Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » PB / Polling Matters podcast: German election special & Labour

2

Comments

  • Options
    Scott_P said:

    JosephG said:

    What is to stop the UK addressing the border and saying, "Regardless of any agreemement - we'll keep on putting up with the fags smuggled across the border - we are imposing no tariffs, no customs duties, the CTA, and, accordingly we will impose no borders between NI and RoI - at least as far as goods and people passing North are concerned.

    The thing that stops them is Brexit. You know, control of our borders and free movement of people.
    No that doesn't answer the question. If we decide to implement our control on the NI border by putting up no controls at that point then that is our decision and our control.

    We can still put up controls at other points. Free movement of people isn't controlled at the border, its controlled at the workplace and home. My Canadian in-laws can come to the UK whenever they want to on their Canadian passport but they have no right to live and work here, just come on holiday. The government won't stop them entering the country but companies could not legally hire them without a visa.
  • Options
    not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,341
    edited September 2017

    Scott_P said:

    JosephG said:

    What is to stop the UK addressing the border and saying, "Regardless of any agreemement - we'll keep on putting up with the fags smuggled across the border - we are imposing no tariffs, no customs duties, the CTA, and, accordingly we will impose no borders between NI and RoI - at least as far as goods and people passing North are concerned.

    The thing that stops them is Brexit. You know, control of our borders and free movement of people.
    No that doesn't answer the question. If we decide to implement our control on the NI border by putting up no controls at that point then that is our decision and our control.

    We can still put up controls at other points. Free movement of people isn't controlled at the border, its controlled at the workplace and home. My Canadian in-laws can come to the UK whenever they want to on their Canadian passport but they have no right to live and work here, just come on holiday. The government won't stop them entering the country but companies could not legally hire them without a visa.
    So need to worry about ISIS terrorists from Syria as long as hey can’t get a job. Got it.

    Interesting to see the latest Brexiteer climb down: Taking Back Control of our Borders didn’t actually mean controls at, erm, the border.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859

    rcs1000 said:

    JohnLoony said:

    Meanwhile, the defence procurement row between Boeing and Bombardier seems to be caused ultimately by the Canadian government giving an unfair subsidy to Bombardier, resulting in a 219% tariff by the USA to level the playing field.

    Is that correct, or am I senile again?

    If correct, it's another example of how political preference and geographical favouritism gets in the way of making proper defence decisions based on which is best or most efficient. In other words, it's like Westland again. This time, the Heseltine is Justin Bieber throwing his toys out of the Trump.

    I'm no expert but I think you have summarised the American case against Bombadier, and the defence is that these arrangements are quite normal and used by Boeing as well. but others better informed should be along shortly.

    What it should remind us is that the American government is protectionist and plays hardball.. A free trade agreement with the United States should be regarded with great suspicion, especially when judged by American tribunals known for home-town decisions, and not lauded as a great prize of Brexit.
    There was an excellent research piece by the Alliance Bernstein Aerospace team about three years ago looking at subsidies in this sector. Basically, 4% of Boeing's revenues are subsidies from the US government in one form or another. EADS is about 5% from the EU and various European governments; Bombadier was 8% with the Quebec and Canadian governments weighing in and Embraer was 9%. We don't know exactly what the numbers are for the Chinese or the Russians, but it's likely to be in the 25-30% range.

    The danger is that this leads to tit-for-tat responses and an effective end to international aircraft competition. Which would be a loss for consumers everywhere.
    The Economist takes a more cynical view, and also reminds us Boeing has done the same thing as regards pricing (the first few orders are sold at less than the cost of production, or seem to be until development and tooling costs are averaged over lots of orders), and Boeing is not directly hurt as it makes no planes this small so just wants to damage a foreign plane-maker.
    https://www.economist.com/news/business/21729469-row-between-planemakers-has-become-political-boeing-takes-flight-hypocrisy
    I think every manufacturer sells the first few planes of a new model below marginal cost - those planes are usually overweight, hand assembled as they train the machines, and frequently a year or three behind schedule as they find faults in testing.

    Emirates are already retiring their early A380s, they’re something like 10 tonnes heavier than newly delivered models of the same aircraft - that’s a lot of cargo they can’t carry.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,721
    From a purely selfish point of view if stokes were fined heavily by the team and stripped of the be captaincy that'd be nice. But they'll likely be pilloried if that's all they do.
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    kle4 said:

    From a purely selfish point of view if stokes were fined heavily by the team and stripped of the be captaincy that'd be nice. But they'll likely be pilloried if that's all they do.

    He's not the Captain.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,721

    kle4 said:

    From a purely selfish point of view if stokes were fined heavily by the team and stripped of the be captaincy that'd be nice. But they'll likely be pilloried if that's all they do.

    He's not the Captain.
    I missed the word vice. One day vice captain isn't he.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    Scott_P said:

    JosephG said:

    What is to stop the UK addressing the border and saying, "Regardless of any agreemement - we'll keep on putting up with the fags smuggled across the border - we are imposing no tariffs, no customs duties, the CTA, and, accordingly we will impose no borders between NI and RoI - at least as far as goods and people passing North are concerned.

    The thing that stops them is Brexit. You know, control of our borders and free movement of people.
    No that doesn't answer the question. If we decide to implement our control on the NI border by putting up no controls at that point then that is our decision and our control.

    We can still put up controls at other points. Free movement of people isn't controlled at the border, its controlled at the workplace and home. My Canadian in-laws can come to the UK whenever they want to on their Canadian passport but they have no right to live and work here, just come on holiday. The government won't stop them entering the country but companies could not legally hire them without a visa.
    I think that ignoring tarrifs, quotas and goods with one WTO member (RoI) while apllying them to others (RoW) is a violation of WTO, unless part of a signed Free Trade Agreement. That would have to be EU rather than RoI of course.
  • Options
    Mr. Loony, ah, you're right. I was thinking today was Friday for some reason :p
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,721

    Scott_P said:

    JosephG said:

    What is to stop the UK addressing the border and saying, "Regardless of any agreemement - we'll keep on putting up with the fags smuggled across the border - we are imposing no tariffs, no customs duties, the CTA, and, accordingly we will impose no borders between NI and RoI - at least as far as goods and people passing North are concerned.

    The thing that stops them is Brexit. You know, control of our borders and free movement of people.
    No that doesn't answer the question. If we decide to implement our control on the NI border by putting up no controls at that point then that is our decision and our control.

    We can still put up controls at other points. Free movement of people isn't controlled at the border, its controlled at the workplace and home. My Canadian in-laws can come to the UK whenever they want to on their Canadian passport but they have no right to live and work here, just come on holiday. The government won't stop them entering the country but companies could not legally hire them without a visa.
    So need to worry about ISIS terrorists from Syria as long as hey can’t get a job. Got it.

    Interesting to see the latest Brexiteer climb down: Taking Back Control of our Borders didn’t actually mean controls at, erm, the border.
    This may surprise you but not every brexiteer cared about the same things. One such taking a more open approach doesn't mean all think that.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    kle4 said:

    From a purely selfish point of view if stokes were fined heavily by the team and stripped of the be captaincy that'd be nice. But they'll likely be pilloried if that's all they do.

    It’s a common situation in sport and entertainment, as well as sales-orientated workplaces - what do you do with someone who’s a superstar at the job, but a nightmare to deal with as a person. Could probably be called Jeremy Clarkson syndrome.

    If they drop Stokes then the selectors will be applauded - until the day we fail to win the ashes, then it will be their fault for not selecting the best cricketers irrespective of other factors. Not that the England selectors have been doing the best of jobs this year anyway.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Well Labour are back with another messiah - Brown , Blair, Ed and now Jezza.

    The others all turned out tot be crap but this time it’s er different.

    Dissenters will be purged and the talent pool hollowed out - it’s bound to end differently this time.

