If Bercow is ousted, does he have to resign his seat - or can he take up as a Conservative MP again? That would seem a bit off...
But if Hoyle gets the gig, it presumably helps the Tory's majority? Which may be a reason Labour MPs won't want him....
I don't have it to hand but Erskine May I believe goes so far as to say usually retiring speakers become cross bench peers.
Though Bercow does not like tradition of course.
Recalling the furore about Martin, one thing that was clear at the time is that there’s no way of actually getting rid of a Speaker, he has to resign of his own volition. I don’t think that procedure has changed in the intervening period.
So: Bercow can choose not to call a motion of no confidence in himself. He can refuse to put it to the vote. If there is a vote in the Commons it will be publicly recorded, giving him a handy list of enemies. If he loses a VoC he is not obliged to resign. etc...
Could a deputy speaker call a motion of no confidence in his boss? That would be considered somewhat unparliamentary and cause even more problems.
Anyone else have any idea of how to get rid of him? Could he be censured as an MP for the abuse claims, and suspended from Parliament under a process from which would be obliged to recuse himself?
Mr. B, yeah, although for Xi as well, I think. If he makes removing him peacefully impossible, then it'll happen through violence. Qin Xi Huangdi couldn't rule forever, and neither will Xi.
Edited extra bit: well, possibly he'll hang on until he dies, but then there'll be bloodletting over the succession.
Being part of the reason they instituted their term system no doubt. He's managed to consolidate things pretty effectively in a little over 1 term.
Interesting article about the man running Trump's trade policy. Although he sees China as the biggest problem, it doesn't look he's getting much traction there. China is probably too powerful. His main objectives are to repatriate supply chains to the US from the weaker members of NAFTA, ie Mexico and Canada, and to duff up South Korea.
Mr. B, yeah, although for Xi as well, I think. If he makes removing him peacefully impossible, then it'll happen through violence. Qin Xi Huangdi couldn't rule forever, and neither will Xi.
Edited extra bit: well, possibly he'll hang on until he dies, but then there'll be bloodletting over the succession.
At least with a monarchy there's normally a generally accepted set of rules to determine the succession, but in a dictatorship even that is missing.
Mr. kle4, yeah, and the anti-corruption drive may have magically removed many of his potential rivals too.
But no reign lasts forever. His actions may have secured him longevity at the cost of a peaceful transition and stable retirement.
Indeed. Perhaps Putin has had the right idea in keeping term limits for consecutive terms - he has a method to go on as long as he wants, but an out to bow out if he wants.
Or maybe hell just get rid of the restrictions next time.
Mr. B, yeah, although for Xi as well, I think. If he makes removing him peacefully impossible, then it'll happen through violence. Qin Xi Huangdi couldn't rule forever, and neither will Xi.
Edited extra bit: well, possibly he'll hang on until he dies, but then there'll be bloodletting over the succession.
At least with a monarchy there's normally a generally accepted set of rules to determine the succession, but in a dictatorship even that is missing.
Probably one reason why several dictatorships turn into de facto monarchies.
Mr. Me, but China had such rules. Two terms, then retirement. Designated successor takes over.
Whilst not democratic, it was stable.
Mr. kle4, there were interesting rumours that Putin was thinking of inviting Prince Michael of Kent to become Czar. Having a permanent ceremonial head of state would've enabled Putin to take on a political position on a permanent basis.
Whatever else we think of Putin, he's very sharp. It will be interesting to see how he manages his exit.
Perhaps, though it is also possible there is a tax-credits type scenario where patients at the margin move in and out of eligibility, often without knowing it, depending whether or not they worked an extra shift one week.
Mr. Me, but China had such rules. Two terms, then retirement. Designated successor takes over.
Whilst not democratic, it was stable.
Mr. kle4, there were interesting rumours that Putin was thinking of inviting Prince Michael of Kent to become Czar. Having a permanent ceremonial head of state would've enabled Putin to take on a political position on a permanent basis.
