2021 is also a strong bet for the date of the next general election, as that would also be after Brexit and just as the transition period would be ending.
The Tory membership will also be likely to pick a Leaver to succeed May and to ensure we do genuinely leave both the EU and single market and end free movement post Brexit. Boris, JRM and Davis and Gove all stand a chance but I think MPs will likely put forward Davis and Rudd and the membership would then pick Davis. Let us also not forget Cameron only won with the membership in 2005 after the party had been in opposition for 8 years, in 2001 members put purity over proven ability and IDS easily beat Clarke with opposition to the Euro proving the pivotal litmus test. I expect being a proven Leaver to be the key litmus test next time.
I think it'll be GE2022, because the Government will want to bank some quick wins in the first 12 months post-Brexit: think new immigration controls, blue passports, a few new trade deals, and extra cash for the NHS.
The next election will hinge on leadership, the economy and whether austerity has ended or not, though, with the Conservatives having a harder time making the running just due to being in office for 12 years.
JRM is now clearly the 'Prince across the water' for Tory hard Brexiteers and is setting himself up as the de facto leader of that wing within the party. I don't think he will have enough MP support to get to the final 2 this time to succeed May, though he may get close, however he is the likely next Tory leader of the opposition if and when the Tories lose power.
Well you’ve changed your tune, you kept on telling us JRM was certain to make the final two.
Australian ABC news projects John Alexander has won the by election today in Bennelong (John Howard's old seat) for the governing LNP coalition after a close fight with Labor. That will provide some relief to PM Turnbull and ensure he keeps his very narrow 1 seat majority. The by election was called after Alexander was found to be half British and he has now renounced his dual nationality to stay in the Parliament
"Found to be half-British" - that's weird. Most Australians have British heritage, and there's over a million Brits living there.
True. The last PM Tony Abbott was born in London too and both he and Turnbull went to Oxford, indeed apart from New Zealand Australia is the most British nation in the world, hence the Ashes still has such resonance.
However for some reason you cannot legally be a dual citizen and an Australian MP
JRM is now clearly the 'Prince across the water' for Tory hard Brexiteers and is setting himself up as the de facto leader of that wing within the party. I don't think he will have enough MP support to get to the final 2 this time to succeed May, though he may get close, however he is the likely next Tory leader of the opposition if and when the Tories lose power.
Well you’ve changed your tune, you kept on telling us JRM was certain to make the final two.
I never said JRM would make the final two with MPs while the Tories were in government, I did say he would have a good chance with the membership if he did.
Rudd isn't in a safe enough seat. She's very vulnerable to being out of the commons, no way can she be the next leader.
If Joe 90 loses her seat then the Horde have lost the GE and will be replacing her as leader anyway so her marginal status is irrelevant.
I disagree, I don't think that takes the demographics in Hastings (and the way this is changing) into account; think Brighton but 40 years behind. I could well see the Tories scraping a narrow majority overall but losing Hastings at the next GE.
I'm surprised that the Conservatives still hold Hastings. I guess the Conservative vote in Rye and other outlying villages is so overwhelming that it enables them to just about hold the seat.
I don't think people in Rye think of themselves as an outlying village. But you are right. There is a solid Tory vote there and it will not be an easy seat for Labour even in a good year.
Population of Rye = circa 5,000; population of Hastings = circa 90,000.
Write off the Mogg at your peril. The only issue in town is Brexit, not only is the issue not finished but a significant body of opinion is forming that the direction of travel is a BETRAYAL.
A chap who can represent that thinking whilst looking and sounding like a proper Tory for a change (unlike these so-called 'modernisers' like Cameron and May) will go a long way. And once members and associations make that clear to their MPs I can't see how he fails to make the final two. And then win.
Mogg vs Corbyn. I bet the Lib Dems still fail to get more than a dozen seats...
Mr. Eagles, I remember when Verstappen fell from 251 to 51. Nothing to do with me, of course, but that was quite the tumble. And still overpriced, as it turned out.
Cheers for your tip. When's the final result?
Around 8.45pmish
Given that the result is down to the public vote I'd be surprised if it's anything else than:
1) Joe 2) Debbie 3) Alexandra 4) Gemma
Personally, lost interest since Mollie and AJ were eliminated. OK, she couldn't really dance, but they were soooh cute together!
Rudd isn't in a safe enough seat. She's very vulnerable to being out of the commons, no way can she be the next leader.
If Joe 90 loses her seat then the Horde have lost the GE and will be replacing her as leader anyway so her marginal status is irrelevant.
I disagree, I don't think that takes the demographics in Hastings (and the way this is changing) into account; think Brighton but 40 years behind. I could well see the Tories scraping a narrow majority overall but losing Hastings at the next GE.
I'm surprised that the Conservatives still hold Hastings. I guess the Conservative vote in Rye and other outlying villages is so overwhelming that it enables them to just about hold the seat.
I don't think people in Rye think of themselves as an outlying village. But you are right. There is a solid Tory vote there and it will not be an easy seat for Labour even in a good year.
Population of Rye = circa 5,000; population of Hastings = circa 90,000.
As well as Rye, Winchelsea and a number of other villages like Fairlight and Camber are also in the seat
Write off the Mogg at your peril. The only issue in town is Brexit, not only is the issue not finished but a significant body of opinion is forming that the direction of travel is a BETRAYAL.
A chap who can represent that thinking whilst looking and sounding like a proper Tory for a change (unlike these so-called 'modernisers' like Cameron and May) will go a long way. And once members and associations make that clear to their MPs I can't see how he fails to make the final two. And then win.
Mogg vs Corbyn. I bet the Lib Dems still fail to get more than a dozen seats...
Associations do not make these things clear to MPs and even if they did, the MPs would ignore them. Unlike Labour's silly rules, Tory MPs votes are secret for good reason.
Write off the Mogg at your peril. The only issue in town is Brexit, not only is the issue not finished but a significant body of opinion is forming that the direction of travel is a BETRAYAL.
A chap who can represent that thinking whilst looking and sounding like a proper Tory for a change (unlike these so-called 'modernisers' like Cameron and May) will go a long way. And once members and associations make that clear to their MPs I can't see how he fails to make the final two. And then win.
Mogg vs Corbyn. I bet the Lib Dems still fail to get more than a dozen seats...
Associations do not make these things clear to MPs and even if they did, the MPs would ignore them. Unlike Labour's silly rules, Tory MPs votes are secret for good reason.
Thankfully, pragmatism appears to have won over ideology in the last week or so. And I just can't see him getting the backing of more than a handful of Tory MPs.
Mr. F, easier to blame the evil government than take responsibility for a massive screw-up.
Mr. Punter, quis eligiet ipsos eligeres?
[Apologies for ropey Latin].
If you consider the significant cuts in police and justice funding, then it's not unreasonable to think the system might be struggling. On the other hand, bringing unnecessary or plainly unjust cases to court simply compounds the problem.
I concur that it is not unreasonable to think that the system might be struggling, but for the record, the Times has today published a letter from the Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders, in which she says "It is incorrect to suggest that the CPS would withhold such data in order to save costs. The CPS is clear about its obligations to disclose relevant material that could assist the defence case. Cost considerations play no part in decisions over disclosure."
Without doubt, all the emergency services are at breaking point due to chronic under funding but this case just seems plain wrong.
On topic I agree with David except about laying Ruth Davidson.
I’m backing her.
If she formally announces her intention to stand at Westminster her price is going to collapse.
That's still quite a tall order -
- She would need to find a winnable and probably therefore English seat. - Win the local constituency party's nomination. - Garner sufficient support of the Parliamentary Party to go into the final ballot. - Short of there being a "coronation", win the Tory membership vote.
Taking account of the above, it might require a two stage process for her to become say the leader after next, which could take 9 years or more and by which time there are likely to be other, as yet unidentified contenders.
I think there are several Scottish seats she could easily win on current polling - if they became vacant.
Cuckoo
Ahem - border seats, Aberdeenshire seats - you really think the Tories will lose them all on current polling. You obviously haven't had your daily turnip yet.
I'm also considering Gavin Williamson at 50/1. Yes, he's being bloody obvious about it, but he's made an impressive start, and is clearly hungry for it (and ruthless enough to fight for it) and some of his moves in Defence are very much calculated to appeal to the Tory base.
Williamson is Steerpike made flesh. If ever he had harboured a conscience in his tough narrow breast he had by now dug out and flung away the awkward thing — flung it so far away that were he ever to need it again he could never find it. High-shouldered to a degree little short of malformation, slender and adroit of limb and frame, his eyes close-set and the colour of dried blood, he is climbing the spiral staircase of the soul of Gormenghast, bound for some pinnacle of the itching fancy — some wild, invulnerable eyrie best known to himself; where he can watch the world spread out below him, and shake exultantly his clotted wings
"If one good deed in all my life I did, I do repent it with my very soul."
