While I agree, those of us in secure professional jobs including myself are pretty well insulated from the shocks of Brexit. SO is in the West Midlands, and in an export orientated sector of the economy as I recall.
It is rather like the bacon and the egg. The chicken is involved but the pig is commited.
On a point regarding export, as my day job is a cash accountant working for a small/medium exporter having the GBP/EUR at 1.40 as it was pre referendum was absolutely murderous. Now any sort of tariffs might lead us to set up a plaque or even warehouse in the EU if needs be but pre ref was no panacea
Second. Like the rate the UK will be after Brexit.
Better than being subsumed into a United States of Europe. Then we'd have no rate whatsoever.
I'd rather have a bigger pond to swim in. But if you prefer to think small can I suggest Easter Island.
What's bigger than the rest of the world?
Why is it that the UK is so feeble it cannot do what other big EU member states do and engage with the whole world while being an integral part of the biggest free trade zone on the planet? Why do we - uniquely - have to make a choice instead of having it all?
Because the voters decided the political compromises, including FOM, were not worth it
They did. We’ll find out over the coming years if they were right. As the Japanese have made very clear, if the Tories cannot get a good Brexit deal a lot of well-paid jobs that sustain a number of communities in Leave voting areas are at substantial risk. But you’ll be fine, Charles, so that’s some relief, at least.
You have a very unpleasant way of personalising things
Reality is reality, Charles. Brexit will have almost no impact on you and your family. Millions of others are not in that fortunate position. However unpleasant it is to make, I think it is an important point: wealthy, privileged advocates of leaving the EU will not have to live with the consequences of what happens should it go wrong.
On the contrary I think the cosmopolitan city dwellers wil notice the isolation most. If all you do is spend your time in a bingo hall in Hartlipool your only interaction with the the free moving Europeans is what you read on your fish and chip wrapper.
It's very decent of you to acknowledge that such people can read.
Tory female mp`s would probably want a female to stand.If Rudd does not stand then given Brexit females Estey Mcvey 66 and Penny Mordaunt 100 being in the Cabinet their odds are overpriced compared to Leadsom. Despite being out of favour Priti Patel certainly wants to be PM At Northern Ireland Karen Bradley 100 has the scope to do eyecatching work such as with the hard border issue and getting a Northern Ireland govt back. Can also make cases for Liz Truss,Claire Perry and Suella Fernandez
He’s not got a hope. He would have been a good Chief Secretary but that should have been his limit
The Tory CoE not got a hope of leadership ? I doubt you'll find a better illustration of what's wrong with this government.
I think the split in the cabinet is too log jammed for there to be a coherent set of instructions to our negotiating team. Something that should have been sorted a year ago remains unsorted. One or other faction needs to go.
Interesting piece here btw, relevant to the header:
He’s not got a hope. He would have been a good Chief Secretary but that should have been his limit
The Tory CoE not got a hope of leadership ? I doubt you'll find a better illustration of what's wrong with this government.
I think the split in the cabinet is too log jammed for there to be a coherent set of instructions to our negotiating team. Something that should have been sorted a year ago remains unsorted. One or other faction needs to go.
Interesting piece here btw, relevant to the header:
On topic, this is an excellent thread header. The resilience of Boris in the betting markets surprises me; clearly, he's felt to have some sort of box-office appeal others lack. I'm on both Gove and Hunt. I wouldn't rule out Williamson either, but his present odds are too short. The other one I'm keeping an eye on is McVey, but I suspect she's too behind the curve and a bit too uncompromising to run, notwithstanding she'd have to do so from the DWP.
Hammond doesn't feature not because of his views on the EU, but because of his utter tin ear for politics. Tim Shipman's book "Fallout" makes this very clear, and I'd recommend that to anyone who is yet to read it.
Nor would I rule out JRM because of his views on the EU. He cuts through as well as any other Tory these days. He always engages. He patiently and confidently argues his case from first principles - something which far too many Tories have no clue how to do - and treats everyone with respect. He wins a lot of admiration in doing so, even from his opponents. I also think he is smart - far more so than Corbyn will ever be - if a little eccentric and probably inclined to put the purity of his principles above pragmatism more often than he should.
However, he is too short at current odds and I have never seen any hint of ambition in him for the top job. But, make no mistake: he is a huge asset to the Conservative Party.
Given the number of times JRM has stated that he dosn't want the job and the amount of money his hedge fund pays him for the work he does I really cannot imagine him actually wanting to be PM (at the moment).
Hence I suspect any leadership contest in next 2 years will end up being between Gove and Hunt.
Second. Like the rate the UK will be after Brexit.
Better than being subsumed into a United States of Europe. Then we'd have no rate whatsoever.
I'd rather have a bigger pond to swim in. But if you prefer to think small can I suggest Easter Island.
What's bigger than the rest of the world?
Why is it that the UK is so feeble it cannot do what other big EU member states do and engage with the whole world while being an integral part of the biggest free trade zone on the planet? Why do we - uniquely - have to make a choice instead of having it all?
Because the voters decided the political compromises, including FOM, were not worth it
They did. We’ll find be fine, Charles, so that’s some relief, at least.
Why spoil a perfectly sound point with the personal dig. Just diminishes your point.
Because the cake and eat its to.
There youall parties making all sorts of dubious claims. Time to move on.
I am moving on. Did you hear what the Japanese government said about future investment in the UK this week? Did you see the economic forecasts for the NE in the case of a No Deal or WTO Brexit? It doesn’t take a genius to see where certain parts of the country are heading should the Tories fail to get a good deal.
Except for your silly personal digs at the 'privileged' Brexiteers you make interesting comments. I'd be more annoyed at the privileged establishment which utterly failed in 2016 to make a case for the EU.
The referendum campaign was largely dominated by wealthy Tories telling lies to the voters. That was to be expected. What I find most unforgiveable is the attitude of the Labour leadership. As he showed last May and June, Corbyn could have galvanised younger voters to come out and vote Remain. He went on holiday instead. That is contemptible.
If true, I would not call Corbyn contemptible, more like bloody marvellous.
It's certainly true in substance, but whether contemptible or not depends on your view of Brexit.
It was however consistent with his general take on the EU, which is well characterised as that of a 'diffident Remainer'.
Second. Like the rate the UK will be after Brexit.
Better than being subsumed into a United States of Europe. Then we'd have no rate whatsoever.
I'd rather have a bigger pond to swim in. But if you prefer to think small can I suggest Easter Island.
What's bigger than the rest of the world?
Why is it that the UK is so feeble it cannot do what other big EU member states do and engage with the whole world while being an integral part of the biggest free trade zone on the planet? Why do we - uniquely - have to make a choice instead of having it all?
Because the voters decided the political compromises, including FOM, were not worth it
They did. We’ll find out over the coming years if they were right. As the Japanese have made very clear, if the Tories cannot get a good Brexit deal a lot of well-paid jobs that sustain a number of communities in Leave voting areas are at substantial risk. But you’ll be fine, Charles, so that’s some relief, at least.
You have a very unpleasant way of personalising things
Reality is reality, Charles. Brexit will have almost no impact on you and your family. Millions of others are not in that fortunate position. However unpleasant it is to make, I think it is an important point: wealthy, privileged advocates of leaving the EU will not have to live with the consequences of what happens should it go wrong.
On the contrary I think the cosmopolitan city dwellers wil notice the isolation most. If all you do is spend your time in a bingo hall in Hartlipool your only interaction with the the free moving Europeans is what you read on your fish and chip wrapper.
Health and Safety stopped old newspapers being used as fish and chip wrappers back in the 90's..
Second. Like the rate the UK will be after Brexit.
Better than being subsumed into a United States of Europe. Then we'd have no rate whatsoever.
I'd rather have a bigger pond to swim in. But if you prefer to think small can I suggest Easter Island.
What's bigger than the rest of the world?
Why is it that the UK is so feeble it cannot do what other big EU member states do and engage with the whole world while being an integral part of the biggest free trade zone on the planet? Why do we - uniquely - have to make a choice instead of having it all?
Because the voters decided the political compromises, including FOM, were not worth it
They did. We’ll find out over the coming years if they were right. As the Japanese have made very clear, if the Tories cannot get a good Brexit deal a lot of well-paid jobs that sustain a number of communities in Leave voting areas are at substantial risk. But you’ll be fine, Charles, so that’s some relief, at least.
You have a very unpleasant way of personalising things
Reality is reality, Charles. Brexit will have almost no impact on you and your family. Millions of others are not in that fortunate position. However unpleasant it is to make, I think it is an important point: wealthy, privileged advocates of leaving the EU will not have to live with the consequences of what happens should it go wrong.
