Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If the Sun’s Harry Cole is right there are signs that a move a

245

Comments

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    “Wants” is very different to “will get”. You’d have thought even the Minister for Winging It might have worked that out by now. Though after yesterday’s embarrassing performance maybe not.

    I'm not sure that is at odds.

    The EU have said we need their permission to sign trade deals during the transition, not to negotiate them. We'll be a third country after all.

    This says we'd then sign on the dotted line immediately after it ends. Which would be fine.
    We could also sign a binding agreement to sign...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959
    Essexit said:

    “Wants” is very different to “will get”. You’d have thought even the Minister for Winging It might have worked that out by now. Though after yesterday’s embarrassing performance maybe not.

    I'm not sure that is at odds.

    The EU have said we need their permission to sign trade deals during the transition, not to negotiate them. We'll be a third country after all.

    This says we'd then sign on the dotted line immediately after it ends. Which would be fine.
    Let's just sign them anyway. What's the EU going to do, kick us out?
    Someone should suggest to the EU that perhaps they shouldn't expect full conjugal rights with the UK between decree nisi and decree absolute.
  • MaxPB said:

    I don't mind her getting canned, but there is no obvious successor.

    Of course there is.

    Jeremy Hunt.
  • DavidL said:

    The rise in Sterling is becoming genuinely concerning. The BoE really should be trying to stop it before it chokes off the recovery in exports. Trump and the US have made it clear they want a weak dollar to resolve their trade deficit. We need the same. The Euro has been stronger but we are now gaining against that too.

    The problem is partly caused by a stream of good news (or at least substantially less bad than feared news) on the economy in recent weeks, the latest of which was the remarkable increase in employment yesterday. An interest rate increase this year already looks more likely than a couple of weeks ago. I am not sure I see that changing in the near term. Its possible that some real instability in the government might reduce the upward pressure but it would not be a cost free option.

    It seems like only yesterday the "exchange rate as virility symbol" mob were cheering sterling's rise against the dollar and deploring its fall against the euro.
    I must have missed that mob. Who's in it?
  • TonyETonyE Posts: 938

    “Wants” is very different to “will get”. You’d have thought even the Minister for Winging It might have worked that out by now. Though after yesterday’s embarrassing performance maybe not.

    I'm not sure that is at odds.

    The EU have said we need their permission to sign trade deals during the transition, not to negotiate them. We'll be a third country after all.

    This says we'd then sign on the dotted line immediately after it ends. Which would be fine.
    I thought they said we'd need their permission for them to take force during transition. Nothing stopping us from signing deals that take effect from the moment transition ends.
    Most of those deals are the ones in force now, (Over 70 of them) which the current third countries have already agreed that they want to replicate with the consistent alterations (exchange of EU bodies for UK ones etc), which will then operate seamlessly at the end of the transition period.

    A second aspect of this will then come from the customs systems agreements that will have to come into place after transition. The chances are that this will not be ready in two years, so it benefits everyone that these particular deals remain as they are, and the UK remains temporarily inside the CU (as a mirror CU, not the EU one as that is not legally possible), while the new customs infrastructure is built. ONly then will it be viable to add new trade agreements, based on the fact that it creates some odd complexities when you have a CU with a trade block, plus external FTA's not in existence in the large block.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959
    ydoethur said:

    any sane Tory

    This is the party that made BoJo Foreign Secretary.
    The Party didn't.

    The PM did....
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    I agree with Mr. Eagles. Jeremy Hunt would be a great choice for my wallet the country.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,979

    Why now?

    Punishment for that reshuffle/trying to make Gavin Williamson her successor.

    Plus she’s lost the hardcore Brexiteers.

    Cf JRM v David Davis yesterday.
    There are 316 Tory MPs. For there to be a leadership election, a majority of them would have to vote no confidence in the PM. Why would they?

    There are two potential reasons.

    1. The passionate Brexiteers who sense a betrayal want to install one of their own as PM. I'm guessing there are about 50-80 of these. Certainly not a majority.

    2. The rest who are pragmatic but want a PM who better ensures they are reelected at the next election. They are not likely to be attracted to the prospect of Johnson or Rees-Mogg. They are much more likely to want to wait until 2020/21 after Brexit is clearer and other potential leaders have emerged until they make their move. They'll be discussing this between themselves so there are prepared if a vote of no confidence is triggered. I think very few of them will be motivated by "punishment" if it is against their interests. They'll be more pragmatic than that. It is the Brexiteers who are emotionally obsessed.

    I don't think the 2/1 on May going this year is value.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    The Standard editorial the day that Theresa May finally goes will be a cut out and keep.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136

    Incidentally, this surely adds to our list of useless election-related systems. The idea that you gradually fill up a vase with a trickle of water (people feeling annoyed about this or that at some point) and when it's 15% full you suddenly call a vote of no confidence is just bonkers. Quite possibly there are letters in there from years ago that the authors have even forgotten they've written.

    If they're going to do it there should at least be an actual physical vase, and preferably a mechanism involving little balls rolling around in the manner of The Adventures of Biisuke.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    MaxPB said:

    I don't mind her getting canned, but there is no obvious successor.

    Of course there is.

    Jeremy Hunt.
    I'd vote for him. Not sure he'll make the final two though.
  • The Standard editorial the day that Theresa May finally goes will be a cut out and keep.

    It’s going to say

    ‘Rejoice, just rejoice at that news’
  • Spot the difference:

    Jess Phillips downplaying the Cologne sex attacks:

    ' Labour's Jess Phillips has compared the hundreds of sex attacks on women in Cologne on New Year's Eve to the harassment of women every weekend in Birmingham city centre. '

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/labour-mp-jess-phillips-says-mass-cologne-sex-attacks-on-women-like-birmingham-every-weekend-a6840981.html

    Jess Phillips getting outraged about a sleezy blokes night:

    ' In an urgent question in the House of Commons, furious Labour MP Jess Philips said: "I notice that the organisation wants to put it onto the individual members, but what actually happened was that women were bought as bait for men. '

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/women-used-bait-charity-dinner-11906722
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516
    How do we k ow reports of Brady being like this aren't jist Boris backers trying to prompt a bunch more letters?
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136
    I agree with Barnesian, the vase overflows and it goes to a vote of the full party, at which point most MPs will have reasons to vote to keep TMay for a bit, ranging from the practical to the tactical to the ideological.

    They might get a commitment to stand down after Brexit out of her, though.
  • TonyE said:

    “Wants” is very different to “will get”. You’d have thought even the Minister for Winging It might have worked that out by now. Though after yesterday’s embarrassing performance maybe not.

    I'm not sure that is at odds.

    The EU have said we need their permission to sign trade deals during the transition, not to negotiate them. We'll be a third country after all.

    This says we'd then sign on the dotted line immediately after it ends. Which would be fine.
    I thought they said we'd need their permission for them to take force during transition. Nothing stopping us from signing deals that take effect from the moment transition ends.
    Most of those deals are the ones in force now, (Over 70 of them) which the current third countries have already agreed that they want to replicate with the consistent alterations (exchange of EU bodies for UK ones etc), which will then operate seamlessly at the end of the transition period.

    A second aspect of this will then come from the customs systems agreements that will have to come into place after transition. The chances are that this will not be ready in two years, so it benefits everyone that these particular deals remain as they are, and the UK remains temporarily inside the CU (as a mirror CU, not the EU one as that is not legally possible), while the new customs infrastructure is built. ONly then will it be viable to add new trade agreements, based on the fact that it creates some odd complexities when you have a CU with a trade block, plus external FTA's not in existence in the large block.

    Which third countries have agreed? I have not seen this and it would certainly be very good news. Do you have a link?

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959
    Being unusually serious for a minute, it seems to me that Theresa May needs to make it clear to everybody that she will call an election for party leader in the spring of 2019 - and step down as PM once her successor is appointed. She will not be a candidate. That should stem the flow of letters - might even get some of the existing letters withdrawn. We can then have an extended beauty parade for 15 months, where people can show why they are - or are not - viable candidates. Their behaviour during these final stages of the Brexit negotiations should be a reasonable period for the membership to look at them, with a view to casting their votes.

    The only way May fights another election as PM is if circumstances force a fresh election this year - so you lot, get back in your box and behave! Or we'll slide into another unwanted election. The outcome of which would likely be PM Corbyn.

    /SeriousMode
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503

    DavidL said:

    The rise in Sterling is becoming genuinely concerning. The BoE really should be trying to stop it before it chokes off the recovery in exports. Trump and the US have made it clear they want a weak dollar to resolve their trade deficit. We need the same. The Euro has been stronger but we are now gaining against that too.