Mr. F, easier to blame the evil government than take responsibility for a massive screw-up.
Mr. Punter, quis eligiet ipsos eligeres?
[Apologies for ropey Latin].
If you consider the significant cuts in police and justice funding, then it's not unreasonable to think the system might be struggling. On the other hand, bringing unnecessary or plainly unjust cases to court simply compounds the problem.
I concur that it is not unreasonable to think that the system might be struggling, but for the record, the Times has today published a letter from the Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders, in which she says "It is incorrect to suggest that the CPS would withhold such data in order to save costs. The CPS is clear about its obligations to disclose relevant material that could assist the defence case. Cost considerations play no part in decisions over disclosure."
Without doubt, all the emergency services are at breaking point due to chronic under funding but this case just seems plain wrong.
It definitely looks like the police thought they could withhold the key evidence to get their prosecution rate up. This whole rubbish about how few rape cases end in a prosecution has put too much pressure on them to try and game the cases and lock up innocent people. Just so they can get the numbers. Disgusting.
Mr. Eagles, I remember when Verstappen fell from 251 to 51. Nothing to do with me, of course, but that was quite the tumble. And still overpriced, as it turned out.
Cheers for your tip. When's the final result?
Around 8.45pmish
Given that the result is down to the public vote I'd be surprised if it's anything else than:
1) Joe 2) Debbie 3) Alexandra 4) Gemma
Personally, lost interest since Mollie and AJ were eliminated. OK, she couldn't really dance, but they were soooh cute together!
In a four horse race is she really a 4% chance?
She’s been in fewer dance offs than Alexandra and as many as Debbie.
2021 is also a strong bet for the date of the next general election, as that would also be after Brexit and just as the transition period would be ending.
The Tory membership will also be likely to pick a Leaver to succeed May and to ensure we do genuinely leave both the EU and single market and end free movement post Brexit. Boris, JRM and Davis and Gove all stand a chance but I think MPs will likely put forward Davis and Rudd and the membership would then pick Davis. Let us also not forget Cameron only won with the membership in 2005 after the party had been in opposition for 8 years, in 2001 members put purity over proven ability and IDS easily beat Clarke with opposition to the Euro proving the pivotal litmus test. I expect being a proven Leaver to be the key litmus test next time.
I think it'll be GE2022, because the Government will want to bank some quick wins in the first 12 months post-Brexit: think new immigration controls, blue passports, a few new trade deals, and extra cash for the NHS.
The next election will hinge on leadership, the economy and whether austerity has ended or not, though, with the Conservatives having a harder time making the running just due to being in office for 12 years.
I doubt we’ll have any trade deals by 2022. No-one’s going to do one with us until our final relationship with the EU is sorted out. Then there’ll have to be negotiations. Liam Fox will be doing nothing but collecting air miles for the next few years. We could have blue passports now. I’m really durprised it hasn’t happened. As you say, it would be a very quick win.
Write off the Mogg at your peril. The only issue in town is Brexit, not only is the issue not finished but a significant body of opinion is forming that the direction of travel is a BETRAYAL.
A chap who can represent that thinking whilst looking and sounding like a proper Tory for a change (unlike these so-called 'modernisers' like Cameron and May) will go a long way. And once members and associations make that clear to their MPs I can't see how he fails to make the final two. And then win.
Mogg vs Corbyn. I bet the Lib Dems still fail to get more than a dozen seats...
Associations do not make these things clear to MPs and even if they did, the MPs would ignore them. Unlike Labour's silly rules, Tory MPs votes are secret for good reason.
Thankfully, pragmatism appears to have won over ideology in the last week or so. And I just can't see him getting the backing of more than a handful of Tory MPs.
Indeed. Why would they put their own, never mind their party's, future in the hands of someone who is completely untested in ministerial office, in any ability to manage a party or run an election, and who goes out of his way to appear out of touch, both personally and in some of his social attitudes?
It should be remembered that in Labour - with Momentum types (for which there's no Tory equivalent) and with open nominations - the PLP still remain overwhelmingly opposed to Corbyn, even if much more quietly these days.
On topic I agree with David except about laying Ruth Davidson.
I’m backing her.
If she formally announces her intention to stand at Westminster her price is going to collapse.
That's still quite a tall order -
- She would need to find a winnable and probably therefore English seat. - Win the local constituency party's nomination. - Garner sufficient support of the Parliamentary Party to go into the final ballot. - Short of there being a "coronation", win the Tory membership vote.
Taking account of the above, it might require a two stage process for her to become say the leader after next, which could take 9 years or more and by which time there are likely to be other, as yet unidentified contenders.
I think there are several Scottish seats she could easily win on current polling - if they became vacant.
Cuckoo
Ahem - border seats, Aberdeenshire seats - you really think the Tories will lose them all on current polling. You obviously haven't had your daily turnip yet.
John Lamont has spent his career trying g to become MP of BRS, he gave up his Holyrood seat to do so - he isn't moving.
Dumfries and Galloway has a large Labour 3rd place to squeeze for an anti-terrorism vote.
Only DCT of the borders seat is a viable seat for Mundell to step down and Davidson to take over.
Write off the Mogg at your peril. The only issue in town is Brexit, not only is the issue not finished but a significant body of opinion is forming that the direction of travel is a BETRAYAL.
A chap who can represent that thinking whilst looking and sounding like a proper Tory for a change (unlike these so-called 'modernisers' like Cameron and May) will go a long way. And once members and associations make that clear to their MPs I can't see how he fails to make the final two. And then win.
Mogg vs Corbyn. I bet the Lib Dems still fail to get more than a dozen seats...
Associations do not make these things clear to MPs and even if they did, the MPs would ignore them. Unlike Labour's silly rules, Tory MPs votes are secret for good reason.
Thankfully, pragmatism appears to have won over ideology in the last week or so. And I just can't see him getting the backing of more than a handful of Tory MPs.
The full consequences of that welcome pragmatism will only gradually become completely clear over the course of the next year. It will not be pretty on the Tory benches. But they can scrap away happy in the knowledge that the Corbyn firewall will keep them competitive.
On topic I agree with David except about laying Ruth Davidson.
I’m backing her.
If she formally announces her intention to stand at Westminster her price is going to collapse.
That's still quite a tall order -
- She would need to find a winnable and probably therefore English seat. - Win the local constituency party's nomination. - Garner sufficient support of the Parliamentary Party to go into the final ballot. - Short of there being a "coronation", win the Tory membership vote.
Taking account of the above, it might require a two stage process for her to become say the leader after next, which could take 9 years or more and by which time there are likely to be other, as yet unidentified contenders.
I think there are several Scottish seats she could easily win on current polling - if they became vacant.
Cuckoo
Ahem - border seats, Aberdeenshire seats - you really think the Tories will lose them all on current polling. You obviously haven't had your daily turnip yet.
John Lamont has spent his career trying g to become MP of BRS, he gave up his Holyrood seat to do so - he isn't moving.
Dumfries and Galloway has a large Labour 3rd place to squeeze for an anti-terrorism vote.
Only DCT of the borders seat is a viable seat for Mundell to step down and Davidson to take over.
Oh indeed - my point was simply that Ruth could easily win a Scottish seat if one came up.
2021 is also a strong bet for the date of the next general election, as that would also be after Brexit and just as the transition period would be ending.
The Tory membership will also be likely to pick a Leaver to succeed May and to ensure we do genuinely leave both the EU and single market and end free movement post Brexit. Boris, JRM and Davis and Gove all stand a chance but I think MPs will likely put forward Davis and Rudd and the membership would then pick Davis. Let us also not forget Cameron only won with the membership in 2005 after the party had been in opposition for 8 years, in 2001 members put purity over proven ability and IDS easily beat Clarke with opposition to the Euro proving the pivotal litmus test. I expect being a proven Leaver to be the key litmus test next time.
I think it'll be GE2022, because the Government will want to bank some quick wins in the first 12 months post-Brexit: think new immigration controls, blue passports, a few new trade deals, and extra cash for the NHS.
The next election will hinge on leadership, the economy and whether austerity has ended or not, though, with the Conservatives having a harder time making the running just due to being in office for 12 years.
I doubt we’ll have any trade deals by 2022. No-one’s going to do one with us until our final relationship with the EU is sorted out. Then there’ll have to be negotiations. Liam Fox will be doing nothing but collecting air miles for the next few years. We could have blue passports now. I’m really durprised it hasn’t happened. As you say, it would be a very quick win.
You doubt, because you are pessimism personified.
The future framework of our relationship with the EU will be negotiated by March 2019, when we'll be formally out. The 2-year transition period will be used to negotiate deals to take effect in 2021, whereupon the new relationship with the EU will also take effect.
It's not as simple as you suggest, regarding blue passports.
2021 is also a strong bet for the date of the next general election, as that would also be after Brexit and just as the transition period would be ending.