On the contrary I think the cosmopolitan city dwellers wil notice the isolation most. If all you do is spend your time in a bingo hall in Hartlipool your only interaction with the the free moving Europeans is what you read on your fish and chip wrapper.
Health and Safety stopped old newspapers being used as fish and chip wrappers back in the 90's..
Disastrous error. Greaseproof paper makes the chips all soggy. Philip Madoc's U-boat captain would be most displeased.
Second. Like the rate the UK will be after Brexit.
Better than being subsumed into a United States of Europe. Then we'd have no rate whatsoever.
I'd rather have a bigger pond to swim in. But if you prefer to think small can I suggest Easter Island.
What's bigger than the rest of the world?
Why is it that the UK is so feeble it cannot do what other big EU member states do and engage with the whole world while being an integral part of the biggest free trade zone on the planet? Why do we - uniquely - have to make a choice instead of having it all?
Because the voters decided the political compromises, including FOM, were not worth it
They did. We’ll find out over the coming years if they were right. As the Japanese have made very clear, if the Tories cannot get a good Brexit deal a lot of well-paid jobs that sustain a number of communities in Leave voting areas are at substantial risk. But you’ll be fine, Charles, so that’s some relief, at least.
You have a very unpleasant way of personalising things
Reality is reality, Charles. Brexit will have almost no impact on you and your family. Millions of others are not in that fortunate position. However unpleasant it is to make, I think it is an important point: wealthy, privileged advocates of leaving the EU will not have to live with the consequences of what happens should it go wrong.
On the contrary I think the cosmopolitan city dwellers wil notice the isolation most. If all you do is spend your time in a bingo hall in Hartlipool your only interaction with the the free moving Europeans is what you read on your fish and chip wrapper.
Health and Safety stopped old newspapers being used as fish and chip wrappers back in the 90's..
Presumably that retrograde decision is one thing that can be reversed once we're out of the EU?
On topic, an excellent article as usual from David. Glad that his expert opinion somewhat matches my book, I’m green on Gove and Hunt (and Hammond) and most red on JRM and Boris.
I'm about the same. I'm so red on Jacob Recusant-Mosely that I'll probably have to sell our house if he ends up leader. I'm slightly less fucked if Boris gets it.
He’s not got a hope. He would have been a good Chief Secretary but that should have been his limit
The Tory CoE not got a hope of leadership ? I doubt you'll find a better illustration of what's wrong with this government.
I think the split in the cabinet is too log jammed for there to be a coherent set of instructions to our negotiating team. Something that should have been sorted a year ago remains unsorted. One or other faction needs to go.
Interesting piece here btw, relevant to the header:
Good header and a good thread, enhanced by Southam's decent change of heart and Charles's immediate acceptance of it. Like Casino I think Gove and Hunt are the ones to watch. The only point I'd question about it all is whether we're seeing it too much through the Brexit prism. The current average popular attitude to Brexit is gloomy boredom - "doesn't seem to be going very well, but I wish they'd got on with it".
If Brexit has happened, the electorate will overwhelmingly want a leader who wants to move forward, and whether someone favoured one side or the other back in the day will look quite irrelevant even to most Tory members. Gove looks good because he has interesting ideas, Hunt looks good because he's Mr Calm Stability. Boris appeals to people who want entertainment in politics (not a trivial number) and to Tories who think he's a winner. On balance I think Hunt will come through, but I'm talking my book.
On topic, an excellent article as usual from David. Glad that his expert opinion somewhat matches my book, I’m green on Gove and Hunt (and Hammond) and most red on JRM and Boris.
I'm about the same. I'm so red on Jacob Recusant-Mosely that I'll probably have to sell our house if he ends up leader. I'm slightly less fucked if Boris gets it.
Yes, I think this is one of the most sensible pieces I have read on the subject and billy bunters would do well to heed David's words. He has a very strong track record.
My only caveat would be that circumstances could change rapidly and unpredictably, in which case a realignment of bets is likely to be called for. But if I were starting with a blank sheet, I would certainly follow DH's advice.
Second. Like the rate the UK will be after Brexit.
Better than being subsumed into a United States of Europe. Then we'd have no rate whatsoever.
I'd rather have a bigger pond to swim in. But if you prefer to think small can I suggest Easter Island.
What's bigger than the rest of the world?
Why is it that the UK is so feeble it cannot do what other big EU member states do and engage with the whole world while being an integral part of the biggest free trade zone on the planet? Why do we - uniquely - have to make a choice instead of having it all?
Because the voters decided the political compromises, including FOM, were not worth it
They did. We’ll find out over the coming years if they were right. As the Japanese have made very clear, if the Tories cannot get a good Brexit deal a lot of well-paid jobs that sustain a number of communities in Leave voting areas are at substantial risk. But you’ll be fine, Charles, so that’s some relief, at least.
You have a very unpleasant way of personalising things
Reality is reality, Charles. Brexit will have almost no impact on you and your family. Millions of others are not in that fortunate position. However unpleasant it is to make, I think it is an important point: wealthy, privileged advocates of leaving the EU will not have to live with the consequences of what happens should it go wrong.
On the contrary I think the cosmopolitan city dwellers wil notice the isolation most. If all you do is spend your time in a bingo hall in Hartlipool your only interaction with the the free moving Europeans is what you read on your fish and chip wrapper.
It's very decent of you to acknowledge that such people can read.
And it does show how in-touch Roger is with the lives of ordinary folks. Wrapping fish & chips in newspaper has been illegal for thirty years.....
The referendum campaign was largely dominated by wealthy Tories telling lies to the voters. That was to be expected. What I find most unforgiveable is the attitude of the Labour leadership. As he showed last May and June, Corbyn could have galvanised younger voters to come out and vote Remain. He went on holiday instead. That is contemptible.
There may be a slight difference between rallying people to your vision (or at least one negotiated within the party) and the specific version of the EU we currently have.
Whilst Corbyn's vision for the country was inspiring (to some) even some of the more pro EU people struggled to be really enthusiastic about the EU, well before the vote anyway.
If the media had given Corbyn's campaign a bit more attention rather than just the Tories it might have helped, it certainly did in the general election but the broadcasters rules didn't apply in the same way.
Labour should have picked someone better than Johnson as head of the official campaign, surely there were more charismatic options?
Gove *and* Boris making the final three would be interesting. Would raise the rather obvious question about one of them deserting the other on the basis he wasn't up to the job...
I think that bridge has already been crossed? But in truth, they don't have to believe that someone else isn't up to it to believe that they'd do it better.
Except for your silly personal digs at the 'privileged' Brexiteers you make interesting comments. I'd be more annoyed at the privileged establishment which utterly failed in 2016 to make a case for the EU.
That fails on logic. Many Remainers are very logical people. The Remain campaign made predictions, that, while over-egged, will broadly pan out. Meanwhile the Leave campaign came out with complete nonsense but nevertheless carried the day. Why should we blame those that were more real.
There's a reason why most of those that know what they are talking about, the disparaged experts, supported staying in the EU. Many Leavers operate on faith or intuition, and that's OK, assume Remainers must also build the reality from the belief. But it's not our project. We are more sceptical and so work from the evidence.
The arrogance in your post is breathtaking but goes a long way to explain why remain lost.
He’s not got a hope. He would have been a good Chief Secretary but that should have been his limit
The Tory CoE not got a hope of leadership ? I doubt you'll find a better illustration of what's wrong with this government.
He’s been overpromoted. It happens.
And yet, unsackable. The CoE should always be a potential leader, otherwise they shouldn't have the job.
Not necessarily. The best governments have a team at the top
I'm intrigued. Which government has had a 'team' that didn't fight like ferrets in a sack?
I can think of Brown and Chamberlain, who sacked all the naysayers and put colourless makeweights in instead. However neither is a happy precedent.
I would have said the best governments have strong, talented figures with independent power bases who can stand up to the PM when they are wrong. In that I am supported by Baldwin, who said that Chamberlain's problem was he had nobody to offer him another view (he said that Chamberlain himself had done that for him).
Of course it can go too far - look at Blair and Brown. But the fact Clegg had an independent power base and an alternative perspective was one reason why the Coalition for all its faults was the best government of the last thirty years.
It helped that Cameron and Osborne appeared united, so each element of the coalition was mostly stable. and everyone knew and accepted there would be disagreements between them and the lds. As you say, governments fight, but we don't seem to accept it as normal except in coalition.
