Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Huge blow for Trump as GOP loses the Alabama Senate election o

13»

Comments

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Turns out Moore losing was only the second best result today...

    Artists who were nominated this year but not chosen for induction included British singer Kate Bush, alt-rock band Radiohead and the J.Geils band.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-music-rockhalloffame/bon-jovi-nina-simone-among-five-rock-hall-of-fame-inductees-idUSKBN1E71I1
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited December 2017

    Pong said:

    https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940920486275325952

    "Rent controls... result in reducing the number of homes that are available for people who want to be able to have accommodation and a roof over their own head"

    The prime minister actually said that.

    She views shelter an aspiration rather than a right or a need.

    Odd you haven't picked up on Labour's Shadow Housing Minister 'that fewer people owning their own home isn't such a bad thing'

    Given your interest in the housing market, you've not picked up on Labour's plans to reduces the availability of mortgages.

    Also can you direct me to your comments criticising the house price increases that we saw under the last Labour government?
    I copied the wrong link. 1m 30s: https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940919556746362880
    @Stereotomy got the point. Incredible.
  • Pong said:

    Pong said:

    https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940920486275325952

    "Rent controls... result in reducing the number of homes that are available for people who want to be able to have accommodation and a roof over their own head"

    The prime minister actually said that.

    She views shelter an aspiration rather than a right or a need.

    Odd you haven't picked up on Labour's Shadow Housing Minister 'that fewer people owning their own home isn't such a bad thing'

    Given your interest in the housing market, you've not picked up on Labour's plans to reduces the availability of mortgages.

    Also can you direct me to your comments criticising the house price increases that we saw under the last Labour government?
    I copied the wrong link. 1m 30s: https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940919556746362880
    @Stereotomy got the point. Incredible.
    I do think we need to have a serious conversation about security of tenure for private renters as an *alternative* to rent controls.

    E.g. varying the minimum period for a section 21 notice to 10 months from the current 4.

    Three years for all tenants isn't achievable without much bigger changes - but it is voluntarily being taken up in a few developments, which is very interesting.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,969
    edited December 2017
    Pong said:

    Pong said:

    https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940920486275325952

    "Rent controls... result in reducing the number of homes that are available for people who want to be able to have accommodation and a roof over their own head"

    The prime minister actually said that.

    She views shelter an aspiration rather than a right or a need.

    Odd you haven't picked up on Labour's Shadow Housing Minister 'that fewer people owning their own home isn't such a bad thing'

    Given your interest in the housing market, you've not picked up on Labour's plans to reduces the availability of mortgages.

    Also can you direct me to your comments criticising the house price increases that we saw under the last Labour government?
    I copied the wrong link. 1m 30s: https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940919556746362880
    @Stereotomy got the point. Incredible.
    I watched PMQs, I saw it, I got your trolling.

    How about answering the rest of my questions?

    Normally you're so hot on housing.
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,340
    edited December 2017
    saddo said:

    Saw the trailer for the new Churchill film "Darkest Hour". Makes you realise how ungrateful the EU is for everything the UK did in WW2.

    WW2 was 70 years ago and took place before 90% of the current population were alive. The rest of the world has long since moved on
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,460
    Scott_P said:

    Turns out Moore losing was only the second best result today...

    Artists who were nominated this year but not chosen for induction included British singer Kate Bush, alt-rock band Radiohead and the J.Geils band.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-music-rockhalloffame/bon-jovi-nina-simone-among-five-rock-hall-of-fame-inductees-idUSKBN1E71I1

    My blood runs cold.
  • @paulwaugh: Labour spksman on Jeremy Corbyn and Israeli boycott: "He doesn't support BDS. It's not party policy. " Asked if Kate Osamor post at risk:"No".
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,340
    edited December 2017
    .
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    Pong said:

    Pong said:

    https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940920486275325952

    "Rent controls... result in reducing the number of homes that are available for people who want to be able to have accommodation and a roof over their own head"

    The prime minister actually said that.

    She views shelter an aspiration rather than a right or a need.

    Odd you haven't picked up on Labour's Shadow Housing Minister 'that fewer people owning their own home isn't such a bad thing'

    Given your interest in the housing market, you've not picked up on Labour's plans to reduces the availability of mortgages.

    Also can you direct me to your comments criticising the house price increases that we saw under the last Labour government?
    I copied the wrong link. 1m 30s: https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940919556746362880
    @Stereotomy got the point. Incredible.
    I do think we need to have a serious conversation about security of tenure for private renters as an *alternative* to rent controls.

    E.g. varying the minimum period for a section 21 notice to 10 months from the current 4.

    Three years for all tenants isn't achievable without much bigger changes - but it is voluntarily being taken up in a few developments, which is very interesting.
    Three years for all private tenants ?!

    What happens if the renter wants less ?
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,340
    Pulpstar said:

    Pong said:

    Pong said:

    https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940920486275325952

    "Rent controls... result in reducing the number of homes that are available for people who want to be able to have accommodation and a roof over their own head"

    The prime minister actually said that.

    She views shelter an aspiration rather than a right or a need.

    Odd you haven't picked up on Labour's Shadow Housing Minister 'that fewer people owning their own home isn't such a bad thing'

    Given your interest in the housing market, you've not picked up on Labour's plans to reduces the availability of mortgages.

    Also can you direct me to your comments criticising the house price increases that we saw under the last Labour government?
    I copied the wrong link. 1m 30s: https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940919556746362880
    @Stereotomy got the point. Incredible.
    I do think we need to have a serious conversation about security of tenure for private renters as an *alternative* to rent controls.

    E.g. varying the minimum period for a section 21 notice to 10 months from the current 4.

    Three years for all tenants isn't achievable without much bigger changes - but it is voluntarily being taken up in a few developments, which is very interesting.
    Three years for all private tenants ?!

    What happens if the renter wants less ?
    Presumably there will be provision for the tenant (but not the landlord) to give notice before the end of the period
  • @paulwaugh: Labour spksman on Jeremy Corbyn and Israeli boycott: "He doesn't support BDS. It's not party policy. " Asked if Kate Osamor post at risk:"No".

