Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Can we end this “snap election” speculation – TMay, like Dave

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited March 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Can we end this “snap election” speculation – TMay, like Dave before, simply does not have the power to call one

In the latest PB polling matters podcast we hear that polling has been going on asking the public what they think of the idea of having an early General Election. The responses are interesting but they ignore one pertinent fact:

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    edited March 2017
    First!

    Like LEAVE and NO...
  • 3rd, like the SNP in the 2017 General Election
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,748

    3rd, like the SNP in the 2017 General Election

    And the 2015 tbf.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    End baseless speculation? Then what would I do with my time?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    The other factor that OGH omits is that Mrs May has said it won't happen......
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Didn't I just see a clip of Labour's election campaign chief saying they would vote for an election if a motion was brought forward in the Commons?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    On topic, I am +107/-247 for a General Election this year. I'd like to thank the backers.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Divvie, hmm.

    The SNP might be disappointed to win fewer seats than Corbyn-led Labour :p
  • MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,191
    Now that negotiation over the terms of exit has begun and with only 2 years to go at it, it would be idiotic to initiate a GE campaign.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    FPT @ Sunil "NOUVELLE THREAD"

    Should that not be Nouveau Fil(lon)?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    Now that negotiation over the terms of exit has begun and with only 2 years to go at it, it would be idiotic to initiate a GE campaign.

    This is why I don't think there will be one.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Inclined to agree with OGH.

    The possibility of an early election has passed with the serving of A50.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Any polling on public appetite for an early election.

    Can imagine the voters are absolutely sick of voting and want a break.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Nicola will be FEWMIN !!

    "4.5 This will be an opportunity to determine the level best placed to take decisions on
    these issues, ensuring power sits closer to the people of the UK than ever before. It is the
    expectation of the Government that the outcome of this process will be a significant increase
    in the decision making power of each devolved administration."
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    The role of EU derived law and the ECJ under the Great Repeal Bill seems crystal clear to me. It's just like Common Law. Unless or until new legislation changes it, it is the law. If new legislation comes in then that takes precedence.

    What's unclear to people?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,038
    Fixed Term: bonkers idea.

  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    edited March 2017
    Ken talking Hitler. :smiley:
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    edited March 2017

    Fixed Term: bonkers idea.

    It's up for review in 2020. Would be surprised to see it continue after that. Repealing would be interesting, from a constitutional perspective.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    edited March 2017

    Fixed Term: bonkers idea.

    I quite like it actually. Obviously more elections would be better for me personally.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    The PM said there would be no election before 2020, after all we've scene so far, it’s about time punters started to believe her.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,038
    RobD said:

    Fixed Term: bonkers idea.

    It's up for review in 2020. Would be surprised to see it continue after that. Repealing would be interesting, from a constitutional perspective.
    iirc they would be major difficulties as it would involve reinstating the Queen's powers in some way and this would involve codifying them. Can't remember the details.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,038
    chestnut said:

    Ken talking Hitler. :smiley:

    is there a live feed? History Channel?
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    RobD said:

    Fixed Term: bonkers idea.

    It's up for review in 2020. Would be surprised to see it continue after that. Repealing would be interesting, from a constitutional perspective.
    My guess is that the main change would be four year parliaments. In any case it is not certain that the repeal of the Act would automatically return to the Royal Pejorative.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    RobD said:

    Fixed Term: bonkers idea.

    It's up for review in 2020. Would be surprised to see it continue after that. Repealing would be interesting, from a constitutional perspective.
    iirc they would be major difficulties as it would involve reinstating the Queen's powers in some way and this would involve codifying them. Can't remember the details.
    Yeah, but it could be something along the lines of "the monarch will issue the writ for an election by order-in-council". The FTPA did also repeal the Septennial Act, so a new provisions for the maximum term of a parliament would be required.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,879

    The role of EU derived law and the ECJ under the Great Repeal Bill seems crystal clear to me. It's just like Common Law. Unless or until new legislation changes it, it is the law. If new legislation comes in then that takes precedence.

    What's unclear to people?

    "We will, of course, continue to honour our international commitments and follow international law."

    Post-Brexit any agreements between the UK and the EU will be international. There will need to be a forum in which disputes and uncertainties relating to those agreements are ruled upon. Maybe it could be called the European Court of Justice ;-)
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    RobD said:

    Fixed Term: bonkers idea.

