at re-colonization and resist it tooth and nail. There was also talk of creating a kind of British Israel in the Australian desert. I think that would only be viable if you worked out a way of fencing the British settlers in.

    They didn't ask for free movement. They asked for easier access for Australians travelling on business.
    You and your facts......

    Alexander Downer, Australia's high commissioner to the UK, said the country would want better access for business people working in the UK before reaching a post-Brexit deal.

    Mr Downer told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that Australia's access for businesses had often been a part of its free trade negotiations.
    "It might just make it a bit simpler actually," he said.

    "For example, an Australian company that invests in the UK might want to bring some of its executives to the UK.

    "That can be done with what are called tier 2 visas, but maybe that could be made a little bit easier.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38704325
    'A little bit easier'. Unfettered freedom of movement by any other name. Riot! We really are in danger of losing the plot completely.
    The manic fervour with which people are talking down their own country's chances is quite something to behold.
  • Options
    Sean_F said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    I agree with everyone on the previous thread who said that free movement between Britain and Australia is fanciful. The Aussies would bitterly dismiss it as an attempt at re-colonization and resist it tooth and nail. There was also talk of creating a kind of British Israel in the Australian desert. I think that would only be viable if you worked out a way of fencing the British settlers in.

    Polling suggests it is quite a popular idea, with 70% in favour.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-13/australia-canada-nz-support-eu-style-free-movement-poll-says/7242634
    Interesting, but have they published the actual wording (my brief Googling revealed nothing)? My suspicion is that they only asked about the X-to-Britain flow of immigration. If not, then it's frankly astonishing that only 58% of Britons believe they should be allowed free movement to Aus/NZ/Canada.
    The article implies they asked about a free movement area between the four countries. The lack of appetite for the UK is probably due to attitudes towards EU freedom of movement.

    Edit: posted the press release above
    Ideally, the UK, Canada, Australia, and Canada would form one nation, but that ship has sailed.
    Canada mentioned twice!
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited January 2017

    rubbish performance??? at least 10% ahead in the polls...opposition useless. scraping the barrel drawing anything from by elections.

    Touchy touchy. I'm not talking about polls which may or may not be giving us a good picture. I'm talking about real elections where the Tories have been doing rubbish even in LEAVE areas
    Not in the least touchy, Some of the Tories (MP's) I hear are really ghastly, but we are where we are.

    Lib Dems are in a taxi despite their council gains.. There are some protest votes and stay at homes and Labour are just risible. Frankly its quite worrying that we have a Govt with no real opposition.

    I was just pointing out that by elections are not pointers to Westminster elections, not in my opinion anyway.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961

    Sean_F said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    I agree with everyone on the previous thread who said that free movement between Britain and Australia is fanciful. The Aussies would bitterly dismiss it as an attempt at re-colonization and resist it tooth and nail. There was also talk of creating a kind of British Israel in the Australian desert. I think that would only be viable if you worked out a way of fencing the British settlers in.

    Polling suggests it is quite a popular idea, with 70% in favour.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-13/australia-canada-nz-support-eu-style-free-movement-poll-says/7242634
    Interesting, but have they published the actual wording (my brief Googling revealed nothing)? My suspicion is that they only asked about the X-to-Britain flow of immigration. If not, then it's frankly astonishing that only 58% of Britons believe they should be allowed free movement to Aus/NZ/Canada.
    The article implies they asked about a free movement area between the four countries. The lack of appetite for the UK is probably due to attitudes towards EU freedom of movement.

    Edit: posted the press release above
    Ideally, the UK, Canada, Australia, and Canada would form one nation, but that ship has sailed.
    Canada mentioned twice!
    Well it is pretty big!
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,748
    Norm said:

    .

    Sean_F said:

    dr_spyn said:

    Can't see LDs on that chart, yellow on white never easy to find.

    They're half and inch or so below UKIP. No further comment...

    Farrron has indicated that the priority will be Stoke

    Wrong choice when he has a big majority in the constituency next to Copeland.
    30% could be enough to win Stoke, so Farron is probably correct.
    Also the Lab candidate in Copeland is the sort of candidate that Farron himself would like. I could see a tacit agreement where the LDs concentate on the tory wards.
    First and foremost the Lib Dems are suspect on nuclear power and the nuclear deterrent to boot. Secondly most remainer Tories have a pragmatic view on Brexit and accept the need to make it work unlike Lib Dems who enjoy waffling on about it all day on social media. I'd expect any self respecting Tory in Copeland would actually prefer Lib Dem canvassers to sling their hook although they'd be too polite to say so.
    Seems to me that Labour's candidate in Copeland is a good enough choice, but I can't really see her winning (primarily) on a personal vote. I base this only on what I've read from her tweets etc. So Labour will have to win on a party vote, and I'm not sure they will.

    I can't see the LDs winning with her as a candidate though. Some Corbynite, and they'd perhaps have had a decent chance.

    These are both great by-elections for betting!
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    RobD said:

    John_M said:

    Charles said:

    I agree with everyone on the previous thread who said that free movement between Britain and Australia is fanciful. The Aussies would bitterly dismiss it as an attempt at re-colonization and resist it tooth and nail. There was also talk of creating a kind of British Israel in the Australian desert. I think that would only be viable if you worked out a way of fencing the British settlers in.