Good header and a good thread, enhanced by Southam's decent change of heart and Charles's immediate acceptance of it. Like Casino I think Gove and Hunt are the ones to watch. The only point I'd question about it all is whether we're seeing it too much through the Brexit prism. The current average popular attitude to Brexit is gloomy boredom - "doesn't seem to be going very well, but I wish they'd got on with it".
If Brexit has happened, the electorate will overwhelmingly want a leader who wants to move forward, and whether someone favoured one side or the other back in the day will look quite irrelevant even to most Tory members. Gove looks good because he has interesting ideas, Hunt looks good because he's Mr Calm Stability. Boris appeals to people who want entertainment in politics (not a trivial number) and to Tories who think he's a winner. On balance I think Hunt will come through, but I'm talking my book.
+1. While Gove has (sometimes) great ideas he takes the “showbusiness for ugly people” maxim too far and Boris was pithily summed up by Sir Alan in one four letter word. Hunt it is - after Brexit so he can focus on “what’s next” not wading through the coming carnage as May gets on with doing a lot of other people’s dirty work.
At the moment I think the most likely outcome is MPs put Boris and Rudd in the final 2, Foreign Secretary v Home Secretary, Leaver v Remainer and Boris wins. Though clearly a long way to go yet especially if another contender starts to poll well against Corbyn
Good header and a good thread, enhanced by Southam's decent change of heart and Charles's immediate acceptance of it. Like Casino I think Gove and Hunt are the ones to watch. The only point I'd question about it all is whether we're seeing it too much through the Brexit prism. The current average popular attitude to Brexit is gloomy boredom - "doesn't seem to be going very well, but I wish they'd got on with it".
If Brexit has happened, the electorate will overwhelmingly want a leader who wants to move forward, and whether someone favoured one side or the other back in the day will look quite irrelevant even to most Tory members. Gove looks good because he has interesting ideas, Hunt looks good because he's Mr Calm Stability. Boris appeals to people who want entertainment in politics (not a trivial number) and to Tories who think he's a winner. On balance I think Hunt will come through, but I'm talking my book.
Agreed in every respect, Nick. I'd have it 1.Hunt 2.Gove and 3 Boris, in a close finish, but like you that reflects my book.
The Tories need someone who might inspire people to join their party.
Er, no. They need someone who can run the country effectively. The last thing we need right now is another shallow opportunist like Corbyn.
Cannot someone try to manage both, to run things well and inspire people to join?
My thinking as well.
On Tory leadership contenders, I think Hunt is a better option for them than Gove, Boris, and JRM. The latter three are pretty divisive figures, whereas I’ve not seen too much evidence outside of twitter that Hunt is massively disliked. I should say I’m not his biggest fan by any stretch of the imagination.
Previously, I used to think his big issue was that he was very bland. However in the long term, him not getting too involved with the culture war issues, and that tweet to Trump should help his standing with voters IMHO.
On topic, an excellent article as usual from David. Glad that his expert opinion somewhat matches my book, I’m green on Gove and Hunt (and Hammond) and most red on JRM and Boris.
I'm about the same. I'm so red on Jacob Recusant-Mosely that I'll probably have to sell our house if he ends up leader. I'm slightly less fucked if Boris gets it.
That could be a metaphor for the whole country.
Although if Corbyn gets in and nationalises everything but the kitchen sink...
Not in favour of changing the calendar to accommodate an individual driver.
Interesting. By the way I’m currently watching a new Amazon documentary that followed McLaren as they prepared for last season. Fascinating insight as to what the F1 teams and drivers are doing during the winter.
Second. Like the rate the UK will be after Brexit.
Better than being subsumed into a United States of Europe. Then we'd have no rate whatsoever.
I'd rather have a bigger pond to swim in. But if you prefer to think small can I suggest Easter Island.
What's bigger than the rest of the world?
Why is it that the UK is so feeble it cannot do what other big EU member states do and engage with the whole world while being an integral part of the biggest free trade zone on the planet? Why do we - uniquely - have to make a choice instead of having it all?
Because the voters decided the political compromises, including FOM, were not worth it
They did. We’ll find out over the coming years if they were right. As the Japanese have made very clear, if the Tories cannot get a good Brexit deal a lot of well-paid jobs that sustain a number of communities in Leave voting areas are at substantial risk. But you’ll be fine, Charles, so that’s some relief, at least.
You have a very unpleasant way of personalising things
Reality is reality, Charles. Brexit will have almost no impact on you and your family. Millions of others are not in that fortunate position. However unpleasant it is to make, I think it is an important point: wealthy, privileged advocates of leaving the EU will not have to live with the consequences of what happens should it go wrong.
On the contrary I think the cosmopolitan city dwellers wil notice the isolation most. If all you do is spend your time in a bingo hall in Hartlipool your only interaction with the the free moving Europeans is what you read on your fish and chip wrapper.
It's very decent of you to acknowledge that such people can read.
And it does show how in-touch Roger is with the lives of ordinary folks. Wrapping fish & chips in newspaper has been illegal for thirty years.....
If they make it legal again, there is an ex-Chancellor who can supply so much that we will be self sufficient in the stuff.
Except for your silly personal digs at the 'privileged' Brexiteers you make interesting comments. I'd be more annoyed at the privileged establishment which utterly failed in 2016 to make a case for the EU.
That fails on logic. Many Remainers are very logical people. The Remain campaign made predictions, that, while over-egged, will broadly pan out. Meanwhile the Leave campaign came out with complete nonsense but nevertheless carried the day. Why should we blame those that were more real.
There's a reason why most of those that know what they are talking about, the disparaged experts, supported staying in the EU. Many Leavers operate on faith or intuition, and that's OK, assume Remainers must also build the reality from the belief. But it's not our project. We are more sceptical and so work from the evidence.
The arrogance in your post is breathtaking but goes a long way to explain why remain lost.
Really? I thought it was succinct and hit the nail on the head
Second. Like the rate the UK will be after Brexit.
Better than being subsumed into a United States of Europe. Then we'd have no rate whatsoever.
I'd rather have a bigger pond to swim in. But if you prefer to think small can I suggest Easter Island.
What's bigger than the rest of the world?
Why is it that the UK is so feeble it cannot do what other big EU member states do and engage with the whole world while being an integral part of the biggest free trade zone on the planet? Why do we - uniquely - have to make a choice instead of having it all?
Because the voters decided the political compromises, including FOM, were not worth it
They did. We’ll find out over the coming years if they were right. As the Japanese have made very clear, if the Tories cannot get a good Brexit deal a lot of well-paid jobs that sustain a number of communities in Leave voting areas are at substantial risk. But you’ll be fine, Charles, so that’s some relief, at least.
You have a very unpleasant way of personalising things
Reality is reality, Charles. Brexit will have almost no impact on you and your family. Millions of others are not in that fortunate position. However unpleasant it is to make, I think it is an important point: wealthy, privileged advocates of leaving the EU will not have to live with the consequences of what happens should it go wrong.
On the contrary I think the cosmopolitan city dwellers wil notice the isolation most. If all you do is spend your time in a bingo hall in Hartlipool your only interaction with the the free moving Europeans is what you read on your fish and chip wrapper.
It's very decent of you to acknowledge that such people can read.
And it does show how in-touch Roger is with the lives of ordinary folks. Wrapping fish & chips in newspaper has been illegal for thirty years.....
If you say so, but that would mean it's been illegal my whole life more or less, yet I thought nothing stand out in the reference. Which is not to say I don't eat fish and chips, I do, but that as a joke or casual comment the idea of it being wrapped in newspaper still works and it woukd be harsh to suggest that in itself is evidence of being out of touch I think. Though Roger might be pleased to be so.
On topic, an excellent article as usual from David. Glad that his expert opinion somewhat matches my book, I’m green on Gove and Hunt (and Hammond) and most red on JRM and Boris.
I'm about the same. I'm so red on Jacob Recusant-Mosely that I'll probably have to sell our house if he ends up leader. I'm slightly less fucked if Boris gets it.
That could be a metaphor for the whole country.
Although if Corbyn gets in and nationalises everything but the kitchen sink...
Really, what is Corbyn going to do? Nationalise the railways? Big deal. They were shit when they were BR, they are shit now and they will be shit when they are Great Jeremy Railways. Nationalise water/gas/electricity? Good. I won't have to put with the nagging feeling that I am getting done up the shitpipe if I don't spend 200 hours researching 25 different suppliers and their hilariously complex offerings.
Second. Like the rate the UK will be after Brexit.