    Lab spksman adds:"I'm not saying he [JC] is uncomfortable with the tweet [Osamor's]."
    Feels like firm backing for his Shad DfID Sec.
  • Pong said:

    Pong said:

    https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940920486275325952

    "Rent controls... result in reducing the number of homes that are available for people who want to be able to have accommodation and a roof over their own head"

    The prime minister actually said that.

    She views shelter an aspiration rather than a right or a need.

    Odd you haven't picked up on Labour's Shadow Housing Minister 'that fewer people owning their own home isn't such a bad thing'

    Given your interest in the housing market, you've not picked up on Labour's plans to reduces the availability of mortgages.

    Also can you direct me to your comments criticising the house price increases that we saw under the last Labour government?
    I copied the wrong link. 1m 30s: https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940919556746362880
    @Stereotomy got the point. Incredible.
    I do think we need to have a serious conversation about security of tenure for private renters as an *alternative* to rent controls.

    E.g. varying the minimum period for a section 21 notice to 10 months from the current 4.

    Three years for all tenants isn't achievable without much bigger changes - but it is voluntarily being taken up in a few developments, which is very interesting.
    One of the policies I've seen bandied about is using 2/3 years worth of rent payments as evidence of being credit worthy for a mortgage.

    It sounds like a good idea, but I'm sure I'm missing something obvious that PBers will point out why it is a bad idea.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @MrHarryCole: Latest from Labour - leadership is neither comfortable not uncomfortable with Kate Osamor tweeting direct contradiction to Labour policy. But collective responsibility still binds frontbenchers, until it doesn't. Keep up.
  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    edited December 2017

    Pong said:

    Pong said:

    https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940920486275325952

    "Rent controls... result in reducing the number of homes that are available for people who want to be able to have accommodation and a roof over their own head"

    The prime minister actually said that.

    She views shelter an aspiration rather than a right or a need.

    Odd you haven't picked up on Labour's Shadow Housing Minister 'that fewer people owning their own home isn't such a bad thing'

    Given your interest in the housing market, you've not picked up on Labour's plans to reduces the availability of mortgages.

    Also can you direct me to your comments criticising the house price increases that we saw under the last Labour government?
    I copied the wrong link. 1m 30s: https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940919556746362880
    @Stereotomy got the point. Incredible.
    I do think we need to have a serious conversation about security of tenure for private renters as an *alternative* to rent controls.

    E.g. varying the minimum period for a section 21 notice to 10 months from the current 4.

    Three years for all tenants isn't achievable without much bigger changes - but it is voluntarily being taken up in a few developments, which is very interesting.
    One of the policies I've seen bandied about is using 2/3 years worth of rent payments as evidence of being credit worthy for a mortgage.

    It sounds like a good idea, but I'm sure I'm missing something obvious that PBers will point out why it is a bad idea.

    I think the problem the banks have with it, is they are now required to consider affordability. Interest payments might suddenly jump up considerably, but rent payments only rise with inflation. So paying £1,000 pcm rent doesn't mean you can afford £1,000 mortgage repayments, as the latter could increase far more.

  • Pulpstar said:

    Pong said:

    Pong said:

    https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940920486275325952

    "Rent controls... result in reducing the number of homes that are available for people who want to be able to have accommodation and a roof over their own head"

    The prime minister actually said that.

    She views shelter an aspiration rather than a right or a need.

    Odd you haven't picked up on Labour's Shadow Housing Minister 'that fewer people owning their own home isn't such a bad thing'

    Given your interest in the housing market, you've not picked up on Labour's plans to reduces the availability of mortgages.

    Also can you direct me to your comments criticising the house price increases that we saw under the last Labour government?
    I copied the wrong link. 1m 30s: https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940919556746362880
    @Stereotomy got the point. Incredible.
    I do think we need to have a serious conversation about security of tenure for private renters as an *alternative* to rent controls.

    E.g. varying the minimum period for a section 21 notice to 10 months from the current 4.

    Three years for all tenants isn't achievable without much bigger changes - but it is voluntarily being taken up in a few developments, which is very interesting.
    Three years for all private tenants ?!

    What happens if the renter wants less ?
    Presumably there will be provision for the tenant (but not the landlord) to give notice before the end of the period
    Well that's a cast-iron certain way of reducing supply. Utterly bonkers.

    The only sensible way of making longer tenancies available is to encourage corporate/pension fund investment in the rented sector. The money is there, and the sector is beginning to grow.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Pong said:

    Pong said:

    https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940920486275325952

    "Rent controls... result in reducing the number of homes that are available for people who want to be able to have accommodation and a roof over their own head"

    The prime minister actually said that.

    She views shelter an aspiration rather than a right or a need.

    Odd you haven't picked up on Labour's Shadow Housing Minister 'that fewer people owning their own home isn't such a bad thing'

    Given your interest in the housing market, you've not picked up on Labour's plans to reduces the availability of mortgages.

    Also can you direct me to your comments criticising the house price increases that we saw under the last Labour government?
    I copied the wrong link. 1m 30s: https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940919556746362880
    @Stereotomy got the point. Incredible.
    I do think we need to have a serious conversation about security of tenure for private renters as an *alternative* to rent controls.

    E.g. varying the minimum period for a section 21 notice to 10 months from the current 4.

    Three years for all tenants isn't achievable without much bigger changes - but it is voluntarily being taken up in a few developments, which is very interesting.
    Three years for all private tenants ?!

    What happens if the renter wants less ?
    Presumably there will be provision for the tenant (but not the landlord) to give notice before the end of the period
    Not without its problems. Going by the voluntary schemes, the idea is your house can be more of a "home" - paint the walls, replace the light fittings, etc. (and amortize the cost, o to speak).

    A one-sided break has complications for that model. Hence why >1 year would need a full new housing bill, not a tweak.
  • Lordy, I really don't like the Welsh sports fans. I think it is years worth of abuse of getting told where I can shove the sweet chariot.

    The Football Association of Wales (FAW) has begun disciplinary action against its chief executive Jonathan Ford for saying the next Wales manager could be "foreign", but "definitely not English".

    The FAW has set up a three-person panel to investigate a BBC Sport Wales interview in which Ford said: "We have always favoured Welsh people because arguably the passion is there.

    "Somebody said this earlier, Welsh most definitely, foreign possibly but definitely not English."