    The problem is partly caused by a stream of good news (or at least substantially less bad than feared news) on the economy in recent weeks, the latest of which was the remarkable increase in employment yesterday. An interest rate increase this year already looks more likely than a couple of weeks ago. I am not sure I see that changing in the near term. Its possible that some real instability in the government might reduce the upward pressure but it would not be a cost free option.

    It seems like only yesterday the "exchange rate as virility symbol" mob were cheering sterling's rise against the dollar and deploring its fall against the euro.
    I must have missed that mob. Who's in it?
    Oh, I've always longed to be in a mob. Can I? Please? Who's running this mob?

    It's interesting that this is kicking off while Mrs May is in Davros, whittering on about some complete non sequitur.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    “Wants” is very different to “will get”. You’d have thought even the Minister for Winging It might have worked that out by now. Though after yesterday’s embarrassing performance maybe not.

    I'm not sure that is at odds.

    The EU have said we need their permission to sign trade deals during the transition, not to negotiate them. We'll be a third country after all.

    This says we'd then sign on the dotted line immediately after it ends. Which would be fine.
    How would it work for a country to negotiate a trade deal with us without knowing what our final state with the EU will be?

    Or are we expecting all the trade deals (us/EU, us/everyone else) to be negotiated within a year?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,043
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I don't mind her getting canned, but there is no obvious successor.

    Of course there is.

    Jeremy Hunt.
    I'd vote for him. Not sure he'll make the final two though.
    Iain Martin's article makes the point that there have often been occasions where there is no obvious or obviously right solution/candidate to a leadership issue. The dice should be rolled.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,704

    Being unusually serious for a minute, it seems to me that Theresa May needs to make it clear to everybody that she will call an election for party leader in the spring of 2019 - and step down as PM once her successor is appointed. She will not be a candidate.
    /SeriousMode

    Probably. This is probably a move to try to force her to commit to leaving rather than dumping her now. Her stepping down in 2019 and allowing an open contest would be less damaging for the party then her being deposed forcibly.
  • I agree with Barnesian, the vase overflows and it goes to a vote of the full party, at which point most MPs will have reasons to vote to keep TMay for a bit, ranging from the practical to the tactical to the ideological.

    They might get a commitment to stand down after Brexit out of her, though.

    I think it’ll be like 1990 all over again.

    Mrs May will win a majority of MPs but be fatally damaged in the process.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,349
    It MAY be a blessing in disguise for the Conservatives. She was poor from the beginning, despite the rose tinted glasses worn by some Tories. She sounded hesitant and uncertain and then raced her words as if she were trying to say things before she forgot them.

    Jezza too was crap to begin with, but he's been coached, and avoids iffy territory now. Ming was another, but he never got enough time to improve.

    Mrs May is hardly any better now, especially as Cameron had the smooth, Etonian self-confidence that can hide a multitude of faults. He was quite good at politics, even if he said it himself. Osborne's self confidence extended into the smug zone.

    Politics is a sub-set of the media. Appearance is all.

    Sexism is in play. It's harder to dethrone a woman even when they are unsuited to the job.

    Accept that being PM is an acting role, and Mrs May can't do it.
  • TonyETonyE Posts: 938

    TonyE said:

    “Wants” is very different to “will get”. You’d have thought even the Minister for Winging It might have worked that out by now. Though after yesterday’s embarrassing performance maybe not.

    I'm not sure that is at odds.

    The EU have said we need their permission to sign trade deals during the transition, not to negotiate them. We'll be a third country after all.

    This says we'd then sign on the dotted line immediately after it ends. Which would be fine.
    I thought they said we'd need their permission for them to take force during transition. Nothing stopping us from signing deals that take effect from the moment transition ends.
    Most of those deals are the ones in force now, (Over 70 of them) which the current third countries have already agreed that they want to replicate with the consistent alterations (exchange of EU bodies for UK ones etc), which will then operate seamlessly at the end of the transition period.

    A second aspect of this will then come from the customs systems agreements that will have to come into place after transition. The chances are that this will not be ready in two years, so it benefits everyone that these particular deals remain as they are, and the UK remains temporarily inside the CU (as a mirror CU, not the EU one as that is not legally possible), while the new customs infrastructure is built. ONly then will it be viable to add new trade agreements, based on the fact that it creates some odd complexities when you have a CU with a trade block, plus external FTA's not in existence in the large block.

    Which third countries have agreed? I have not seen this and it would certainly be very good news. Do you have a link?

    https://twitter.com/GregHands/status/956117295599968256

    I think the real issue for many of the third countries is that in a globalised world, specialisation occurs at pace (as Adam Smith basically suggested). However, that leads to inelasticity of supply issues - so that if you disrupt important trade links its difficult to source the same goods, at the same price or at the same immediate timeframe.
  • DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    any sane Tory

    This is the party that made BoJo Foreign Secretary.
    Hopefully nothing will ever beat electing IDS as leader. I mean, bloody hell.
    Yes but that was some time ago. Anyone can make 1 mistake nearly 20 years ago. I was thinking of the here and now.
    Anyone? The whole party did with an alternative choice of one of the most competent Ministers in recent years with a truly vast range of experience and knowledge including a successful period as Chancellor. The Tory party was truly and profoundly sick in those times. Hopefully Brexit is the cure.

    Right now May, like any PM, has to balance the interests in the party. Boris had just led a successful referendum against the PM and the Chancellor. He had to be given a significant post. Would you rather he had been Chancellor?
    It should be remembered that Ken Clarke's successful period as Chancellor was based on a policy he opposed ie leaving the ERM and cutting interest rates.

    He would be rather less fondly remembered if interest rates had been 3% higher and sterling overvalued during his time in office.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959

    Being unusually serious for a minute, it seems to me that Theresa May needs to make it clear to everybody that she will call an election for party leader in the spring of 2019 - and step down as PM once her successor is appointed. She will not be a candidate.
    /SeriousMode

    Probably. This is probably a move to try to force her to commit to leaving rather than dumping her now. Her stepping down in 2019 and allowing an open contest would be less damaging for the party then her being deposed forcibly.
    And it's the assumption the Party is working on anyway. If she tried a Maggie-style "on and on and on", the letters would be with Brady by lunchtime.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    I have havered on this subject but I am currently of the view that Theresa May is so abject the Conservative party would do better replacing her now. That would mean in practice someone who the obsessives deem sound on Brexit but it remains possible that person could also address other more pressing matters.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,979

    I agree with Barnesian, the vase overflows and it goes to a vote of the full party, at which point most MPs will have reasons to vote to keep TMay for a bit, ranging from the practical to the tactical to the ideological.

    They might get a commitment to stand down after Brexit out of her, though.

    Yes. I note on Betfair that the favourite time for her to go is 2Q 2019. However this is inconsistent with the Betfair price on "UK to leave the EU by the 29/03/2019" which shows 60% probability NO.

    If she wins a vote of no confidence, what do the rules say about the timing of the triggering of another vote of no confidence - a second referendum on her as it were?

  • TOPPING said:

    “Wants” is very different to “will get”. You’d have thought even the Minister for Winging It might have worked that out by now. Though after yesterday’s embarrassing performance maybe not.

    I'm not sure that is at odds.

    The EU have said we need their permission to sign trade deals during the transition, not to negotiate them. We'll be a third country after all.

    This says we'd then sign on the dotted line immediately after it ends. Which would be fine.
    How would it work for a country to negotiate a trade deal with us without knowing what our final state with the EU will be?

    Or are we expecting all the trade deals (us/EU, us/everyone else) to be negotiated within a year?

    Yep, it’s hard to see how we can do any meaningful deals with anyone until our relationship with the EU27 is finalised. Our level of access to the single market will be a big factor in determining how attractive a partner we might be, as will the degree of regulatory divergence we are permitted.

  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136
    Essexit said:


    Let's just sign them anyway. What's the EU going to do, kick us out?

    Britain: Oh hi Japan we'd like to make a treaty with you
    Japan: How do we know you won't break it?
    Britain: You can trust us, we never break treaties
  • TOPPING said:

    “Wants” is very different to “will get”. You’d have thought even the Minister for Winging It might have worked that out by now. Though after yesterday’s embarrassing performance maybe not.

    I'm not sure that is at odds.

    The EU have said we need their permission to sign trade deals during the transition, not to negotiate them. We'll be a third country after all.