Better than being subsumed into a United States of Europe. Then we'd have no rate whatsoever.
I'd rather have a bigger pond to swim in. But if you prefer to think small can I suggest Easter Island.
What's bigger than the rest of the world?
Why is it that the UK is so feeble it cannot do what other big EU member states do and engage with the whole world while being an integral part of the biggest free trade zone on the planet? Why do we - uniquely - have to make a choice instead of having it all?
Because the voters decided the political compromises, including FOM, were not worth it
They did. We’ll find out over the coming years if they were right. As the Japanese have made very clear, if the Tories cannot get a good Brexit deal a lot of well-paid jobs that sustain a number of communities in Leave voting areas are at substantial risk. But you’ll be fine, Charles, so that’s some relief, at least.
You have a very unpleasant way of personalising things
Reality is reality, Charles. Brexit will have almost no impact on you and your family. Millions of others are not in that fortunate position. However unpleasant it is to make, I think it is an important point: wealthy, privileged advocates of leaving the EU will not have to live with the consequences of what happens should it go wrong.
On the contrary I think the cosmopolitan city dwellers wil notice the isolation most. If all you do is spend your time in a bingo hall in Hartlipool your only interaction with the the free moving Europeans is what you read on your fish and chip wrapper.
Health and Safety stopped old newspapers being used as fish and chip wrappers back in the 90's..
Disastrous error. Greaseproof paper makes the chips all soggy. Philip Madoc's U-boat captain would be most displeased.
This may a moment on par with liking disgusting pineapple on pizza, but I actually don't mind a soggy chip. I'm usually slather ing them and a saveloy/sausage in curry sauce anyway.
On topic, an excellent article as usual from David. Glad that his expert opinion somewhat matches my book, I’m green on Gove and Hunt (and Hammond) and most red on JRM and Boris.
I'm about the same. I'm so red on Jacob Recusant-Mosely that I'll probably have to sell our house if he ends up leader. I'm slightly less fucked if Boris gets it.
That could be a metaphor for the whole country.
Although if Corbyn gets in and nationalises everything but the kitchen sink...
Really, what is Corbyn going to do? Nationalise the railways? Big deal. They were shit when they were BR, they are shit now and they will be shit when they are Great Jeremy Railways. Nationalise water/gas/electricity? Good. I won't have to put with the nagging feeling that I am getting done up the shitpipe if I don't spend 200 hours researching 25 different suppliers and their hilariously complex offerings.
Well, I was thinking that if he nationalised your house (apart of course from your sink) you wouldn't need to worry about losing it to your betting losses. I will leave it up to you whether that comment was meant to be taken entirely seriously.
Second. Like the rate the UK will be after Brexit.
Better than being subsumed into a United States of Europe. Then we'd have no rate whatsoever.
I'd rather have a bigger pond to swim in. But if you prefer to think small can I suggest Easter Island.
What's bigger than the rest of the world?
Why is it that the UK is so feeble it cannot do what other big EU member states do and engage with the whole world while being an integral part of the biggest free trade zone on the planet? Why do we - uniquely - have to make a choice instead of having it all?
Because the voters decided the political compromises, including FOM, were not worth it
They did. We’ll find out over the coming years if they were right. As the Japanese have made very clear, if the Tories cannot get a good Brexit deal a lot of well-paid jobs that sustain a number of communities in Leave voting areas are at substantial risk. But you’ll be fine, Charles, so that’s some relief, at least.
You have a very unpleasant way of personalising things
Reality is reality, Charles. Brexit will have almost no impact on you and your family. Millions of others are not in that fortunate position. However unpleasant it is to make, I think it is an important point: wealthy, privileged advocates of leaving the EU will not have to live with the consequences of what happens should it go wrong.
On the contrary I think the cosmopolitan city dwellers wil notice the isolation most. If all you do is spend your time in a bingo hall in Hartlipool your only interaction with the the free moving Europeans is what you read on your fish and chip wrapper.
Health and Safety stopped old newspapers being used as fish and chip wrappers back in the 90's..
Disastrous error. Greaseproof paper makes the chips all soggy. Philip Madoc's U-boat captain would be most displeased.
This may a moment on par with liking disgusting pineapple on pizza, but I actually don't mind a soggy chip. I'm usually slather ing them and a saveloy/sausage in curry sauce anyway.
It's certainly true in substance, but whether contemptible or not depends on your view of Brexit.
It was however consistent with his general take on the EU, which is well characterised as that of a 'diffident Remainer'.
Yes, it's a curiosity of contemporary politics that while most people don't actually have a strong view on the EU one way or the other, people who feel that way in politics are treated as though they were bizarre sun-worshippers. The Remain campaign could have done with additional prominent people who said "I'm not a great fan of the EU but on balance we'd be better off staying", rather than "Vote Remain or the economy gets it", which most people thought (probably correctly) was hyperbole. In 2022, poliicians who are fanatical about the EU either way will look out of touch.
And I say that as someone who IS fanatical - I think the EU is great, and would have no problem with it moving to becoming a single country. But I recognise that it's an unusual view, reflecting my many years abroad.
On topic, an excellent article as usual from David. Glad that his expert opinion somewhat matches my book, I’m green on Gove and Hunt (and Hammond) and most red on JRM and Boris.
I'm about the same. I'm so red on Jacob Recusant-Mosely that I'll probably have to sell our house if he ends up leader. I'm slightly less fucked if Boris gets it.
That could be a metaphor for the whole country.
Although if Corbyn gets in and nationalises everything but the kitchen sink...
Really, what is Corbyn going to do? Nationalise the railways? Big deal. They were shit when they were BR, they are shit now and they will be shit when they are Great Jeremy Railways. Nationalise water/gas/electricity? Good. I won't have to put with the nagging feeling that I am getting done up the shitpipe if I don't spend 200 hours researching 25 different suppliers and their hilariously complex offerings.
It is certainly on the face of it not a terrifying prospect. I'm given to understand it would be terrible, but more effort needs doing on why, as superficially nationalising a service which is shit is attractive.
On topic, an excellent article as usual from David. Glad that his expert opinion somewhat matches my book, I’m green on Gove and Hunt (and Hammond) and most red on JRM and Boris.
I'm about the same. I'm so red on Jacob Recusant-Mosely that I'll probably have to sell our house if he ends up leader. I'm slightly less fucked if Boris gets it.
That could be a metaphor for the whole country.
Although if Corbyn gets in and nationalises everything but the kitchen sink...
Really, what is Corbyn going to do? Nationalise the railways? Big deal. They were shit when they were BR, they are shit now and they will be shit when they are Great Jeremy Railways. Nationalise water/gas/electricity? Good. I won't have to put with the nagging feeling that I am getting done up the shitpipe if I don't spend 200 hours researching 25 different suppliers and their hilariously complex offerings.
Yes, nationalisation doesn’t particularly scare off voters.
Mr. Sandpit, I heard about that. Wherever it was I read of the documentary gave the team credit for keeping going with the filming despite their torrid time.
51 votes for Fox. I must admit that I had expunged that from my memory. The nutter element in this party is not small, even post Cameron. It makes rational prediction problematic.
At the moment I think the most likely outcome is MPs put Boris and Rudd in the final 2, Foreign Secretary v Home Secretary, Leaver v Remainer and Boris wins. Though clearly a long way to go yet especially if another contender starts to poll well against Corbyn
Boris v Rudd would be about the worst possible pair to go to the membership. It’d be like the choice of Trump v Clinton that the Americans faced last year.
Except for your silly personal digs at the 'privileged' Brexiteers you make interesting comments. I'd be more annoyed at the privileged establishment which utterly failed in 2016 to make a case for the EU.
That fails on logic. Many Remainers are very logical people. The Remain campaign made predictions, that, while over-egged, will broadly pan out. Meanwhile the Leave campaign came out with complete nonsense but nevertheless carried the day. Why should we blame those that were more real.
There's a reason why most of those that know what they are talking about, the disparaged experts, supported staying in the EU. Many Leavers operate on faith or intuition, and that's OK, assume Remainers must also build the reality from the belief. But it's not our project. We are more sceptical and so work from the evidence.
The arrogance in your post is breathtaking but goes a long way to explain why remain lost.
Really? I thought it was succinct and hit the nail on the head
I suspect that you are right. It is the more culturally aware Remainers who will mourn the departure of Britain from the mainstream of Europe. The CDE's of the NE may miss out economically, but that has been their lot for most of the last century, only it is self chosen this time. Of course it is worth noting that even in darkest Leaverstan a third voted Remain. They are not all troglodytes.