    The interview, at the Wales Sport Awards, was discussed at an FAW council meeting when Ford was asked to leave the room.

    A disciplinary panel will meet to question Ford on the matter, though he is working as normal as Wales look to replace Chris Coleman, who departed following the failure of the national team to qualify for the 2018 World Cup finals in Russia, next summer.

    Ford declined to comment when contacted by BBC Sport Wales.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42337632
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Bring it on...

    @bbclaurak: 1. Govt still seems to be confident in the end the rebels will back down... a big miscalculation if they try to tough it out and later turn out to be wrong

    @bbclaurak: 2. We know of at least 8 tory rebels who, at this stage, determined to vote against govt, but a lot could change, and potentially v quickly, as the day progresses
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,969
    edited December 2017

    Pong said:

    Pong said:

    https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940920486275325952

    "Rent controls... result in reducing the number of homes that are available for people who want to be able to have accommodation and a roof over their own head"

    The prime minister actually said that.

    She views shelter an aspiration rather than a right or a need.

    Odd you haven't picked up on Labour's Shadow Housing Minister 'that fewer people owning their own home isn't such a bad thing'

    Given your interest in the housing market, you've not picked up on Labour's plans to reduces the availability of mortgages.

    Also can you direct me to your comments criticising the house price increases that we saw under the last Labour government?
    I copied the wrong link. 1m 30s: https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940919556746362880
    @Stereotomy got the point. Incredible.
    I do think we need to have a serious conversation about security of tenure for private renters as an *alternative* to rent controls.

    E.g. varying the minimum period for a section 21 notice to 10 months from the current 4.

    Three years for all tenants isn't achievable without much bigger changes - but it is voluntarily being taken up in a few developments, which is very interesting.
    One of the policies I've seen bandied about is using 2/3 years worth of rent payments as evidence of being credit worthy for a mortgage.

    It sounds like a good idea, but I'm sure I'm missing something obvious that PBers will point out why it is a bad idea.

    I think the problem the banks have with it, is they are now required to consider affordability. Interest payments might suddenly jump up considerably, but rent payments only rise with inflation. So paying £1,000 pcm rent doesn't mean you can afford £1,000 mortgage repayments, as the latter could increase far more.

    Cheers, that makes sense.

    I suppose you could say if you've been paying a £1,000 a month rent for three years plus, it makes you worthy for say a £750 per month mortgage allowing for big increases in interest rates.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    welshowl said:

    Scott_P said:

    Turns out Moore losing was only the second best result today...

    Artists who were nominated this year but not chosen for induction included British singer Kate Bush, alt-rock band Radiohead and the J.Geils band.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-music-rockhalloffame/bon-jovi-nina-simone-among-five-rock-hall-of-fame-inductees-idUSKBN1E71I1

    My blood runs cold.
    My memories have just been sold.

    I saw the J Geils Band supporting the Rolling Stones at Wembley in 1982. Tickets were £10.80, and I had a blowout weekend staying with my brother on the lash. I must have spent £30. Happy days!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    Pong said:

    Pong said:

    https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940920486275325952

    "Rent controls... result in reducing the number of homes that are available for people who want to be able to have accommodation and a roof over their own head"

    The prime minister actually said that.

    She views shelter an aspiration rather than a right or a need.

    Odd you haven't picked up on Labour's Shadow Housing Minister 'that fewer people owning their own home isn't such a bad thing'

    Given your interest in the housing market, you've not picked up on Labour's plans to reduces the availability of mortgages.

    Also can you direct me to your comments criticising the house price increases that we saw under the last Labour government?
    I copied the wrong link. 1m 30s: https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/940919556746362880
    @Stereotomy got the point. Incredible.
    I do think we need to have a serious conversation about security of tenure for private renters as an *alternative* to rent controls.

    E.g. varying the minimum period for a section 21 notice to 10 months from the current 4.

    Three years for all tenants isn't achievable without much bigger changes - but it is voluntarily being taken up in a few developments, which is very interesting.
    One of the policies I've seen bandied about is using 2/3 years worth of rent payments as evidence of being credit worthy for a mortgage.

    It sounds like a good idea, but I'm sure I'm missing something obvious that PBers will point out why it is a bad idea.

    I think the problem the banks have with it, is they are now required to consider affordability. Interest payments might suddenly jump up considerably, but rent payments only rise with inflation. So paying £1,000 pcm rent doesn't mean you can afford £1,000 mortgage repayments, as the latter could increase far more.

    Cheers, that makes sense.

    I suppose you could say if you've been paying a £1,000 a month mortgage for three years plus, it makes you worthy for say a £750 per month mortgage allowing for big increases in interest rates.
    The wage multiples allowed by the banks are already crackers I think though - 4.5* joint income !
    Do people actually want to borrow more than that ?
  • Pulpstar said:

    The wage multiples allowed by the banks are already crackers I think though - 4.5* joint income !
    Do people actually want to borrow more than that ?

    I've been speaking to one of my staff about her getting a mortgage, she points out she's 24, the way pension age is rising, she'll probably be likely going to be working for another 50 years before she retires, so a large multiplier makes sense.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited December 2017
    Where's Santa...he's stuck in the snow....

    Among the comedy of errors was a Santa who got stuck making his way to the attraction on snow-covered roads, a ferris wheel which was shut due to high winds and an ice rink closed because the area around it was too SLIPPY.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5129603/mud-covered-winter-wonderland-slammed-by-fuming-parents-after-slippy-ice-rink-and-ferris-wheel-shut-and-santa-gets-stuck-on-motorway/
  • The mainstream GOP are gunning for Bannon.

    *Grabs popcorn*

    https://twitter.com/RepPeteKing/status/940907000657006592
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    In other news, I see Momentum are in a spot of bother with the electoral commission... :D
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Never ridden in western saddle/stirrups, but Roy Moore's general horsemanship is terrible,
  • One of the main drivers of house prices is loose credit, so by increasing credit further you're just going to push up prices until they're unaffordable again. It's pointless.