    It's up for review in 2020. Would be surprised to see it continue after that. Repealing would be interesting, from a constitutional perspective.
    My guess is that the main change would be four year parliaments. In any case it is not certain that the repeal of the Act would automatically return to the Royal Pejorative.
    I think it is a bit like Pandora's Box!
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,916
    MTimT said:

    FPT @ Sunil "NOUVELLE THREAD"

    Should that not be Nouveau Fil(lon)?

    Peut-être :)
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    https://order-order.com/2017/03/30/lloyds-chief-london-will-remain-our-major-financial-centre/

    So by the looks of it, despite all the spin, you will be able to fit all of Lloyds of London's EU operation in the back of a taxi.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341

    chestnut said:

    Ken talking Hitler. :smiley:

    is there a live feed? History Channel?
    He's just been explaining the difference between real anti-semites and others.

    It's a matter of Geography, apparently. Israeli Jews are fair game. London N16, not so.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Mrs May knows how the spineless entity known as The Labour Party works. If she forced a no-confidence motion then Corbyn would accept the PMship and the supine Labourites would fall in behind him awaiting his patronage.

    Has everyone forgotten how, when Gordon had his coronation, even his enemies were queuing up to sign a declaration of support because no one dared not to have their name on the list?

    Then make offers to the SNP, Greens and Unionists and you have a working minority govt until 2020.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    Hitler, Hitler, Hitler, Hitler, Hitler.....

    Ken Livingstone embroiled in new Hitler row after saying Zionists collaborated with Nazis

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/30/ken-livingstone-faces-expulsion-labour-party-appears-misconduct/
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,787

    RobD said:

    Fixed Term: bonkers idea.

    It's up for review in 2020. Would be surprised to see it continue after that. Repealing would be interesting, from a constitutional perspective.
    iirc they would be major difficulties as it would involve reinstating the Queen's powers in some way and this would involve codifying them. Can't remember the details.
    I don't think that would be a problem. You could give the PM statutory powers to replicate the previous situation that existed by Royal prerogative.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    RobD said:

    Fixed Term: bonkers idea.

    It's up for review in 2020. Would be surprised to see it continue after that. Repealing would be interesting, from a constitutional perspective.
    My guess is that the main change would be four year parliaments. In any case it is not certain that the repeal of the Act would automatically return to the Royal Pejorative.
    Local elections back to matching up with the "Date from last election" in the cycle instead of the effective 20 year metacycle we have now !
  • HHemmeligHHemmelig Posts: 617
    Mr Smithson says-

    "This legislation came about as part of the 2010 coalition deal between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. It was pressed for by the yellow team because they didn’t want to get into a situation where the Tories could just govern for a year or so and then go straight to the country when circumstances appeared most right ditching them."

    Which was rather ironic as it turned out....I imagine that if the Tories had cut & run after a year of coalition the Lib Dems would have held substantially more than the miserable 8 seats they got in 2015.

    That said I totally agree with the premise of this piece, the only chance of an early election IMO will be if the expenses issue forces multiple convictions and by-elections.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    Mrs May knows how the spineless entity known as The Labour Party works. If she forced a no-confidence motion then Corbyn would accept the PMship and the supine Labourites would fall in behind him awaiting his patronage.

    Would he even be offered it? He can't command the confidence of his own party, let alone the commons.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    HHemmelig said:

    Mr Smithson says-

    "This legislation came about as part of the 2010 coalition deal between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. It was pressed for by the yellow team because they didn’t want to get into a situation where the Tories could just govern for a year or so and then go straight to the country when circumstances appeared most right ditching them."

    Which was rather ironic as it turned out....I imagine that if the Tories had cut & run after a year of coalition the Lib Dems would have held substantially more than the miserable 8 seats they got in 2015.

    That said I totally agree with the premise of this piece, the only chance of an early election IMO will be if the expenses issue forces multiple convictions and by-elections.

    Hopefully that will push the price of a 2018 election way down when we get towards the end of the year. (5-2 2018 election say)

    Then 2019 "Will exiting the EU force an early election" (hopefully) (3-1 2019 Election hopefully)

    Small trading opportunities abound :>
  • glwglw Posts: 9,535

    https://order-order.com/2017/03/30/lloyds-chief-london-will-remain-our-major-financial-centre/

    So by the looks of it, despite all the spin, you will be able to fit all of Lloyds of London's EU operation in the back of a taxi.

    I think it was Inga Beale from Lloyd's on the radio this morning, during her interview she also said that "tens of jobs" might move. It's about having an EU office, not where the work will actually be done.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Not so much a Brussels offce as a portakabin.
  • RestharrowRestharrow Posts: 233
    Under the FTPA Section 7:

    [In 2020] "The Prime Minister must make arrangements ... for a committee to carry out a review of the operation of this Act and, if appropriate in consequence of its findings, to make recommendations for the repeal or amendment of this Act."