Whatever else we think of Putin, he's very sharp. It will be interesting to see how he manages his exit.
Mr. kle4, yeah, and the anti-corruption drive may have magically removed many of his potential rivals too.
But no reign lasts forever. His actions may have secured him longevity at the cost of a peaceful transition and stable retirement.
Indeed. Perhaps Putin has had the right idea in keeping term limits for consecutive terms - he has a method to go on as long as he wants, but an out to bow out if he wants.
Or maybe hell just get rid of the restrictions next time.
The conjecture in Russian language media is that he'll make the State Council the main governing body (it is currently only advisory) and appoint himself Chairman reducing the President's job to that of a ceremonial figurehead. Konyechno, Chairman of the State Council has no inconvenient term limits.
Interesting article about the man running Trump's trade policy. Although he sees China as the biggest problem, it doesn't look he's getting much traction there. China is probably too powerful. His main objectives are to repatriate supply chains to the US from the weaker members of NAFTA, ie Mexico and Canada, and to duff up South Korea.
Apparently not much Chinese steel goes to the USA. the three biggest sources are Canada, Brazil and Canada. Only 2% of Chines steel is exported to the USA, though presumably it has some effect on suppressing world prices.
Perhaps, though it is also possible there is a tax-credits type scenario where patients at the margin move in and out of eligibility, often without knowing it, depending whether or not they worked an extra shift one week.
And if Hammond had said "yes, it is worth it" - he would have been bogged down in "so what has changed your mind about Brexit?". And if he had said "no, it is not worth it" he would have been bogged down in "so why do we have a Chancellor who does not believe it is right to implement the will of the voters? Plus, he'd be facing umpteen MPs calling for him to be fired.
Hammond would say the same formulation a thousand times a week, if asked.
Is Tom Newton Dunn really that naive about how politics works to think this is worth tweeting about?
Mr. Me, but China had such rules. Two terms, then retirement. Designated successor takes over.
Whilst not democratic, it was stable.
Mr. kle4, there were interesting rumours that Putin was thinking of inviting Prince Michael of Kent to become Czar. Having a permanent ceremonial head of state would've enabled Putin to take on a political position on a permanent basis.
Whatever else we think of Putin, he's very sharp. It will be interesting to see how he manages his exit.
Yes, that's why this it's such a retrograde step for China, but the absence of term limits is not a problem for a constitutional monarchy or a democracy.
Perhaps, though it is also possible there is a tax-credits type scenario where patients at the margin move in and out of eligibility, often without knowing it, depending whether or not they worked an extra shift one week.
In general I think that term limits are anti-democratic in a democracy, but they are vital in bringing stability to the collective dictatorship that ruled China between Mao and Xi.
And if Hammond had said "yes, it is worth it" - he would have been bogged down in "so what has changed your mind about Brexit?". And if he had said "no, it is not worth it" he would have been bogged down in "so why do we have a Chancellor who does not believe it is right to implement the will of the voters? Plus, he'd be facing umpteen MPs calling for him to be fired.
Hammond would say the same formulation a thousand times a week, if asked.
Is Tom Newton Dunn really that naive about how politics works to think this is worth tweeting about?
Page 61 'Reflections upon the character or actions of the Speaker may be punished as breaches of privilege. His action cannot be criticised incidentally in debate or upon any form of proceeding except a substantive motion
If Bercow is to go, it is recommended they give at least 10 days' notice. As it notes 'On the last two occasions in 2000 and 2009, considerable notice of the retirement of the Speaker was given'. So come on Bercow, tell us your plans!
And if Hammond had said "yes, it is worth it" - he would have been bogged down in "so what has changed your mind about Brexit?". And if he had said "no, it is not worth it" he would have been bogged down in "so why do we have a Chancellor who does not believe it is right to implement the will of the voters? Plus, he'd be facing umpteen MPs calling for him to be fired.
Hammond would say the same formulation a thousand times a week, if asked.