The Tory membership will also be likely to pick a Leaver to succeed May and to ensure we do genuinely leave both the EU and single market and end free movement post Brexit. Boris, JRM and Davis and Gove all stand a chance but I think MPs will likely put forward Davis and Rudd and the membership would then pick Davis. Let us also not forget Cameron only won with the membership in 2005 after the party had been in opposition for 8 years, in 2001 members put purity over proven ability and IDS easily beat Clarke with opposition to the Euro proving the pivotal litmus test. I expect being a proven Leaver to be the key litmus test next time.
I think it'll be GE2022, because the Government will want to bank some quick wins in the first 12 months post-Brexit: think new immigration controls, blue passports, a few new trade deals, and extra cash for the NHS.
The next election will hinge on leadership, the economy and whether austerity has ended or not, though, with the Conservatives having a harder time making the running just due to being in office for 12 years.
I doubt we’ll have any trade deals by 2022. No-one’s going to do one with us until our final relationship with the EU is sorted out. Then there’ll have to be negotiations. Liam Fox will be doing nothing but collecting air miles for the next few years. We could have blue passports now. I’m really durprised it hasn’t happened. As you say, it would be a very quick win.
You doubt, because you are pessimism personified.
The future framework of our relationship with the EU will be negotiated by March 2019, when we'll be formally out. The 2-year transition period will be used to negotiate deals to take effect in 2021, whereupon the new relationship with the EU will also take effect.
It's not as simple as you suggest, regarding blue passports.
Blue passports are another one of those Remainer tropes. Never heard any Leavers actually asking for them.....
2021 is also a strong bet for the date of the next general election, as that would also be after Brexit and just as the transition period would be ending.
The Tory membership will also be likely to pick a Leaver to succeed May and to ensure we do genuinely leave both the EU and single market and end free movement post Brexit. Boris, JRM and Davis and Gove all stand a chance but I think MPs will likely put forward Davis and Rudd and the membership would then pick Davis. Let us also not forget Cameron only won with the membership in 2005 after the party had been in opposition for 8 years, in 2001 members put purity over proven ability and IDS easily beat Clarke with opposition to the Euro proving the pivotal litmus test. I expect being a proven Leaver to be the key litmus test next time.
I think it'll be GE2022, because the Government will want to bank some quick wins in the first 12 months post-Brexit: think new immigration controls, blue passports, a few new trade deals, and extra cash for the NHS.
The next election will hinge on leadership, the economy and whether austerity has ended or not, though, with the Conservatives having a harder time making the running just due to being in office for 12 years.
I doubt we’ll have any trade deals by 2022. No-one’s going to do one with us until our final relationship with the EU is sorted out. Then there’ll have to be negotiations. Liam Fox will be doing nothing but collecting air miles for the next few years. We could have blue passports now. I’m really durprised it hasn’t happened. As you say, it would be a very quick win.
You doubt, because you are pessimism personified.
The future framework of our relationship with the EU will be negotiated by March 2019, when we'll be formally out. The 2-year transition period will be used to negotiate deals to take effect in 2021, whereupon the new relationship with the EU will also take effect.
It's not as simple as you suggest, regarding blue passports.
OK. I'm a remainer, but for me blue passports would not be a 'quick win' at all. 1) Aesthetically, I prefer the burgundy ones but, more importantly; 2) symbolically, I would no longer be identified as an EU citizen. EU citizenship is something I value highly, and find in no way incompatible with being a British citizen.
Mr. F, easier to blame the evil government than take responsibility for a massive screw-up.
Mr. Punter, quis eligiet ipsos eligeres?
[Apologies for ropey Latin].
If you consider the significant cuts in police and justice funding, then it's not unreasonable to think the system might be struggling. On the other hand, bringing unnecessary or plainly unjust cases to court simply compounds the problem.
I concur that it is not unreasonable to think that the system might be struggling, but for the record, the Times has today published a letter from the Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders, in which she says "It is incorrect to suggest that the CPS would withhold such data in order to save costs. The CPS is clear about its obligations to disclose relevant material that could assist the defence case. Cost considerations play no part in decisions over disclosure."
Without doubt, all the emergency services are at breaking point due to chronic under funding but this case just seems plain wrong.
It definitely looks like the police thought they could withhold the key evidence to get their prosecution rate up. This whole rubbish about how few rape cases end in a prosecution has put too much pressure on them to try and game the cases and lock up innocent people. Just so they can get the numbers. Disgusting.
It's difficult to tell whether the police behaviour was deliberate wrongful behaviour, or simply incompetence - though there is reportedly an attitude of 'if in doubt let the courts sort it out' regarding rape cases.
As far as the CPS is concerned, there is clearly a long standing systemic problem with disclosure of evidence, as clearly set out in this report by the CPS inspectorate: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40638513
Addressing clearly identified problems is obviously more difficult when resources are stretched (and Hayes himself says the cuts have taken things to breaking point), but there seems to be an utter lack of effective leadership. The CPS statement about the case was disgraceful.
Mr. F, easier to blame the evil government than take responsibility for a massive screw-up.
Mr. Punter, quis eligiet ipsos eligeres?
[Apologies for ropey Latin].
If you consider the significant cuts in police and justice funding, then it's not unreasonable to think the system might be struggling. On the other hand, bringing unnecessary or plainly unjust cases to court simply compounds the problem.
I concur that it is not unreasonable to think that the system might be struggling, but for the record, the Times has today published a letter from the Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders, in which she says "It is incorrect to suggest that the CPS would withhold such data in order to save costs. The CPS is clear about its obligations to disclose relevant material that could assist the defence case. Cost considerations play no part in decisions over disclosure."
Without doubt, all the emergency services are at breaking point due to chronic under funding but this case just seems plain wrong.
It definitely looks like the police thought they could withhold the key evidence to get their prosecution rate up. This whole rubbish about how few rape cases end in a prosecution has put too much pressure on them to try and game the cases and lock up innocent people. Just so they can get the numbers. Disgusting.
It's difficult to tell whether the police behaviour was deliberate wrongful behaviour, or simply incompetence - though there is reportedly an attitude of 'if in doubt let the courts sort it out' regarding rape cases.
As far as the CPS is concerned, there is clearly a long standing systemic problem with disclosure of evidence, as clearly set out in this report by the CPS inspectorate: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40638513
Addressing clearly identified problems is obviously more difficult when resources are stretched (and Hayes himself says the cuts have taken things to breaking point), but there seems to be an utter lack of effective leadership. The CPS statement about the case was disgraceful.
Apparently there were 40,000 messages through various platforms.
Seems like somebody couldn’t be arsed to go through them all.
2021 is also a strong bet for the date of the next general election, as that would also be after Brexit and just as the transition period would be ending.
The Tory membership will also be likely to pick a Leaver to succeed May and to ensure we do genuinely leave both the EU and single market and end free movement post Brexit. Boris, JRM and Davis and Gove all stand a chance but I think MPs will likely put forward Davis and Rudd and the membership would then pick Davis. Let us also not forget Cameron only won with the membership in 2005 after the party had been in opposition for 8 years, in 2001 members put purity over proven ability and IDS easily beat Clarke with opposition to the Euro proving the pivotal litmus test. I expect being a proven Leaver to be the key litmus test next time.
I think it'll be GE2022, because the Government will want to bank some quick wins in the first 12 months post-Brexit: think new immigration controls, blue passports, a few new trade deals, and extra cash for the NHS.
The next election will hinge on leadership, the economy and whether austerity has ended or not, though, with the Conservatives having a harder time making the running just due to being in office for 12 years.
I doubt we’ll have any trade deals by 2022. No-one’s going to do one with us until our final relationship with the EU is sorted out. Then there’ll have to be negotiations. Liam Fox will be doing nothing but collecting air miles for the next few years. We could have blue passports now. I’m really durprised it hasn’t happened. As you say, it would be a very quick win.
You doubt, because you are pessimism personified.
The future framework of our relationship with the EU will be negotiated by March 2019, when we'll be formally out. The 2-year transition period will be used to negotiate deals to take effect in 2021, whereupon the new relationship with the EU will also take effect.
It's not as simple as you suggest, regarding blue passports.
No, I doubt because I know trade deals take a long time to do and no sane country would agree anything with the UK until they are completely clear on what the UK’s final relationship with the EU will be: how far our laws & regulations will be aligned, the level of access UK-based businesses will have to the single market, and so on. The attractiveness of the UK as a free trade partner and the kind of concessions that both sides would make to get a deal will be dependent on how Brexit turns out. There is also the issue of bandwidth - you can’t just whistle up trade negotiators. If ours are working on a complex disengagement from the EU, they will not be working on other stuff.
Mr. F, easier to blame the evil government than take responsibility for a massive screw-up.
Mr. Punter, quis eligiet ipsos eligeres?
[Apologies for ropey Latin].