    This says we'd then sign on the dotted line immediately after it ends. Which would be fine.
    How would it work for a country to negotiate a trade deal with us without knowing what our final state with the EU will be?

    Or are we expecting all the trade deals (us/EU, us/everyone else) to be negotiated within a year?

    Yep, it’s hard to see how we can do any meaningful deals with anyone until our relationship with the EU27 is finalised. Our level of access to the single market will be a big factor in determining how attractive a partner we might be, as will the degree of regulatory divergence we are permitted.

    And, of course, there’s the Fox factor:

    https://twitter.com/clougholive/status/956427920485924865
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    To my mind the most impressive TMay alternative is Dominic Raab who notably didn't get a cabinet position in the reshuffle - a reflection, I'd suggest, of hoew much TMay fears him.

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789

    I have havered on this subject but I am currently of the view that Theresa May is so abject the Conservative party would do better replacing her now. That would mean in practice someone who the obsessives deem sound on Brexit but it remains possible that person could also address other more pressing matters.

    It can only be Andrea Leadsom then.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    I agree with Barnesian, the vase overflows and it goes to a vote of the full party, at which point most MPs will have reasons to vote to keep TMay for a bit, ranging from the practical to the tactical to the ideological.

    They might get a commitment to stand down after Brexit out of her, though.

    I think it’ll be like 1990 all over again.

    Mrs May will win a majority of MPs but be fatally damaged in the process.
    Alternately it could be like 1995 again, with the PM asking the MPs to back her or sack her, and the Parliamentarians realising that leaving the incumbent in place is better than a disaster of a leadership campaign when there’s more important things to think about.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658

    I agree with Barnesian, the vase overflows and it goes to a vote of the full party, at which point most MPs will have reasons to vote to keep TMay for a bit, ranging from the practical to the tactical to the ideological.

    They might get a commitment to stand down after Brexit out of her, though.

    I think it’ll be like 1990 all over again.

    Mrs May will win a majority of MPs but be fatally damaged in the process.
    Surely you are of the belief that she is “fatally damaged” already? She’s a regular
    Black knight.
  • TonyETonyE Posts: 938
    @SouthamObserver

    I should add that if we are trying to stay in a replicated CU with the EU, if the third countries didn't replicate those deals, they might have some international trade issues with goods coming into the EU via the UK, and also possibly some WTO trade schedule realignments.

    The problems of CU's is complex, especially where they overlap with other Free Trade Deals, because there are still customs frictions to deal with. I can see a point coming here where we stay in a fairly long term CU holding pattern, with almost exactly the same trading environment as now, while we implement the Customs Systems changes necessary to fully digitalise declaration, add 'Free Ports' and Bonded warehousing to the UK, and create proper international trade zones where the system will be bypassed for throughput.
  • TonyE said:

    TonyE said:

    “Wants” is very different to “will get”. You’d have thought even the Minister for Winging It might have worked that out by now. Though after yesterday’s embarrassing performance maybe not.

    I'm not sure that is at odds.

    The EU have said we need their permission to sign trade deals during the transition, not to negotiate them. We'll be a third country after all.

    This says we'd then sign on the dotted line immediately after it ends. Which would be fine.
    I thought they said we'd need their permission for them to take force during transition. Nothing stopping us from signing deals that take effect from the moment transition ends.
    Most of those deals are the ones in force now, (Over 70 of them) which the current third countries have already agreed that they want to replicate with the consistent alterations (exchange of EU bodies for UK ones etc), which will then operate seamlessly at the end of the transition period.

    A second aspect of this will then come from the customs systems agreements that will have to come into place after transition. The chances are that this will not be ready in two years, so it benefits everyone that these particular deals remain as they are, and the UK remains temporarily inside the CU (as a mirror CU, not the EU one as that is not legally possible), while the new customs infrastructure is built. ONly then will it be viable to add new trade agreements, based on the fact that it creates some odd complexities when you have a CU with a trade block, plus external FTA's not in existence in the large block.

    Which third countries have agreed? I have not seen this and it would certainly be very good news. Do you have a link?

    https://twitter.com/GregHands/status/956117295599968256

    I think the real issue for many of the third countries is that in a globalised world, specialisation occurs at pace (as Adam Smith basically suggested). However, that leads to inelasticity of supply issues - so that if you disrupt important trade links its difficult to source the same goods, at the same price or at the same immediate timeframe.

    None has objected is very different to all have agreed.

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    TonyE said:

    TonyE said:

    “Wants” is very different to “will get”. You’d have thought even the Minister for Winging It might have worked that out by now. Though after yesterday’s embarrassing performance maybe not.

    I'm not sure that is at odds.

    The EU have said we need their permission to sign trade deals during the transition, not to negotiate them. We'll be a third country after all.

    This says we'd then sign on the dotted line immediately after it ends. Which would be fine.
    I thought they said we'd need their permission for them to take force during transition. Nothing stopping us from signing deals that take effect from the moment transition ends.
    Most of those deals are the ones in force now, (Over 70 of them) which the current third countries have already agreed that they want to replicate with the consistent alterations (exchange of EU bodies for UK ones etc), which will then operate seamlessly at the end of the transition period.

    A second aspect of this will then come from the customs systems agreements that will have to come into place after transition. The chances are that this will not be ready in two years, so it benefits everyone that these particular deals remain as they are, and the UK remains temporarily inside the CU (as a mirror CU, not the EU one as that is not legally possible), while the new customs infrastructure is built. ONly then will it be viable to add new trade agreements, based on the fact that it creates some odd complexities when you have a CU with a trade block, plus external FTA's not in existence in the large block.

    Which third countries have agreed? I have not seen this and it would certainly be very good news. Do you have a link?

    https://twitter.com/GregHands/status/956117295599968256

    I think the real issue for many of the third countries is that in a globalised world, specialisation occurs at pace (as Adam Smith basically suggested). However, that leads to inelasticity of supply issues - so that if you disrupt important trade links its difficult to source the same goods, at the same price or at the same immediate timeframe.
    Good news!
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    I have backed Rudd, Hunt, Herbert and Boles.

    Rudd is more impressive than her HS post gives away plus will take some of the patricianophile vote away from JRM. Having a PM as MP will also, I think bolster her majority or she can be found another seat. Hunt has the albatross of the NHS around his neck, but, you know, this is still the tin-eared Conservative Party we are talking about.

    Boles & Herbert are precisely the sort of people that the Party should be promoting but obviously won't but they were large prices so hey.

  • TonyETonyE Posts: 938

    TonyE said:

    TonyE said:

    “Wants” is very different to “will get”. You’d have thought even the Minister for Winging It might have worked that out by now. Though after yesterday’s embarrassing performance maybe not.

    I'm not sure that is at odds.

    The EU have said we need their permission to sign trade deals during the transition, not to negotiate them. We'll be a third country after all.

    This says we'd then sign on the dotted line immediately after it ends. Which would be fine.
    I thought they said we'd need their permission for them to take force during transition. Nothing stopping us from signing deals that take effect from the moment transition ends.
    Most of those deals are the ones in force now, (Over 70 of them) which the current third countries have already agreed that they want to replicate with the consistent alterations (exchange of EU bodies for UK ones etc), which will then operate seamlessly at the end of the transition period.

    A second aspect of this will then come from the customs systems agreements that will have to come into place after transition. The chances are that this will not be ready in two years, so it benefits everyone that these particular deals remain as they are, and the UK remains temporarily inside the CU (as a mirror CU, not the EU one as that is not legally possible), while the new customs infrastructure is built. ONly then will it be viable to add new trade agreements, based on the fact that it creates some odd complexities when you have a CU with a trade block, plus external FTA's not in existence in the large block.

    Which third countries have agreed? I have not seen this and it would certainly be very good news. Do you have a link?

    https://twitter.com/GregHands/status/956117295599968256

    I think the real issue for many of the third countries is that in a globalised world, specialisation occurs at pace (as Adam Smith basically suggested). However, that leads to inelasticity of supply issues - so that if you disrupt important trade links its difficult to source the same goods, at the same price or at the same immediate timeframe.

    None has objected is very different to all have agreed.