While I agree, those of us in secure professional jobs including myself are pretty well insulated from the shocks of Brexit. SO is in the West Midlands, and in an export orientated sector of the economy as I recall.
It is rather like the bacon and the egg. The chicken is involved but the pig is commited.
On a point regarding export, as my day job is a cash accountant working for a small/medium exporter having the GBP/EUR at 1.40 as it was pre referendum was absolutely murderous. Now any sort of tariffs might lead us to set up a plaque or even warehouse in the EU if needs be but pre ref was no panacea
I've done quite nicely with sales to EU since the fall of the pound. But it is mainly making me think how much easier it would be if we simply joined the Euro.
The Tories need someone who might inspire people to join their party.
Er, no. They need someone who can run the country effectively. The last thing we need right now is another shallow opportunist like Corbyn.
Cannot someone try to manage both, to run things well and inspire people to join?
My thinking as well.
On Tory leadership contenders, I think Hunt is a better option for them than Gove, Boris, and JRM. The latter three are pretty divisive figures, whereas I’ve not seen too much evidence outside of twitter that Hunt is massively disliked. I should say I’m not his biggest fan by any stretch of the imagination.
Previously, I used to think his big issue was that he was very bland. However in the long term, him not getting too involved with the culture war issues, and that tweet to Trump should help his standing with voters IMHO.
He seems to be getting more mentons and being by comparison calm and stable has a certain appeal. Regretably it was part of Mays appeal though.
He’s not got a hope. He would have been a good Chief Secretary but that should have been his limit
The Tory CoE not got a hope of leadership ? I doubt you'll find a better illustration of what's wrong with this government.
He’s been overpromoted. It happens.
And yet, unsackable. The CoE should always be a potential leader, otherwise they shouldn't have the job.
Not necessarily. The best governments have a team at the top
The person in charge of the nations finances not even a long shot for the top job? Something is wrong.
With the previous history of Brown becoming Prime Minister. Chancellor to PM is not a good route Having Brown in any job was a bad idea.
Would have been quite funny to see him as Foreign Secretary after 2001. Can you imagine him at the UN with Chirac over Iraq?
If Brown had been FS, Britain might well not have gone into Iraq.
Indeed. If he had gone there he might have terrified Saddam into given up his five Kalashnikovs and 22 (or however many) al-Samoud missiles plus his cyanide pill without inspectors even being needed.
Or he might have been kidnapped and locked up by Saddam.
Win-win for Tony Blair. He was a fool not to do it.
On topic, an excellent article as usual from David. Glad that his expert opinion somewhat matches my book, I’m green on Gove and Hunt (and Hammond) and most red on JRM and Boris.
I'm about the same. I'm so red on Jacob Recusant-Mosely that I'll probably have to sell our house if he ends up leader. I'm slightly less fucked if Boris gets it.
That could be a metaphor for the whole country.
Although if Corbyn gets in and nationalises everything but the kitchen sink...
Really, what is Corbyn going to do? Nationalise the railways? Big deal. They were shit when they were BR, they are shit now and they will be shit when they are Great Jeremy Railways. Nationalise water/gas/electricity? Good. I won't have to put with the nagging feeling that I am getting done up the shitpipe if I don't spend 200 hours researching 25 different suppliers and their hilariously complex offerings.
I've been informed by my other halfs grandmother the railways were shit when they were the "big 4" pre BR
Suppose the SPD members vote Nein to a deal. Does Merkel stay as CDU leader for the ensuing election? Might she step down after said election?
Would there be time to replace her? But it will be endorsed - they took the decision in principle when they went into talks and there's nothing in the detail to object to.
The Tories need someone who might inspire people to join their party.
Er, no. They need someone who can run the country effectively. The last thing we need right now is another shallow opportunist like Corbyn.
Cannot someone try to manage both, to run things well and inspire people to join?
My thinking as well.
On Tory leadership contenders, I think Hunt is a better option for them than Gove, Boris, and JRM. The latter three are pretty divisive figures, whereas I’ve not seen too much evidence outside of twitter that Hunt is massively disliked. I should say I’m not his biggest fan by any stretch of the imagination.
Previously, I used to think his big issue was that he was very bland. However in the long term, him not getting too involved with the culture war issues, and that tweet to Trump should help his standing with voters IMHO.
He seems to be getting more mentons and being by comparison calm and stable has a certain appeal. Regretably it was part of Mays appeal though.
Yes, the biggest asset for both is ‘not as terrible as the others.’ Sigh....
On topic, an excellent article as usual from David. Glad that his expert opinion somewhat matches my book, I’m green on Gove and Hunt (and Hammond) and most red on JRM and Boris.
I'm about the same. I'm so red on Jacob Recusant-Mosely that I'll probably have to sell our house if he ends up leader. I'm slightly less fucked if Boris gets it.
That could be a metaphor for the whole country.
Although if Corbyn gets in and nationalises everything but the kitchen sink...
Really, what is Corbyn going to do? Nationalise the railways? Big deal. They were shit when they were BR, they are shit now and they will be shit when they are Great Jeremy Railways. Nationalise water/gas/electricity? Good. I won't have to put with the nagging feeling that I am getting done up the shitpipe if I don't spend 200 hours researching 25 different suppliers and their hilariously complex offerings.
It is certainly on the face of it not a terrifying prospect. I'm given to understand it would be terrible, but more effort needs doing on why, as superficially nationalising a service which is shit is attractive.
The worst feature of the current rail set up is the toilets.
On topic, an excellent article as usual from David. Glad that his expert opinion somewhat matches my book, I’m green on Gove and Hunt (and Hammond) and most red on JRM and Boris.
I'm about the same. I'm so red on Jacob Recusant-Mosely that I'll probably have to sell our house if he ends up leader. I'm slightly less fucked if Boris gets it.
That could be a metaphor for the whole country.
Although if Corbyn gets in and nationalises everything but the kitchen sink...
Really, what is Corbyn going to do? Nationalise the railways? Big deal. They were shit when they were BR, they are shit now and they will be shit when they are Great Jeremy Railways. Nationalise water/gas/electricity? Good. I won't have to put with the nagging feeling that I am getting done up the shitpipe if I don't spend 200 hours researching 25 different suppliers and their hilariously complex offerings.
It is certainly on the face of it not a terrifying prospect. I'm given to understand it would be terrible, but more effort needs doing on why, as superficially nationalising a service which is shit is attractive.
The worst feature of the current rail set up is the toilets.
As Adonis said the other day Grayling is doing his best to persuade us all that the railways need nationalising.
On topic, an excellent article as usual from David. Glad that his expert opinion somewhat matches my book, I’m green on Gove and Hunt (and Hammond) and most red on JRM and Boris.
I'm about the same. I'm so red on Jacob Recusant-Mosely that I'll probably have to sell our house if he ends up leader. I'm slightly less fucked if Boris gets it.
That could be a metaphor for the whole country.
Although if Corbyn gets in and nationalises everything but the kitchen sink...
Really, what is Corbyn going to do? Nationalise the railways? Big deal. They were shit when they were BR, they are shit now and they will be shit when they are Great Jeremy Railways. Nationalise water/gas/electricity? Good. I won't have to put with the nagging feeling that I am getting done up the shitpipe if I don't spend 200 hours researching 25 different suppliers and their hilariously complex offerings.
I've been informed by my other halfs grandmother the railways were shit when they were the "big 4" pre BR
He’s not got a hope. He would have been a good Chief Secretary but that should have been his limit
The Tory CoE not got a hope of leadership ? I doubt you'll find a better illustration of what's wrong with this government.
I think the split in the cabinet is too log jammed for there to be a coherent set of instructions to our negotiating team. Something that should have been sorted a year ago remains unsorted. One or other faction needs to go.
Interesting piece here btw, relevant to the header:
70 would be a very strong starting point but wouldn't be enough to make a run-off unless the other candidate won at least 175, which would be a huge lead.
Very good article from Mr Herdson. Interesting to see the other point of view to the Newstatesman guy who had a MP saying JRM could pull around 90 votes on first round.
Personally, I believe Boris will prevail. But I am green on JRM, Gove, Boris and Rudd. And massively green on good old Hunt.
51 votes for Fox. I must admit that I had expunged that from my memory. The nutter element in this party is not small, even post Cameron. It makes rational prediction problematic.
Remember in 2005 Fox was the only bona fide Eurosceptic in the contest.
David Cameron was unknown and seen as a bit of a liberal on other things.
Ken Clarke no comment required about his euroscepticism.