    Prices need to fall and the government needs to stop propping them up (which of course is the real reason for all these schemes)
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    Have Morrissey and Steve Bannon ever been seen in the same room?
  • dr_spyn said:
    "JFL is controlled entirely by its sole director, Momentum supremo and founder Jon Lansman, and is registered to his luxury Shad Thames flat. JFL is where the asset value in Momentum really lies: it is the ‘data controller’ which legally owns a huge database of supporter contact details collected"

    He can't lose....Even if Jezza mythical status blows up, he has really valuable data to sell on.
  • Have Morrissey and Steve Bannon ever been seen in the same room?

    Morrissey would deny it, then irrefutable evidence would turn showing Morrissey was lying.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    dr_spyn said:
    So they’ve got 15 paid staff but only spent £39k on the election.
    Popcorn time!
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @JohnRentoul: Waiting for Hansard of Theresa May's reply to Cheryl Gillan at #PMQs: she spoke of post-Brexit "subsequent agreements"

    @JohnRentoul: Which may be 1st time she's admitted she won't get the trade deal done by March 2019, which everyone else has told her for months
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Pulpstar said:

    Never ridden in western saddle/stirrups, but Roy Moore's general horsemanship is terrible,

    His form looks horrible to me.
  • The mainstream GOP are gunning for Bannon.

    *Grabs popcorn*

    https://twitter.com/RepPeteKing/status/940907000657006592

    Yes, Steve, crawl back to the internet cesspool you came from and take Farage and Yiannopoulos with you. Ba ha ha ha ha!
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited December 2017
    Sandpit said:

    dr_spyn said:
    So they’ve got 15 paid staff but only spent £39k on the election.
    Popcorn time!
    image
  • OchEyeOchEye Posts: 1,469
    IanB2 said:

    welshowl said:

    IanB2 said:

    Re Darkest Hour -- the other thing people forget is most Conservatives hated Churchill at the time.

    Indeed. His own constituency party put forward a motion of no confidence in him as its member of parliament - at the time he was campaigning against national party policy of appeasement, shortly before the war - something that for the Conservative Party is very rare indeed. Even more remarkably, the no confidence vote was defeated by just a single vote amongst his local members, after a fair bit of arm twisting by the party chairman who still has a hall named after him in Woodford.
    Crikey that's a butterfly's wing beat moment. One vote swapping sides in an obscure meeting in Essex (?) on a single night 1934 or whenever it was, and the world might look very different.

    There again I think it was Eden worked out at dinner with Hitler in 1935 that they had been opposite each other at some point in WW1 in the trenches, and apparently when he recounted this in the 50's to some French (or Belgian?) diplomats the horrified reaction was "and you missed him!"
    We're talking 1938, after Munich, not 1934! I did a bit of checking. Several of his branches (presumably what we would now call wards) did actually carry hostile motions against Churchill. According to the Jenkins biography, he won the main vote 100 to 44, so it is probable that my recollection of the single vote refers to one of the branches.

    Historians believe Churchill's intention was to form an alternative local party and go to a by-election, if defeated (his chances were by no means guaranteed, Tory appeasers won most of the by-elections fought that year against the Churchill-ites, even where Liberal and Labour stood aside, as in Kinross & W Perth). He had already made overtures seeking Liberal support in such an event. However Tory government whips would have controlled when it would have been called.
    Churchill's reputation around Perth, Kinross and in particular, nearby Dundee, was shot, this explains it easily:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/new-scotland-documentary-reveals-how-winston-churchill-fell-out-of-favour-in-dundee-a6944391.html
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Off topic:

    Have a long term bet on Chris Froome winning 5 TdFs... ><
  • VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,429
    What is the problem with Sheffield part two:

    https://www.citymetric.com/business/sheffield-economy-jobs-meadowhall-suburb-north-3546

    It is all the fault of people like TSE apparently.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    Scott_P said:

    @BBCNormanS: Hmm....PM rebuffs call by @Anna_Soubry to accept “meaningful vote” amendment. Sounds like Govt going to try and tough this one out #PMQs

    Probably a mistake, but they've prepared the way for a loss, or someone has, with months of build up to it.
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,545
    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    @BBCNormanS: Hmm....PM rebuffs call by @Anna_Soubry to accept “meaningful vote” amendment. Sounds like Govt going to try and tough this one out #PMQs

    Probably a mistake, but they've prepared the way for a loss, or someone has, with months of build up to it.
    Of all the amendments in play, I can't get my head around why the Government are going to the wall on this one. So what if there's a meaningful vote before they sign? If there's no parliamentary majority for it it's toast anyway.

    Perhaps scared of what happens if parliament votes it down? I think that's the point.
  • What is the problem with Sheffield part two:

    https://www.citymetric.com/business/sheffield-economy-jobs-meadowhall-suburb-north-3546

    It is all the fault of people like TSE apparently.

    It’s always my fault.

    It has been interesting that I’ve been working for 18 years, and I’ve never had a job in Sheffield, I’ve worked 5 years in London, 6 years in Leeds, and nearly 7 years plus in Manchester.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    The story of the 33 year old “child” refugee, who murdered the daughter of an EU official in Germany.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5175101/Child-refugee-raped-murdered-girl-19-33.html
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    tpfkar said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    @BBCNormanS: Hmm....PM rebuffs call by @Anna_Soubry to accept “meaningful vote” amendment. Sounds like Govt going to try and tough this one out #PMQs

    Probably a mistake, but they've prepared the way for a loss, or someone has, with months of build up to it.
    Of all the amendments in play, I can't get my head around why the Government are going to the wall on this one. So what if there's a meaningful vote before they sign? If there's no parliamentary majority for it it's toast anyway.

    Perhaps scared of what happens if parliament votes it down? I think that's the point.
    Have any of the proponents of this amendment managed to articulate what exactly it sets out to achieve?
  • Sandpit said:

    tpfkar said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    @BBCNormanS: Hmm....PM rebuffs call by @Anna_Soubry to accept “meaningful vote” amendment. Sounds like Govt going to try and tough this one out #PMQs

    Probably a mistake, but they've prepared the way for a loss, or someone has, with months of build up to it.
    Of all the amendments in play, I can't get my head around why the Government are going to the wall on this one. So what if there's a meaningful vote before they sign? If there's no parliamentary majority for it it's toast anyway.