    If the FTPA is repealed after 2020 does that mean consequent amendments to prior legislation would automatically be reinstated? For example the Sovereign's power to dissolve Parliament under the Succession to the Crown Act 1707?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    edited March 2017

    Under the FTPA Section 7:

    [In 2020] "The Prime Minister must make arrangements ... for a committee to carry out a review of the operation of this Act and, if appropriate in consequence of its findings, to make recommendations for the repeal or amendment of this Act."

    If the FTPA is repealed after 2020 does that mean consequent amendments to prior legislation would automatically be reinstated? For example the Sovereign's power to dissolve Parliament under the Succession to the Crown Act 1707?

    No. Repealing an act that repealed another act does not reverse that repeal.

    And HM's power to dissolve was never codified - it was a prerogative power.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,535
    chestnut said:

    Not so much a Brussels offce as a portakabin.

    To be fair I get why Remainers would seize on such news. But trying to be objective there is not a lot of sign of panic in the business world, there has been a lot of positive investment and business news in recent months. The UK and London in particular look likely to remain a popular location for investment and operations, even if there does have to be some peripheral reorganisation to operate from outside of the EU.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Alistair said:
    Think you and the tweeter need to read section 4.5 of the Great Repeal Bill.

    Bad news for the Scottish Nationalists is that they will have even more powers to waste.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Could our Nick win if the vote on the right splits? :D

    https://order-order.com/2017/03/30/soubry-backs-new-centrist-party/
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,038
    RobD said:

    Mrs May knows how the spineless entity known as The Labour Party works. If she forced a no-confidence motion then Corbyn would accept the PMship and the supine Labourites would fall in behind him awaiting his patronage.

    Would he even be offered it? He can't command the confidence of his own party, let alone the commons.
    I suspect May will be very reluctant to put HM in the position of deciding whether to allow Corbyn time to seek confidence.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,748
    TGOHF said:

    Alistair said:
    Think you and the tweeter need to read section 4.5 of the Great Repeal Bill.

    Bad news for the Scottish Nationalists is that they will have even more powers to waste.
    Will it be enshrined in a nice photoshopped vow? Or even better, real vellum!
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,787

    RobD said:

    Mrs May knows how the spineless entity known as The Labour Party works. If she forced a no-confidence motion then Corbyn would accept the PMship and the supine Labourites would fall in behind him awaiting his patronage.

    Would he even be offered it? He can't command the confidence of his own party, let alone the commons.
    I suspect May will be very reluctant to put HM in the position of deciding whether to allow Corbyn time to seek confidence.
    It wouldn't need to be Corbyn. Putting parliament into limbo would also run the risk that the parties would fracture and a new centrist majority coalition could seize power.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,038
    RobD said:

    Could our Nick win if the vote on the right splits? :D

    https://order-order.com/2017/03/30/soubry-backs-new-centrist-party/

    Not while Corbyn is leader.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    TGOHF said:

    Alistair said:
    Think you and the tweeter need to read section 4.5 of the Great Repeal Bill.

    Bad news for the Scottish Nationalists is that they will have even more powers to waste.
    Will it be enshrined in a nice photoshopped vow? Or even better, real vellum!
    I realist that the cult of Nicla will be a bit scared of being forced to use powers for subjects other than calling for referendums but it's in the bill - wonder if the SNP will vote for or against more powers ??
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    glw said:

    chestnut said:

    Not so much a Brussels offce as a portakabin.

    To be fair I get why Remainers would seize on such news. But trying to be objective there is not a lot of sign of panic in the business world, there has been a lot of positive investment and business news in recent months. The UK and London in particular look likely to remain a popular location for investment and operations, even if there does have to be some peripheral reorganisation to operate from outside of the EU.
    The loss of work from the City was always part of the anti-Brexit narrative but it only tells half the story. Other businesses are moving work into the UK and the flow is two way. It was always going to be a case of individual businesses doing what they assumed would be right for them.

    The big picture remains very good employment figures, near record job opportunities and a Brexit boosted improvement in the public sector finances. Inflation is also finally at the desired 2% level.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    The role of EU derived law and the ECJ under the Great Repeal Bill seems crystal clear to me. It's just like Common Law. Unless or until new legislation changes it, it is the law. If new legislation comes in then that takes precedence.

    What's unclear to people?

    "We will, of course, continue to honour our international commitments and follow international law."