    Of course, but the diplomatic mood music is running in the right direction. One shouldn't be too churlish about this - there will be snags along the way but good reason to believe that this is the direction of travel.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165

    Spot the difference:

    Jess Phillips downplaying the Cologne sex attacks:

    ' Labour's Jess Phillips has compared the hundreds of sex attacks on women in Cologne on New Year's Eve to the harassment of women every weekend in Birmingham city centre. '

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/labour-mp-jess-phillips-says-mass-cologne-sex-attacks-on-women-like-birmingham-every-weekend-a6840981.html

    Jess Phillips getting outraged about a sleezy blokes night:

    ' In an urgent question in the House of Commons, furious Labour MP Jess Philips said: "I notice that the organisation wants to put it onto the individual members, but what actually happened was that women were bought as bait for men. '

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/women-used-bait-charity-dinner-11906722

    Yes, she is the very real opposite to the straw man presented by James O’Brien yesterday.
  • TonyE said:

    @SouthamObserver

    I should add that if we are trying to stay in a replicated CU with the EU, if the third countries didn't replicate those deals, they might have some international trade issues with goods coming into the EU via the UK, and also possibly some WTO trade schedule realignments.

    The problems of CU's is complex, especially where they overlap with other Free Trade Deals, because there are still customs frictions to deal with. I can see a point coming here where we stay in a fairly long term CU holding pattern, with almost exactly the same trading environment as now, while we implement the Customs Systems changes necessary to fully digitalise declaration, add 'Free Ports' and Bonded warehousing to the UK, and create proper international trade zones where the system will be bypassed for throughput.

    Yep, I agree with that. Not much is going to change for a very long time.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959
    edited January 2018

    TonyE said:

    TonyE said:

    “Wants” is very different to “will get”. You’d have thought even the Minister for Winging It might have worked that out by now. Though after yesterday’s embarrassing performance maybe not.

    I'm not sure that is at odds.

    The EU have said we need their permission to sign trade deals during the transition, not to negotiate them. We'll be a third country after all.

    This says we'd then sign on the dotted line immediately after it ends. Which would be fine.
    I thought they said we'd need their permission for them to take force during transition. Nothing stopping us from signing deals that take effect from the moment transition ends.
    Most of those deals are the ones in force now, (Over 70 of them) which the current third countries have already agreed that they want to replicate with the consistent alterations (exchange of EU bodies for UK ones etc), which will then operate seamlessly at the end of the transition period.

    A second aspect of this will then come from the customs systems agreements that will have to come into place after transition. The chances are that this will not be ready in two years, so it benefits everyone that these particular deals remain as they are, and the UK remains temporarily inside the CU (as a mirror CU, not the EU one as that is not legally possible), while the new customs infrastructure is built. ONly then will it be viable to add new trade agreements, based on the fact that it creates some odd complexities when you have a CU with a trade block, plus external FTA's not in existence in the large block.

    Which third countries have agreed? I have not seen this and it would certainly be very good news. Do you have a link?

    https://twitter.com/GregHands/status/956117295599968256

    I think the real issue for many of the third countries is that in a globalised world, specialisation occurs at pace (as Adam Smith basically suggested). However, that leads to inelasticity of supply issues - so that if you disrupt important trade links its difficult to source the same goods, at the same price or at the same immediate timeframe.

    None has objected is very different to all have agreed.

    Thank you, Eeyore. But even you have to concede, it is much, much better than "have objected".
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,921
    edited January 2018
    Barnesian said:

    I agree with Barnesian, the vase overflows and it goes to a vote of the full party, at which point most MPs will have reasons to vote to keep TMay for a bit, ranging from the practical to the tactical to the ideological.

    They might get a commitment to stand down after Brexit out of her, though.

    Yes. I note on Betfair that the favourite time for her to go is 2Q 2019. However this is inconsistent with the Betfair price on "UK to leave the EU by the 29/03/2019" which shows 60% probability NO.

    If she wins a vote of no confidence, what do the rules say about the timing of the triggering of another vote of no confidence - a second referendum on her as it were?

    We discussed the latter last night - no letters accepted for a year after success in a confidence vote.

    Which is why I wonder if this is an attempt to flush out the plotters....and give her a year without worrying about the party.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165
    I see the Americans have the right idea when it comes to sentencing serial sex attackers.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    TOPPING said:

    I have backed Rudd, Hunt, Herbert and Boles.

    Rudd is more impressive than her HS post gives away plus will take some of the patricianophile vote away from JRM. Having a PM as MP will also, I think bolster her majority or she can be found another seat. Hunt has the albatross of the NHS around his neck, but, you know, this is still the tin-eared Conservative Party we are talking about.

    Boles & Herbert are precisely the sort of people that the Party should be promoting but obviously won't but they were large prices so hey.

    The home office is turning into a complete shambles under Rudd. Yesterday’s story was that they’re turning down the NHS for skilled worker visas, and they still have problems with sending deportation letters out to the wrong people.
  • TonyE said:

    TonyE said:

    TonyE said:

    “Wants” is very different to “will get”. You’d have thought even the Minister for Winging It might have worked that out by now. Though after yesterday’s embarrassing performance maybe not.

    I'm not sure that is at odds.

    The EU have said we need their permission to sign trade deals during the transition, not to negotiate them. We'll be a third country after all.

    This says we'd then sign on the dotted line immediately after it ends. Which would be fine.
    I thought they said we'd need their permission for them to take force during transition. Nothing stopping us from signing deals that take effect from the moment transition ends.
    Most of those deals are the ones in force now, (Over 70 of them) which the current third countries have already agreed that they want to replicate with the consistent alterations (exchange of EU bodies for UK ones etc), which will then operate seamlessly at the end of the transition period.

    A second aspect of this willey are, and the UK remains temporarily inside the CU (as a mirror CU, not the EU one as that is not legally possible), while the new customs infrastructure is built. ONly then will it be viable to add new trade agreements, based on the fact that it creates some odd complexities when you have a CU with a trade block, plus external FTA's not in existence in the large block.

    Which third countries have agreed? I have not seen this and it would certainly be very good news. Do you have a link?

    https://twitter.com/GregHands/status/956117295599968256

    I think the real issue for many of the third countries is that in a globalised world, specialisation occurs at pace (as Adam Smith basically suggested). However, that leads to inelasticity of supply issues - so that if you disrupt important trade links its difficult to source the same goods, at the same price or at the same immediate timeframe.

    None has objected is very different to all have agreed.

    Of course, but the diplomatic mood music is running in the right direction. One shouldn't be too churlish about this - there will be snags along the way but good reason to believe that this is the direction of travel.

    I am sure we will get transitionary deals. However, third countries know just how weak our bargaining position is, so I am extremely doubtful that many will essentially be cut and pastes of the existing set-up.

  • TonyE said:

    TonyE said:

    “Wants” is very different to “will get”. You’d have thought even the Minister for Winging It might have worked that out by now. Though after yesterday’s embarrassing performance maybe not.

    I'm not sure that is at odds.

    The EU have said we need their permission to sign trade deals during the transition, not to negotiate them. We'll be a third country after all.

    This says we'd then sign on the dotted line immediately after it ends. Which would be fine.
    I thought they said we'd need their permission for them to take force during transition. Nothing stopping us from signing deals that take effect from the moment transition ends.
    Most of those deals are the ones in force now, (Over 70 of them) which the current third countries have already agreed that they want to replicate with the consistent alterations (exchange of EU bodies for UK ones etc), which will then operate seamlessly at the end of the transition period.

    A second aspect ofly possible), while the new customs infrastructure is built. ONly then will it be viable to add new trade agreements, based on the fact that it creates some odd complexities when you have a CU with a trade block, plus external FTA's not in existence in the large block.

    Which third countries have agreed? I have not seen this and it would certainly be very good news. Do you have a link?

    https://twitter.com/GregHands/status/956117295599968256

    I think the real issue for many of the third countries is that in a globalised world, specialisation occurs at pace (as Adam Smith basically suggested). However, that leads to inelasticity of supply issues - so that if you disrupt important trade links its difficult to source the same goods, at the same price or at the same immediate timeframe.

    None has objected is very different to all have agreed.

    Thank you, Eeyore. But even you have to concede, it is much, much better than "have objected".

    Why on earth would they object to the opportunity to renegotiate trade arrangements with a G8 economy from a position of strength?

  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    IanB2 said:

    Oh God, not Boris.
    Please not Boris.

    +100
    + 1000
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516

    Spot the difference:

    Jess Phillips downplaying the Cologne sex attacks:

    ' Labour's Jess Phillips has compared the hundreds of sex attacks on women in Cologne on New Year's Eve to the harassment of women every weekend in Birmingham city centre. '

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/labour-mp-jess-phillips-says-mass-cologne-sex-attacks-on-women-like-birmingham-every-weekend-a6840981.html

    Jess Phillips getting outraged about a sleezy blokes night:

    ' In an urgent question in the House of Commons, furious Labour MP Jess Philips said: "I notice that the organisation wants to put it onto the individual members, but what actually happened was that women were bought as bait for men. '

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/women-used-bait-charity-dinner-11906722

    Jess Phillips is a terrible leader to fight this sort of thing. I remember her scoffing at men's day. She's like the AltRight stereotype of a hectoring, hypocritical feminist.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    I have backed Rudd, Hunt, Herbert and Boles.