    Perhaps scared of what happens if parliament votes it down? I think that's the point.
    Have any of the proponents of this amendment managed to articulate what exactly it sets out to achieve?
    Desperate last attempt to stop Brexit.
  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    Sandpit said:

    tpfkar said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    @BBCNormanS: Hmm....PM rebuffs call by @Anna_Soubry to accept “meaningful vote” amendment. Sounds like Govt going to try and tough this one out #PMQs

    Probably a mistake, but they've prepared the way for a loss, or someone has, with months of build up to it.
    Of all the amendments in play, I can't get my head around why the Government are going to the wall on this one. So what if there's a meaningful vote before they sign? If there's no parliamentary majority for it it's toast anyway.

    Perhaps scared of what happens if parliament votes it down? I think that's the point.
    Have any of the proponents of this amendment managed to articulate what exactly it sets out to achieve?

    It probably sets out to achieve:

    a) Virtue Signalling,

    b) Embarrassment for TMay.

  • Sandpit said:

    tpfkar said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    @BBCNormanS: Hmm....PM rebuffs call by @Anna_Soubry to accept “meaningful vote” amendment. Sounds like Govt going to try and tough this one out #PMQs

    Probably a mistake, but they've prepared the way for a loss, or someone has, with months of build up to it.
    Of all the amendments in play, I can't get my head around why the Government are going to the wall on this one. So what if there's a meaningful vote before they sign? If there's no parliamentary majority for it it's toast anyway.

    Perhaps scared of what happens if parliament votes it down? I think that's the point.
    Have any of the proponents of this amendment managed to articulate what exactly it sets out to achieve?
    To ensure a sovereign Parliament gets a meaningful vote.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,921

    Sandpit said:

    tpfkar said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    @BBCNormanS: Hmm....PM rebuffs call by @Anna_Soubry to accept “meaningful vote” amendment. Sounds like Govt going to try and tough this one out #PMQs

    Probably a mistake, but they've prepared the way for a loss, or someone has, with months of build up to it.
    Of all the amendments in play, I can't get my head around why the Government are going to the wall on this one. So what if there's a meaningful vote before they sign? If there's no parliamentary majority for it it's toast anyway.

    Perhaps scared of what happens if parliament votes it down? I think that's the point.
    Have any of the proponents of this amendment managed to articulate what exactly it sets out to achieve?

    It probably sets out to achieve:

    a) Virtue Signalling,

    b) Embarrassment for TMay.

    I hear that they're also mulling the 'moon on a stick' amendment, too.

    I mean, seriously, what is the point of this 'meaningful vote' guff. Can someone clever please explain
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    Sandpit said:

    tpfkar said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    @BBCNormanS: Hmm....PM rebuffs call by @Anna_Soubry to accept “meaningful vote” amendment. Sounds like Govt going to try and tough this one out #PMQs

    Probably a mistake, but they've prepared the way for a loss, or someone has, with months of build up to it.
    Of all the amendments in play, I can't get my head around why the Government are going to the wall on this one. So what if there's a meaningful vote before they sign? If there's no parliamentary majority for it it's toast anyway.

    Perhaps scared of what happens if parliament votes it down? I think that's the point.
    Have any of the proponents of this amendment managed to articulate what exactly it sets out to achieve?
    To ensure a sovereign Parliament gets a meaningful vote.
    Parliament isn’t sovereign until after we have left the EU. What does the amendment actually mean in practice?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    BA have allowed me to backdate all of my business flights to the correct EC account. Got my gold status sorted for next year now. Panic over.
  • Ugh. Just say it Parliament and they are safe.

    Conservative rebels have been threatened with legal action if they make false public comments about the activities of the government’s whips in the run-up to Wednesday night’s crunch vote in parliament, the Guardian understands.

    In an indication of the toxic atmosphere at Westminster as Theresa May seeks to avoid an embarrassing defeat over MPs’ demands for a meaningful vote on the Brexit deal, at least one potential mutineer was warned by the chief whip, Julian Smith, that they could be sued if they made defamatory comments about the whips’ activities.

    Another backbencher described the approach of the whips, who are responsible for party discipline, as “bullying junior MPs”.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/13/david-davis-promises-parliamentary-vote-eu-divorce-deal-tory-rebels
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    What is the problem with Sheffield part two:

    https://www.citymetric.com/business/sheffield-economy-jobs-meadowhall-suburb-north-3546

    It is all the fault of people like TSE apparently.

    It’s always my fault.

    It has been interesting that I’ve been working for 18 years, and I’ve never had a job in Sheffield, I’ve worked 5 years in London, 6 years in Leeds, and nearly 7 years plus in Manchester.
    I note Sheffield -> Manchester train improvements have been kiboshed on hte grounds of 'too expensive' -
    £40 Bn for the EU, £2Bn for the DUP, £56 Bn for HS2, £15 Bn for crossrail, £30 Bn for Crossrail 2...

    The Tories are aware High Peak is a marginal right ?
  • Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    tpfkar said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    @BBCNormanS: Hmm....PM rebuffs call by @Anna_Soubry to accept “meaningful vote” amendment. Sounds like Govt going to try and tough this one out #PMQs

    Probably a mistake, but they've prepared the way for a loss, or someone has, with months of build up to it.
    Of all the amendments in play, I can't get my head around why the Government are going to the wall on this one. So what if there's a meaningful vote before they sign? If there's no parliamentary majority for it it's toast anyway.

    Perhaps scared of what happens if parliament votes it down? I think that's the point.
    Have any of the proponents of this amendment managed to articulate what exactly it sets out to achieve?
    To ensure a sovereign Parliament gets a meaningful vote.
    Parliament isn’t sovereign until after we have left the EU. What does the amendment actually mean in practice?
    They can vote to say to government that their deal is unacceptable and get a better one.

    Theoretically they could ask the government to ask the EU for an extension of article 50 to help get a good deal.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,960
    Sandpit said:

    dr_spyn said:
    So they’ve got 15 paid staff but only spent £39k on the election.
    Popcorn time!
    On the issue of whether Momenum got their mailing lists from Labour, I woder if any of the £3 Tories for Corbyn have been approached to join Momentum? If so, would seem the only way they got those details was directly from Labour....
  • Pulpstar said:

    What is the problem with Sheffield part two:

    https://www.citymetric.com/business/sheffield-economy-jobs-meadowhall-suburb-north-3546

    It is all the fault of people like TSE apparently.