If you consider the significant cuts in police and justice funding, then it's not unreasonable to think the system might be struggling. On the other hand, bringing unnecessary or plainly unjust cases to court simply compounds the problem.
I concur that it is not unreasonable to think that the system might be struggling, but for the record, the Times has today published a letter from the Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders, in which she says "It is incorrect to suggest that the CPS would withhold such data in order to save costs. The CPS is clear about its obligations to disclose relevant material that could assist the defence case. Cost considerations play no part in decisions over disclosure."
Without doubt, all the emergency services are at breaking point due to chronic under funding but this case just seems plain wrong.
It definitely looks like the police thought they could withhold the key evidence to get their prosecution rate up. This whole rubbish about how few rape cases end in a prosecution has put too much pressure on them to try and game the cases and lock up innocent people. Just so they can get the numbers. Disgusting.
It's difficult to tell whether the police behaviour was deliberate wrongful behaviour, or simply incompetence - though there is reportedly an attitude of 'if in doubt let the courts sort it out' regarding rape cases.
As far as the CPS is concerned, there is clearly a long standing systemic problem with disclosure of evidence, as clearly set out in this report by the CPS inspectorate: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40638513
Addressing clearly identified problems is obviously more difficult when resources are stretched (and Hayes himself says the cuts have taken things to breaking point), but there seems to be an utter lack of effective leadership. The CPS statement about the case was disgraceful.
Apparently there were 40,000 messages through various platforms.
Seems like somebody couldn’t be arsed to go through them all.
Will the accuser be charged for false accusations? Perjury, perhaps?
Mr. F, easier to blame the evil government than take responsibility for a massive screw-up.
Mr. Punter, quis eligiet ipsos eligeres?
[Apologies for ropey Latin].
If you consider the significant cuts in police and justice funding, then it's not unreasonable to think the system might be struggling. On the other hand, bringing unnecessary or plainly unjust cases to court simply compounds the problem.
I concur that it is not unreasonable to think that the system might be struggling, but for the record, the Times has today published a letter from the Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders, in which she says "It is incorrect to suggest that the CPS would withhold such data in order to save costs. The CPS is clear about its obligations to disclose relevant material that could assist the defence case. Cost considerations play no part in decisions over disclosure."
Without doubt, all the emergency services are at breaking point due to chronic under funding but this case just seems plain wrong.
It definitely looks like the police thought they could withhold the key evidence to get their prosecution rate up. This whole rubbish about how few rape cases end in a prosecution has put too much pressure on them to try and game the cases and lock up innocent people. Just so they can get the numbers. Disgusting.
It's difficult to tell whether the police behaviour was deliberate wrongful behaviour, or simply incompetence - though there is reportedly an attitude of 'if in doubt let the courts sort it out' regarding rape cases.
As far as the CPS is concerned, there is clearly a long standing systemic problem with disclosure of evidence, as clearly set out in this report by the CPS inspectorate: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40638513
Addressing clearly identified problems is obviously more difficult when resources are stretched (and Hayes himself says the cuts have taken things to breaking point), but there seems to be an utter lack of effective leadership. The CPS statement about the case was disgraceful.
Apparently there were 40,000 messages through various platforms.
Seems like somebody couldn’t be arsed to go through them all.
Will the accuser be charged for false accusations? Perjury, perhaps?
Unlikely. Will look like the CPS trying to deflect from their huge mistake.
Plus as a rule they don’t like charging complainants in these sorts of crimes lest it puts off others coming forward.
Mr. F, easier to blame the evil government than take responsibility for a massive screw-up.
Mr. Punter, quis eligiet ipsos eligeres?
[Apologies for ropey Latin].
If you consider the significant cuts in police and justice funding, then it's not unreasonable to think the system might be struggling. On the other hand, bringing unnecessary or plainly unjust cases to court simply compounds the problem.
I concur that it is not unreasonable to think that the system might be struggling, but for the record, the Times has today published a letter from the Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders, in which she says "It is incorrect to suggest that the CPS would withhold such data in order to save costs. The CPS is clear about its obligations to disclose relevant material that could assist the defence case. Cost considerations play no part in decisions over disclosure."
Without doubt, all the emergency services are at breaking point due to chronic under funding but this case just seems plain wrong.
It definitely looks like the police thought they could withhold the key evidence to get their prosecution rate up. This whole rubbish about how few rape cases end in a prosecution has put too much pressure on them to try and game the cases and lock up innocent people. Just so they can get the numbers. Disgusting.
Isn't it more likely that the Police simply didn't review the evidence, not that they withheld it in the knowledge that it would clear him?
Mr. Eagles, if the case just isn't proven I think that's fair enough. But if an accuser has been proved or there's strong evidence she (or he) has lied to maliciously make a false accusation that should absolutely be prosecuted.
The media, police and politicians should recall justice is for everyone, both the accusers and the accused.
A close mate was in Ox when our class lists were posted - he text to let me know I had a 2:2.
His text saying 'only joking' took about 5 minutes to arrive. Painful - but character building
So you got a Douglas then ?
My croquet improved immeasurably during Finals, though.
Why did Oxford get rid of theirs in 2009?
No idea. Bizarre.
Class lists are very meritocratic.
Were you at the House? That garden is a hidden gem.
Nah, BNC. But the ChCh croquet lawn is fantastic.
Wen't back to our old cricket ground for a trade association annual match a few months ago. Oxford pitches in early September are far better than in May/June!
Mr. F, easier to blame the evil government than take responsibility for a massive screw-up.
Mr. Punter, quis eligiet ipsos eligeres?
[Apologies for ropey Latin].
If you consider the significant cuts in police and justice funding, then it's not unreasonable to think the system might be struggling. On the other hand, bringing unnecessary or plainly unjust cases to court simply compounds the problem.
I concur that it is not unreasonable to think that the system might be struggling, but for the record, the Times has today published a letter from the Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders, in which she says "It is incorrect to suggest that the CPS would withhold such data in order to save costs. The CPS is clear about its obligations to disclose relevant material that could assist the defence case. Cost considerations play no part in decisions over disclosure."
Without doubt, all the emergency services are at breaking point due to chronic under funding but this case just seems plain wrong.
It definitely looks like the police thought they could withhold the key evidence to get their prosecution rate up. This whole rubbish about how few rape cases end in a prosecution has put too much pressure on them to try and game the cases and lock up innocent people. Just so they can get the numbers. Disgusting.
Isn't it more likely that the Police simply didn't review the evidence, not that they withheld it in the knowledge that it would clear him?
I don't trust the Met at all. Anything for a conviction.
On topic I agree with David except about laying Ruth Davidson.
I’m backing her.
If she formally announces her intention to stand at Westminster her price is going to collapse.
That's still quite a tall order -
- She would need to find a winnable and probably therefore English seat. - Win the local constituency party's nomination. - Garner sufficient support of the Parliamentary Party to go into the final ballot. - Short of there being a "coronation", win the Tory membership vote.
Taking account of the above, it might require a two stage process for her to become say the leader after next, which could take 9 years or more and by which time there are likely to be other, as yet unidentified contenders.
I think there are several Scottish seats she could easily win on current polling - if they became vacant.
Cuckoo
Ahem - border seats, Aberdeenshire seats - you really think the Tories will lose them all on current polling. You obviously haven't had your daily turnip yet.
John Lamont has spent his career trying g to become MP of BRS, he gave up his Holyrood seat to do so - he isn't moving.
Dumfries and Galloway has a large Labour 3rd place to squeeze for an anti-terrorism vote.
Only DCT of the borders seat is a viable seat for Mundell to step down and Davidson to take over.
Labour has the potential to recover to be back in serious contention in Dumfries & Galloway. I would expect most tactical voting to unwind next time.
Mr. F, easier to blame the evil government than take responsibility for a massive screw-up.
Mr. Punter, quis eligiet ipsos eligeres?
[Apologies for ropey Latin].
If you consider the significant cuts in police and justice funding, then it's not unreasonable to think the system might be struggling. On the other hand, bringing unnecessary or plainly unjust cases to court simply compounds the problem.
The Courts themselves have complained about too many weak and badly prepared cases being brought. It's a symptom of lack of funding and yea it makes matters worse because then resources are burned up in inquiries, apologies and reviews etc.
Now I really must go, Sorry Morris, didn't get the Latin.
There's an argument to be had about resources when complex cases are given to people too junior or inexperienced, due to funding cuts.
But, this type of error is pretty basic.
Yes, basic indeed Sean, but if my experience was anything to go on I should say it's wrong to call it an error. It's an error when somebody reviews a case and makes a bad call. But my guess is that nobody reviewed the case in any meaningful way. And why? Because the outfit is under heavy pressure to produce results and reduce costs. Response? Don't bother with time-consuming reviews - just send them all forward for prosecution and hope some get through.
I think that's what happening. Lamentable, if true, but if we are going to deal with the problem it's best to be honest about the cause.