David Davis was distrusted/hated by eurosceptics following his stint as a whip during the Maastricht treaty and felt he had gone native during his stint as Europe Minister during the fag end of the Major years.
I've been informed by my other halfs grandmother the railways were shit when they were the "big 4" pre BR
Depends on which one and depends on what you wanted. The LMS/LNER were both good at long distance prestige expresses, terrible at suburban networks - tank engines pulling single coaches. The Southern did a lot of pioneering electrification but their trains were quite slow so long distances were not great. The GWR made some effort with diesel but didn't get far. However they had their successes in terms of capital projects and station refurbishment and did a lot of work with road transport (including owning or part owning several bus companies) and docks. They also had real successes in integrating the network and starting through-ticketing which simply wasn't available under BR for many years after.
Ultimately the key thing to remember about all of them is that their overheads were so high, fares so restricted (indeed Wolmar claims in what it has to be said even by his standards is a surreal remark that they were effectively nationalised because of the fare pricing structure) and the common carrier obligation so onerous that they all ran, every year, at a loss. So from that point of view the exercise was a failure and nationalisation post war was a logical option.
What I think people, including Corbyn and Macdonnell, don't quite get is that there is a high price tag attached to it. Although Dalton tried to pay peanuts in compensation (bizarrely spun by its supporters as 'too generous') it was still an expensive process and ironically left no money over for refurbishment. Indeed, on the Southern which had spent vast sums on refurbishing its track from 1945-48 spending came to a juddering halt and what should have been the most lucrative part of the network later became the most burdensome.
If Corbyn and Macdonnell have to spend even half the value of the water companies nationalising them - and that's optimistic - that's £45 billion we won't see again and that they didn't allow for in their so-called 'fully costed' manifesto.Where then do we find the money to improve the pipes, which yes, is badly needed?
A more effective course of action would be for the government to pump that £45 billion into the companies in exchange for 50% of the equity on a preference basis. But that's ideologically unacceptable to both sides. To sum up, of course people like nationalisation if they think it's something for nothing. It's Brexit bus claims with less risk from that point of view. Until you explain that that's a lie and it's a costly process for no benefit.
On topic, an excellent article as usual from David. Glad that his expert opinion somewhat matches my book, I’m green on Gove and Hunt (and Hammond) and most red on JRM and Boris.
I'm about the same. I'm so red on Jacob Recusant-Mosely that I'll probably have to sell our house if he ends up leader. I'm slightly less fucked if Boris gets it.
That could be a metaphor for the whole country.
Although if Corbyn gets in and nationalises everything but the kitchen sink...
Really, what is Corbyn going to do? Nationalise the railways? Big deal. They were shit when they were BR, they are shit now and they will be shit when they are Great Jeremy Railways. Nationalise water/gas/electricity? Good. I won't have to put with the nagging feeling that I am getting done up the shitpipe if I don't spend 200 hours researching 25 different suppliers and their hilariously complex offerings.
It is certainly on the face of it not a terrifying prospect. I'm given to understand it would be terrible, but more effort needs doing on why, as superficially nationalising a service which is shit is attractive.
The worst feature of the current rail set up is the toilets.
As Adonis said the other day Grayling is doing his best to persuade us all that the railways need nationalising.
So you want more power over the railways in Grayling’s hands?
51 votes for Fox. I must admit that I had expunged that from my memory. The nutter element in this party is not small, even post Cameron. It makes rational prediction problematic.
Remember in 2005 Fox was the only bona fide Eurosceptic in the contest.
David Cameron was unknown and seen as a bit of a liberal on other things.
Ken Clarke no comment required about his euroscepticism.
David Davis was distrusted/hated by eurosceptics following his stint as a whip during the Maastricht treaty and felt he had gone native during his stint as Europe Minister during the fag end of the Major years.
DD was never a whip. That is a role that is so far beyond his skill set (such as it is) that's not even funny.
He’s not got a hope. He would have been a good Chief Secretary but that should have been his limit
The Tory CoE not got a hope of leadership ? I doubt you'll find a better illustration of what's wrong with this government.
He’s been overpromoted. It happens.
And yet, unsackable. The CoE should always be a potential leader, otherwise they shouldn't have the job.
Not necessarily. The best governments have a team at the top
The person in charge of the nations finances not even a long shot for the top job? Something is wrong.
With the previous history of Brown becoming Prime Minister. Chancellor to PM is not a good route Having Brown in any job was a bad idea.
Would have been quite funny to see him as Foreign Secretary after 2001. Can you imagine him at the UN with Chirac over Iraq?
If Brown had been FS, Britain might well not have gone into Iraq.
Indeed. If he had gone there he might have terrified Saddam into given up his five Kalashnikovs and 22 (or however many) al-Samoud missiles plus his cyanide pill without inspectors even being needed.
Or he might have been kidnapped and locked up by Saddam.
Win-win for Tony Blair. He was a fool not to do it.
Or he might just have foreseen that it would bugger up his leadership prospects.
He’s not got a hope. He would have been a good Chief Secretary but that should have been his limit
The Tory CoE not got a hope of leadership ? I doubt you'll find a better illustration of what's wrong with this government.
He’s been overpromoted. It happens.
And yet, unsackable. The CoE should always be a potential leader, otherwise they shouldn't have the job.
Not necessarily. The best governments have a team at the top
The person in charge of the nations finances not even a long shot for the top job? Something is wrong.
Good morning all.
Not necessarily so. One of life's gifts is in knowing one's limitations. May had greatness thrust upon her, but is clearly neither up to it nor enjoying it. Hammond is reliable. A safe pair of hands. Nothing more.
In terms of David's magisterial article, I almost don't care who succeeds May. However, I'm a founder member of the 'Anyone but Williamson' movement.
Second. Like the rate the UK will be after Brexit.
Better than being subsumed into a United States of Europe. Then we'd have no rate whatsoever.
I'd rather have a bigger pond to swim in. But if you prefer to think small can I suggest Easter Island.
What's bigger than the rest of the world?
Why is it that the UK is so feeble it cannot do what other big EU member states do and engage with the whole world while being an integral part of the biggest free trade zone on the planet? Why do we - uniquely - have to make a choice instead of having it all?
Because the voters decided the political compromises, including FOM, were not worth it
They did. We’ll find out over the coming years if they were right. As the Japanese have made very clear, if the Tories cannot get a good Brexit deal a lot of well-paid jobs that sustain a number of communities in Leave voting areas are at substantial risk. But you’ll be fine, Charles, so that’s some relief, at least.
You have a very unpleasant way of personalising things
Reality is reality, Charles. Brexit will have almost no impact on you and your family. Millions of others are not in that fortunate position. However unpleasant it is to make, I think it is an important point: wealthy, privileged advocates of leaving the EU will not have to live with the consequences of what happens should it go wrong.
On the contrary I think the cosmopolitan city dwellers wil notice the isolation most. If all you do is spend your time in a bingo hall in Hartlipool your only interaction with the the free moving Europeans is what you read on your fish and chip wrapper.
Health and Safety stopped old newspapers being used as fish and chip wrappers back in the 90's..
Disastrous error. Greaseproof paper makes the chips all soggy. Philip Madoc's U-boat captain would be most displeased.
This may a moment on par with liking disgusting pineapple on pizza, but I actually don't mind a soggy chip. I'm usually slather ing them and a saveloy/sausage in curry sauce anyway.
He’s not got a hope. He would have been a good Chief Secretary but that should have been his limit
The Tory CoE not got a hope of leadership ? I doubt you'll find a better illustration of what's wrong with this government.
He’s been overpromoted. It happens.
And yet, unsackable. The CoE should always be a potential leader, otherwise they shouldn't have the job.
Not necessarily. The best governments have a team at the top
The person in charge of the nations finances not even a long shot for the top job? Something is wrong.
With the previous history of Brown becoming Prime Minister. Chancellor to PM is not a good route Having Brown in any job was a bad idea.
Would have been quite funny to see him as Foreign Secretary after 2001. Can you imagine him at the UN with Chirac over Iraq?
If Brown had been FS, Britain might well not have gone into Iraq.
Indeed. If he had gone there he might have terrified Saddam into given up his five Kalashnikovs and 22 (or however many) al-Samoud missiles plus his cyanide pill without inspectors even being needed.
Or he might have been kidnapped and locked up by Saddam.
Win-win for Tony Blair. He was a fool not to do it.
Or he might just have foreseen that it would bugger up his leadership prospects.
Win-win-win then!
Edit - more seriously, at the time it should have been offered (June 2001) Iraq was not really on the radar. Blair could have spun it as preparing Brown for the premiership by widening his experience and giving him international stature.