    It’s always my fault.

    It has been interesting that I’ve been working for 18 years, and I’ve never had a job in Sheffield, I’ve worked 5 years in London, 6 years in Leeds, and nearly 7 years plus in Manchester.
    I note Sheffield -> Manchester train improvements have been kiboshed on hte grounds of 'too expensive' -
    £40 Bn for the EU, £2Bn for the DUP, £56 Bn for HS2, £15 Bn for crossrail, £30 Bn for Crossrail 2...

    The Tories are aware High Peak is a marginal right ?
    But it is in the desolate North so not worth mithering about.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    tpfkar said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    @BBCNormanS: Hmm....PM rebuffs call by @Anna_Soubry to accept “meaningful vote” amendment. Sounds like Govt going to try and tough this one out #PMQs

    Probably a mistake, but they've prepared the way for a loss, or someone has, with months of build up to it.
    Of all the amendments in play, I can't get my head around why the Government are going to the wall on this one. So what if there's a meaningful vote before they sign? If there's no parliamentary majority for it it's toast anyway.

    Perhaps scared of what happens if parliament votes it down? I think that's the point.
    Have any of the proponents of this amendment managed to articulate what exactly it sets out to achieve?
    To ensure a sovereign Parliament gets a meaningful vote.
    Parliament isn’t sovereign until after we have left the EU. What does the amendment actually mean in practice?
    They can vote to say to government that their deal is unacceptable and get a better one.

    Theoretically they could ask the government to ask the EU for an extension of article 50 to help get a good deal.
    And if the EU say no?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    tpfkar said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    @BBCNormanS: Hmm....PM rebuffs call by @Anna_Soubry to accept “meaningful vote” amendment. Sounds like Govt going to try and tough this one out #PMQs

    Probably a mistake, but they've prepared the way for a loss, or someone has, with months of build up to it.
    Of all the amendments in play, I can't get my head around why the Government are going to the wall on this one. So what if there's a meaningful vote before they sign? If there's no parliamentary majority for it it's toast anyway.

    Perhaps scared of what happens if parliament votes it down? I think that's the point.
    Have any of the proponents of this amendment managed to articulate what exactly it sets out to achieve?
    To ensure a sovereign Parliament gets a meaningful vote.
    Parliament isn’t sovereign until after we have left the EU. What does the amendment actually mean in practice?
    They can vote to say to government that their deal is unacceptable and get a better one.

    Theoretically they could ask the government to ask the EU for an extension of article 50 to help get a good deal.
    They can also ask to declare war of Albania, claim the moon as Uk territory and request that the government point a supercannon at Stuttgart ... I suppose.

  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,279
    Perhaps it might be better to spend some time looking at electoral foul ups without blaming Putin.

    https://twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/940957008467030016
  • RobD said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    tpfkar said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    @BBCNormanS: Hmm....PM rebuffs call by @Anna_Soubry to accept “meaningful vote” amendment. Sounds like Govt going to try and tough this one out #PMQs

    Probably a mistake, but they've prepared the way for a loss, or someone has, with months of build up to it.
    Of all the amendments in play, I can't get my head around why the Government are going to the wall on this one. So what if there's a meaningful vote before they sign? If there's no parliamentary majority for it it's toast anyway.

    Perhaps scared of what happens if parliament votes it down? I think that's the point.
    Have any of the proponents of this amendment managed to articulate what exactly it sets out to achieve?
    To ensure a sovereign Parliament gets a meaningful vote.
    Parliament isn’t sovereign until after we have left the EU. What does the amendment actually mean in practice?
    They can vote to say to government that their deal is unacceptable and get a better one.

    Theoretically they could ask the government to ask the EU for an extension of article 50 to help get a good deal.
    And if the EU say no?
    Then win win for the government. They can blame the EU
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,960
    edited December 2017

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    tpfkar said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    @BBCNormanS: Hmm....PM rebuffs call by @Anna_Soubry to accept “meaningful vote” amendment. Sounds like Govt going to try and tough this one out #PMQs

    Probably a mistake, but they've prepared the way for a loss, or someone has, with months of build up to it.
    Of all the amendments in play, I can't get my head around why the Government are going to the wall on this one. So what if there's a meaningful vote before they sign? If there's no parliamentary majority for it it's toast anyway.

    Perhaps scared of what happens if parliament votes it down? I think that's the point.
    Have any of the proponents of this amendment managed to articulate what exactly it sets out to achieve?
    To ensure a sovereign Parliament gets a meaningful vote.
    Parliament isn’t sovereign until after we have left the EU. What does the amendment actually mean in practice?
    They can vote to say to government that their deal is unacceptable and get a better one.

    Theoretically they could ask the government to ask the EU for an extension of article 50 to help get a good deal.
    And the Govt. would then say "we already have the best deal available from the EU, after a massive negotiating process". So the proponents of the amendment have to show that they could get a better deal. You think the EU are going to say "actually, you would have got a WAY better deal - if only it had been Anna Soubry heading the negotiations....".

    The amendment is just layer upon layer of delusional wank. Any Tory MP voting for it is looking like they are a couple of chips short of a Happy Meal.
  • Facebook says its investigation into Russian attempts to influence the Brexit vote has determined the activity amounted to just three adverts.

    [...]

    It said the identified ads had cost less than $1 (75p) in total to post, and had reached no more than 200 UK-based viewers over four days.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-42342216
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    Sandpit said:

    dr_spyn said:
    So they’ve got 15 paid staff but only spent £39k on the election.
    Popcorn time!
    On the issue of whether Momenum got their mailing lists from Labour, I woder if any of the £3 Tories for Corbyn have been approached to join Momentum? If so, would seem the only way they got those details was directly from Labour....
    As Ms Cyclefree suggested the other day, there’s possibly data protection questions to answer when it comes to Lansman’s database.
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,545
    Sandpit said:

    tpfkar said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    @BBCNormanS: Hmm....PM rebuffs call by @Anna_Soubry to accept “meaningful vote” amendment. Sounds like Govt going to try and tough this one out #PMQs

    Probably a mistake, but they've prepared the way for a loss, or someone has, with months of build up to it.
    Of all the amendments in play, I can't get my head around why the Government are going to the wall on this one. So what if there's a meaningful vote before they sign? If there's no parliamentary majority for it it's toast anyway.