    Post-Brexit any agreements between the UK and the EU will be international. There will need to be a forum in which disputes and uncertainties relating to those agreements are ruled upon. Maybe it could be called the European Court of Justice ;-)
    If we form a trade deal with the USA will we get SCOTUS to be the forum for any dispurmtes? Or AN ISDS? Or a third party organisation like the WTO?

    Any UK EU deal will need a neutral ISDS or another third party.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,695
    Yes no election now.

    Serving A50 means it can't happen until we've left.

    There must be an outside possibility of an election in 2019 if Parliament was to vote down Theresa's deal... That would in effect, be a vote of no confidence in the government.

    However, it does look like it'll be 2020.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    TGOHF said:

    Alistair said:
    Think you and the tweeter need to read section 4.5 of the Great Repeal Bill.

    Bad news for the Scottish Nationalists is that they will have even more powers to waste.
    Like the ones they currently don't use....

    Oh well, at least they could get a bridge built on time....
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    RobD said:

    Mrs May knows how the spineless entity known as The Labour Party works. If she forced a no-confidence motion then Corbyn would accept the PMship and the supine Labourites would fall in behind him awaiting his patronage.

    Would he even be offered it? He can't command the confidence of his own party, let alone the commons.
    I suspect May will be very reluctant to put HM in the position of deciding whether to allow Corbyn time to seek confidence.
    It wouldn't need to be Corbyn. Putting parliament into limbo would also run the risk that the parties would fracture and a new centrist majority coalition could seize power.
    It wouldn't go into limbo it would go into a General Election campaign that is two weeks longer than normal. Parties unite at General Elections they do not fracture at them.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 3,870
    RobD said:

    Could our Nick win if the vote on the right splits? :D

    https://order-order.com/2017/03/30/soubry-backs-new-centrist-party/

    Overheard some interesting comments by the Labour group leader on a local authority recently (Remain-voting area).

    They are terrified of the Lib Dems at the May elections - bear in mind that the group leader in question had 10 times the LD candidate's vote in their division in 2013. They have seen how the LDs are hoovering up local by-elections and believe this could potentially be repeated in their area. Turnout is expected to be low and so "anything could happen".

    Corbyn and Labour's general supineness towards Brexit could well result in a bloodbath in May. I still reckon Soubry and Osborne jumping ship is unlikely, but if they did, a lot of Labour would follow them.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,748
    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    Alistair said:
    Think you and the tweeter need to read section 4.5 of the Great Repeal Bill.

    Bad news for the Scottish Nationalists is that they will have even more powers to waste.
    Will it be enshrined in a nice photoshopped vow? Or even better, real vellum!
    I realist that the cult of Nicla will be a bit scared of being forced to use powers for subjects other than calling for referendums but it's in the bill - wonder if the SNP will vote for or against more powers ??
    If we only we knew what those magnificent, new superpowers are. Perhaps you could give us some hints?

    Anyway, what do you care, you're a migrant. What's the Great Repeal Bill doing for YOUR region?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    edited March 2017

    The other factor that OGH omits is that Mrs May has said it won't happen......

    Irrelevant, if she could do it simply and it later appealed to her to do so. As it is, the appeal might be there but it is much harder to make happen. And with A50, while a big majority might be nice, it is not the time for an election now.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    Hitler, Hitler, Hitler, Hitler, Hitler.....

    Ken Livingstone embroiled in new Hitler row after saying Zionists collaborated with Nazis

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/30/ken-livingstone-faces-expulsion-labour-party-appears-misconduct/

    That's not a new row, it's the same row, merely deferred for a timer.
  • Animal_pbAnimal_pb Posts: 608
    edited March 2017
    glw said:

    chestnut said:

    Not so much a Brussels offce as a portakabin.

    To be fair I get why Remainers would seize on such news. But trying to be objective there is not a lot of sign of panic in the business world, there has been a lot of positive investment and business news in recent months. The UK and London in particular look likely to remain a popular location for investment and operations, even if there does have to be some peripheral reorganisation to operate from outside of the EU.
    Interestingly, the reason Brussels and Luxembourg made the shortlist (and Ireland didn't) was because these jurisdictions offered the greatest regulatory flexibility - there's already competitive arbitrage between EU states to pick up marginal business. Almost a race to the bottom, one might say...
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    Inside The Guardian’s sinking US expansion

    http://digiday.com/media/inside-guardians-flailing-u-s-expansion/

    Perhaps people aren't interested in live blogging the faux outrage over Legs-It-Gate...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    RobD said:

    Fixed Term: bonkers idea.