    They didn't ask for free movement. They asked for easier access for Australians travelling on business.
    You and your facts......

    Alexander Downer, Australia's high commissioner to the UK, said the country would want better access for business people working in the UK before reaching a post-Brexit deal.

    Mr Downer told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that Australia's access for businesses had often been a part of its free trade negotiations.
    "It might just make it a bit simpler actually," he said.

    "For example, an Australian company that invests in the UK might want to bring some of its executives to the UK.

    "That can be done with what are called tier 2 visas, but maybe that could be made a little bit easier.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38704325
    'A little bit easier'. Unfettered freedom of movement by any other name. Riot! We really are in danger of losing the plot completely.
    A bit of difference between loosening some visa restrictions and freedom of movement!
    Rob, this is the 21st century Internet. There is no nuance, no middle ground, no shades of grey. You're either for full, free and unfettered migration or you're for pulling up the drawbridge and deporting Johnny Foreigner en masse.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,940
    edited January 2017

    rubbish performance??? at least 10% ahead in the polls...opposition useless. scraping the barrel drawing anything from by elections.

    Touchy touchy. I'm not talking about polls which may or may not be giving us a good picture. I'm talking about real elections where the Tories have been doing rubbish even in LEAVE areas
    The only competitive parliamentary by election in a Leave area since the referendum in Sleaford saw a 2.5% swing from Labour to the Tories and the Tories winning with over 50% of the vote
  • Options
    Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    tyson said:

    @malcolmG

    Why don't we just live in Italy?

    All our joint assets are in the UK. If I died the tax implications for my wife would be horrendous. I cannot allow my wife to be exposed to that kind of uncertainty.

    When anyone with substantial assets dies the tax is a pain in the arse. You just need to appoint a bank as executor, or pay a lawyer to do stuff for you. They will take some obscene percentage of the estate, but that is better than having major life decisions dictated to you by the tax laws.

    I sympathise with your plight, but it is a first-world plight. There are tons of migrants in Tuscany who would love to have your problem. They could also, surely, be paid fairly affordable sums to act as carers for your inlaws?
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549

    @tobyharnden: White House confirms that U.K. PM @theresa_may will visit Washington next week & meet with President @realDonaldTrump

    Fools rush in. Merkel is sensibly biding her time.
    And if Trump was seeing Merkel first you'd be saying it shows where real power lies and is bad for Brexit.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961
    John_M said:

    RobD said:

    John_M said:

    Charles said:

    I agree with everyone on the previous thread who said that free movement between Britain and Australia is fanciful. The Aussies would bitterly dismiss it as an attempt at re-colonization and resist it tooth and nail. There was also talk of creating a kind of British Israel in the Australian desert. I think that would only be viable if you worked out a way of fencing the British settlers in.

    They didn't ask for free movement. They asked for easier access for Australians travelling on business.
    You and your facts......

    Alexander Downer, Australia's high commissioner to the UK, said the country would want better access for business people working in the UK before reaching a post-Brexit deal.

    Mr Downer told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that Australia's access for businesses had often been a part of its free trade negotiations.
    "It might just make it a bit simpler actually," he said.

    "For example, an Australian company that invests in the UK might want to bring some of its executives to the UK.

    "That can be done with what are called tier 2 visas, but maybe that could be made a little bit easier.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38704325
    'A little bit easier'. Unfettered freedom of movement by any other name. Riot! We really are in danger of losing the plot completely.
    A bit of difference between loosening some visa restrictions and freedom of movement!
    Rob, this is the 21st century Internet. There is no nuance, no middle ground, no shades of grey. You're either for full, free and unfettered migration or you're for pulling up the drawbridge and deporting Johnny Foreigner en masse.
    Glad we cleared that one up :D
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,267
    Sean_F said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    I agree with everyone on the previous thread who said that free movement between Britain and Australia is fanciful. The Aussies would bitterly dismiss it as an attempt at re-colonization and resist it tooth and nail. There was also talk of creating a kind of British Israel in the Australian desert. I think that would only be viable if you worked out a way of fencing the British settlers in.

    Polling suggests it is quite a popular idea, with 70% in favour.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-13/australia-canada-nz-support-eu-style-free-movement-poll-says/7242634
    Interesting, but have they published the actual wording (my brief Googling revealed nothing)? My suspicion is that they only asked about the X-to-Britain flow of immigration. If not, then it's frankly astonishing that only 58% of Britons believe they should be allowed free movement to Aus/NZ/Canada.
    The article implies they asked about a free movement area between the four countries. The lack of appetite for the UK is probably due to attitudes towards EU freedom of movement.

    Edit: posted the press release above
    Ideally, the UK, Canada, Australia, and Canada would form one nation, but that ship has sailed.
    They might well, still, be able to form a very close trading bloc, with political and defence alliances between them all though.

    Canada is probably the loosest of the three: I think global immigration has run far higher there - without the heavy bias to the UK that Australia and NZ still has - and the presence of Quebec pulls Canadian governance institutionally to the left.