  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859

    Mr. Loony, ah, you're right. I was thinking today was Friday for some reason :p

    If it was Friday, you’d have missed P1 already and P2 would just be starting. ;)
  • Options
    RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    edited September 2017



    correction, Chris Kendall worked for the UK DTI on the aerospace dispute in the 90's, and later went on to start the CETA deal. His twitter threads on trade policy are very well sourced. Todays is not happy reading for Corbynites.

    https://twitter.com/ottocrat/status/913279141797093376


    When left wingers discussed this back in the eighties they were well aware of the risks of trade disruption from leaving the EU, which they were planning to do at the same time as tweeking NATO's nose. They were planning a whole set of measures to counteract the problems. The package was known as the siege economy. I was reminded of it by the discussion of the risk of a run on the pound if Labour were to be elected. MacDonald probably knows all the arguments around this kind of thing inside out. I am not a big fan of Brexit and I don't like the idea of a siege economy any more now than I did back in the day. But I have to say if we are going to go ahead with Brexit I'd rather do it in the hands of the left. At least they have plans. I don't think knowing a bit of latin and owning a monocle will really cut it.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,326
    Odd finding:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/28/otto-warmbier-torture-north-korea-coroner

    Doesn't really affect anything much, since we all accept that N Korea is horrible, whether they tortured this particular prisoner or not. The implication seems to be that the distraught parents assumed the worst. But I suppose it's another example of needing to take news with caution.
  • Options
    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    JosephG said:

    What is to stop the UK addressing the border and saying, "Regardless of any agreemement - we'll keep on putting up with the fags smuggled across the border - we are imposing no tariffs, no customs duties, the CTA, and, accordingly we will impose no borders between NI and RoI - at least as far as goods and people passing North are concerned.

    The thing that stops them is Brexit. You know, control of our borders and free movement of people.
    No that doesn't answer the question. If we decide to implement our control on the NI border by putting up no controls at that point then that is our decision and our control.

    We can still put up controls at other points. Free movement of people isn't controlled at the border, its controlled at the workplace and home. My Canadian in-laws can come to the UK whenever they want to on their Canadian passport but they have no right to live and work here, just come on holiday. The government won't stop them entering the country but companies could not legally hire them without a visa.
    So need to worry about ISIS terrorists from Syria as long as hey can’t get a job. Got it.

    Interesting to see the latest Brexiteer climb down: Taking Back Control of our Borders didn’t actually mean controls at, erm, the border.
    This may surprise you but not every brexiteer cared about the same things. One such taking a more open approach doesn't mean all think that.
    Well this is why there is so much in-fighting now- what Leave meant was (deliberately) never clearly defined so that everyone thought they were voting for their own pet version.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,326

    Scott_P said:

    JosephG said:

    What is to stop the UK addressing the border and saying, "Regardless of any agreemement - we'll keep on putting up with the fags smuggled across the border - we are imposing no tariffs, no customs duties, the CTA, and, accordingly we will impose no borders between NI and RoI - at least as far as goods and people passing North are concerned.

    The thing that stops them is Brexit. You know, control of our borders and free movement of people.
    No that doesn't answer the question. If we decide to implement our control on the NI border by putting up no controls at that point then that is our decision and our control.

    We can still put up controls at other points. Free movement of people isn't controlled at the border, its controlled at the workplace and home. My Canadian in-laws can come to the UK whenever they want to on their Canadian passport but they have no right to live and work here, just come on holiday. The government won't stop them entering the country but companies could not legally hire them without a visa.
    You're putting the viewpoint that Brexit is about power rather than policy, and for some voters you're clearly right. But not sure that people who voted Brexit expecting more border controls envisaged that we meant "no controls, but because we decide we don't want them".
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,942
    edited September 2017



    When left wingers discussed this back in the eighties they were well aware of the risks of trade disruption from leaving the EU, which they were planning to do at the same time as tweeking NATO's nose. They were planning a whole set of measures to counteract the problems. The package was known as the siege economy. I was reminded of it by the discussion of the risk of a run on the pound if Labour were to be elected. MacDonald probably knows all the arguments around this kind of thing inside out. I am not a big fan of Brexit and I don't like the idea of a siege economy any more now than I did back in the day. But I have to say if we are going to go ahead with Brexit I'd rather do it in the hands of the left. At least they have plans. I don't think knowing a bit of latin and owning a monocle will really cut it.

    Because you want the party with little or no support from or experience of business and trade in power when you're changing trade relationships.

    Makes sense.


    Oh, wait...
  • Options
    Mr. Sandpit, I'd know if my daft tiny stakes bets on the Renault, Sauber, Williams and Toro Rosso drivers to 'win' first practice had come off or not :pensive:

    I'm hoping it's absolutely pissing it down and Ericsson's the only man to set a lap time :D
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    edited September 2017
    Sandpit said:

    Mr. Loony, ah, you're right. I was thinking today was Friday for some reason :p

    If it was Friday, you’d have missed P1 already and P2 would just be starting. ;)
    Talking about Friday morning, at 05.30 tomorrow morning Elon Musk is due to give an hour-long talk about his latest plans for Mars. Apparently underpants and crowdfunding are out.

    Early birds will be able to watch it on a livestream.
  • Options
    philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704


    correction, Chris Kendall worked for the UK DTI on the aerospace dispute in the 90's, and later went on to start the CETA deal. His twitter threads on trade policy are very well sourced. Todays is not happy reading for Corbynites.

    https://twitter.com/ottocrat/status/913279141797093376


    When left wingers discussed this back in the eighties they were well aware of the risks of trade disruption from leaving the EU, which they were planning to do at the same time as tweeking NATO's nose. They were planning a whole set of measures to counteract the problems. The package was known as the siege economy. I was reminded of it by the discussion of the risk of a run on the pound if Labour were to be elected. MacDonald probably knows all the arguments around this kind of thing inside out. I am not a big fan of Brexit and I don't like the idea of a siege economy any more now than I did back in the day. But I have to say if we are going to go ahead with Brexit I'd rather do it in the hands of the left. At least they have plans. I don't think knowing a bit of latin and owning a monocle will really cut it.

    Problem is, the plans may be very bad plans.

    A well planned disaster is a bigger disaster than an unforseen one as you are actively streaming in the wrong direction and won't see our listen to the warnings.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    edited September 2017

    Sandpit said:

    Mr. Loony, ah, you're right. I was thinking today was Friday for some reason :p

    If it was Friday, you’d have missed P1 already and P2 would just be starting. ;)
    Talking about Friday morning, at 05.30 tomorrow morning Elon Musk is due to give an hour-long talk about his latest plans for Mars. Apparently underpants and crowdfunding are out.

    Early birds will be able to watch it on a livestream.
    That’s conveniently just as P1 finishes, thanks for heads-up. Hooray for time zones, I’m three hours ahead of UK!
  • Options

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    JohnLoony said:

    Meanwhile, the defence procurement row between Boeing and Bombardier seems to be caused ultimately by the Canadian government giving an unfair subsidy to Bombardier, resulting in a 219% tariff by the USA to level the playing field.

    Is that correct, or am I senile again?

    If correct, it's another example of how political preference and geographical favouritism gets in the way of making proper defence decisions based on which is best or most efficient. In other words, it's like Westland again. This time, the Heseltine is Justin Bieber throwing his toys out of the Trump.

    I'm no expert but I think you have summarised the American case against Bombadier, and the defence is that these arrangements are quite normal and used by Boeing as well. but others better informed should be along shortly.

    What it should remind us is that the American government is protectionist and plays hardball.. A free trade agreement with the United States should be regarded with great suspicion, especially when judged by American tribunals known for home-town decisions, and not lauded as a great prize of Brexit.
    There was an excellent research piece by the Alliance Bernstein Aerospace team about three years ago looking at subsidies in this sector. Basically, 4% of Boeing's revenues are subsidies from the US government in one form or another. EADS is about 5% from the EU and various European governments; Bombadier was 8% with the Quebec and Canadian governments weighing in and Embraer was 9%. We don't know exactly what the numbers are for the Chinese or the Russians, but it's likely to be in the 25-30% range.