    It's up for review in 2020. Would be surprised to see it continue after that. Repealing would be interesting, from a constitutional perspective.
    My guess is that the main change would be four year parliaments. In any case it is not certain that the repeal of the Act would automatically return to the Royal Pejorative.
    I cannot say I see why four year parliaments, though more common, would intrinsically be superior to 5 year ones, as some seem to think. Running out of business isn't a reason, since that's a cultural problem.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    RobD said:

    Mrs May knows how the spineless entity known as The Labour Party works. If she forced a no-confidence motion then Corbyn would accept the PMship and the supine Labourites would fall in behind him awaiting his patronage.

    Would he even be offered it? He can't command the confidence of his own party, let alone the commons.
    He would have to be, if only for forms sake. He "leads" the next biggest grouping and in theory could form a minority govt
  • glwglw Posts: 9,535
    Animal_pb said:

    glw said:

    chestnut said:

    Not so much a Brussels offce as a portakabin.

    To be fair I get why Remainers would seize on such news. But trying to be objective there is not a lot of sign of panic in the business world, there has been a lot of positive investment and business news in recent months. The UK and London in particular look likely to remain a popular location for investment and operations, even if there does have to be some peripheral reorganisation to operate from outside of the EU.
    Interestingly, the reason Brussels and Luxembourg made the shortlist (and Ireland didn't) was because these jurisdictions offered the greatest regulatory flexibility - there's already competitive arbitrage between EU states to pick up marginal business. Almost a race to the bottom, one might say...
    A bit like Delaware, lots of businesses, not so many jobs.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,393
    kle4 said:

    RobD said:

    Fixed Term: bonkers idea.

    It's up for review in 2020. Would be surprised to see it continue after that. Repealing would be interesting, from a constitutional perspective.
    My guess is that the main change would be four year parliaments. In any case it is not certain that the repeal of the Act would automatically return to the Royal Pejorative.
    I cannot say I see why four year parliaments, though more common, would intrinsically be superior to 5 year ones, as some seem to think. Running out of business isn't a reason, since that's a cultural problem.
    Perhaps it is something that the EU should legislate for? Unified parliamentary terms across the federation.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    chestnut said:

    glw said:

    chestnut said:

    Not so much a Brussels offce as a portakabin.

    To be fair I get why Remainers would seize on such news. But trying to be objective there is not a lot of sign of panic in the business world, there has been a lot of positive investment and business news in recent months. The UK and London in particular look likely to remain a popular location for investment and operations, even if there does have to be some peripheral reorganisation to operate from outside of the EU.
    The loss of work from the City was always part of the anti-Brexit narrative but it only tells half the story. Other businesses are moving work into the UK and the flow is two way. It was always going to be a case of individual businesses doing what they assumed would be right for them.

    The big picture remains very good employment figures, near record job opportunities and a Brexit boosted improvement in the public sector finances. Inflation is also finally at the desired 2% level.
    What business has moved here because of Brexit?
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    I still reckon Soubry and Osborne jumping ship is unlikely, but if they did, a lot of Labour would follow them.

    Soubry, probably, but not Osborne. The lefties have spent too long vilifying him and it has probaby soaked into their DNA and caused mutations resulting in an allergic reaction to Osbournic pathogens....

  • Animal_pbAnimal_pb Posts: 608
    SeanT said:

    Animal_pb said:

    glw said:

    chestnut said:

    Not so much a Brussels offce as a portakabin.

    To be fair I get why Remainers would seize on such news. But trying to be objective there is not a lot of sign of panic in the business world, there has been a lot of positive investment and business news in recent months. The UK and London in particular look likely to remain a popular location for investment and operations, even if there does have to be some peripheral reorganisation to operate from outside of the EU.
    Interestingly, the reason Brussels and Luxembourg made the shortlist (and Ireland didn't) was because these jurisdictions offered the greatest regulatory flexibility - there's already competitive arbitrage between EU states to pick up marginal business. Almost a race to the bottom, one might say...
    Typo of the year (before you edited it):

    "face to the bottom"

    Superb
    Stupid autocorrect.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    JonathanD said:

    chestnut said:

    glw said:

    chestnut said:

    Not so much a Brussels offce as a portakabin.

    To be fair I get why Remainers would seize on such news. But trying to be objective there is not a lot of sign of panic in the business world, there has been a lot of positive investment and business news in recent months. The UK and London in particular look likely to remain a popular location for investment and operations, even if there does have to be some peripheral reorganisation to operate from outside of the EU.
    The loss of work from the City was always part of the anti-Brexit narrative but it only tells half the story. Other businesses are moving work into the UK and the flow is two way. It was always going to be a case of individual businesses doing what they assumed would be right for them.