    But places like the Maritimes, rural Ontario, Victoria and Alberta are still very pro-British.
  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    glw said:

    @tobyharnden: White House confirms that U.K. PM @theresa_may will visit Washington next week & meet with President @realDonaldTrump

    Fools rush in. Merkel is sensibly biding her time.
    And if Trump was seeing Merkel first you'd be saying it shows where real power lies and is bad for Brexit.
    Great minds think alike. :lol:
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,306
    RobD said:

    Sean_F said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    I agree with everyone on the previous thread who said that free movement between Britain and Australia is fanciful. The Aussies would bitterly dismiss it as an attempt at re-colonization and resist it tooth and nail. There was also talk of creating a kind of British Israel in the Australian desert. I think that would only be viable if you worked out a way of fencing the British settlers in.

    Polling suggests it is quite a popular idea, with 70% in favour.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-13/australia-canada-nz-support-eu-style-free-movement-poll-says/7242634
    Interesting, but have they published the actual wording (my brief Googling revealed nothing)? My suspicion is that they only asked about the X-to-Britain flow of immigration. If not, then it's frankly astonishing that only 58% of Britons believe they should be allowed free movement to Aus/NZ/Canada.
    The article implies they asked about a free movement area between the four countries. The lack of appetite for the UK is probably due to attitudes towards EU freedom of movement.

    Edit: posted the press release above
    Ideally, the UK, Canada, Australia, and Canada would form one nation, but that ship has sailed.
    Canada mentioned twice!
    Well it is pretty big!
    I really can't think why that would be in any way ideal. Why should we be ruled over as a single entity when we have hugely divergent locations, priorities, etc?
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    edited January 2017
    Deleted due to blockquote shenanigans :).
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,748
    SeanT said:

    Written by a notorious europhile quisling. Really, we need to start burning these people at Smithfield*

    *metaphorically, moderators, metaphorically
    There does seem to be a trend for UK journos to write slightly controversial pieces aimed (one imagines) at a UK audience, but publish them in US papers, or on US websites. I certainly noticed this post Brexit, but perhaps it's not new.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,940

    I agree with everyone on the previous thread who said that free movement between Britain and Australia is fanciful. The Aussies would bitterly dismiss it as an attempt at re-colonization and resist it tooth and nail. There was also talk of creating a kind of British Israel in the Australian desert. I think that would only be viable if you worked out a way of fencing the British settlers in.

    I expect most Aussies would be more than happy with free movement between London and Australia though!
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,267
    SeanT said:

    Written by a notorious europhile quisling. Really, we need to start burning these people at Smithfield*

    *metaphorically, moderators, metaphorically
    I had a drink last night ('work' drinks, following a team away day) with an Islington socialist and Labour Party member, who really admires Emily Thornberry (his local MP), who bellowed to me that Theresa May was a total idiot and that Brexit was thanks to the 'fascists' up North.

    And he knows full well I voted Leave.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961

    RobD said:

    Sean_F said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    I agree with everyone on the previous thread who said that free movement between Britain and Australia is fanciful. The Aussies would bitterly dismiss it as an attempt at re-colonization and resist it tooth and nail. There was also talk of creating a kind of British Israel in the Australian desert. I think that would only be viable if you worked out a way of fencing the British settlers in.

    Polling suggests it is quite a popular idea, with 70% in favour.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-13/australia-canada-nz-support-eu-style-free-movement-poll-says/7242634
    Interesting, but have they published the actual wording (my brief Googling revealed nothing)? My suspicion is that they only asked about the X-to-Britain flow of immigration. If not, then it's frankly astonishing that only 58% of Britons believe they should be allowed free movement to Aus/NZ/Canada.
    The article implies they asked about a free movement area between the four countries. The lack of appetite for the UK is probably due to attitudes towards EU freedom of movement.

    Edit: posted the press release above
    Ideally, the UK, Canada, Australia, and Canada would form one nation, but that ship has sailed.
    Canada mentioned twice!
    Well it is pretty big!
    I really can't think why that would be in any way ideal. Why should we be ruled over as a single entity when we have hugely divergent locations, priorities, etc?
    Yeah, more cooperation is a good thing, but that doesn't mean we have to merge.
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549
    John_M said:

    Rob, this is the 21st century Internet. There is no nuance, no middle ground, no shades of grey. You're either for full, free and unfettered migration or you're for pulling up the drawbridge and deporting Johnny Foreigner en masse.

    Funny thing is when I heard about this story on the radio this morning it was reported as "free movement", not as less restrictive visas. It must have been some of that "fake news" that's all the rage.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961

    SeanT said:

    Written by a notorious europhile quisling. Really, we need to start burning these people at Smithfield*

    *metaphorically, moderators, metaphorically
    I had a drink last night ('work' drinks, following a team away day) with an Islington socialist and Labour Party member, who really admires Emily Thornberry (his local MP), who bellowed to me that Theresa May was a total idiot and that Brexit was thanks to the 'fascists' up North.

    And he knows full well I voted Leave.
    Lady Nugee. I hope you corrected him. ;)
This discussion has been closed.