    Rudd is more impressive than her HS post gives away plus will take some of the patricianophile vote away from JRM. Having a PM as MP will also, I think bolster her majority or she can be found another seat. Hunt has the albatross of the NHS around his neck, but, you know, this is still the tin-eared Conservative Party we are talking about.

    Boles & Herbert are precisely the sort of people that the Party should be promoting but obviously won't but they were large prices so hey.

    The home office is turning into a complete shambles under Rudd. Yesterday’s story was that they’re turning down the NHS for skilled worker visas, and they still have problems with sending deportation letters out to the wrong people.
    The Home Office is always fighting the last battle; that is its nature. The situation changes and that brings changes in regulations and laws if it is deemed appropriate. You can't scream "Gotcha" at a scenario that until very recently didn't exist.
  • TonyETonyE Posts: 938




    I am sure we will get transitionary deals. However, third countries know just how weak our bargaining position is, so I am extremely doubtful that many will essentially be cut and pastes of the existing set-up.

    Not transnational deals - there would be no reason to alter them. We aren't in a weak position, because we are nett importers from most of these jurisdictions. We might make a low quantity of high value exports, but many others make a large number of low value UK imports. That makes it a much more even situation - in which displacement is not in the interest of either side.

    You constantly tend to see the UK as weak, because you're comparing it to Germany, or the EU as a whole, or the USA. But the world isn't like that - and the EU doesn't have FTA's with many of the major players. It has some trade deals with them that deal with conformity and trade facilitation, but not massive tariff reductions as it has with say Mexico or more recently Canada.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,279
    More gossip from the forest.

    https://twitter.com/ShippersUnbound/status/956451783051800577

    While the cat's away, the mice will play.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    The most telling thing about that article is the comment below

    Vim Fuego 1 hour ago

    Do tell, who asked you to write this JRM or Bo Jo?
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,049
    If Cilic plays at this level there is no-one in world tennis that can stay with him.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    "Jacob Rees-Mogg Should Not Be Next Tory Leader, Says MP In Charge Of Contest

    Sir Graham Brady says 'cast of thousands' will run."

    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/jacob-rees-mogg-should-not-be-next-tory-leader-says-mp-in-charge-of-contest_uk_5a580a02e4b02cebbfda5c8a?ncid=tweetlnkukhpmg00000008
  • TonyE said:




    I am sure we will get transitionary deals. However, third countries know just how weak our bargaining position is, so I am extremely doubtful that many will essentially be cut and pastes of the existing set-up.

    Not transnational deals - there would be no reason to alter them. We aren't in a weak position, because we are nett importers from most of these jurisdictions. We might make a low quantity of high value exports, but many others make a large number of low value UK imports. That makes it a much more even situation - in which displacement is not in the interest of either side.

    You constantly tend to see the UK as weak, because you're comparing it to Germany, or the EU as a whole, or the USA. But the world isn't like that - and the EU doesn't have FTA's with many of the major players. It has some trade deals with them that deal with conformity and trade facilitation, but not massive tariff reductions as it has with say Mexico or more recently Canada.

    We are in the process of making it more expensive, more time-consuming and less profitable to do business in our most important export market. We cannot afford to repeat the exercise elsewhere. Other countries know this.

  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 2,973
    ..i think the end game for May is coming into view..
  • TonyE said:

    TonyE said:

    “Wants” is very different to “will get”. You’d have thought even the Minister for Winging It might have worked that out by now. Though after yesterday’s embarrassing performance maybe not.

    I'm not sure that is at odds.

    The EU have said we need their permission to sign trade deals during the transition, not to negotiate them. We'll be a third country after all.

    This says we'd then sign on the dotted line immediately after it ends. Which would be fine.
    I thought they said we'd need their permission for them to take force during transition. Nothing stopping us from signing deals that take effect from the moment transition ends.
    Most of those deals are the ones in force now, (Over 70 of them) which the current third countries have already agreed that they want to replicate with the consistent alterations (exchange of EU bodies for UK ones etc), which will then operate seamlessly at the end of the transition period.

    A second aspect ofly possible), while the new customs infrastructure is built. ONly then will it be viable to add new trade agreements, based on the fact that it creates some odd complexities when you have a CU with a trade block, plus external FTA's not in existence in the large block.

    Which third countries have agreed? I have not seen this and it would certainly be very good news. Do you have a link?

    https://twitter.com/GregHands/status/956117295599968256

    I think the real issue for many of the third countries is that in a globalised world, specialisation occurs at pace (as Adam Smith basically suggested). However, that leads to inelasticity of supply issues - so that if you disrupt important trade links its difficult to source the same goods, at the same price or at the same immediate timeframe.

    None has objected is very different to all have agreed.

    Thank you, Eeyore. But even you have to concede, it is much, much better than "have objected".

    Why on earth would they object to the opportunity to renegotiate trade arrangements with a G8 economy from a position of strength?

    What position of strength? Name one country mentioned that has an economy bigger or stronger than ours?

    Bonus points if that's one we are running a trade surplus with.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    I've got £20 on Kemi Badenoch at odds of 150/1, although I wasn't expecting a contest so soon, if one happens.
  • South Africa’s Kyle Edmund loses the first set.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959

    South Africa’s Kyle Edmund loses the first set.

    Still on course for a US$670,000 cheque though. Not too shabby.
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 2,973

    South Africa’s Kyle Edmund loses the first set.

    Lets hope Great Britains Kyle Edmund wins the second.
  • South Africa’s Kyle Edmund loses the first set.

    Lets hope Great Britains Kyle Edmund wins the second.
    If he wins, then he’s Yorkshire’s Kyle Edmund.
  • TonyE said:




    I am sure we will get transitionary deals. However, third countries know just how weak our bargaining position is, so I am extremely doubtful that many will essentially be cut and pastes of the existing set-up.

    Not transnational deals - there would be no reason to alter them. We aren't in a weak position, because we are nett importers from most of these jurisdictions. We might make a low quantity of high value exports, but many others make a large number of low value UK imports. That makes it a much more even situation - in which displacement is not in the interest of either side.

    You constantly tend to see the UK as weak, because you're comparing it to Germany, or the EU as a whole, or the USA. But the world isn't like that - and the EU doesn't have FTA's with many of the major players. It has some trade deals with them that deal with conformity and trade facilitation, but not massive tariff reductions as it has with say Mexico or more recently Canada.

    We are in the process of making it more expensive, more time-consuming and less profitable to do business in our most important export market. We cannot afford to repeat the exercise elsewhere. Other countries know this.

    So are you saying that the EU trade agreements are always the optimum result for the UK ?

    Considering that there are 28 EU countries any agreements are highly unlikely to be the optimum for any particular country.

    And I rather doubt that Brussels put UK trade requirements high on the list of those 28.

    Which means that it should be possible to negotiate trade agreements which are an improvement both for the UK and for the other country.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    Elliot said:

    Spot the difference:

    Jess Phillips downplaying the Cologne sex attacks:

    ' Labour's Jess Phillips has compared the hundreds of sex attacks on women in Cologne on New Year's Eve to the harassment of women every weekend in Birmingham city centre. '

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/labour-mp-jess-phillips-says-mass-cologne-sex-attacks-on-women-like-birmingham-every-weekend-a6840981.html

    Jess Phillips getting outraged about a sleezy blokes night:

    ' In an urgent question in the House of Commons, furious Labour MP Jess Philips said: "I notice that the organisation wants to put it onto the individual members, but what actually happened was that women were bought as bait for men. '

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/women-used-bait-charity-dinner-11906722

    Jess Phillips is a terrible leader to fight this sort of thing. I remember her scoffing at men's day. She's like the AltRight stereotype of a hectoring, hypocritical feminist.
    I do love the incoherence of the professional outraged about this. It looks to me as if the women involved were rational adults freely contracting in a country where freedom of contract is a thing (and the FT reporter who is the primary source for all this confirms that most of them knew exactly what they were doing, and many of them had done the job in previous years). Perhaps we should make a rule that women can only contract via their father or husband?

    I can't think of anything more patronising and insulting than telling people they have allowed themselves to be "used as bait".
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,049

    South Africa’s Kyle Edmund loses the first set.