    The big picture remains very good employment figures, near record job opportunities and a Brexit boosted improvement in the public sector finances. Inflation is also finally at the desired 2% level.
    What business has moved here because of Brexit?
    I linked to the Alsico related move from Italy to the UK yesterday. BigG was doing similar this morning.
  • Animal_pbAnimal_pb Posts: 608
    SeanT said:

    JonathanD said:

    chestnut said:

    glw said:

    chestnut said:

    Not so much a Brussels offce as a portakabin.

    To be fair I get why Remainers would seize on such news. But trying to be objective there is not a lot of sign of panic in the business world, there has been a lot of positive investment and business news in recent months. The UK and London in particular look likely to remain a popular location for investment and operations, even if there does have to be some peripheral reorganisation to operate from outside of the EU.
    The loss of work from the City was always part of the anti-Brexit narrative but it only tells half the story. Other businesses are moving work into the UK and the flow is two way. It was always going to be a case of individual businesses doing what they assumed would be right for them.

    The big picture remains very good employment figures, near record job opportunities and a Brexit boosted improvement in the public sector finances. Inflation is also finally at the desired 2% level.
    What business has moved here because of Brexit?
    The business of proper politics and true democracy.
    That calls for a toast, surely.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,846
    FPT

    SouthamObserver said


    "We will, of course, continue to honour our international commitments and follow international law."

    Once we have left the EU, any agreements between the UK and the EU will be subject to international law. But in cases of dispute or uncertainty those agreements will need to be interpreted. I wonder who will do that."

    The agreement will be in the former of either a treaty or a trade agreement and will be adjudicated in just the same way as the thousands of other treaties and FTAs in existence.
  • ParistondaParistonda Posts: 1,819
    "A reason why Labour MPs might not back a Commons motion calling for an early election is that it is so much better for them if they force the government to go through the vote of confidence process."

    This is another good point actually - Labour would be fools to support a motion, they can simply say "if you have no confidence in your own government, feel free to vote it down, we will of course also be doing that, but we won't support this motion". Tories voting down their own government either comes across as a lack of confidence or as a engineering an election for political gains / playing politics - neither will go down well in the country at large.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    I don't understand this "TMay" thing.

    Is it supposed to be insulting? I've never seen it used elsewhere.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    GeoffM said:

    I don't understand this "TMay" thing.

    Is it supposed to be insulting? I've never seen it used elsewhere.

    I imagine its because occasionally sentences look strange with May, particularly if you want to say 'May may want to do x' for instance.
  • GeoffM said:

    I don't understand this "TMay" thing.

    Is it supposed to be insulting? I've never seen it used elsewhere.

    No. It is because our Prime Minister's name is also a month and a modal verb.

    So it is stop potential confusion of something like 'May may call a May election'
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    kle4 said:

    GeoffM said:

    I don't understand this "TMay" thing.

    Is it supposed to be insulting? I've never seen it used elsewhere.

    I imagine its because occasionally sentences look strange with May, particularly if you want to say 'May may want to do x' for instance.
    May may choose May as a good time for the next GE, for example :)
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    GeoffM said:

    I don't understand this "TMay" thing.

    Is it supposed to be insulting? I've never seen it used elsewhere.

    No. It is because our Prime Minister's name is also a month and a modal verb.

    So it is stop potential confusion of something like 'May may call a May election'
    Drat, beaten to it by TSE of all people!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    edited March 2017

    GeoffM said:

    I don't understand this "TMay" thing.

    Is it supposed to be insulting? I've never seen it used elsewhere.

    No. It is because our Prime Minister's name is also a month and a modal verb.

    So it is stop potential confusion of something like 'May may call a May election'
    May May hold an election in may ?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Pulpstar said:

    GeoffM said:

    I don't understand this "TMay" thing.

    Is it supposed to be insulting? I've never seen it used elsewhere.

    No. It is because our Prime Minister's name is also a month and a modal verb.

    So it is stop potential confusion of something like 'May may call a May election'
    May May hold an election in may ?
    Shouldn't the last May also be capitalised? :p
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    GeoffM said:

    I don't understand this "TMay" thing.

    Is it supposed to be insulting? I've never seen it used elsewhere.

    No. It is because our Prime Minister's name is also a month and a modal verb.