On topic, an excellent article as usual from David. Glad that his expert opinion somewhat matches my book, I’m green on Gove and Hunt (and Hammond) and most red on JRM and Boris.
I'm about the same. I'm so red on Jacob Recusant-Mosely that I'll probably have to sell our house if he ends up leader. I'm slightly less fucked if Boris gets it.
That could be a metaphor for the whole country.
Although if Corbyn gets in and nationalises everything but the kitchen sink...
Really, what is Corbyn going to do? Nationalise the railways? Big deal. They were shit when they were BR, they are shit now and they will be shit when they are Great Jeremy Railways. Nationalise water/gas/electricity? Good. I won't have to put with the nagging feeling that I am getting done up the shitpipe if I don't spend 200 hours researching 25 different suppliers and their hilariously complex offerings.
It is certainly on the face of it not a terrifying prospect. I'm given to understand it would be terrible, but more effort needs doing on why, as superficially nationalising a service which is shit is attractive.
The worst feature of the current rail set up is the toilets.
As Adonis said the other day Grayling is doing his best to persuade us all that the railways need nationalising.
So you want more power over the railways in Grayling’s hands?
In a word, no.
Adonis was speaking in the context of Labour's plans I guess. So someone I've never heard of will be in charge, unless they put Adonis into his favourite job.
While I agree, those of us in secure professional jobs including myself are pretty well insulated from the shocks of Brexit. SO is in the West Midlands, and in an export orientated sector of the economy as I recall.
It is rather like the bacon and the egg. The chicken is involved but the pig is commited.
On a point regarding export, as my day job is a cash accountant working for a small/medium exporter having the GBP/EUR at 1.40 as it was pre referendum was absolutely murderous. Now any sort of tariffs might lead us to set up a plaque or even warehouse in the EU if needs be but pre ref was no panacea
I've done quite nicely with sales to EU since the fall of the pound. But it is mainly making me think how much easier it would be if we simply joined the Euro.
It would have meant much more severe austerity after the crash had we been unable to devalue. Spain, Italy, Greece, Ireland, etc all saw dramatic real wage cuts on a much bigger scale and very high unemploymenty.
Water, rail, Royal Mail to be nationalised as previously announced. Plus looking at universal free Internet access for all (unless I misunderstood). That presumably involves mass nationalised of telecoms companies? Is this Labour policy?
Water, rail, Royal Mail to be nationalised as previously announced. Plus looking at universal free Internet access for all (unless I misunderstood). That presumably involves mass nationalised of telecoms companies? Is this Labour policy?
He's one to talk about rigging. The Labour leadership election is now rigged in favour of the hard left, Momentum is taking over key positions. He's stolen the word rigged from Trump, and "For the Many not the Few was Tony Blair's election slogan.
@Charles - on reflection, I realise I was wrong to make the personal comments I did earlier. I should not have done it and I apologise. I could and should have made my points without bringing you into it. For what it’s worth, I enjoy your posts and insights - however much I disagree with them - while I wish there were a lot more businesses in this country like your family’s. I am not a hater by nature and I ask you to treat this morning’s little episode as an aberration. My only excuse is a bad night’s sleep!
Thank you. Forgotten already
Thank-you!!
If no good deal is obtained, the City will be hurt so those working in it and associated sectors are not quite as insulated from Brexit as might be supposed, though they may be better able to cope than an unemployed car worker in Sunderland. Too soon to say what the implications of a car crash Brexit might be.
Water, rail, Royal Mail to be nationalised as previously announced. Plus looking at universal free Internet access for all (unless I misunderstood). That presumably involves mass nationalised of telecoms companies? Is this Labour policy?
He was interviewed on Sky during the paper review and apart from a leftie academic no one else believed a word he said. He is a very dangerous politician for the well being of this country and the millions whose pensions would be decimated by his mad cap ideas
Water, rail, Royal Mail to be nationalised as previously announced. Plus looking at universal free Internet access for all (unless I misunderstood). That presumably involves mass nationalised of telecoms companies? Is this Labour policy?
He's one to talk about rigging. The Labour leadership election is now rigged in favour of the hard left, Momentum is taking over key positions. He's stolen the word rigged from Trump, and "For the Many not the Few was Tony Blair's election slogan.
You have to admire his fiscal responsibility in not handing over a shedload of money to PR companies when he adopted perfectly serviceable and successful slogans at no cost to the party.
51 votes for Fox. I must admit that I had expunged that from my memory. The nutter element in this party is not small, even post Cameron. It makes rational prediction problematic.
Remember in 2005 Fox was the only bona fide Eurosceptic in the contest.
David Cameron was unknown and seen as a bit of a liberal on other things.
Ken Clarke no comment required about his euroscepticism.
David Davis was distrusted/hated by eurosceptics following his stint as a whip during the Maastricht treaty and felt he had gone native during his stint as Europe Minister during the fag end of the Major years.
That's really what I mean. 51 MPs whose job and promotion prospect depended on the leader were willing to vote for a complete prat like Fox instead of someone sane like Cameron because of their ideological stance. Go back further and you have a party which chose IDS over Clarke. I am a Euro-sceptic who voted leave and such irrationality frankly scares me. Such people should have no say over the running of Roger's fish and chip shop, let alone the country.
The worst feature of the current rail set up is the toilets.
An oddity by the current dismal standards is Eurostar, where the standard carriages are OK but nothing special but the toilets are superb - more spacious and possibly cleaner than the one I have at home.
A more serious comment is that nationalisation is funded by debt, not as ydoethur implies by current spending, so it's oversimplified to say we couldn't spend money on a decent service because we'd have given it all to shareholders.
Attitudes to government debt in even Conservative opinion are oddly variable - sometimes it's a terrible crisis requiring immediate extreme action (which then tends not to happen, but serves to win an election or two), sometimes meh, it needs to be brought down sometime. It's clearly a long-term drain on the exchequer, though a productive investment may yield a countervailing income flow that outbalances it. That's the case for major investment in airports, HS2, and so on, and there's a fair case for saying that a unified rail system would be more cost-effective than the current mess. I'm mildly in favour but it's not really top priority IMO, and gradual nationalisation when the franchises run out (so compensation is essentially zero) seems a good plan.
Water, rail, Royal Mail to be nationalised as previously announced. Plus looking at universal free Internet access for all (unless I misunderstood). That presumably involves mass nationalised of telecoms companies? Is this Labour policy?
He looks like a character from 'On The Buses'. Have they even sold Burgundy V neck sweaters in the last 40 years?
Water, rail, Royal Mail to be nationalised as previously announced. Plus looking at universal free Internet access for all (unless I misunderstood). That presumably involves mass nationalised of telecoms companies? Is this Labour policy?
I would be fully in favour of Openreach and BT being demerged. Openreach might be better in public ownership given its nature if it can be bought at a reasonable price. But as Treasury civil servants and Macdonnell would be doing the haggling that seems unlikely.
Edit - and he's right about the wealthy elite too. Why, there's one political party whose leader was raised in a seven-bedroom house, got two Es at A-level but rose to the top essentially because of his father's connections!
51 votes for Fox. I must admit that I had expunged that from my memory. The nutter element in this party is not small, even post Cameron. It makes rational prediction problematic.
Remember in 2005 Fox was the only bona fide Eurosceptic in the contest.
David Cameron was unknown and seen as a bit of a liberal on other things.
Ken Clarke no comment required about his euroscepticism.
David Davis was distrusted/hated by eurosceptics following his stint as a whip during the Maastricht treaty and felt he had gone native during his stint as Europe Minister during the fag end of the Major years.
That's really what I mean. 51 MPs whose job and promotion prospect depended on the leader were willing to vote for a complete prat like Fox instead of someone sane like Cameron because of their ideological stance. Go back further and you have a party which chose IDS over Clarke. I am a Euro-sceptic who voted leave and such irrationality frankly scares me. Such people should have no say over the running of Roger's fish and chip shop, let alone the country.
Sadly winning the referendum has only emboldened them.
Water, rail, Royal Mail to be nationalised as previously announced. Plus looking at universal free Internet access for all (unless I misunderstood). That presumably involves mass nationalised of telecoms companies? Is this Labour policy?
He's one to talk about rigging. The Labour leadership election is now rigged in favour of the hard left, Momentum is taking over key positions. He's stolen the word rigged from Trump, and "For the Many not the Few was Tony Blair's election slogan.