Is Tom Newton Dunn really that naive about how politics works to think this is worth tweeting about?
Nah. The Chancellor giving the most lukewarm defence possible of government policy is a big deal that somehow we take for granted in these mad political times.
Perhaps, though it is also possible there is a tax-credits type scenario where patients at the margin move in and out of eligibility, often without knowing it, depending whether or not they worked an extra shift one week.
In general I think that term limits are anti-democratic in a democracy, but they are vital in bringing stability to the collective dictatorship that ruled China between Mao and Xi.
The President of Bolivia would agree with you - although he only agreed after the proposal to amend the constitution - which he himself had put in place - to get rid of term limits, was not approved by the people. Cannot always trust the people of course.
In all seriousness we seem to get by mostly fine without term limits, it's damn hard to stay at the top of our politics for more than a few terms, but I can see why democracies and less personally focused dictatorships find them to be a good thing.
Mr. Me, but China had such rules. Two terms, then retirement. Designated successor takes over.
Whilst not democratic, it was stable.
Mr. kle4, there were interesting rumours that Putin was thinking of inviting Prince Michael of Kent to become Czar. Having a permanent ceremonial head of state would've enabled Putin to take on a political position on a permanent basis.
Whatever else we think of Putin, he's very sharp. It will be interesting to see how he manages his exit.
The FCO vetoed it (as they did Prince Edward becoming King of Estonia). They are worried about the precedent set by the former Duke of Albany (stripped)
I see nothing unusual about that. He obviously is a remainer but recognises the vote and accepts it and is working to make it happen.
Indeed I am in the same place
Isn't May in the same place as that? She may have done, but I don't really recall her saying whether she was wrong to oppose Brexit, in which case she believes the best option for us would have been to remain, just that it is no longer supportable due to the referendum.
Mr. Me, but China had such rules. Two terms, then retirement. Designated successor takes over.
Whilst not democratic, it was stable.
Mr. kle4, there were interesting rumours that Putin was thinking of inviting Prince Michael of Kent to become Czar. Having a permanent ceremonial head of state would've enabled Putin to take on a political position on a permanent basis.
Whatever else we think of Putin, he's very sharp. It will be interesting to see how he manages his exit.
Perhaps, though it is also possible there is a tax-credits type scenario where patients at the margin move in and out of eligibility, often without knowing it, depending whether or not they worked an extra shift one week.
ETA: not to mention a one-third false penalty rate is scandalous whatever the status of the other two thirds.
Prescription charges in England are at a penal level.
Precription charges do not come close to covering the cost for many items, though are inflated for others.
Why should they?
I have no particular axe to grind on this, and only something like a quarter of prescriptions incur a charge, just pointing out that the charges are not penal.
I see nothing unusual about that. He obviously is a remainer but recognises the vote and accepts it and is working to make it happen.
Indeed I am in the same place
Isn't May in the same place as that? She may have done, but I don't really recall her saying whether she was wrong to oppose Brexit, in which case she believes the best option for us would have been to remain, just that it is no longer supportable due to the referendum.
In a very humble way I would suggest TM, Hammond and myself are all of the same mind
Perhaps, though it is also possible there is a tax-credits type scenario where patients at the margin move in and out of eligibility, often without knowing it, depending whether or not they worked an extra shift one week.
And if Hammond had said "yes, it is worth it" - he would have been bogged down in "so what has changed your mind about Brexit?". And if he had said "no, it is not worth it" he would have been bogged down in "so why do we have a Chancellor who does not believe it is right to implement the will of the voters? Plus, he'd be facing umpteen MPs calling for him to be fired.
Hammond would say the same formulation a thousand times a week, if asked.
Is Tom Newton Dunn really that naive about how politics works to think this is worth tweeting about?
Nah. The Chancellor giving the most lukewarm defence possible of government policy is a big deal that somehow we take for granted in these mad political times.