    So it is stop potential confusion of something like 'May may call a May election'
    You could simply say "Mrs May" as in conversation. Good manners etc..
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,393
    SeanT said:

    JonathanD said:

    chestnut said:

    glw said:

    chestnut said:

    Not so much a Brussels offce as a portakabin.

    To be fair I get why Remainers would seize on such news. But trying to be objective there is not a lot of sign of panic in the business world, there has been a lot of positive investment and business news in recent months. The UK and London in particular look likely to remain a popular location for investment and operations, even if there does have to be some peripheral reorganisation to operate from outside of the EU.
    The loss of work from the City was always part of the anti-Brexit narrative but it only tells half the story. Other businesses are moving work into the UK and the flow is two way. It was always going to be a case of individual businesses doing what they assumed would be right for them.

    The big picture remains very good employment figures, near record job opportunities and a Brexit boosted improvement in the public sector finances. Inflation is also finally at the desired 2% level.
    What business has moved here because of Brexit?
    Also, in time, a fair proportion of the tens of thousands of lobbyists, now in Brussels, will move to London. The UK is 20% of EU GDP; when the UK is making 95% of its own laws, rather than 50%, these lobbyists will need to attend, much more closely, to the large British market.

    This is what Brexit means. Power flows back to the UK. London becomes MORE important, politically (likewise Edinburgh, Cardiff, Belfast), even as we lose influence over Brussels.

    Where power resides, business clusters.

    "Power flows back to the UK."

    Yes - currently 2 GW through the French interconnector and 1 GW through the Dutch interconnector.

    http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

    Let's hope the buggers don't shut it off to spite us.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958

    RobD said:

    Fixed Term: bonkers idea.

    It's up for review in 2020. Would be surprised to see it continue after that. Repealing would be interesting, from a constitutional perspective.
    My guess is that the main change would be four year parliaments. In any case it is not certain that the repeal of the Act would automatically return to the Royal Pejorative.
    The Royal Pejorative? Your republican roots are showing....
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    edited March 2017

    GeoffM said:

    I don't understand this "TMay" thing.

    Is it supposed to be insulting? I've never seen it used elsewhere.

    No. It is because our Prime Minister's name is also a month and a modal verb.

    So it is stop potential confusion of something like 'May may call a May election'
    Surely "May? May may."
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    edited March 2017
    snip
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    Charles said:

    GeoffM said:

    I don't understand this "TMay" thing.

    Is it supposed to be insulting? I've never seen it used elsewhere.

    No. It is because our Prime Minister's name is also a month and a modal verb.

    So it is stop potential confusion of something like 'May may call a May election'
    Surely "May? May may."
    May? May May?
  • MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,191
    edited March 2017
    May may go to the polls in May but may be better waiting till May 2020. Maybe.
  • I've really warmed to Mrs May in the last 24 hours.

    Her comparing of Maidenhead to Scotland is the platinum level grade trolling I wish I could do to the Scot Nats.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    GeoffM said:

    I don't understand this "TMay" thing.

    Is it supposed to be insulting? I've never seen it used elsewhere.

    No. It is because our Prime Minister's name is also a month and a modal verb.

    So it is stop potential confusion of something like 'May may call a May election'
    You could simply say "Mrs May" as in conversation. Good manners etc..
    Some don't like using such terms - we know EMily Thornberry does not!
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,393
    "PM might call a Whitsun election"

    Sorted.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    May may go to the polls in May but may be better waiting till May 2020. Maybe.

    Shame it won't be May 4th :(
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,544



    If we form a trade deal with the USA will we get SCOTUS to be the forum for any dispurmtes? Or AN ISDS? Or a third party organisation like the WTO?

    Any UK EU deal will need a neutral ISDS or another third party.

    If trade is run at its smoothest, the law has to be the same and it has to be applied in the same way. It doesn't matter where the court is or who is donning the gowns. But it means signing up, not just to current EU law but to future EU law, and also to ECJ case law. Otherwise we won't get equivalence, which we may decide is OK, but it will impact trade.

    This is a big bone of contention with the Swiss bilaterals.
  • I did suggest to Mike instead of 'TMay' he used the term 'Our current PM who has never won a general election'

    But he thought that was my Pro-Theresa bias showing.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071

    GeoffM said:

    I don't understand this "TMay" thing.

    Is it supposed to be insulting? I've never seen it used elsewhere.

    No. It is because our Prime Minister's name is also a month and a modal verb.

    So it is stop potential confusion of something like 'May may call a May election'
    Thanks for this and also thanks to everyone else who replied.

    I shall use Mrs May in any situation where confusion might arise.