    Perhaps scared of what happens if parliament votes it down? I think that's the point.
    Have any of the proponents of this amendment managed to articulate what exactly it sets out to achieve?
    Isn't that the answer to the opposite question? If the amendment itself doesn't achieve much beyond what the Government has already promised, even less reason for the Government to fight to the death on it?
  • Sandpit said:

    The story of the 33 year old “child” refugee, who murdered the daughter of an EU official in Germany.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5175101/Child-refugee-raped-murdered-girl-19-33.html

    From the story: It was learned after his arrest that he had been arrested and sentenced to ten years for attempted murder in Corfu in 2013 before coming to Germany seeking refuge in 2015 as an 'unaccompanied minor.'

    So why was he not in a Corfu prison? Presumably some EUrocrat will say this whole mess proves we need an EU-wide database of all criminals, asylum seekers or just all citizens.
  • I’m embarrassed for Bernard Jenkin. Surely no one can be that thick ?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,960

    Facebook says its investigation into Russian attempts to influence the Brexit vote has determined the activity amounted to just three adverts.

    [...]

    It said the identified ads had cost less than $1 (75p) in total to post, and had reached no more than 200 UK-based viewers over four days.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-42342216

    Cost of Russian interference in the Referendum - £0.75

    Cost of UK government interference in the Referendum - £7,500,00.00

    And yet Russia bought the Referendum, apparrently. Now THAT is value for money any capitalist would be proud of!
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    tpfkar said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    @BBCNormanS: Hmm....PM rebuffs call by @Anna_Soubry to accept “meaningful vote” amendment. Sounds like Govt going to try and tough this one out #PMQs

    Probably a mistake, but they've prepared the way for a loss, or someone has, with months of build up to it.
    Of all the amendments in play, I can't get my head around why the Government are going to the wall on this one. So what if there's a meaningful vote before they sign? If there's no parliamentary majority for it it's toast anyway.

    Perhaps scared of what happens if parliament votes it down? I think that's the point.
    Have any of the proponents of this amendment managed to articulate what exactly it sets out to achieve?
    To ensure a sovereign Parliament gets a meaningful vote.
    Parliament isn’t sovereign until after we have left the EU. What does the amendment actually mean in practice?
    They can vote to say to government that their deal is unacceptable and get a better one.

    Theoretically they could ask the government to ask the EU for an extension of article 50 to help get a good deal.
    And the Govt. would then say "we already have the best deal available from the EU, after a massive negotiating process". So the proponents of the amendment have to show that they could get a better deal. You think the EU are going to say "actually, you would have got a WAY better deal - if only it had been Anna Soubry heading the negotiations....".

    The amendment is just layer upon layer of delusional wank. Any Tory MP voting for it is looking like they are a couple of chips short of a Happy Meal.
    The wrong group are rebelling. It should be the 'no dealers' who think they could get a better deal by sending gunboats up the Rhine.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    Facebook says its investigation into Russian attempts to influence the Brexit vote has determined the activity amounted to just three adverts.

    [...]

    It said the identified ads had cost less than $1 (75p) in total to post, and had reached no more than 200 UK-based viewers over four days.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-42342216

    Cost of Russian interference in the Referendum - £0.75

    Cost of UK government interference in the Referendum - £7,500,00.00

    And yet Russia bought the Referendum, apparrently. Now THAT is value for money any capitalist would be proud of!
    Arf :D
  • Ken Clarke and Anna Soubry sitting in front of him....
  • Sandpit said:

    The story of the 33 year old “child” refugee, who murdered the daughter of an EU official in Germany.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5175101/Child-refugee-raped-murdered-girl-19-33.html

    17, 33, near enough....
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    Sandpit said:

    The story of the 33 year old “child” refugee, who murdered the daughter of an EU official in Germany.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5175101/Child-refugee-raped-murdered-girl-19-33.html

    From the story: It was learned after his arrest that he had been arrested and sentenced to ten years for attempted murder in Corfu in 2013 before coming to Germany seeking refuge in 2015 as an 'unaccompanied minor.'

    So why was he not in a Corfu prison? Presumably some EUrocrat will say this whole mess proves we need an EU-wide database of all criminals, asylum seekers or just all citizens.
    If Mrs Merkel wants to understand why she’s still not been able to form a government, this is why. No matter your political affiliation, David Cameron should be acknowledged as having had the correct answer to the issue of people displaced from the civil war in Syria.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,960
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    dr_spyn said:
    So they’ve got 15 paid staff but only spent £39k on the election.
    Popcorn time!
    On the issue of whether Momenum got their mailing lists from Labour, I woder if any of the £3 Tories for Corbyn have been approached to join Momentum? If so, would seem the only way they got those details was directly from Labour....
    As Ms Cyclefree suggested the other day, there’s possibly data protection questions to answer when it comes to Lansman’s database.
    Oh, I can't wait for the Panorama expose on that....

    Channel 4 then? Oi, Crick - yes you.

    5Live?



  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    edited December 2017

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    tpfkar said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    @BBCNormanS: Hmm....PM rebuffs call by @Anna_Soubry to accept “meaningful vote” amendment. Sounds like Govt going to try and tough this one out #PMQs

    Probably a mistake, but they've prepared the way for a loss, or someone has, with months of build up to it.
    Of all the amendments in play, I can't get my head around why the Government are going to the wall on this one. So what if there's a meaningful vote before they sign? If there's no parliamentary majority for it it's toast anyway.

    Perhaps scared of what happens if parliament votes it down? I think that's the point.
    Have any of the proponents of this amendment managed to articulate what exactly it sets out to achieve?
    To ensure a sovereign Parliament gets a meaningful vote.
    Parliament isn’t sovereign until after we have left the EU. What does the amendment actually mean in practice?
    They can vote to say to government that their deal is unacceptable and get a better one.