    The danger is that this leads to tit-for-tat responses and an effective end to international aircraft competition. Which would be a loss for consumers everywhere.
    That sounds like a very interesting piece of research. Do you know how much of the subsidy was direct financial aid and how much indirect, such as governments buying planes from the ‘local’ manufacturer with no effective competition?

    Unfortunately this is one of these things that’s better for everyone if no-one does it, but bettter for each individual company if they do. It’s also a good example of the need for good independent arbitration in our trade agreement with the USA.
    You might find this twitter thread interesting by a former WTO official involved with aerospace:

    https://twitter.com/ottocrat/status/912999011459756032

    morning all,

    interesting tweet and follow tweets. another case of what many have said, but especially Blair - pure sovereignty is an illusion in a globalised, highly technical world which is dividing into giant trading blocs.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    edited September 2017

    Mr. Sandpit, I'd know if my daft tiny stakes bets on the Renault, Sauber, Williams and Toro Rosso drivers to 'win' first practice had come off or not :pensive:

    I'm hoping it's absolutely pissing it down and Ericsson's the only man to set a lap time :D

    Those sound somewhat, err, optimistic bets, good luck.

    Your best hope is that, with rain forecast all weekend, the quicker teams want to save their wet tyres for Saturday and Sunday. If they decide they need to run then expect Hamilton, Verstappen and Alonso to be the quickest.

    By the way, weird timings this weekend. Qualifying is at 10 on Saturday and the race at 8 on Sunday (BST) - if things run on time.
  • Options
    Mr. Sandpit, I've put on absolutely tiny stakes, so I'm fine if they don't come off. The limitation on wet tyres is something that might help, as you say (I was looking at the third practice in Italy for teams perhaps likeliest to go out).

    Yeah, I was aware of the slightly odd timings. Early, but not annoyingly so (I'd be up then anyway). Pre-qualifying article will be up tomorrow.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,721

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    JosephG said:

    What is to stop the UK addressing the border and saying, "Regardless of any agreemement - we'll keep on putting up with the fags smuggled across the border - we are imposing no tariffs, no customs duties, the CTA, and, accordingly we will impose no borders between NI and RoI - at least as far as goods and people passing North are concerned.

    The thing that stops them is Brexit. You know, control of our borders and free movement of people.
    No that doesn't answer the question. If we decide to implement our control on the NI border by putting up no controls at that point then that is our decision and our control.

    We can still put up controls at other points. Free movement of people isn't controlled at the border, its controlled at the workplace and home. My Canadian in-laws can come to the UK whenever they want to on their Canadian passport but they have no right to live and work here, just come on holiday. The government won't stop them entering the country but companies could not legally hire them without a visa.
    So need to worry about ISIS terrorists from Syria as long as hey can’t get a job. Got it.

    Interesting to see the latest Brexiteer climb down: Taking Back Control of our Borders didn’t actually mean controls at, erm, the border.
    This may surprise you but not every brexiteer cared about the same things. One such taking a more open approach doesn't mean all think that.
    Well this is why there is so much in-fighting now- what Leave meant was (deliberately) never clearly defined so that everyone thought they were voting for their own pet version.
    That is so, and it means fair game to argue the case as one likes as to the best approach, hard or soft or something else.
  • Options
    The hard Left's paranoia is already at a high level, what will they be like if the polls start to turn under a new Tory leader?

    As an example:

    https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2017/09/27/need-talk-laura-kuenssberg-shes-listed-speaker-tory-party-conference/
  • Options
    SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,704
    edited September 2017

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    JohnLoony said:

    Meanwhile, the defence procurement row between Boeing and Bombardier seems to be caused ultimately by the Canadian government giving an unfair subsidy to Bombardier, resulting in a 219% tariff by the USA to level the playing field.

    Is that correct, or am I senile again?

    If correct, it's another example of how political preference and geographical favouritism gets in the way of making proper defence decisions based on which is best or most efficient. In other words, it's like Westland again. This time, the Heseltine is Justin Bieber throwing his toys out of the Trump.

    I'm no expert but I think you have summarised the American case against Bombadier, and the defence is that these arrangements are quite normal and used by Boeing as well. but others better informed should be along shortly.

    What it should remind us is that the American government is protectionist and plays hardball.. A free trade agreement with the United States should be regarded with great suspicion, especially when judged by American tribunals known for home-town decisions, and not lauded as a great prize of Brexit.
    There was an excellent research piece by the Alliance Bernstein Aerospace team about three years ago looking at subsidies in this sector. Basically, 4% of Boeing's revenues are subsidies from the US government in one form or another. EADS is about 5% from the EU and various European governments; Bombadier was 8% with the Quebec and Canadian governments weighing in and Embraer was 9%. We don't know exactly what the numbers are for the Chinese or the Russians, but it's likely to be in the 25-30% range.

    Unfortunately this is one of these things that’s better for everyone if no-one does it, but bettter for each individual company if they do. It’s also a good example of the need for good independent arbitration in our trade agreement with the USA.
    You might find this twitter thread interesting by a former WTO official involved with aerospace:

    https://twitter.com/ottocrat/status/912999011459756032

    morning all,

    interesting tweet and follow tweets. another case of what many have said, but especially Blair - pure sovereignty is an illusion in a globalised, highly technical world which is dividing into giant trading blocs.
    That may be the way it's going, but has anyone actually asked 'the people' if they want that? Seemingly Brexit and many votes across europe have indicated they don't, or at least a good proportion of unease about these things.

    Edit: messed up the formatting of my post
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095

    The hard Left's paranoia is already at a high level, what will they be like if the polls start to turn under a new Tory leader?

    As an example:

    https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2017/09/27/need-talk-laura-kuenssberg-shes-listed-speaker-tory-party-conference/

    The Canary is an online left wing rag IIRC
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,282
    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    From a purely selfish point of view if stokes were fined heavily by the team and stripped of the be captaincy that'd be nice. But they'll likely be pilloried if that's all they do.

    It’s a common situation in sport and entertainment, as well as sales-orientated workplaces - what do you do with someone who’s a superstar at the job, but a nightmare to deal with as a person. Could probably be called Jeremy Clarkson syndrome.

    If they drop Stokes then the selectors will be applauded - until the day we fail to win the ashes, then it will be their fault for not selecting the best cricketers irrespective of other factors. Not that the England selectors have been doing the best of jobs this year anyway.
    No I doubt people would be worried that we didn't select what looks, on first inspection, like someone boozed up, unable to control himself, even when the situation had calmed down; he went gunning for the other two guys.

    Banned, please.
  • Options

    The hard Left's paranoia is already at a high level, what will they be like if the polls start to turn under a new Tory leader?

    As an example:

    https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2017/09/27/need-talk-laura-kuenssberg-shes-listed-speaker-tory-party-conference/

    The BBC is run by Tories and biased against the left. See pb passim for right-wing claims that the BBC is run by socialists who hate Tories. In LK's case, she has form for anti-Corbyn reporting.
  • Options
    RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    Mortimer said:



    When left wingers discussed this back in the eighties they were well aware of the risks of trade disruption from leaving the EU, which they were planning to do at the same time as tweeking NATO's nose. They were planning a whole set of measures to counteract the problems. The package was known as the siege economy. I was reminded of it by the discussion of the risk of a run on the pound if Labour were to be elected. MacDonald probably knows all the arguments around this kind of thing inside out. I am not a big fan of Brexit and I don't like the idea of a siege economy any more now than I did back in the day. But I have to say if we are going to go ahead with Brexit I'd rather do it in the hands of the left. At least they have plans. I don't think knowing a bit of latin and owning a monocle will really cut it.