Mr. F, easier to blame the evil government than take responsibility for a massive screw-up.
Mr. Punter, quis eligiet ipsos eligeres?
[Apologies for ropey Latin].
If you consider the significant cuts in police and justice funding, then it's not unreasonable to think the system might be struggling. On the other hand, bringing unnecessary or plainly unjust cases to court simply compounds the problem.
...Cost considerations play no part in decisions over disclosure."
Without doubt, all the emergency services are at breaking point due to chronic under funding but this case just seems plain wrong.
It definitely looks like the police thought they could withhold the key evidence to get their prosecution rate up. This whole rubbish about how few rape cases end in a prosecution has put too much pressure on them to try and game the cases and lock up innocent people. Just so they can get the numbers. Disgusting.
It's difficult to tell whether the police behaviour was deliberate wrongful behaviour, or simply incompetence - though there is reportedly an attitude of 'if in doubt let the courts sort it out' regarding rape cases.
As far as the CPS is concerned, there is clearly a long standing systemic problem with disclosure of evidence, as clearly set out in this report by the CPS inspectorate: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40638513
Addressing clearly identified problems is obviously more difficult when resources are stretched (and Hayes himself says the cuts have taken things to breaking point), but there seems to be an utter lack of effective leadership. The CPS statement about the case was disgraceful.
Apparently there were 40,000 messages through various platforms.
Seems like somebody couldn’t be arsed to go through them all.
And then refused the evidence to the defense on the grounds there was nothing material in there. Failure properly to review, and refusal to disclose evidence is a systemic problem leading to numerous miscarriages of justice - in this case only averted by a persistent trial lawyer and a judge ordered disclosure.
The young man involved lost two years of his life, and was extremely lucky to escape a wrongful conviction. The CPS statement makes it sound as though the system worked as it should.
On topic I agree with David except about laying Ruth Davidson.
I’m backing her.
If she formally announces her intention to stand at Westminster her price is going to collapse.
That's still quite a tall order -
- She would need to find a winnable and probably therefore English seat. - Win the local constituency party's nomination. - Garner sufficient support of the Parliamentary Party to go into the final ballot. - Short of there being a "coronation", win the Tory membership vote.
Taking account of the above, it might require a two stage process for her to become say the leader after next, which could take 9 years or more and by which time there are likely to be other, as yet unidentified contenders.
I think there are several Scottish seats she could easily win on current polling - if they became vacant.
Cuckoo
Ahem - border seats, Aberdeenshire seats - you really think the Tories will lose them all on current polling. You obviously haven't had your daily turnip yet.
John Lamont has spent his career trying g to become MP of BRS, he gave up his Holyrood seat to do so - he isn't moving.
Dumfries and Galloway has a large Labour 3rd place to squeeze for an anti-terrorism vote.
Only DCT of the borders seat is a viable seat for Mundell to step down and Davidson to take over.
Labour has the potential to recover to be back in serious contention in Dumfries & Galloway. I would expect most tactical voting to unwind next time.
I have no f'ing clue what will happen in D&G next time out. But my take away is that I wouldn't call it a safe Tory seat - and if Davidson was to stand there it would surely coalesce an anti-tory tactical vote.
A close mate was in Ox when our class lists were posted - he text to let me know I had a 2:2.
His text saying 'only joking' took about 5 minutes to arrive. Painful - but character building
And what is wrong with a Desmond?
Surely it depends on when it was awarded? Back in the 1960s and 1970s most students ended up with a 2:2 and were chuffed to get anything better - but for the last twenty years or so anything less than a 2:1 is widely perceived as pretty much a waste of time. That is what rampant grade inflation has done for us!
A close mate was in Ox when our class lists were posted - he text to let me know I had a 2:2.
His text saying 'only joking' took about 5 minutes to arrive. Painful - but character building
And what is wrong with a Desmond?
Surely it depends on when it was awarded? Back in the 1960s and 1970s most students ended up with a 2:2 and were chuffed to get anything better - but for the last twenty years or so anything less than a 2:1 is widely perceived as pretty much a waste of time. That is what rampant grade inflation has done for us!
That is always my excuse after getting a 2:2 in 1968
A close mate was in Ox when our class lists were posted - he text to let me know I had a 2:2.
His text saying 'only joking' took about 5 minutes to arrive. Painful - but character building
And what is wrong with a Desmond?
Surely it depends on when it was awarded? Back in the 1960s and 1970s most students ended up with a 2:2 and were chuffed to get anything better - but for the last twenty years or so anything less than a 2:1 is widely perceived as pretty much a waste of time. That is what rampant grade inflation has done for us!
That is always my excuse after getting a 2:2 in 1968
But it is a perfectly fair point is it not? Students of your generation awarded a 2:2 could be pretty certain to have obtained a 2:1 over the last 25 years or so.Most of those then given a 2:1 would today be given 1st class honours degrees. Of course, we could look at it the other way and resonably claim that people now gaining 2:1 degrees would have done no better than a 2:2 in earlier decades.
2021 is also a strong bet for the date of the next general election, as that would also be after Brexit and just as the transition period would be ending.
The Tory membership will also be likely to pick a Leaver to succeed May and to ensure we do genuinely leave both the EU and single market and end free movement post Brexit. Boris, JRM and Davis and Gove all stand a chance but I think MPs will likely put forward Davis and Rudd and the membership would then pick Davis. Let us also not forget Cameron only won with the membership in 2005 after the party had been in opposition for 8 years, in 2001 members put purity over proven ability and IDS easily beat Clarke with opposition to the Euro proving the pivotal litmus test. I expect being a proven Leaver to be the key litmus test next time.
I think it'll be GE2022, because the Government will want to bank some quick wins in the first 12 months post-Brexit: think new immigration controls, blue passports, a few new trade deals, and extra cash for the NHS.
The next election will hinge on leadership, the economy and whether austerity has ended or not, though, with the Conservatives having a harder time making the running just due to being in office for 12 years.
I doubt we’ll have any trade deals by 2022. No-one’s going to do one with us until our final relationship with the EU is sorted out. Then there’ll have to be negotiations. Liam Fox will be doing nothing but collecting air miles for the next few years. We could have blue passports now. I’m really durprised it hasn’t happened. As you say, it would be a very quick win.
You doubt, because you are pessimism personified.
The future framework of our relationship with the EU will be negotiated by March 2019, when we'll be formally out. The 2-year transition period will be used to negotiate deals to take effect in 2021, whereupon the new relationship with the EU will also take effect.
It's not as simple as you suggest, regarding blue passports.
Blue passports are another one of those Remainer tropes. Never heard any Leavers actually asking for them.....
A close mate was in Ox when our class lists were posted - he text to let me know I had a 2:2.
His text saying 'only joking' took about 5 minutes to arrive. Painful - but character building
And what is wrong with a Desmond?
Surely it depends on when it was awarded? Back in the 1960s and 1970s most students ended up with a 2:2 and were chuffed to get anything better - but for the last twenty years or so anything less than a 2:1 is widely perceived as pretty much a waste of time. That is what rampant grade inflation has done for us!
That is always my excuse after getting a 2:2 in 1968
But it is a perfectly fair point is it not? Students of your generation awarded a 2:2 could be pretty certain to have obtained a 2:1 over the last 25 years or so.Most of those then given a 2:1 would today be given 1st class honours degrees. Of course, we could look at it the other way and resonably claim that people now gaining 2:1 degrees would have done no better than a 2:2 in earlier decades.
Is that actually true, or are just more people getting 2:1 because more are going to university?
On topic I agree with David except about laying Ruth Davidson.
I’m backing her.
If she formally announces her intention to stand at Westminster her price is going to collapse.
That's still quite a tall order -
- She would need to find a winnable and probably therefore English seat. - Win the local constituency party's nomination. - Garner sufficient support of the Parliamentary Party to go into the final ballot. - Short of there being a "coronation", win the Tory membership vote.
Taking account of the above, it might require a two stage process for her to become say the leader after next, which could take 9 years or more and by which time there are likely to be other, as yet unidentified contenders.
I think there are several Scottish seats she could easily win on current polling - if they became vacant.
Cuckoo
Ahem - border seats, Aberdeenshire seats - you really think the Tories will lose them all on current polling. You obviously haven't had your daily turnip yet.
John Lamont has spent his career trying g to become MP of BRS, he gave up his Holyrood seat to do so - he isn't moving.
Dumfries and Galloway has a large Labour 3rd place to squeeze for an anti-terrorism vote.
Only DCT of the borders seat is a viable seat for Mundell to step down and Davidson to take over.
Labour has the potential to recover to be back in serious contention in Dumfries & Galloway. I would expect most tactical voting to unwind next time.
I have no f'ing clue what will happen in D&G next time out. But my take away is that I wouldn't call it a safe Tory seat - and if Davidson was to stand there it would surely coalesce an anti-tory tactical vote.