    Theoretically they could ask the government to ask the EU for an extension of article 50 to help get a good deal.
    And the Govt. would then say "we already have the best deal available from the EU, after a massive negotiating process". So the proponents of the amendment have to show that they could get a better deal. You think the EU are going to say "actually, you would have got a WAY better deal - if only it had been Anna Soubry heading the negotiations....".

    The amendment is just layer upon layer of delusional wank. Any Tory MP voting for it is looking like they are a couple of chips short of a Happy Meal.
    The wrong group are rebelling. It should be the 'no dealers' who think they could get a better deal by sending gunboats up the Rhine.
    The "hard" Brexiteers have actually taken the interim deal with a great deal more maturity than the ultra-remainers who seem to want a final opportunity to sink the deal at the last possible moment.

    "Gunboats up the Rhine" ? You been reading Commando magazine at lunchtime again ?

  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,911
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    The story of the 33 year old “child” refugee, who murdered the daughter of an EU official in Germany.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5175101/Child-refugee-raped-murdered-girl-19-33.html

    From the story: It was learned after his arrest that he had been arrested and sentenced to ten years for attempted murder in Corfu in 2013 before coming to Germany seeking refuge in 2015 as an 'unaccompanied minor.'

    So why was he not in a Corfu prison? Presumably some EUrocrat will say this whole mess proves we need an EU-wide database of all criminals, asylum seekers or just all citizens.
    If Mrs Merkel wants to understand why she’s still not been able to form a government, this is why. No matter your political affiliation, David Cameron should be acknowledged as having had the correct answer to the issue of people displaced from the civil war in Syria.
    +1

    Cameron was entirely right in his answer to the crisis. You'd have to have a heart of stone to not want to help, but help is very different to opening our borders and letting anyone in. The repercussions of the Merkel Madness have been felt across Europe. Surely the worst politician of our time.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,960
    TGOHF said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    tpfkar said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    @BBCNormanS: Hmm....PM rebuffs call by @Anna_Soubry to accept “meaningful vote” amendment. Sounds like Govt going to try and tough this one out #PMQs

    Probably a mistake, but they've prepared the way for a loss, or someone has, with months of build up to it.
    Of all the amendments in play, I can't get my head around why the Government are going to the wall on this one. So what if there's a meaningful vote before they sign? If there's no parliamentary majority for it it's toast anyway.

    Perhaps scared of what happens if parliament votes it down? I think that's the point.
    Have any of the proponents of this amendment managed to articulate what exactly it sets out to achieve?
    To ensure a sovereign Parliament gets a meaningful vote.
    Parliament isn’t sovereign until after we have left the EU. What does the amendment actually mean in practice?
    They can vote to say to government that their deal is unacceptable and get a better one.

    Theoretically they could ask the government to ask the EU for an extension of article 50 to help get a good deal.
    And the Govt. would then say "we already have the best deal available from the EU, after a massive negotiating process". So the proponents of the amendment have to show that they could get a better deal. You think the EU are going to say "actually, you would have got a WAY better deal - if only it had been Anna Soubry heading the negotiations....".

    The amendment is just layer upon layer of delusional wank. Any Tory MP voting for it is looking like they are a couple of chips short of a Happy Meal.
    The wrong group are rebelling. It should be the 'no dealers' who think they could get a better deal by sending gunboats up the Rhine.
    The "hard" Brexiteers have actually taken the interim deal with a great deal more maturity than the ultra-remainers who seem to want a final opportunity to sink the deal at the last possible moment.

    "Gunboats up the Rhine" ? You been reading Commando magazine at lunchtime again ?

    That stock answer from Remainers down the years.

    "What did you do in the great EUropean war, daddy?"

    Knowingly tapping the side of the nose. "Gunboats up the Rhine, son...gunboats up the Rhine...."
  • NEW THREAD

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    Sandpit said:

    tpfkar said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    @BBCNormanS: Hmm....PM rebuffs call by @Anna_Soubry to accept “meaningful vote” amendment. Sounds like Govt going to try and tough this one out #PMQs

    Probably a mistake, but they've prepared the way for a loss, or someone has, with months of build up to it.
    Of all the amendments in play, I can't get my head around why the Government are going to the wall on this one. So what if there's a meaningful vote before they sign? If there's no parliamentary majority for it it's toast anyway.

    Perhaps scared of what happens if parliament votes it down? I think that's the point.
    Have any of the proponents of this amendment managed to articulate what exactly it sets out to achieve?
    To ensure a sovereign Parliament gets a meaningful vote.
    I hope you sing the same tune if the amendment is defeated, as it will be our sovereign parliament saying no need for another vote.
  • welshowl said:

    saddo said:

    Saw the trailer for the new Churchill film "Darkest Hour". Makes you realise how ungrateful the EU is for everything the UK did in WW2.

    At the start of the war, it looked as if we abandoned Europe to its fate.

    After D-Day, and this is what a lot of people forget, liberating Europe involved killing or blowing up a lot of what we were liberating, and which had lived in relative peace for several years apart from the odd incident where the local resistance groups took a night off from fighting each other, and killed some Nazis, which left villagers to face reprisals.
    How did it look like we had abandoned them? Hitler was very keen for us to do just that and pretty much offered the status quo post Dunkirk if I recall correctly ie you leave us alone and we will do likewise. Wouldn't have been viable long term for us, but it wouldn't have been unreasonable for us short term to take it. That would've abandoned Europe. We didn't do that.
    Look at it from the point of view of the countries that were overrun. Czechoslovakia of course was handed over before the start. We declared war in support of Poland but did not actually fight for or defend that country. That was the so-called phony war. Belgium was given up without much of a fight, and then we withdrew from France. We invaded Norway but were soon beaten. Ironically, it was the Norway campaign that led directly to Chamberlain's resignation and Churchill becoming prime minister, yet it was Churchill who was the architect of that military fiasco.
    We lost 63,000 men defending France and Belgium in 1940. We took over 100,000 French troops out of France to Britain to allow them to rebuild and carry on fighting the Germans.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074

    Comedian Peter Kay has announced he is cancelling all upcoming work projects, including his stand-up tour, "due to unforeseen family circumstances".

    http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-42339698

    This really is the tour that doesn't tour....

    Oh no. I had got tickets for his performance in Dublin in 2019. Ah well.....

    I hope whatever it is with his family turns out for the best.
This discussion has been closed.