I always imagined "for the many not the few" was some SpAd's joke taken from Star Trek's "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" but it is in Labour's Clause 4 now (the Tony Blair remix) so I'm not sure how much I'd read into it as a portent of full-scale revolution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clause_IV
While I agree, those of us in secure professional jobs including myself are pretty well insulated from the shocks of Brexit. SO is in the West Midlands, and in an export orientated sector of the economy as I recall.
It is rather like the bacon and the egg. The chicken is involved but the pig is commited.
On a point regarding export, as my day job is a cash accountant working for a small/medium exporter having the GBP/EUR at 1.40 as it was pre referendum was absolutely murderous. Now any sort of tariffs might lead us to set up a plaque or even warehouse in the EU if needs be but pre ref was no panacea
I've done quite nicely with sales to EU since the fall of the pound. But it is mainly making me think how much easier it would be if we simply joined the Euro.
It would have meant much more severe austerity after the crash had we been unable to devalue. Spain, Italy, Greece, Ireland, etc all saw dramatic real wage cuts on a much bigger scale and very high unemploymenty.
With both goods and service imports from the EU up last quarter, widening the trade deficit, it seems that the benefit of devaluation has worn off. Another one required? or is serial devaluation really not the cure for our economic ills?
Water, rail, Royal Mail to be nationalised as previously announced. Plus looking at universal free Internet access for all (unless I misunderstood). That presumably involves mass nationalised of telecoms companies? Is this Labour policy?
He's one to talk about rigging. The Labour leadership election is now rigged in favour of the hard left, Momentum is taking over key positions. He's stolen the word rigged from Trump, and "For the Many not the Few was Tony Blair's election slogan.
You have to admire his fiscal responsibility in not handing over a shedload of money to PR companies when he adopted perfectly serviceable and successful slogans at no cost to the party.
And his prudence in not forking out for a new jumper since 1968.
Comments
Despite being out of favour Priti Patel certainly wants to be PM
At Northern Ireland Karen Bradley 100 has the scope to do eyecatching work such as with the hard border issue and getting a Northern Ireland govt back.
Can also make cases for Liz Truss,Claire Perry and Suella Fernandez
Suppose the SPD members vote Nein to a deal. Does Merkel stay as CDU leader for the ensuing election? Might she step down after said election?
Good morning.
Hence I suspect any leadership contest in next 2 years will end up being between Gove and Hunt.
It was however consistent with his general take on the EU, which is well characterised as that of a 'diffident Remainer'.
If Brexit has happened, the electorate will overwhelmingly want a leader who wants to move forward, and whether someone favoured one side or the other back in the day will look quite irrelevant even to most Tory members. Gove looks good because he has interesting ideas, Hunt looks good because he's Mr Calm Stability. Boris appeals to people who want entertainment in politics (not a trivial number) and to Tories who think he's a winner. On balance I think Hunt will come through, but I'm talking my book.
My only caveat would be that circumstances could change rapidly and unpredictably, in which case a realignment of bets is likely to be called for. But if I were starting with a blank sheet, I would certainly follow DH's advice.
Whilst Corbyn's vision for the country was inspiring (to some) even some of the more pro EU people struggled to be really enthusiastic about the EU, well before the vote anyway.
If the media had given Corbyn's campaign a bit more attention rather than just the Tories it might have helped, it certainly did in the general election but the broadcasters rules didn't apply in the same way.
Labour should have picked someone better than Johnson as head of the official campaign, surely there were more charismatic options?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2l5IKeO-9I
2 hours 18 minutes and 50 seconds in. Smile wiped off Cameron's face.
On Tory leadership contenders, I think Hunt is a better option for them than Gove, Boris, and JRM. The latter three are pretty divisive figures, whereas I’ve not seen too much evidence outside of twitter that Hunt is massively disliked. I should say I’m not his biggest fan by any stretch of the imagination.
Previously, I used to think his big issue was that he was very bland. However in the long term, him not getting too involved with the culture war issues, and that tweet to Trump should help his standing with voters IMHO.
Although if Corbyn gets in and nationalises everything but the kitchen sink...
And I say that as someone who IS fanatical - I think the EU is great, and would have no problem with it moving to becoming a single country. But I recognise that it's an unusual view, reflecting my many years abroad.
Or he might have been kidnapped and locked up by Saddam.
Win-win for Tony Blair. He was a fool not to do it.
There was a reason they were nationalised!
But that list of 70 is possibles, not supporters.
Personally, I believe Boris will prevail. But I am green on JRM, Gove, Boris and Rudd. And massively green on good old Hunt.
David Cameron was unknown and seen as a bit of a liberal on other things.
Ken Clarke no comment required about his euroscepticism.
David Davis was distrusted/hated by eurosceptics following his stint as a whip during the Maastricht treaty and felt he had gone native during his stint as Europe Minister during the fag end of the Major years.
Ultimately the key thing to remember about all of them is that their overheads were so high, fares so restricted (indeed Wolmar claims in what it has to be said even by his standards is a surreal remark that they were effectively nationalised because of the fare pricing structure) and the common carrier obligation so onerous that they all ran, every year, at a loss. So from that point of view the exercise was a failure and nationalisation post war was a logical option.
What I think people, including Corbyn and Macdonnell, don't quite get is that there is a high price tag attached to it. Although Dalton tried to pay peanuts in compensation (bizarrely spun by its supporters as 'too generous') it was still an expensive process and ironically left no money over for refurbishment. Indeed, on the Southern which had spent vast sums on refurbishing its track from 1945-48 spending came to a juddering halt and what should have been the most lucrative part of the network later became the most burdensome.
If Corbyn and Macdonnell have to spend even half the value of the water companies nationalising them - and that's optimistic - that's £45 billion we won't see again and that they didn't allow for in their so-called 'fully costed' manifesto.Where then do we find the money to improve the pipes, which yes, is badly needed?
A more effective course of action would be for the government to pump that £45 billion into the companies in exchange for 50% of the equity on a preference basis. But that's ideologically unacceptable to both sides. To sum up, of course people like nationalisation if they think it's something for nothing. It's Brexit bus claims with less risk from that point of view. Until you explain that that's a lie and it's a costly process for no benefit.
Not necessarily so. One of life's gifts is in knowing one's limitations. May had greatness thrust upon her, but is clearly neither up to it nor enjoying it. Hammond is reliable. A safe pair of hands. Nothing more.
In terms of David's magisterial article, I almost don't care who succeeds May. However, I'm a founder member of the 'Anyone but Williamson' movement.
We could see at least a dozen contenders in the first ballot, which could see weeks of voting and elimination which makes life interesting.
I've written off Gavin Williamson, not only is he rubbish, he's pissed off way too many people and he's so nakedly ambitious about it.
Worst of all he's Mrs May's choice to succeed her and her actions have harmed him.
Edit - more seriously, at the time it should have been offered (June 2001) Iraq was not really on the radar. Blair could have spun it as preparing Brown for the premiership by widening his experience and giving him international stature.
I hope they smash Divers FC
Adonis was speaking in the context of Labour's plans I guess. So someone I've never heard of will be in charge, unless they put Adonis into his favourite job.
https://twitter.com/johnmcdonnellMP/status/962234705721479169
Water, rail, Royal Mail to be nationalised as previously announced. Plus looking at universal free Internet access for all (unless I misunderstood). That presumably involves mass nationalised of telecoms companies? Is this Labour policy?
Best price appears to be with Betfair's Sportsbook of 14/5.
On topic, thanks to @DavidHerdson for this analysis. Why no Sajid Javid, though?
A more serious comment is that nationalisation is funded by debt, not as ydoethur implies by current spending, so it's oversimplified to say we couldn't spend money on a decent service because we'd have given it all to shareholders.
Attitudes to government debt in even Conservative opinion are oddly variable - sometimes it's a terrible crisis requiring immediate extreme action (which then tends not to happen, but serves to win an election or two), sometimes meh, it needs to be brought down sometime. It's clearly a long-term drain on the exchequer, though a productive investment may yield a countervailing income flow that outbalances it. That's the case for major investment in airports, HS2, and so on, and there's a fair case for saying that a unified rail system would be more cost-effective than the current mess. I'm mildly in favour but it's not really top priority IMO, and gradual nationalisation when the franchises run out (so compensation is essentially zero) seems a good plan.
https://twitter.com/DaisyyMeadows/status/962071518128652289
Happy Pizza Day! All the best national deals in one place
Edit - and he's right about the wealthy elite too. Why, there's one political party whose leader was raised in a seven-bedroom house, got two Es at A-level but rose to the top essentially because of his father's connections!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clause_IV