To stand and lose in Scotland would completely shatter Ruth's credibility and damage the SCON brand which is pretty much built on her non-Tory like reputation, perhaps she could inherit May's seat
People such as David Dimbleby, Jeremy Thorpe , Barbara Castle and Edward Boyle ended up with Third class degrees from Oxford. Very rare indeed nowadays. David Steel and Kinnock did no better at their universities.
On topic I agree with David except about laying Ruth Davidson.
I’m backing her.
If she formally announces her intention to stand at Westminster her price is going to collapse.
That's still quite a tall order -
- She would need to find a winnable and probably therefore English seat. - Win the local constituency party's nomination. - Garner sufficient support of the Parliamentary Party to go into the final ballot. - Short of there being a "coronation", win the Tory membership vote.
Taking account of the above, it might require a two stage process for her to become say the leader after next, which could take 9 years or more and by which time there are likely to be other, as yet unidentified contenders.
I think there are several Scottish seats she could easily win on current polling - if they became vacant.
Cuckoo
Ahem - border seats, Aberdeenshire seats - you really think the Tories will lose them all on current polling. You obviously haven't had your daily turnip yet.
John Lamont has spent his career trying g to become MP of BRS, he gave up his Holyrood seat to do so - he isn't moving.
Dumfries and Galloway has a large Labour 3rd place to squeeze for an anti-terrorism vote.
Only DCT of the borders seat is a viable seat for Mundell to step down and Davidson to take over.
Labour has the potential to recover to be back in serious contention in Dumfries & Galloway. I would expect most tactical voting to unwind next time.
I have no f'ing clue what will happen in D&G next time out. But my take away is that I wouldn't call it a safe Tory seat - and if Davidson was to stand there it would surely coalesce an anti-tory tactical vote.
To stand and lose in Scotland would completely shatter Ruth's credibility and damage the SCON brand which is pretty much built on her non-Tory like reputation, perhaps she could inherit May's seat
She likes a challenge as proven in the Scottish parliament seat she won. I'd be very confident she'd win almost any existing Scottish Tory seat with ease.
A close mate was in Ox when our class lists were posted - he text to let me know I had a 2:2.
His text saying 'only joking' took about 5 minutes to arrive. Painful - but character building
And what is wrong with a Desmond?
Surely it depends on when it was awarded? Back in the 1960s and 1970s most students ended up with a 2:2 and were chuffed to get anything better - but for the last twenty years or so anything less than a 2:1 is widely perceived as pretty much a waste of time. That is what rampant grade inflation has done for us!
That is always my excuse after getting a 2:2 in 1968
But it is a perfectly fair point is it not? Students of your generation awarded a 2:2 could be pretty certain to have obtained a 2:1 over the last 25 years or so.Most of those then given a 2:1 would today be given 1st class honours degrees. Of course, we could look at it the other way and resonably claim that people now gaining 2:1 degrees would have done no better than a 2:2 in earlier decades.
Is that actually true, or are just more people getting 2:1 because more are going to university?
Yes it is true - and widely acknowledged by the academics themselves who frequently recount their experiences at Exam Boards of pressure to upgrade students.League table competition has contributed to it - as has the much greater reliance on course work rather than end of year exams. Indeed if standards were being maintained, the effect of moving from the much more elitist scenario of the 60s & 70s were only 5% - 10% took degrees to the circa 40% we have today , the average degree classification logically ought to have dropped because entry standards are less demanding. In reality,of course, the opposite has happened!
On topic I agree with David except about laying Ruth Davidson.
I’m backing her.
If she formally announces her intention to stand at Westminster her price is going to collapse.
That's still quite a tall order -
- She would need to find a winnable and probably therefore English seat. - Win the local constituency party's nomination. - Garner sufficient support of the Parliamentary Party to go into the final ballot. - Short of there being a "coronation", win the Tory membership vote.
Taking account of the above, it might require a two stage process for her to become say the leader after next, which could take 9 years or more and by which time there are likely to be other, as yet unidentified contenders.
I think there are several Scottish seats she could easily win on current polling - if they became vacant.
Cuckoo
Ahem - border seats, Aberdeenshire seats - you really think the Tories will lose them all on current polling. You obviously haven't had your daily turnip yet.
John Lamont has spent his career trying g to become MP of BRS, he gave up his Holyrood seat to do so - he isn't moving.
Dumfries and Galloway has a large Labour 3rd place to squeeze for an anti-terrorism vote.
Only DCT of the borders seat is a viable seat for Mundell to step down and Davidson to take over.
Labour has the potential to recover to be back in serious contention in Dumfries & Galloway. I would expect most tactical voting to unwind next time.
I have no f'ing clue what will happen in D&G next time out. But my take away is that I wouldn't call it a safe Tory seat - and if Davidson was to stand there it would surely coalesce an anti-tory tactical vote.
To stand and lose in Scotland would completely shatter Ruth's credibility and damage the SCON brand which is pretty much built on her non-Tory like reputation, perhaps she could inherit May's seat
She likes a challenge as proven in the Scottish parliament seat she won. I'd be very confident she'd win almost any existing Scottish Tory seat with ease.
She'd struggle to win my seat, Stirling, which was delivered by tactical voting by the Orange Trade Union Corbynista vote, which was led by the Vice-Chairman of the local Labour party - who is also an ex-miner.
On topic I agree with David except about laying Ruth Davidson.
I’m backing her.
If she formally announces her intention to stand at Westminster her price is going to collapse.
That's still quite a tall order -
- She would need to find a winnable and probably therefore English seat. - Win the local constituency party's nomination. - Garner sufficient support of the Parliamentary Party to go into the final ballot. - Short of there being a "coronation", win the Tory membership vote.
Taking account of the above, it might require a two stage process for her to become say the leader after next, which could take 9 years or more and by which time there are likely to be other, as yet unidentified contenders.
I think there are several Scottish seats she could easily win on current polling - if they became vacant.
Cuckoo
Ahem - border seats, Aberdeenshire seats - you really think the Tories will lose them all on current polling. You obviously haven't had your daily turnip yet.
John Lamont has spent his career trying g to become MP of BRS, he gave up his Holyrood seat to do so - he isn't moving.
Dumfries and Galloway has a large Labour 3rd place to squeeze for an anti-terrorism vote.
Only DCT of the borders seat is a viable seat for Mundell to step down and Davidson to take over.
Labour has the potential to recover to be back in serious contention in Dumfries & Galloway. I would expect most tactical voting to unwind next time.
I have no f'ing clue what will happen in D&G next time out. But my take away is that I wouldn't call it a safe Tory seat - and if Davidson was to stand there it would surely coalesce an anti-tory tactical vote.
To stand and lose in Scotland would completely shatter Ruth's credibility and damage the SCON brand which is pretty much built on her non-Tory like reputation, perhaps she could inherit May's seat
She likes a challenge as proven in the Scottish parliament seat she won. I'd be very confident she'd win almost any existing Scottish Tory seat with ease.
She'd struggle to win my seat, Stirling, which was delivered by tactical voting by the Orange Trade Union Corbynista vote, which was led by the Vice-Chairman of the local Labour party - who is also an ex-miner.
I would expect a surge in the Labour vote in Stirling next time. It could well be a three-way marginal.
No, I doubt because I know trade deals take a long time to do and no sane country would agree anything with the UK until they are completely clear on what the UK’s final relationship with the EU will be: how far our laws & regulations will be aligned, the level of access UK-based businesses will have to the single market, and so on. The attractiveness of the UK as a free trade partner and the kind of concessions that both sides would make to get a deal will be dependent on how Brexit turns out. There is also the issue of bandwidth - you can’t just whistle up trade negotiators. If ours are working on a complex disengagement from the EU, they will not be working on other stuff.
So the logic of your position is that the UK should leave now on WTO terms and come back and negotiate a trade agreement with the EU later. In the meantime we can focus our limited resources on other trade deals and, of course, save the 45 bn that we are handing to the EU in exchange for nothing. That would provide far more certainty to our trading partners and business than living in transition purgatory for an indeterminate amount of time whilst the EU screw us around. Sound right?
A close mate was in Ox when our class lists were posted - he text to let me know I had a 2:2.
His text saying 'only joking' took about 5 minutes to arrive. Painful - but character building
And what is wrong with a Desmond?
Surely it depends on when it was awarded? Back in the 1960s and 1970s most students ended up with a 2:2 and were chuffed to get anything better - but for the last twenty years or so anything less than a 2:1 is widely perceived as pretty much a waste of time. That is what rampant grade inflation has done for us!
That is always my excuse after getting a 2:2 in 1968
But it is a perfectly fair point is it not? Students of your generation awarded a 2:2 could be pretty certain to have obtained a 2:1 over the last 25 years or so.Most of those then given a 2:1 would today be given 1st class honours degrees. Of course, we could look at it the other way and resonably claim that people now gaining 2:1 degrees would have done no better than a 2:2 in earlier decades.