    Because you want the party with little or no support from or experience of business and trade in power when you're changing trade relationships.

    Makes sense.


    Oh, wait...
    Yes. I think the people who have thought it through are preferable to the ones who think they know it all.
  • Options

    Fair point, although in UK we have elected governments over last few decades who openly were in favour, so that is a form of consent under our parliamentary system.

    Clearly UKIP were protectionist, and so to, in some form, and perhaps more in earlier phases, were the Greens (as an example of the latter Colin Hines has been talking and writing books about this for years). Neither got much of a vote outside of EU parliamentary votes.
  • Options

    The hard Left's paranoia is already at a high level, what will they be like if the polls start to turn under a new Tory leader?

    As an example:

    https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2017/09/27/need-talk-laura-kuenssberg-shes-listed-speaker-tory-party-conference/

    The BBC is run by Tories and biased against the left. See pb passim for right-wing claims that the BBC is run by socialists who hate Tories. In LK's case, she has form for anti-Corbyn reporting.
    I think it was John Simpson who said he knew he was getting it right when the pile of letters complaining of left wingery was equally high as the pile complaining of rightwing bias.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    Ryanair: Thousands more flights cancelled as routes dropped from the winter schedule.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/27/ryanair-cancel-another-400000-bookings/

    UK Civil Aviation Authority now taking a keen interest:
    http://www.caa.co.uk/News/CAA-expedites-enforcement-action-against-Ryanair-for-persistently-misleading-passengers/

    Two RYR 737s have apparently been spending the whole week flying circuits (up, round and down) at Shannon, as they desperately try and get pilots trained to replace those leaving. The problem is that so many experienced captains are leaving that they’re having to pull in trainers to fly passengers, which just makes the problem worse. They’re screwed now for at least six months, and no-ones going to book if they think they’ll have their flight cancelled at short notice.
  • Options
    Mr. Sandpit, sounds like RatnerAir aren't in good shape...
  • Options

    The hard Left's paranoia is already at a high level, what will they be like if the polls start to turn under a new Tory leader?

    As an example:

    https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2017/09/27/need-talk-laura-kuenssberg-shes-listed-speaker-tory-party-conference/

    The BBC is run by Tories and biased against the left. See pb passim for right-wing claims that the BBC is run by socialists who hate Tories. In LK's case, she has form for anti-Corbyn reporting.
    The fact that both left and right wingers accuse the BBC of bias is why I’ve always felt that, on the whole, they do a good job of balance.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    edited September 2017

    Good morning, everyone.

    Isn't the UKIP leadership decided today? That could prove more significant than would've been the case had things remained a little less turbulent.

    UKIP will now seek to appeal to those Leave voters, particularly Tory, who oppose any transition deal

    26% of all voters and 33% of Tory voters and 42% of Leave voters oppose any transition according to the latest yougov rather more than the 1.8% who voted UKIP in June
    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/09/27/voting-intention-conservatives-39-labour-43-22-24-/
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859

    Mr. Sandpit, sounds like RatnerAir aren't in good shape...

    That’s what happens when you treat your customers and staff like shite.

    A decade ago, when almost no other airlines were hiring, the leprechaun could get away with offering staff a crap deal. Now that other airlines are expanding, pilots and cabin crew have a choice of who to work for - and it’s not Ryanair any more.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Isn't the UKIP leadership decided today? That could prove more significant than would've been the case had things remained a little less turbulent.

    UKIP will now seek to appeal to those Leave voters, particularly Tory, who oppose any transition deal
    Good - the Tories’ job would be a lot easier if it was cleansed of the Brexit hard-liners.
  • Options
    Mr. HYUFD, not only that, they'll seek to appeal to WWC social conservatives who aren't interested in a party led by a friend of Hamas. Although specific approach will depend a lot on the leader.

    Next election could be very complicated indeed.
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    Mr. Sandpit, sounds like RatnerAir aren't in good shape...

    That’s what happens when you treat your customers and staff like shite.

    A decade ago, when almost no other airlines were hiring, the leprechaun could get away with offering staff a crap deal. Now that other airlines are expanding, pilots and cabin crew have a choice of who to work for - and it’s not Ryanair any more.
    People like cheap, they don't like sh**. Ryanair seem to have crossed the line.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    edited September 2017

    HYUFD said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Isn't the UKIP leadership decided today? That could prove more significant than would've been the case had things remained a little less turbulent.

    UKIP will now seek to appeal to those Leave voters, particularly Tory, who oppose any transition deal
    Good - the Tories’ job would be a lot easier if it was cleansed of the Brexit hard-liners.
    It will need them back to beat Corbyn though hence Boris most likely next leader in 2019/20 to reassure them transition not permanent. A majority of voters in the poll want a 2 year maximum transition
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983

    Mr. HYUFD, not only that, they'll seek to appeal to WWC social conservatives who aren't interested in a party led by a friend of Hamas. Although specific approach will depend a lot on the leader.

    Next election could be very complicated indeed.

    Indeed particularly if Anne Marie Walters leads them
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859

    The hard Left's paranoia is already at a high level, what will they be like if the polls start to turn under a new Tory leader?

    As an example:

    https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2017/09/27/need-talk-laura-kuenssberg-shes-listed-speaker-tory-party-conference/

    The BBC is run by Tories and biased against the left. See pb passim for right-wing claims that the BBC is run by socialists who hate Tories. In LK's case, she has form for anti-Corbyn reporting.
    I think it was John Simpson who said he knew he was getting it right when the pile of letters complaining of left wingery was equally high as the pile complaining of rightwing bias.
    That sounds fair.

    One comment I would make though, is that the right wingers accusing the BBC of being too left wing generally refer to the BBC as in institution, and make personal comments only about senior managers and producers (hi, Ian Katz). Their complaints don’t result in the need to provide personal security for a working journalist at a conference.
  • Options
    brendan16brendan16 Posts: 2,315

    HYUFD said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Isn't the UKIP leadership decided today? That could prove more significant than would've been the case had things remained a little less turbulent.

    UKIP will now seek to appeal to those Leave voters, particularly Tory, who oppose any transition deal
    Good - the Tories’ job would be a lot easier if it was cleansed of the Brexit hard-liners.
    You mean cleansed of at least one third of its voters and the majority of its activists?
  • Options
    JWisemannJWisemann Posts: 1,082
    The high density of known - Tories / right-wing media expats / people who have gone on to advise right-wing parties - at the current incarnation of BBC current affairs is a matter of record though.

    Maybe it would simply be true to say that whilst the BBC once spoke a certain amount of truth to power, over the last few decades it has gradually morphed into a fairly transparent (if occasionally mildly critical, for the sake of appearances if nothing else) cheerleader for the incumbent government at any given time.

    I have a feeling this wouldn't hold true in the case of a putative Corbyn government, however, considering the tabloid-esque venom and smearing they seem to have deployed against him over the last couple of years, with Kuenssberg being just a particularly egregious example.
  • Options


    Fair point, although in UK we have elected governments over last few decades who openly were in favour, so that is a form of consent under our parliamentary system.

    Clearly UKIP were protectionist, and so to, in some form, and perhaps more in earlier phases, were the Greens (as an example of the latter Colin Hines has been talking and writing books about this for years). Neither got much of a vote outside of EU parliamentary votes.

    People were supportive of free trade while they were getting richer.

    When they stopped becoming richer ** and the benefits were increasingly concentrated in an ever smaller section of society their support for free trade reduced.

    ** and started becoming poorer in some cases.
  • Options

    Sandpit said:

    Mr. Sandpit, sounds like RatnerAir aren't in good shape...

    That’s what happens when you treat your customers and staff like shite.