    Lets hope Great Britains Kyle Edmund wins the second.
    If he wins, then he’s Yorkshire’s Kyle Edmund.

    South Africa’s Kyle Edmund loses the first set.

    Lets hope Great Britains Kyle Edmund wins the second.
    Andy Murray is from Great Britain when he wins....at the moment the injured Scot is not playing....Kyle will be England's finest when he wins....

    I doubt it's going to be today
  • TonyE said:

    TonyE said:

    “Wants” is very different to “will get”. You’d have thought even the Minister for Winging It might have worked that out by now. Though after yesterday’s embarrassing performance maybe not.

    I'm not sure that is at odds.

    The EU have said we need their permission to sign trade deals during the transition, not to negotiate them. We'll be a third country after all.

    This says we'd then sign on the dotted line immediately after it ends. Which would be fine.
    I thought they said we'd need their permission for them to take force during transition. Nothing stopping us from signing deals that take effect from the moment transition ends.
    Most of those dealsy at the end of the transition period.

    A second aspect ofly possible), while the new customs infrastructure is built. ONly then will it be viable to add new trade agreements, based on the fact that it creates some odd complexities when you have a CU with a trade block, plus external FTA's not in existence in the large block.

    Which third countries have agreed? I have not seen this and it would certainly be very good news. Do you have a link?

    https://twitter.com/GregHands/status/956117295599968256

    I think the real issue for many of the third countries is that in a globalised world, specialisation occurs at pace (as Adam Smith basically suggested). However, that leads to inelasticity of supply issues - so that if you disrupt important trade links its difficult to source the same goods, at the same price or at the same immediate timeframe.

    None has objected is very different to all have agreed.

    Thank you, Eeyore. But even you have to concede, it is much, much better than "have objected".

    Why on earth would they object to the opportunity to renegotiate trade arrangements with a G8 economy from a position of strength?

    What position of strength? Name one country mentioned that has an economy bigger or stronger than ours?

    Bonus points if that's one we are running a trade surplus with.

    We are going to be negotiating the future, not the present. That is, the future when we will have made it harder and more expensive to do business in our biggest export market and will not be able to afford to do the same in less significant ones.

  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,279
    Search for Boris Johnson's spine goes on.

    https://twitter.com/BBCJLandale/status/956453098830094337
  • TonyE said:




    I am sure we will get transitionary deals. However, third countries know just how weak our bargaining position is, so I am extremely doubtful that many will essentially be cut and pastes of the existing set-up.

    Not transnational deals - there would be no reason to alter them. We aren't in a weak position, because we are nett importers from most of these jurisdictions. We might make a low quantity of high value exports, but many others make a large number of low value UK imports. That makes it a much more even situation - in which displacement is not in the interest of either side.

    You constantly tend to see the UK as weak, because you're comparing it to Germany, or the EU as a whole, or the USA. But the world isn't like that - and the EU doesn't have FTA's with many of the major players. It has some trade deals with them that deal with conformity and trade facilitation, but not massive tariff reductions as it has with say Mexico or more recently Canada.

    We are in the process of making it more expensive, more time-consuming and less profitable to do business in our most important export market. We cannot afford to repeat the exercise elsewhere. Other countries know this.

    So are you saying that the EU trade agreements are always the optimum result for the UK ?

    Considering that there are 28 EU countries any agreements are highly unlikely to be the optimum for any particular country.

    And I rather doubt that Brussels put UK trade requirements high on the list of those 28.

    Which means that it should be possible to negotiate trade agreements which are an improvement both for the UK and for the other country.

    Certainly better for the other country.

  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    It's not complacency,more a half-way home of an air of helplessness and despondency emanating from the Tory benches but not enough are yet in a state of brown-trousered panic to go for TMay.Once the Con poll rating slips into the mid 30s,expect full-blown panic followed by all-out war in the Tory party.It's just a matter of time.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    edited January 2018
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Elliot said:

    Spot the difference:

    Jess Phillips downplaying the Cologne sex attacks:

    ' Labour's Jess Phillips has compared the hundreds of sex attacks on women in Cologne on New Year's Eve to the harassment of women every weekend in Birmingham city centre. '

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/labour-mp-jess-phillips-says-mass-cologne-sex-attacks-on-women-like-birmingham-every-weekend-a6840981.html

    Jess Phillips getting outraged about a sleezy blokes night:

    ' In an urgent question in the House of Commons, furious Labour MP Jess Philips said: "I notice that the organisation wants to put it onto the individual members, but what actually happened was that women were bought as bait for men. '

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/women-used-bait-charity-dinner-11906722

    Jess Phillips is a terrible leader to fight this sort of thing. I remember her scoffing at men's day. She's like the AltRight stereotype of a hectoring, hypocritical feminist.
    I do love the incoherence of the professional outraged about this. It looks to me as if the women involved were rational adults freely contracting in a country where freedom of contract is a thing (and the FT reporter who is the primary source for all this confirms that most of them knew exactly what they were doing, and many of them had done the job in previous years). Perhaps we should make a rule that women can only contract via their father or husband?

    I can't think of anything more patronising and insulting than telling people they have allowed themselves to be "used as bait".
    Great news! The Presidents' Club decides not to fold and instead to hold exactly the same type of event. Even better news! You are invited.

    Do you attend?
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,279
    Will they dare release the letters next week?

    https://twitter.com/robindbrant/status/956450882597437441
  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 2,315
    tyson said:

    South Africa’s Kyle Edmund loses the first set.

    Lets hope Great Britains Kyle Edmund wins the second.
    If he wins, then he’s Yorkshire’s Kyle Edmund.

    South Africa’s Kyle Edmund loses the first set.

    Lets hope Great Britains Kyle Edmund wins the second.
    Andy Murray is from Great Britain when he wins....at the moment the injured Scot is not playing....Kyle will be England's finest when he wins....

    I doubt it's going to be today
    Kyle derives his British citizenship (via descent at birth) from his Welsh father. Surely he is Wales's finest?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    Being unusually serious for a minute, it seems to me that Theresa May needs to make it clear to everybody that she will call an election for party leader in the spring of 2019 - and step down as PM once her successor is appointed. She will not be a candidate. That should stem the flow of letters - might even get some of the existing letters withdrawn. We can then have an extended beauty parade for 15 months, where people can show why they are - or are not - viable candidates. Their behaviour during these final stages of the Brexit negotiations should be a reasonable period for the membership to look at them, with a view to casting their votes.

    The only way May fights another election as PM is if circumstances force a fresh election this year - so you lot, get back in your box and behave! Or we'll slide into another unwanted election. The outcome of which would likely be PM Corbyn.

    /SeriousMode

    Yes, she needs to do what Michael Howard did after he lost in 2005. Give everyone aiming for the job an extended audition period so the membership is informed for the final vote. It's partly why I wish Dave had held on for a few more months and shaken up his top team instead of standing down.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    edited January 2018
    I am going to say something good about Mrs May and it is to praise her for encouraging women to have cervical smear tests during yesterday’s PMQs. It’s an important health issue for women so good on her for reinforcing the message that this is one test not to skip however uncomfortable it may be.
  • tlg86 said:

    I see the Americans have the right idea when it comes to sentencing serial sex attackers.

    4 years at the (big) White House?
  • dr_spyn said:

    Will they dare release the letters next week?

    https://twitter.com/robindbrant/status/956450882597437441

    ‪Shades of Thatcher in Paris during the 1990 leadership contest?‬
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401
    ydoethur said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    Incidentally, this surely adds to our list of useless election-related systems. The idea that you gradually fill up a vase with a trickle of water (people feeling annoyed about this or that at some point) and when it's 15% full you suddenly call a vote of no confidence is just bonkers. Quite possibly there are letters in there from years ago that the authors have even forgotten they've written.

    When the Tories elect someone as unsuitable as Jeremy Corbyn as their leader, then you may crow about the system :tongue:
    He's already got that right - he was in Parliament when you were led by Iain Duncan Smith.
    But unlike Corbyn, IDS could be got rid of.

    In any case, IDS was a(n almost) wholly negative choice. He was elected because he wasn't pro-Euro and because he wasn't Michael Portillo. The fact that there was an eject system that could be used if he turned out to be a bit useless was a feature, not a bug.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,401
    Isn't it at this point that someone who doesn't know how the process works starts talking about a Stalking Horse?

    Please, please, elect a swivel-eyed loon to lead the Tories into the next election. The Brucie bonus for me is that they would be sure to enact Brexit without any backsliding before being dumped from office.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765

    Isn't it at this point that someone who doesn't know how the process works starts talking about a Stalking Horse?