Is that actually true, or are just more people getting 2:1 because more are going to university?
Yes it is true - and widely acknowledged by the academics themselves who frequently recount their experiences at Exam Boards of pressure to upgrade students.League table competition has contributed to it - as has the much greater reliance on course work rather than end of year exams. Indeed if standards were being maintained, the effect of moving from the much more elitist scenario of the 60s & 70s were only 5% - 10% took degrees to the circa 40% we have today , the average degree classification logically ought to have dropped because entry standards are less demanding. In reality,of course, the opposite has happened!
Interesting, I wonder if having a finer grading scheme would prevent that. I kinda like the US system which is decimal.
On topic I agree with David except about laying Ruth Davidson.
I’m backing her.
If she formally announces her intention to stand at Westminster her price is going to collapse.
That's still quite a tall order -
- She would need to find a winnable and probably therefore English seat. - Win the local constituency party's nomination. - Garner sufficient support of the Parliamentary Party to go into the final ballot. - Short of there being a "coronation", win the Tory membership vote.
I think there are several Scottish seats she could easily win on current polling - if they became vacant.
Cuckoo
Ahem - border seats, Aberdeenshire seats - you really think the Tories will lose them all on current polling. You obviously haven't had your daily turnip yet.
John Lamont has spent his career trying g to become MP of BRS, he gave up his Holyrood seat to do so - he isn't moving.
Dumfries and Galloway has a large Labour 3rd place to squeeze for an anti-terrorism vote.
Only DCT of the borders seat is a viable seat for Mundell to step down and Davidson to take over.
Labour has the potential to recover to be back in serious contention in Dumfries & Galloway. I would expect most tactical voting to unwind next time.
I have no f'ing clue what will happen in D&G next time out. But my take away is that I wouldn't call it a safe Tory seat - and if Davidson was to stand there it would surely coalesce an anti-tory tactical vote.
To stand and lose in Scotland would completely shatter Ruth's credibility and damage the SCON brand which is pretty much built on her non-Tory like reputation, perhaps she could inherit May's seat
She likes a challenge as proven in the Scottish parliament seat she won. I'd be very confident she'd win almost any existing Scottish Tory seat with ease.
She'd struggle to win my seat, Stirling, which was delivered by tactical voting by the Orange Trade Union Corbynista vote, which was led by the Vice-Chairman of the local Labour party - who is also an ex-miner.
Maybe - that is one of the most marginal but there are plenty of much safer seats if they were vacant. I'd also incidentally see her as a shoe-in against the LDs in Westmorland and Lonsdale if she had to go south of the border.
On topic I agree with David except about laying Ruth Davidson.
I’m backing her.
If she formally announces her intention to stand at Westminster her price is going to collapse.
That's still quite a tall order -
- She would need to find a winnable and probably therefore English seat. - Win the local constituency party's nomination. - Garner sufficient support of the Parliamentary Party to go into the final ballot. - Short of there being a "coronation", win the Tory membership vote.
Taking account of the above, it might require a two stage process for her to become say the leader after next, which could take 9 years or more and by which time there are likely to be other, as yet unidentified contenders.
I think there are several Scottish seats she could easily win on current polling - if they became vacant.
Cuckoo
Ahem - border seats, Aberdeenshire seats - you really think the Tories will lose them all on current polling. You obviously haven't had your daily turnip yet.
John Lamont has spent his career trying g to become MP of BRS, he gave up his Holyrood seat to do so - he isn't moving.
Dumfries and Galloway has a large Labour 3rd place to squeeze for an anti-terrorism vote.
Only DCT of the borders seat is a viable seat for Mundell to step down and Davidson to take over.
Labour has the potential to recover to be back in serious contention in Dumfries & Galloway. I would expect most tactical voting to unwind next time.
I have no f'ing clue what will happen in D&G next time out. But my take away is that I wouldn't call it a safe Tory seat - and if Davidson was to stand there it would surely coalesce an anti-tory tactical vote.
To stand and lose in Scotland would completely shatter Ruth's credibility and damage the SCON brand which is pretty much built on her non-Tory like reputation, perhaps she could inherit May's seat
She likes a challenge as proven in the Scottish parliament seat she won. I'd be very confident she'd win almost any existing Scottish Tory seat with ease.
She won in Edinburgh Central due to the first term incumbent stepping down and the greens putting up a candidate.
No, I doubt because I know trade deals take a long time to do and no sane country would agree anything with the UK until they are completely clear on what the UK’s final relationship with the EU will be: how far our laws & regulations will be aligned, the level of access UK-based businesses will have to the single market, and so on. The attractiveness of the UK as a free trade partner and the kind of concessions that both sides would make to get a deal will be dependent on how Brexit turns out. There is also the issue of bandwidth - you can’t just whistle up trade negotiators. If ours are working on a complex disengagement from the EU, they will not be working on other stuff.
So the logic of your position is that the UK should leave now on WTO terms and come back and negotiate a trade agreement with the EU later. In the meantime we can focus our limited resources on other trade deals and, of course, save the 45 bn that we are handing to the EU in exchange for nothing. That would provide far more certainty to our trading partners and business than living in transition purgatory for an indeterminate amount of time whilst the EU screw us around. Sound right?
There's just the small matter of Northern Ireland which prevents any of this from being conceivable...
On topic I agree with David except about laying Ruth Davidson.
I’m backing her.
If she formally announces her intention to stand at Westminster her price is going to collapse.
That's still quite a tall order -
- She would need to find a winnable and probably therefore English seat. - Win the local constituency party's nomination. - Garner sufficient support of the Parliamentary Party to go into the final ballot. - Short of there being a "coronation", win the Tory membership vote.
Taking account of the above, it might require a two stage process for her to become say the leader after next, which could take 9 years or more and by which time there are likely to be other, as yet unidentified contenders.
I think there are several Scottish seats she could easily win on current polling - if they became vacant.
Cuckoo
Ahem - border seats, Aberdeenshire seats - you really think the Tories will lose them all on current polling. You obviously haven't had your daily turnip yet.
John Lamont has spent his career trying g to become MP of BRS, he gave up his Holyrood seat to do so - he isn't moving.
Dumfries and Galloway has a large Labour 3rd place to squeeze for an anti-terrorism vote.
Only DCT of the borders seat is a viable seat for Mundell to step down and Davidson to take over.
Labour has the potential to recover to be back in serious contention in Dumfries & Galloway. I would expect most tactical voting to unwind next time.
I have no f'ing clue what will happen in D&G next time out. But my take away is that I wouldn't call it a safe Tory seat - and if Davidson was to stand there it would surely coalesce an anti-tory tactical vote.
To stand and lose in Scotland would completely shatter Ruth's credibility and damage the SCON brand which is pretty much built on her non-Tory like reputation, perhaps she could inherit May's seat
She likes a challenge as proven in the Scottish parliament seat she won. I'd be very confident she'd win almost any existing Scottish Tory seat with ease.
She won in Edinburgh Central due to the first term incumbent stepping down and the greens putting up a candidate.
Lol - she won - quit making excuses. You don't get to step into the minds of the voters you just acknowledge their wisdom and move on.
On topic I agree with David except about laying Ruth Davidson.
I’m backing her.
If she formally announces her intention to stand at Westminster her price is going to collapse.
That's still quite a tall order -
I think there are several Scottish seats she could easily win on current polling - if they became vacant.
Cuckoo
Ahem - border seats, Aberdeenshire seats - you really think the Tories will lose them all on current polling. You obviously haven't had your daily turnip yet.
John Lamont has spent his career trying g to become MP of BRS, he gave up his Holyrood seat to do so - he isn't moving.
Dumfries and Galloway has a large Labour 3rd place to squeeze for an anti-terrorism vote.
Only DCT of the borders seat is a viable seat for Mundell to step down and Davidson to take over.
Labour has the potential to recover to be back in serious contention in Dumfries & Galloway. I would expect most tactical voting to unwind next time.
I have no f'ing clue what will happen in D&G next time out. But my take away is that I wouldn't call it a safe Tory seat - and if Davidson was to stand there it would surely coalesce an anti-tory tactical vote.
To stand and lose in Scotland would completely shatter Ruth's credibility and damage the SCON brand which is pretty much built on her non-Tory like reputation, perhaps she could inherit May's seat
She likes a challenge as proven in the Scottish parliament seat she won. I'd be very confident she'd win almost any existing Scottish Tory seat with ease.
Er! No. Ruthies Remainer stance has not made her many friends in the North East fishing communities, but from speaking to some conservatives, she is not particularly popular in the party. She is not collegiate and surrounds herself with her own clique supporters She had to leave Glasgow as a couple of her constituency branches there were going to deselect her, while her move to Edinburgh put more than a few noses out of joint. While the 12 new scon MP's are very much aware of how much they "owe" Ruthie and do what she tells them to do... Feels like she may be looking for another challenge though, before things implode on her.