    A decade ago, when almost no other airlines were hiring, the leprechaun could get away with offering staff a crap deal. Now that other airlines are expanding, pilots and cabin crew have a choice of who to work for - and it’s not Ryanair any more.
    People like cheap, they don't like sh**. Ryanair seem to have crossed the line.
    Anecdotally of course, the queue at McDonalds at Westfield is far longer than the other food court outlets.
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    The hard Left's paranoia is already at a high level, what will they be like if the polls start to turn under a new Tory leader?

    As an example:

    https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2017/09/27/need-talk-laura-kuenssberg-shes-listed-speaker-tory-party-conference/

    The BBC is run by Tories and biased against the left. See pb passim for right-wing claims that the BBC is run by socialists who hate Tories. In LK's case, she has form for anti-Corbyn reporting.
    I think it was John Simpson who said he knew he was getting it right when the pile of letters complaining of left wingery was equally high as the pile complaining of rightwing bias.
    That sounds fair.

    One comment I would make though, is that the right wingers accusing the BBC of being too left wing generally refer to the BBC as in institution, and make personal comments only about senior managers and producers (hi, Ian Katz). Their complaints don’t result in the need to provide personal security for a working journalist at a conference.
    There were plenty of personal attacks on Andrew Marr and Nick Robinson -- regularly known as "toenails" to the more radical pb Tories who did not realise Robinson is actually in the blue corner.
  • Options

    Sandpit said:

    The hard Left's paranoia is already at a high level, what will they be like if the polls start to turn under a new Tory leader?

    As an example:

    https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2017/09/27/need-talk-laura-kuenssberg-shes-listed-speaker-tory-party-conference/

    The BBC is run by Tories and biased against the left. See pb passim for right-wing claims that the BBC is run by socialists who hate Tories. In LK's case, she has form for anti-Corbyn reporting.
    I think it was John Simpson who said he knew he was getting it right when the pile of letters complaining of left wingery was equally high as the pile complaining of rightwing bias.
    That sounds fair.

    One comment I would make though, is that the right wingers accusing the BBC of being too left wing generally refer to the BBC as in institution, and make personal comments only about senior managers and producers (hi, Ian Katz). Their complaints don’t result in the need to provide personal security for a working journalist at a conference.
    There were plenty of personal attacks on Andrew Marr and Nick Robinson -- regularly known as "toenails" to the more radical pb Tories who did not realise Robinson is actually in the blue corner.
    Andrew Marr is married to Jackie Ashley, daughter of Lord Ashley (d. 2012)
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Sandpit said:

    Ryanair: Thousands more flights cancelled as routes dropped from the winter schedule.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/27/ryanair-cancel-another-400000-bookings/

    UK Civil Aviation Authority now taking a keen interest:
    http://www.caa.co.uk/News/CAA-expedites-enforcement-action-against-Ryanair-for-persistently-misleading-passengers/

    Two RYR 737s have apparently been spending the whole week flying circuits (up, round and down) at Shannon, as they desperately try and get pilots trained to replace those leaving. The problem is that so many experienced captains are leaving that they’re having to pull in trainers to fly passengers, which just makes the problem worse. They’re screwed now for at least six months, and no-ones going to book if they think they’ll have their flight cancelled at short notice.

    It sounds like a great opportunity for anyone doing their training via the self-improver route. At this rate they might even need me to fly :) although I have only flown a 737 in full-size simulator. It survived the landing, but the passengers' videos would have gone viral on Youtube :D:D
  • Options

    Sandpit said:

    Mr. Sandpit, sounds like RatnerAir aren't in good shape...

    That’s what happens when you treat your customers and staff like shite.

    A decade ago, when almost no other airlines were hiring, the leprechaun could get away with offering staff a crap deal. Now that other airlines are expanding, pilots and cabin crew have a choice of who to work for - and it’s not Ryanair any more.
    People like cheap, they don't like sh**. Ryanair seem to have crossed the line.
    Anecdotally of course, the queue at McDonalds at Westfield is far longer than the other food court outlets.
    Anecdotally, the coffee at McDonalds is better and cheaper than the specialist chains'.
  • Options

    Sandpit said:

    Mr. Sandpit, sounds like RatnerAir aren't in good shape...

    That’s what happens when you treat your customers and staff like shite.

    A decade ago, when almost no other airlines were hiring, the leprechaun could get away with offering staff a crap deal. Now that other airlines are expanding, pilots and cabin crew have a choice of who to work for - and it’s not Ryanair any more.
    People like cheap, they don't like sh**. Ryanair seem to have crossed the line.
    Anecdotally of course, the queue at McDonalds at Westfield is far longer than the other food court outlets.
    Has it been automated? Since the one down the road was refurbished, automated and equipped with self-service touch screens, it seems to have become a damn site slower, even if more profitable.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859

    Sandpit said:

    The hard Left's paranoia is already at a high level, what will they be like if the polls start to turn under a new Tory leader?

    As an example:

    https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2017/09/27/need-talk-laura-kuenssberg-shes-listed-speaker-tory-party-conference/

    The BBC is run by Tories and biased against the left. See pb passim for right-wing claims that the BBC is run by socialists who hate Tories. In LK's case, she has form for anti-Corbyn reporting.
    I think it was John Simpson who said he knew he was getting it right when the pile of letters complaining of left wingery was equally high as the pile complaining of rightwing bias.
    That sounds fair.

    One comment I would make though, is that the right wingers accusing the BBC of being too left wing generally refer to the BBC as in institution, and make personal comments only about senior managers and producers (hi, Ian Katz). Their complaints don’t result in the need to provide personal security for a working journalist at a conference.
    There were plenty of personal attacks on Andrew Marr and Nick Robinson -- regularly known as "toenails" to the more radical pb Tories who did not realise Robinson is actually in the blue corner.
    Ah okay, I’ll give you “toenails”, I think that name came from Guido originally about his uncritical, support for Gordon Brown. But meant light-heartedly, and not requiring the BBC security team to protect him at the Tory conference.

    The Left’s attacks on Laura K are not light-hearted, they’re vicious and nasty. Obviously this has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that she’s female and has a slightly Jewish name, as there’s no sexism and definitely no anti-Semitism in Corbyn’s Labour Party.

    Even Diane Abbott can’t call off the mob:
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/sep/25/diane-abbott-laura-kuenssberg-online-abuse-labour-bbc
  • Options
    Mr. L, I made some derogatory remarks about Robinson. When he revealed he'd known of the depths of Blair-Brown mutual loathing but simply hadn't reported upon them until someone or other (I forget who) brought it up a decade after the time, I think it was legitimate to criticise a political journalist for not doing his job properly.

    It's also worth pointing out that many people have repeatedly praised Andrew Neil for his journalism and (when he still worked for Sky, alas he does no more) Tim Marshall.

    As an aside, it's slightly odd both ITV and Sky now have political editors who were formerly business journalists. I wonder if that might affect coverage.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    edited September 2017

    Sandpit said:

    Ryanair: Thousands more flights cancelled as routes dropped from the winter schedule.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/27/ryanair-cancel-another-400000-bookings/

    UK Civil Aviation Authority now taking a keen interest:
    http://www.caa.co.uk/News/CAA-expedites-enforcement-action-against-Ryanair-for-persistently-misleading-passengers/

    Two RYR 737s have apparently been spending the whole week flying circuits (up, round and down) at Shannon, as they desperately try and get pilots trained to replace those leaving. The problem is that so many experienced captains are leaving that they’re having to pull in trainers to fly passengers, which just makes the problem worse. They’re screwed now for at least six months, and no-ones going to book if they think they’ll have their flight cancelled at short notice.

    It sounds like a great opportunity for anyone doing their training via the self-improver route. At this rate they might even need me to fly :) although I have only flown a 737 in full-size simulator. It survived the landing, but the passengers' videos would have gone viral on Youtube :D:D
    LOL, I had a go in a sim and managed to use almost the whole Heathrow runway to land my 737. :o

    There’s loads of opportunities at Ryanair, they’re desperately hiring.