    Please, please, elect a swivel-eyed loon to lead the Tories into the next election. The Brucie bonus for me is that they would be sure to enact Brexit without any backsliding before being dumped from office.

    No stalking horse is required, these days.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401
    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    Two immediate thoughts: it could be a well-thought through (and very high-risk) gamble to put pressure on her to gain more concessions from the EU in negotiations - "you have to give me something attractive I can sell, or me and my Government will fall".

    Or, the letters have been trickling in for a while and she might have simply just reached the threshold of pissing off too many people.

    This might not be unconnected to Boris's moves - the LoTO with portfolio - over recent weeks as well.

    One thing I've asked before, and not heard an answer to: how long do the letters remain current? Are they all counted from the beginning of a premiership, or are they only seen as being current for a year or two? Also, can they be rescinded by the sender?
    I'd be interested to hear the answer to this. I would have thought they would have been valid until rescinded, and the chairman just has to reach 15% for the vote of no confidence to take place.
    Yes, that's my reading too, and the inference of previous actions. The letters remain live in practice until a change of leader or a VoNC. A letter can be rescinded and there are cases on record where they have been.
    If they are getting near the edge then the pressure will be on those who have had letters in for some time who might be amenable to pressure. A politician might well have ensured that one or two of the new ministers appointed in the reshuffle might have been given a nod that their letter really ought to be rescinded given it was against a leader who has now recognised their shining potential. Of course that requires the politician to have a good idea who the letters were from and that is supposed to be confidential but a recently promoted ex chief Whip really should know.

    But all of this assumes a basic level of political competence that Mrs May has yet to demonstrate at any point since her premiership started. Not for the fifth time there is a real risk that she will blunder into something because of basic incompetence.
    The 'recently promoted Chief Whip' might be able to guess, and might put out suggestions to targeted individuals that if they have a letter in, they might want to reconsider. But the only one who really knows is the Chairman of the 1922. Given his comments, he could usefully spend some time checking that all those who have letters in wish to keep them in.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765
    TOPPING said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Elliot said:

    Spot the difference:

    Jess Phillips downplaying the Cologne sex attacks:

    ' Labour's Jess Phillips has compared the hundreds of sex attacks on women in Cologne on New Year's Eve to the harassment of women every weekend in Birmingham city centre. '

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/labour-mp-jess-phillips-says-mass-cologne-sex-attacks-on-women-like-birmingham-every-weekend-a6840981.html

    Jess Phillips getting outraged about a sleezy blokes night:

    ' In an urgent question in the House of Commons, furious Labour MP Jess Philips said: "I notice that the organisation wants to put it onto the individual members, but what actually happened was that women were bought as bait for men. '

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/women-used-bait-charity-dinner-11906722

    Jess Phillips is a terrible leader to fight this sort of thing. I remember her scoffing at men's day. She's like the AltRight stereotype of a hectoring, hypocritical feminist.
    I do love the incoherence of the professional outraged about this. It looks to me as if the women involved were rational adults freely contracting in a country where freedom of contract is a thing (and the FT reporter who is the primary source for all this confirms that most of them knew exactly what they were doing, and many of them had done the job in previous years). Perhaps we should make a rule that women can only contract via their father or husband?

    I can't think of anything more patronising and insulting than telling people they have allowed themselves to be "used as bait".
    Great news! The Presidents' Club decides not to fold and instead to hold exactly the same type of event. Even better news! You are invited.

    Do you attend?
    I'd probably go out of curiosity.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,279
    edited January 2018
    TOPPING said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Elliot said:

    Spot the difference:

    Jess Phillips downplaying the Cologne sex attacks:

    ' Labour's Jess Phillips has compared the hundreds of sex attacks on women in Cologne on New Year's Eve to the harassment of women every weekend in Birmingham city centre. '

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/labour-mp-jess-phillips-says-mass-cologne-sex-attacks-on-women-like-birmingham-every-weekend-a6840981.html

    Jess Phillips getting outraged about a sleezy blokes night:

    ' In an urgent question in the House of Commons, furious Labour MP Jess Philips said: "I notice that the organisation wants to put it onto the individual members, but what actually happened was that women were bought as bait for men. '

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/women-used-bait-charity-dinner-11906722

    Jess Phillips is a terrible leader to fight this sort of thing. I remember her scoffing at men's day. She's like the AltRight stereotype of a hectoring, hypocritical feminist.
    I do love the incoherence of the professional outraged about this. It looks to me as if the women involved were rational adults freely contracting in a country where freedom of contract is a thing (and the FT reporter who is the primary source for all this confirms that most of them knew exactly what they were doing, and many of them had done the job in previous years). Perhaps we should make a rule that women can only contract via their father or husband?

    I can't think of anything more patronising and insulting than telling people they have allowed themselves to be "used as bait".
    Great news! The Presidents' Club decides not to fold and instead to hold exactly the same type of event. Even better news! You are invited.

    Do you attend?
    Forcing the hostesses to sign NDAs, not necessarily a contract of equals. Would those CEOs be happy for their own daughters to host the event? The FT have had the balls to cover the story and put it on their front page, perhaps the climate was favourable, but the media, Jess Phillips and other MPs might reflect on why so little noise was made over this and other events in the recent past.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    TOPPING said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Elliot said:

    Spot the difference:

    Jess Phillips downplaying the Cologne sex attacks:

    ' Labour's Jess Phillips has compared the hundreds of sex attacks on women in Cologne on New Year's Eve to the harassment of women every weekend in Birmingham city centre. '

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/labour-mp-jess-phillips-says-mass-cologne-sex-attacks-on-women-like-birmingham-every-weekend-a6840981.html

    Jess Phillips getting outraged about a sleezy blokes night:

    ' In an urgent question in the House of Commons, furious Labour MP Jess Philips said: "I notice that the organisation wants to put it onto the individual members, but what actually happened was that women were bought as bait for men. '

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/women-used-bait-charity-dinner-11906722

    Jess Phillips is a terrible leader to fight this sort of thing. I remember her scoffing at men's day. She's like the AltRight stereotype of a hectoring, hypocritical feminist.
    I do love the incoherence of the professional outraged about this. It looks to me as if the women involved were rational adults freely contracting in a country where freedom of contract is a thing (and the FT reporter who is the primary source for all this confirms that most of them knew exactly what they were doing, and many of them had done the job in previous years). Perhaps we should make a rule that women can only contract via their father or husband?

    I can't think of anything more patronising and insulting than telling people they have allowed themselves to be "used as bait".
    Great news! The Presidents' Club decides not to fold and instead to hold exactly the same type of event. Even better news! You are invited.

    Do you attend?
    I would never in a million years have attended such a thing in the first place, and I make my excuses and leave stag nights when that sort of shit kicks off (and don't go in the first place if I have prior knowledge that it is going to happen). I am just in favour of proportionate responses to things, and of leaving people to get on with stuff without interference from me. Has a law been broken? Naah. Is that because there is an obvious yawning gap in the criminal law which needs filling asap because not enough things are illegal at the moment? Naah.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765

    It's not complacency,more a half-way home of an air of helplessness and despondency emanating from the Tory benches but not enough are yet in a state of brown-trousered panic to go for TMay.Once the Con poll rating slips into the mid 30s,expect full-blown panic followed by all-out war in the Tory party.It's just a matter of time.

    The poll rating might not slip, due to fear of Corbyn and support for Brexit, among right wing voters, together with a fairly buoyant economy.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,723
    Cyclefree said:

    I am going to say something good about Mrs May and it is to praise her for encouraging women to have cervical smear tests during yesterday’s PMQs. It’s an important health issue for women so good on her for reinforcing the message that this is one test not to skip however uncomfortable it may be.

    I agree with that. May has not been all bad.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    Ishmael_Z said:

    TOPPING said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Elliot said:

    Spot the difference:

    Jess Phillips downplaying the Cologne sex attacks:

    ' Labour's Jess Phillips has compared the hundreds of sex attacks on women in Cologne on New Year's Eve to the harassment of women every weekend in Birmingham city centre. '

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/labour-mp-jess-phillips-says-mass-cologne-sex-attacks-on-women-like-birmingham-every-weekend-a6840981.html

    Jess Phillips getting outraged about a sleezy blokes night:

    ' In an urgent question in the House of Commons, furious Labour MP Jess Philips said: "I notice that the organisation wants to put it onto the individual members, but what actually happened was that women were bought as bait for men. '

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/women-used-bait-charity-dinner-11906722

    Jess Phillips is a terrible leader to fight this sort of thing. I remember her scoffing at men's day. She's like the AltRight stereotype of a hectoring, hypocritical feminist.
    I do love the incoherence of the professional outraged about this. It looks to me as if the women involved were rational adults freely contracting in a country where freedom of contract is a thing (and the FT reporter who is the primary source for all this confirms that most of them knew exactly what they were doing, and many of them had done the job in previous years). Perhaps we should make a rule that women can only contract via their father or husband?