As a joke I heard recently, if Ruthie leaves Holyrood for Westminster, it will increase the IQ of both...
On topic I agree with David except about laying Ruth Davidson.
I’m backing her.
If she formally announces her intention to stand at Westminster her price is going to collapse.
That's still quite a tall order -
I think there are several Scottish seats she could easily win on current polling - if they became vacant.
Cuckoo
Dumfries and Galloway has a large Labour 3rd place to squeeze for an anti-terrorism vote.
Only DCT of the borders seat is a viable seat for Mundell to step down and Davidson to take over.
Labour has the potential to recover to be back in serious contention in Dumfries & Galloway. I would expect most tactical voting to unwind next time.
I have no f'ing clue what will happen in D&G next time out. But my take away is that I wouldn't call it a safe Tory seat - and if Davidson was to stand there it would surely coalesce an anti-tory tactical vote.
To stand and lose in Scotland would completely shatter Ruth's credibility and damage the SCON brand which is pretty much built on her non-Tory like reputation, perhaps she could inherit May's seat
She likes a challenge as proven in the Scottish parliament seat she won. I'd be very confident she'd win almost any existing Scottish Tory seat with ease.
Er! No. Ruthies Remainer stance has not made her many friends in the North East fishing communities, but from speaking to some conservatives, she is not particularly popular in the party. She is not collegiate and surrounds herself with her own clique supporters She had to leave Glasgow as a couple of her constituency branches there were going to deselect her, while her move to Edinburgh put more than a few noses out of joint. While the 12 new scon MP's are very much aware of how much they "owe" Ruthie and do what she tells them to do... Feels like she may be looking for another challenge though, before things implode on her.
As a joke I heard recently, if Ruthie leaves Holyrood for Westminster, it will increase the IQ of both...
You're speaking to the wrong Conservatives. The very hostility my posts have brought in from Lab and SNP posters suggests i'm in the right ballpark here.
No, I doubt because I know trade deals take a long time to do and no sane country would agree anything with the UK until they are completely clear on what the UK’s final relationship with the EU will be: how far our laws & regulations will be aligned, the level of access UK-based businesses will have to the single market, and so on. The attractiveness of the UK as a free trade partner and the kind of concessions that both sides would make to get a deal will be dependent on how Brexit turns out. There is also the issue of bandwidth - you can’t just whistle up trade negotiators. If ours are working on a complex disengagement from the EU, they will not be working on other stuff.
So the logic of your position is that the UK should leave now on WTO terms and come back and negotiate a trade agreement with the EU later. In the meantime we can focus our limited resources on other trade deals and, of course, save the 45 bn that we are handing to the EU in exchange for nothing. That would provide far more certainty to our trading partners and business than living in transition purgatory for an indeterminate amount of time whilst the EU screw us around. Sound right?
There's just the small matter of Northern Ireland which prevents any of this from being conceivable...
There is no small matter. There will have to be a customs border between NI and ROI - the failure to acknowledge this reality is what is now driving us towards a disastrous trade relationship with the EU. It is perfectly possible to have no restrictions on individuals and to manage goods in exactly the same way that Norway and Sweden do for example.
The UK should never have promised that there will be 'no infrastructure' as this is impossible. But a mostly transparent border is possible but May got bullied into conceding. Now we will end up with the worst of all Worlds - hard Brexit but bound by EU regulations, a totally pointless outcome.
All this talk of who got what degree. Surely only those with a First in PPE should be allowed to post on PB?
May be! On the other hand, I rather doubt that Cameron's First in PPE is comparable to the Firsts gained by the likes of Harold Wilson, Denis Healey and Roy Jenkins in the late 1930s
On PB.com, why does the quality of a poster's contributions always have an inverse relationship to the level of education the poster claims to have attained?
On PB.com, why does the quality of a poster's contribution always have an inverse relationship to the level of education the poster claims to have attained?
Not sure if we have enough pre-schoolers on here to test that hypothesis.
All this talk of who got what degree. Surely only those with a First in PPE should be allowed to post on PB?
Not a real degree according to the Cameron haters.
Only legal, history, science, or engineering degrees count as proper degrees
Not Greats?
And why should vocational courses like law be taught in proper universities?
I was the first member of my family to ever go to University. I did Law because it seemed to have a job at the end of it. And it did. But I thought that I would get an education so I could answer the questions on University Challenge.
The content, teaching standards and general quality of my degree was a real disappointment. Law is indeed a techy subject with pretentions
On PB.com, why does the quality of a poster's contributions always have an inverse relationship to the level of education the poster claims to have attained?
It's an age thing: the older you are the more experience you have and the less likely you are to have gone to university. Throw in some grade inflation and that is the result.
Comments
However for some reason you cannot legally be a dual citizen and an Australian MP
I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.
A chap who can represent that thinking whilst looking and sounding like a proper Tory for a change (unlike these so-called 'modernisers' like Cameron and May) will go a long way. And once members and associations make that clear to their MPs I can't see how he fails to make the final two. And then win.
Mogg vs Corbyn. I bet the Lib Dems still fail to get more than a dozen seats...
1) Joe
2) Debbie
3) Alexandra
4) Gemma
Personally, lost interest since Mollie and AJ were eliminated. OK, she couldn't really dance, but they were soooh cute together!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hastings_and_Rye_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
I do repent it with my very soul."
She’s been in fewer dance offs than Alexandra and as many as Debbie.
It should be remembered that in Labour - with Momentum types (for which there's no Tory equivalent) and with open nominations - the PLP still remain overwhelmingly opposed to Corbyn, even if much more quietly these days.
Dumfries and Galloway has a large Labour 3rd place to squeeze for an anti-terrorism vote.
Only DCT of the borders seat is a viable seat for Mundell to step down and Davidson to take over.
Fen Poly and the EU:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2017/12/15/eu-regulations-set-defeat-cambridge-universitys-300-year-old/
Enough to make you a Leaver?
The future framework of our relationship with the EU will be negotiated by March 2019, when we'll be formally out. The 2-year transition period will be used to negotiate deals to take effect in 2021, whereupon the new relationship with the EU will also take effect.
It's not as simple as you suggest, regarding blue passports.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-to-strengthen-uk-data-protection-law
Let’s see if Trident really does work.
His text saying 'only joking' took about 5 minutes to arrive. Painful - but character building
As far as the CPS is concerned, there is clearly a long standing systemic problem with disclosure of evidence, as clearly set out in this report by the CPS inspectorate:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40638513
Addressing clearly identified problems is obviously more difficult when resources are stretched (and Hayes himself says the cuts have taken things to breaking point), but there seems to be an utter lack of effective leadership.
The CPS statement about the case was disgraceful.
My croquet improved immeasurably during Finals, though.
Seems like somebody couldn’t be arsed to go through them all.
Class lists are very meritocratic.
And then there’s the fun of the Tompkins/Norrington tables.
Plus as a rule they don’t like charging complainants in these sorts of crimes lest it puts off others coming forward.
The media, police and politicians should recall justice is for everyone, both the accusers and the accused.
Wen't back to our old cricket ground for a trade association annual match a few months ago. Oxford pitches in early September are far better than in May/June!
He too got a 2:1 in Modern History.
I think that's what happening. Lamentable, if true, but if we are going to deal with the problem it's best to be honest about the cause.
Failure properly to review, and refusal to disclose evidence is a systemic problem leading to numerous miscarriages of justice - in this case only averted by a persistent trial lawyer and a judge ordered disclosure.
The young man involved lost two years of his life, and was extremely lucky to escape a wrongful conviction.
The CPS statement makes it sound as though the system worked as it should.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-42375154
And a Phd...
In a proper subject.
I'm contemptuous of anyone who hasn't got a first from a university that was around in the 13th century.
As for PhDs, they should be be only awarded to people in the medical or science disciplines.
Calling yourself a Doctor after you've studied the history of how needlework oppressed women is an outrage.
You can tell I'm tired, I can't think of a single 'I bet Frank Bough enjoyed being punished like that' gag
As a joke I heard recently, if Ruthie leaves Holyrood for Westminster, it will increase the IQ of both...
The UK should never have promised that there will be 'no infrastructure' as this is impossible. But a mostly transparent border is possible but May got bullied into conceding. Now we will end up with the worst of all Worlds - hard Brexit but bound by EU regulations, a totally pointless outcome.
Only legal, history, science, or engineering degrees count as proper degrees
Coruscant's finest university
The more gnats join the game the merrier - you can tell it's nearly xmas
https://twitter.com/JimMFelton/status/942002511690510336
And why should vocational courses like law be taught in proper universities?
The content, teaching standards and general quality of my degree was a real disappointment. Law is indeed a techy subject with pretentions