    You’ll need 250hrs, a frozen ATPL and a cheque for €30k for your 737 rating. They’re offering a €60 pay per block hour, on a zero hours self-employed basis, 5 days on and three days off rota, at a base of their choice somewhere in Europe. Still interested? Thought not.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908
    Sandpit said:


    Ah okay, I’ll give you “toenails”, I think that name came from Guido originally about his uncritical, support for Gordon Brown. But meant light-heartedly, and not requiring the BBC security team to protect him at the Tory conference.

    The Left’s attacks on Laura K are not light-hearted, they’re vicious and nasty. Obviously this has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that she’s female and has a slightly Jewish name, as there’s no sexism and definitely no anti-Semitism in Corbyn’s Labour Party.

    Even Diane Abbott can’t call off the mob:
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/sep/25/diane-abbott-laura-kuenssberg-online-abuse-labour-bbc

    It's good that she has tried, and good that other politicians have said similar.
    But ultimately it's not clear to me how Labour (or other political parties) can stop the abuse of journalists and politicians.

    I'm wary of arresting/fining people for what they write on social media - but that may be the only way to go...
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,721
    An interesting idea which shows they know nothing of our politics even as they sneer we low nothing of theirs. The EU does have flaws, their half hearted acknowledgements of that followed by no action and more sneering at populism meant they never accepted the flaws, not really, and so without the remain buT the message was not sellable to most who were on the fence.

    Could Cameron have done a better job with the defence of Remain? Possibly. But criticising that basic premise of Remain but us bloody idiotic, since the alternative would be to say it was perfect and stop whinging.

  • Options
    Mr. rkrkrk, if people are inciting violence, stalking or libelling, legal action is warranted. If they're just being morons, it isn't.

    If we start arresting people for not being polite or respectful, that's the same route the Newsnight report went when it spent 95% of a report criticising an atheist cartoonist for having the temerity to draw Mohammed. We should be very reluctant to curb free speech.
  • Options
    JWisemannJWisemann Posts: 1,082
    Of course the Laura Kuenssberg 'bodyguard' farrago has since been widely shown to be a non-story based on practically zero evidence whipped up by various dubious media outlets to try and distract from the very popular policies being discussed at the conference (see https://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2017/09/laura-kuenssberg-bodyguard-really.html for a good takedown of this ridculous nonsense).

    Ditto the desperate attempt to base an anti-semitism angle on some comments by an Israeli jew with nothing to do with the Labour party at a fringe event which again was nothing to do with the Labour party - and the comments weren't actually that unreasonable, basically calling for free speech regardless of how repugnant the opinions. A fairly libertarian position.
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549
    Sandpit said:

    You’ll need 250hrs, a frozen ATPL and a cheque for €30k for your 737 rating. They’re offering a €60 pay per block hour, on a zero hours self-employed basis, 5 days on and three days off rota, at a base of their choice somewhere in Europe. Still interested? Thought not.

    So how many hours would a typical Ryan Air pilot fly per year?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859

    ttps://twitter.com/camanpour/status/913108392058658816

    Wow, a French politician giving an interview in (very fluent) English! Doesn’t happen very often, well done to him.
  • Options
    Sandpit said:
    At least she tried, I don't recall many folk on the right calling for the abuse of Abbott to stop.
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549
    kle4 said:

    Could Cameron have done a better job with the defence of Remain? Possibly. But criticising that basic premise of Remain but us bloody idiotic, since the alternative would be to say it was perfect and stop whinging.

    It would have been courageous to run a "Remain as everything is fine" campaign. We wouldn't even have had a referendum if that was a widely held view, as most Remainers concede the EU needs to change.
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Ryanair: Thousands more flights cancelled as routes dropped from the winter schedule.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/27/ryanair-cancel-another-400000-bookings/

    UK Civil Aviation Authority now taking a keen interest:
    http://www.caa.co.uk/News/CAA-expedites-enforcement-action-against-Ryanair-for-persistently-misleading-passengers/

    Two RYR 737s have apparently been spending the whole week flying circuits (up, round and down) at Shannon, as they desperately try and get pilots trained to replace those leaving. The problem is that so many experienced captains are leaving that they’re having to pull in trainers to fly passengers, which just makes the problem worse. They’re screwed now for at least six months, and no-ones going to book if they think they’ll have their flight cancelled at short notice.

    It sounds like a great opportunity for anyone doing their training via the self-improver route. At this rate they might even need me to fly :) although I have only flown a 737 in full-size simulator. It survived the landing, but the passengers' videos would have gone viral on Youtube :D:D
    LOL, I had a go in a sim and managed to use almost the whole Heathrow runway to land my 737. :o
    Any landing you walk away from is a good one. If they can use the aircraft again, it is a great one :D
    Sandpit said:

    There’s loads of opportunities at Ryanair, they’re desperately hiring.

    You’ll need 250hrs, a frozen ATPL and a cheque for €30k for your 737 rating. They’re offering a €60 pay per block hour, on a zero hours self-employed basis, 5 days on and three days off rota, at a base of their choice somewhere in Europe. Still interested? Thought not.

    I would not dare to start their training course in case I found that the fuel for the aircraft was an "extra" I had to pay for and that and landing fees had to be purchased in advance and you must bring your receipt with you and show it before boarding. I dread to think how much they would charge for the pushback and Tower conversations are probably charged on a per-second basis. :D
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,972
    glw said:

    kle4 said:

    Could Cameron have done a better job with the defence of Remain? Possibly. But criticising that basic premise of Remain but us bloody idiotic, since the alternative would be to say it was perfect and stop whinging.

    It would have been courageous to run a "Remain as everything is fine" campaign. We wouldn't even have had a referendum if that was a widely held view, as most Remainers concede the EU needs to change.
    Pretty well everything could be better than it is. Even PB itself is sometimes criticised by the odd malcontent.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908
    edited September 2017

    Mr. rkrkrk, if people are inciting violence, stalking or libelling, legal action is warranted. If they're just being morons, it isn't.

    If we start arresting people for not being polite or respectful, that's the same route the Newsnight report went when it spent 95% of a report criticising an atheist cartoonist for having the temerity to draw Mohammed. We should be very reluctant to curb free speech.

    Maybe it's just that the police need to go after the people doing this more.

    The top 5 for abuse before the election were apparently Diane Abbott (way out in front), Joanna Cherry, Emily Thornberry, Jess Phillips and Anna Soubry...

    Note there are some methodological concerns - they didn't included deleted tweets or suspended accounts, and their model may have misclassified some tweets.

    https://medium.com/@AmnestyInsights/unsocial-media-tracking-twitter-abuse-against-women-mps-fc28aeca498a

    I don't really understand why Amnesty International are doing this - and the police aren't.
    It really wouldn't be that hard I would think....


    Edit: To add - I think Twitter should certainly be making available historical tweet data to researchers, even if they have deleted it/suspended the account.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,721
    glw said:

    kle4 said:

    Could Cameron have done a better job with the defence of Remain? Possibly. But criticising that basic premise of Remain but us bloody idiotic, since the alternative would be to say it was perfect and stop whinging.

    It would have been courageous to run a "Remain as everything is fine" campaign. We wouldn't even have had a referendum if that was a widely held view, as most Remainers concede the EU needs to change.
    Well exactly.

    I suspect macron knows full well the political environment woukd not have supported that position - the most pro EU party the lds probably still said remain buT too, given a third of their voters went for leave - but hua messays is pitched to another audience, who'd love a single person to blame for us being hoodwinked. I'm honestly touch and go as to whether I made a mistake, but if he is genuine the arrogant presumption is staggering.

    I wish him well though, he has a tough job ahead.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,721

    glw said:

    kle4 said:

    Could Cameron have done a better job with the defence of Remain? Possibly. But criticising that basic premise of Remain but us bloody idiotic, since the alternative would be to say it was perfect and stop whinging.