    I can't think of anything more patronising and insulting than telling people they have allowed themselves to be "used as bait".
    Great news! The Presidents' Club decides not to fold and instead to hold exactly the same type of event. Even better news! You are invited.

    Do you attend?
    I would never in a million years have attended such a thing in the first place, and I make my excuses and leave stag nights when that sort of shit kicks off (and don't go in the first place if I have prior knowledge that it is going to happen). I am just in favour of proportionate responses to things, and of leaving people to get on with stuff without interference from me. Has a law been broken? Naah. Is that because there is an obvious yawning gap in the criminal law which needs filling asap because not enough things are illegal at the moment? Naah.
    I think it was more a commercial decision on everyone's part (GSOH et al, TPC, etc).
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Elliot said:

    Spot the difference:

    Jess Phillips downplaying the Cologne sex attacks:

    ' Labour's Jess Phillips has compared the hundreds of sex attacks on women in Cologne on New Year's Eve to the harassment of women every weekend in Birmingham city centre. '

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/labour-mp-jess-phillips-says-mass-cologne-sex-attacks-on-women-like-birmingham-every-weekend-a6840981.html

    Jess Phillips getting outraged about a sleezy blokes night:

    ' In an urgent question in the House of Commons, furious Labour MP Jess Philips said: "I notice that the organisation wants to put it onto the individual members, but what actually happened was that women were bought as bait for men. '

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/women-used-bait-charity-dinner-11906722

    Jess Phillips is a terrible leader to fight this sort of thing. I remember her scoffing at men's day. She's like the AltRight stereotype of a hectoring, hypocritical feminist.
    I do love the incoherence of the professional outraged about this. It looks to me as if the women involved were rational adults freely contracting in a country where freedom of contract is a thing (and the FT reporter who is the primary source for all this confirms that most of them knew exactly what they were doing, and many of them had done the job in previous years). Perhaps we should make a rule that women can only contract via their father or husband?

    I can't think of anything more patronising and insulting than telling people they have allowed themselves to be "used as bait".
    You could (and people did) make similar arguments for indentured servitude. Not that this is on the same scale but we also have laws about sexual harassment in this country. In addition, it is all very well for the comfortably off to throw around the freedom of contract argument without realising how tough it is for people doing gig work at the bottom. No doubt if one of them had said no on such a basis and went on the dole, Tories on here would be saying they were scroungers that turned down work.
  • Yes, something's definitely up. Why else Boris's recent determination to portray himself as Mr Brexit and the saviour of the NHS? He must know that rebellion is in the air and Theresa's on borrowed time.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,401
    Ishmael_Z said:

    TOPPING said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Elliot said:

    Spot the difference:

    Jess Phillips downplaying the Cologne sex attacks:

    ' Labour's Jess Phillips has compared the hundreds of sex attacks on women in Cologne on New Year's Eve to the harassment of women every weekend in Birmingham city centre. '

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/labour-mp-jess-phillips-says-mass-cologne-sex-attacks-on-women-like-birmingham-every-weekend-a6840981.html

    Jess Phillips getting outraged about a sleezy blokes night:

    ' In an urgent question in the House of Commons, furious Labour MP Jess Philips said: "I notice that the organisation wants to put it onto the individual members, but what actually happened was that women were bought as bait for men. '

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/women-used-bait-charity-dinner-11906722

    Jess Phillips is a terrible leader to fight this sort of thing. I remember her scoffing at men's day. She's like the AltRight stereotype of a hectoring, hypocritical feminist.
    I do love the incoherence of the professional outraged about this. It looks to me as if the women involved were rational adults freely contracting in a country where freedom of contract is a thing (and the FT reporter who is the primary source for all this confirms that most of them knew exactly what they were doing, and many of them had done the job in previous years). Perhaps we should make a rule that women can only contract via their father or husband?

    I can't think of anything more patronising and insulting than telling people they have allowed themselves to be "used as bait".
    Great news! The Presidents' Club decides not to fold and instead to hold exactly the same type of event. Even better news! You are invited.

    Do you attend?
    I would never in a million years have attended such a thing in the first place, and I make my excuses and leave stag nights when that sort of shit kicks off (and don't go in the first place if I have prior knowledge that it is going to happen). I am just in favour of proportionate responses to things, and of leaving people to get on with stuff without interference from me. Has a law been broken? Naah. Is that because there is an obvious yawning gap in the criminal law which needs filling asap because not enough things are illegal at the moment? Naah.
    The employer had a duty of care for the health, safety and wellbeing of the women they employed as hostesses. Might they have broken a law in failing to meet that duty?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    Something else I've noted about the apparent lack of reaction to Sterling's rise is that no one has mentioned how well the index is holding up. When it was going up because the pound was crashing we had the entire financial press corps tell everyone that it's because the FTSE100 is chock full of international companies that earn in dollars and the index is priced in sterling. Well the pound is back up and the index hasn't crashed.

    The final thing I've noticed is that internationally our nominal GDP is so far ahead of France that anyone who thinks we're falling behind needs their head examined. The gap is getting bigger, not smaller and it will get bigger in 2018, I think.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516

    Yes, something's definitely up. Why else Boris's recent determination to portray himself as Mr Brexit and the saviour of the NHS? He must know that rebellion is in the air and Theresa's on borrowed time.

    An alternative explanation is that May was preparing to sack Boris nd Boris' minders panicked, trying to scare May into not doing it with this story.
  • If TM is challenged I would expect her to receive the backing of her cabinet and a majority of her MP's.

    However, her sole purpose is to steer Brexit through to March 2019 and there is no one else.

    She is good at policy announcements but poor at making them happen. I can understand the frustrations of MP's, some of which I share, and I agree she has to go as soon as possible after Brexit
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    Nasty, inward looking xenophobic little Britain:

    https://medium.com/@robfordmancs/how-have-attitudes-to-immigration-changed-since-brexit-e37881f55530

    Or not.......

    the public have become more positive about immigration. Far fewer see it as a major political priority and more see it as positive for Britain’s economy and culture. What is more, this shift is seen across the board — it isn’t a case of liberal “Remainers” rallying behind migrants, while migrant sceptic “Leavers” dig in their heels. The positive shift in attitudes seems to be occurring across the political and social spectrum.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516
    Sean_F said:

    It's not complacency,more a half-way home of an air of helplessness and despondency emanating from the Tory benches but not enough are yet in a state of brown-trousered panic to go for TMay.Once the Con poll rating slips into the mid 30s,expect full-blown panic followed by all-out war in the Tory party.It's just a matter of time.

    The poll rating might not slip, due to fear of Corbyn and support for Brexit, among right wing voters, together with a fairly buoyant economy.
    Every leader gets a honeymoon bounce, although it happened too early with Cameron. The Tories should wait and appoint a charismatic and currently unknown leader a year before the election.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959
    MaxPB said:

    Being unusually serious for a minute, it seems to me that Theresa May needs to make it clear to everybody that she will call an election for party leader in the spring of 2019 - and step down as PM once her successor is appointed. She will not be a candidate. That should stem the flow of letters - might even get some of the existing letters withdrawn. We can then have an extended beauty parade for 15 months, where people can show why they are - or are not - viable candidates. Their behaviour during these final stages of the Brexit negotiations should be a reasonable period for the membership to look at them, with a view to casting their votes.

    The only way May fights another election as PM is if circumstances force a fresh election this year - so you lot, get back in your box and behave! Or we'll slide into another unwanted election. The outcome of which would likely be PM Corbyn.

    /SeriousMode

    Yes, she needs to do what Michael Howard did after he lost in 2005. Give everyone aiming for the job an extended audition period so the membership is informed for the final vote. It's partly why I wish Dave had held on for a few more months and shaken up his top team instead of standing down.
    I think this is why the reshuffle was so badly received. It was not aimed at getting that new leader in place in 2019, with an opportunity to see the runners and riders in the paddock first. It was seen as circling the wagons around the precarious current PM, whilst excluding anyone who might outshine her.....
This discussion has been closed.