    Cheers.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    GeoffM said:

    GeoffM said:

    I don't understand this "TMay" thing.

    Is it supposed to be insulting? I've never seen it used elsewhere.

    No. It is because our Prime Minister's name is also a month and a modal verb.

    So it is stop potential confusion of something like 'May may call a May election'
    Thanks for this and also thanks to everyone else who replied.

    I shall use Mrs May in any situation where confusion might arise.

    Cheers.
    Can't believe you just assumed May's gender.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    SeanT said:

    JonathanD said:

    chestnut said:

    glw said:

    chestnut said:

    Not so much a Brussels offce as a portakabin.

    To be fair I get why Remainers would seize on such news. But trying to be objective there is not a lot of sign of panic in the business world, there has been a lot of positive investment and business news in recent months. The UK and London in particular look likely to remain a popular location for investment and operations, even if there does have to be some peripheral reorganisation to operate from outside of the EU.
    The loss of work from the City was always part of the anti-Brexit narrative but it only tells half the story. Other businesses are moving work into the UK and the flow is two way. It was always going to be a case of individual businesses doing what they assumed would be right for them.

    The big picture remains very good employment figures, near record job opportunities and a Brexit boosted improvement in the public sector finances. Inflation is also finally at the desired 2% level.
    What business has moved here because of Brexit?
    Also, in time, a fair proportion of the tens of thousands of lobbyists, now in Brussels, will move to London. The UK is 20% of EU GDP; when the UK is making 95% of its own laws, rather than 50%, these lobbyists will need to attend, much more closely, to the large British market.

    This is what Brexit means. Power flows back to the UK. London becomes MORE important, politically (likewise Edinburgh, Cardiff, Belfast), even as we lose influence over Brussels.

    Where power resides, business clusters.

    "Power flows back to the UK."

    Yes - currently 2 GW through the French interconnector and 1 GW through the Dutch interconnector.

    http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
    Where's that darn like button.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    RobD said:

    May may go to the polls in May but may be better waiting till May 2020. Maybe.

    Shame it won't be May 4th :(
    Empire 2.0 strikes back.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,741
    Afternoon all :)

    Semantics - there are words like "Prime Minister" or "PM" which would apply. The Mail often uses the word "Premier" which betrays the Latin notion of "primus inter pares" but will suffice.

    Why have I just wasted my time on this ?

    A thought on leaving/joining parties - I've been in the same Party, albeit under different names, for nearly 40 years. I've invested as much personal, financial and emotional capital as anyone supporting a middling League Two team but that isn't the point.

    I still think a Lib Dem majority Government would be the best thing for this country but I'm quite well aware 92% or so disagree. Doesn't make them right and me wrong.

    To switch to another party would be a total repudiation of that investment and that belief and I can't do that and I'm surprised so many can though a lot of defections in local Government seem based on personality clashes within factions or de-selections.

    I could imagine myself leaving the Party and joining the vast majority of the non-aligned and being able to think for myself (though I'm sure I do that now) and have flirted with the idea two or three times (had Clegg formed a Coalition with Brown's Labour Party in 2010 I'm pretty sure I'd have quit) but it would still be a big wrench.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    kle4 said:

    GeoffM said:

    I don't understand this "TMay" thing.

    Is it supposed to be insulting? I've never seen it used elsewhere.

    No. It is because our Prime Minister's name is also a month and a modal verb.

    So it is stop potential confusion of something like 'May may call a May election'
    You could simply say "Mrs May" as in conversation. Good manners etc..
    Some don't like using such terms - we know EMily Thornberry does not!
    That is Ms Thornberry's problem.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    GeoffM said:

    GeoffM said:

    I don't understand this "TMay" thing.

    Is it supposed to be insulting? I've never seen it used elsewhere.

    No. It is because our Prime Minister's name is also a month and a modal verb.

    So it is stop potential confusion of something like 'May may call a May election'
    Thanks for this and also thanks to everyone else who replied.

    I shall use Mrs May in any situation where confusion might arise.

    Cheers.
    Could also be referred to as PM May or Prime Minister May or the PM.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820

    This is another good point actually - Labour would be fools to support a motion, they can simply say "if you have no confidence in your own government, feel free to vote it down, we will of course also be doing that, but we won't support this motion". Tories voting down their own government either comes across as a lack of confidence or as a engineering an election for political gains / playing politics - neither will go down well in the country at large.

    As I've pointed out before when we've discussed this, the Tories wouldn't need to vote against themselves. They could simply abstain, and justify the abstention with some flim-flam about 'it's time to let voters decide'.
This discussion has been closed.