    It would have been courageous to run a "Remain as everything is fine" campaign. We wouldn't even have had a referendum if that was a widely held view, as most Remainers concede the EU needs to change.
    Pretty well everything could be better than it is. Even PB itself is sometimes criticised by the odd malcontent.
    Heretics, you mean.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    rkrkrk said:

    Sandpit said:


    Ah okay, I’ll give you “toenails”, I think that name came from Guido originally about his uncritical, support for Gordon Brown. But meant light-heartedly, and not requiring the BBC security team to protect him at the Tory conference.

    The Left’s attacks on Laura K are not light-hearted, they’re vicious and nasty. Obviously this has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that she’s female and has a slightly Jewish name, as there’s no sexism and definitely no anti-Semitism in Corbyn’s Labour Party.

    Even Diane Abbott can’t call off the mob:
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/sep/25/diane-abbott-laura-kuenssberg-online-abuse-labour-bbc

    It's good that she has tried, and good that other politicians have said similar.
    But ultimately it's not clear to me how Labour (or other political parties) can stop the abuse of journalists and politicians.

    I'm wary of arresting/fining people for what they write on social media - but that may be the only way to go...
    It’s a very difficult line to draw, in an environment where the polite language of debate seems to have broken down completely. This site is an exception, where people usually engage with the arguments rather than the people making them and we have good moderation which isn’t needed too often.

    I’d say that name-calling is probably okay legally, but any threats against a named person need to be dealt with by authorities.

    As we have discussed, luckily lots of senior people have condemned what’s happened to Laura Kuenssberg this week, but it looks bad on Labour that the BBC security department had to take time out from looking at war zones to think about a journalist in Brighton.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    glw said:

    Sandpit said:

    You’ll need 250hrs, a frozen ATPL and a cheque for €30k for your 737 rating. They’re offering a €60 pay per block hour, on a zero hours self-employed basis, 5 days on and three days off rota, at a base of their choice somewhere in Europe. Still interested? Thought not.

    So how many hours would a typical Ryan Air pilot fly per year?
    900. Legal maximum.
  • Options

    Emmanuel Macron: If Cameron attacks, everything will be alright.

    Michel Barnier: Monsieur Macron... Cameron...

    Angela Merkel: Cameron didn't have enough Remainers. The Remain victory didn't take place.

    [Macron pauses to take off his glasses]

    Macron: The following stay here: Tusk, Merkel, Barnier and Juncker.

    [The four named Euro bigwigs, along with Hollande and Verhofstadt, remain in the room as the others leave. The door closes behind them]

    That was an order! Cameron's attack was an order! How dare you ignore my orders?!

    [Macron's ranting is clearly audible outside the room]

    Is this what it came to? The Commission, everybody lied to me. Even the LibDems! The Remainers are no more than a bunch of disloyal cowards!

    Juncker: Monsieur Macron, I can't permit you to insult the British Remainers...

    Macron: They are all cowards, traitors and failures!

    Juncker: Monsieur Macron, This is outrageous!

    Macron: The Commission are the scum of the European Project!

    [flings a pencil onto the table]

    NO SENSE OF HONOUR! You call yourself "Commissioner" because you spent years at the Euro academy, where you only learned how to use a knife and fork! For years, the Commission obstructed me. All you ever did is thwart me. What I should have done, is had all the high officers fired, like Donald Trump did!

    [pauses]

    I never went to the academy. But I conquered all of France on my own. Traitors! I've been betrayed and deceived from the start. Such enormous betrayal of the European people. But all these traitors will pay. They will pay with their own jobs! They will drown in their European Regulations!

    Theresa May: [To Anna Soubry, outside the room] Anna, please calm yourself!

    Macron: All my orders have been ignored. How can I be a President under these circumstances? It's over. The war is lost. But if you think this means I'll leave Brussels... you're wrong. I'd rather give Nigel Farage fellatio! [sighs] Do whatever you want.
  • Options
    Very good Sunil! :D
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Ryanair: Thousands more flights cancelled as routes dropped from the winter schedule.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/27/ryanair-cancel-another-400000-bookings/

    UK Civil Aviation Authority now taking a keen interest:
    http://www.caa.co.uk/News/CAA-expedites-enforcement-action-against-Ryanair-for-persistently-misleading-passengers/

    Two RYR 737s have apparently been spending the whole week flying circuits (up, round and down) at Shannon, as they desperately try and get pilots trained to replace those leaving. The problem is that so many experienced captains are leaving that they’re having to pull in trainers to fly passengers, which just makes the problem worse. They’re screwed now for at least six months, and no-ones going to book if they think they’ll have their flight cancelled at short notice.

    It sounds like a great opportunity for anyone doing their training via the self-improver route. At this rate they might even need me to fly :) although I have only flown a 737 in full-size simulator. It survived the landing, but the passengers' videos would have gone viral on Youtube :D:D
    LOL, I had a go in a sim and managed to use almost the whole Heathrow runway to land my 737. :o
    Any landing you walk away from is a good one. If they can use the aircraft again, it is a great one :D
    Sandpit said:

    There’s loads of opportunities at Ryanair, they’re desperately hiring.

    You’ll need 250hrs, a frozen ATPL and a cheque for €30k for your 737 rating. They’re offering a €60 pay per block hour, on a zero hours self-employed basis, 5 days on and three days off rota, at a base of their choice somewhere in Europe. Still interested? Thought not.

    I would not dare to start their training course in case I found that the fuel for the aircraft was an "extra" I had to pay for and that and landing fees had to be purchased in advance and you must bring your receipt with you and show it before boarding. I dread to think how much they would charge for the pushback and Tower conversations are probably charged on a per-second basis. :D
    Ha, you had the same instructor as I did, he said the same about good and great landings!

    Yes, given their reputation I could imagine being asked for a contribution to the base training fuel bill, and an invoice afterwards from the TRE for his time.
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549
    Sandpit said:

    glw said:

    Sandpit said:

    You’ll need 250hrs, a frozen ATPL and a cheque for €30k for your 737 rating. They’re offering a €60 pay per block hour, on a zero hours self-employed basis, 5 days on and three days off rota, at a base of their choice somewhere in Europe. Still interested? Thought not.

    So how many hours would a typical Ryan Air pilot fly per year?
    900. Legal maximum.
    So up to €54k, and you are self employed, and you are working for Michael O'Leary?
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549
    kle4 said:

    I suspect macron knows full well the political environment woukd not have supported that position - the most pro EU party the lds probably still said remain buT too, given a third of their voters went for leave - but hua messays is pitched to another audience, who'd love a single person to blame for us being hoodwinked. I'm honestly touch and go as to whether I made a mistake, but if he is genuine the arrogant presumption is staggering.

    I wish him well though, he has a tough job ahead.

    It's also a little odd as Macron himself wants to reform the EU, although in an opposite direction to the one we would choose. There simply aren't many "the EU is fine" people out there.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    edited September 2017

    Sandpit said:
    At least she tried, I don't recall many folk on the right calling for the abuse of Abbott to stop.
    Calling a politician sh!t at her job, and taking five attempts to answer a question while still having the wrong figures, that’s fair play.

    Suggesting that physical harm should come to her, that’s not okay and should be dealt with by authorities.

    Racist/sexist comment is in the middle - not really a matter for the police, but should be condemned and result in people being expelled from organisations such as political parties.
  • Options
    JWisemann said:

    Of course the Laura Kuenssberg 'bodyguard' farrago has since been widely shown to be a non-story based on practically zero evidence whipped up by various dubious media outlets to try and distract from the very popular policies being discussed at the conference (see https://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2017/09/laura-kuenssberg-bodyguard-really.html for a good takedown of this ridculous nonsense).

    Ditto the desperate attempt to base an anti-semitism angle on some comments by an Israeli jew with nothing to do with the Labour party at a fringe event which again was nothing to do with the Labour party - and the comments weren't actually that unreasonable, basically calling for free speech regardless of how repugnant the opinions. A fairly libertarian position.

    Yes, the anti-semitic story was always a bit thin from the outset. I've googled 'Kuenssberg bodyguard' and, yes, all the reports seem to refer back to The Sun and its mysterious 'insider'. Is there any more compelling evidence in existence that I've missed?
  • Options
    calumcalum Posts: 3,046
    edited September 2017
  • Options
    Mr. Sandpit, indeed. Saying whites want to divide and rule, or a judge is unsuitable because he's white, is not on.
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    ttps://twitter.com/camanpour/status/913108392058658816

    Wow, a French politician giving an interview in (very fluent) English! Doesn’t happen very often, well done to him.
    I seem to recall Blair could do a full interview in French.
  • Options

    Very good Sunil! :D

    Thank you :)
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    glw said:

    Sandpit said:

    glw said:

    Sandpit said:

    You’ll need 250hrs, a frozen ATPL and a cheque for €30k for your 737 rating. They’re offering a €60 pay per block hour, on a zero hours self-employed basis, 5 days on and three days off rota, at a base of their choice somewhere in Europe. Still interested? Thought not.

    So how many hours would a typical Ryan Air pilot fly per year?
    900. Legal maximum.
    So up to €54k, and you are self employed, and you are working for Michael O'Leary?
    Yup! They only count hours in the air, so not the time preparing for flight, on standby to be called in, in the simulator etc etc.

    Don’t forget that you’re also €100-€120k in debt for all your training up to this point, so have a bank shouting at you all the time too. These are personal loans not “Student Loans”, and often secured on parents’ property

    And to add to all this, as they’ve cancelled so many flights, they’re asking crews to “Rebase” - to relocate to another city for the winter schedule, at their own expense. They’re also doing this with Captains, who earn about double what the First Officers earn, but often have wives and children to think about too. And the cabin crew, who earn almost nothing and are living several to a room and scraping by.

    And they wonder why they’ve got staffing problems.

    Long thread on pilots’ forum on the subject:
    http://www.pprune.org/terms-endearment/599355-ryanair-cancelling-flights-30.html
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Sandpit said:


    Ha, you had the same instructor as I did, he said the same about good and great landings!

    My favourite piece of advice that I was given was "Never let an aircraft take you somewhere your brain didn't get to five minutes earlier"
    Sandpit said:

    Yes, given their reputation I could imagine being asked for a contribution to the base training fuel bill, and an invoice afterwards from the TRE for his time.

    :+1:

    I have only ever flown Ryanair twice in my life. I hated their booking system's constant sales pitch but, TBF, all the other airlines are getting as bad.

    These days I prefer not to fly at all.
  • Options
    Theresa May at the Bank of England this morning stated very clearly that we will leave the EU on the 29th March 2019 and the transition should be viewed as an implementation period to provide time for business and government to adjust to the new order.

    It is clear she is determined to be out on the 29th March 2019 and the idea that the transition period is just to delay and frustrate Brexit is irrelevant, we will be out.

    This is the first time I have heard her say this with such clarity, will please the leavers but frustrate the remainers
  • Options
    calum said:
    PM of France or Belgium or Ireland?

    Oh.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,972

    Sandpit said:

    ttps://twitter.com/camanpour/status/913108392058658816

    Wow, a French politician giving an interview in (very fluent) English! Doesn’t happen very often, well done to him.
    I seem to recall Blair could do a full interview in French.
    Clegg speaks several European languages fluently. Ashdown speaks Mandarin.
  • Options
    YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    Do any Conservative members wish they had more democratic input on policy ? Looking from the outside they can only vote on a choice of two possible leaders set by the MPs.In today's age and trying to attract younger voters , it does not seem a lot .
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    edited September 2017

    Sandpit said:


    Ha, you had the same instructor as I did, he said the same about good and great landings!

    My favourite piece of advice that I was given was "Never let an aircraft take you somewhere your brain didn't get to five minutes earlier"
    That’s very true, and was my biggest takeaway from the 737 sim. It’s very easy in a complex aircraft to get way behind it, and very difficult to recover from that situation once you’re in it. Hint: go around and try again. ;)

    There’s a good reason the 737 type rating is 30 hours in the full-motion sim and half a dozen circuits in the plane, after you’ve read 1,000 pages of flight manual and company SOPs.
  • Options
    calum said:
    Who benefits ?
    "In the 3 months to November 2016, the deficit on trade in goods was £35.9 billion, widening slightly by £0.1 billionfrom the 3 months to August 2016. This reflects a larger increase in imports from EU countries (5.0%) than exports to EU countries ."
  • Options
    YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    Theresa May at the Bank of England this morning stated very clearly that we will leave the EU on the 29th March 2019 and the transition should be viewed as an implementation period to provide time for business and government to adjust to the new order.

    It is clear she is determined to be out on the 29th March 2019 and the idea that the transition period is just to delay and frustrate Brexit is irrelevant, we will be out.

    This is the first time I have heard her say this with such clarity, will please the leavers but frustrate the remainers

    To be honest Big g , I voted remain but now just wish they would get on with it and leave.However I always thought big business would have the most influence and final say not the voters.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,100

    Theresa May at the Bank of England this morning stated very clearly that we will leave the EU on the 29th March 2019 and the transition should be viewed as an implementation period to provide time for business and government to adjust to the new order.

    It is clear she is determined to be out on the 29th March 2019 and the idea that the transition period is just to delay and frustrate Brexit is irrelevant, we will be out.

    This is the first time I have heard her say this with such clarity, will please the leavers but frustrate the remainers

    Yay!
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,721
    Yorkcity said:

    Do any Conservative members wish they had more democratic input on policy ? Looking from the outside they can only vote on a choice of two possible leaders set by the MPs.In today's age and trying to attract younger voters , it does not seem a lot .

    Not a member, but most parties have a screening process for leader candidates. Labour admittedly ignored the point of that by having mps include one they didn't support - though he's had the last laugh - and the tory method is at least upfront I'm saying the mPS need to know they support and can work with whoever wins when it us put to membership.

    Policy input and influence for local associations I imagine is desirable for them, but the leadership rules do not strike me as particularly unreasonable.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,803
    Morning sexy people. :D

    I see Jezza is getting rapturous headlines this morning!

    Wonder whether anything can stop him now! :open_mouth:
  • Options
    Mr. kle4, it's an interesting question. What was worse: the 2017 Conservative General Election campaign, or the PLP's failure to understand their own leadership election rules?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859

    Sandpit said:

    ttps://twitter.com/camanpour/status/913108392058658816

    Wow, a French politician giving an interview in (very fluent) English! Doesn’t happen very often, well done to him.
    I seem to recall Blair could do a full interview in French.
    Clegg speaks several European languages fluently. Ashdown speaks Mandarin.
    Yes, a few British MEPs have made speeches in other languages to the European Parliament.

    Unusual for politicians to give interviews to journalists in another language though, makes it easier for them to accidentally mis-speak.

    Also unusual for French politicians to speak in any other language, as there’s a Francophone lobby who go mad at what they see as creeping Anglophonic (if that’s the right word) influence on French society.
  • Options
    RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    brendan16 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Isn't the UKIP leadership decided today? That could prove more significant than would've been the case had things remained a little less turbulent.

    UKIP will now seek to appeal to those Leave voters, particularly Tory, who oppose any transition deal
    Good - the Tories’ job would be a lot easier if it was cleansed of the Brexit hard-liners.
    You mean cleansed of at least one third of its voters and the majority of its activists?
    Sounds good.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,721

    Mr. kle4, it's an interesting question. What was worse: the 2017 Conservative General Election campaign, or the PLP's failure to understand their own leadership election rules?

    Given Corbyn may well win the next election, the former.
This discussion has been closed.