Given we know how much Blair and Brown disagreed with each other and lied to the public about it, is that example really that much more mad than now? It probably is madder now, but a Chancellor being lukewarm on official policy is probably not the sign of the end times.
That sign is JRM and Corbyn being favourites for the PM post.
Just checked on Wikipedia, remembered that Gove had some connection with Scottish Fishing. Gove and Ruthie continuing in the effort to split the fishing communities from the SNP.
"Gove was born in Edinburgh and originally forenamed Graham by his biological mother;[14] at the age of four months he was adopted by a Labour-supporting family in Aberdeen, where he was brought up.[15] His adoptive father ran a fish processing business; his adoptive mother was a lab assistant at the University of Aberdeen before working at the Aberdeen School for the Deaf.[16]"
Both self seeking and happy that Tories will sell the fools down the river when it comes to it. They can they try to pretend they were against the NE fools being shafted by the Tories yet again.
Mr. Jonathan, stranger things have happened. Julian the Apostate was effectively plucked from a library to govern half the Roman Empire (largely on the basis that all the emperor's other male relatives were dead, but still). Even odder, he turned out to be really good at it.
Reverting to form, the Scots? Well, SCON reached some dizzying heights (for them in recent decades) and can be proud if that.
LOL, Labour poll by Labour dummies, deluded half wits.
Well I did put it as a question mark. If Labour are not rapidly gaining on the SNP then presumably the Tories are still either maintaining parity with SLAB or exceeding them, or the SNP are reestablishing an even bigger lead.
Perhaps, though it is also possible there is a tax-credits type scenario where patients at the margin move in and out of eligibility, often without knowing it, depending whether or not they worked an extra shift one week.
ETA: not to mention a one-third false penalty rate is scandalous whatever the status of the other two thirds.
Prescription charges in England are at a penal level.
Precription charges do not come close to covering the cost for many items, though are inflated for others.
My gp seems to have too much time on his hands, since he has just, out of the blue, decided to prescribe me vitamin D in batches of 28 @£8.60. That's £112 a year, whereas I can get a year's supply for £7.99 elsewhere. Doesn't worry me because I am exempt anyway, but if there are low income people out there paying that for something whose benefits are so microscopic, I am happy to be outraged on their behalf. I am aware of the argument that some prescriptions are sold at a loss, but I'd love to see who wins overall.
And if Hammond had said "yes, it is worth it" - he would have been bogged down in "so what has changed your mind about Brexit?". And if he had said "no, it is not worth it" he would have been bogged down in "so why do we have a Chancellor who does not believe it is right to implement the will of the voters? Plus, he'd be facing umpteen MPs calling for him to be fired.
Hammond would say the same formulation a thousand times a week, if asked.
Is Tom Newton Dunn really that naive about how politics works to think this is worth tweeting about?
Nah. The Chancellor giving the most lukewarm defence possible of government policy is a big deal that somehow we take for granted in these mad political times.
Given we know how much Blair and Brown disagreed with each other and lied to the public about it, is that example really that much more mad than now? It probably is madder now, but a Chancellor being lukewarm on official policy is probably not the sign of the end times.
That sign is JRM and Corbyn being favourites for the PM post.
It's definitely madder now. Rationality, experts, pragmatism all yesterday's news. We've moved to a position where faith in Brexit, faith in the Jezziah win the day.
And if Hammond had said "yes, it is worth it" - he would have been bogged down in "so what has changed your mind about Brexit?". And if he had said "no, it is not worth it" he would have been bogged down in "so why do we have a Chancellor who does not believe it is right to implement the will of the voters? Plus, he'd be facing umpteen MPs calling for him to be fired.
Hammond would say the same formulation a thousand times a week, if asked.
Is Tom Newton Dunn really that naive about how politics works to think this is worth tweeting about?
Nah. The Chancellor giving the most lukewarm defence possible of government policy is a big deal that somehow we take for granted in these mad political times.
Given we know how much Blair and Brown disagreed with each other and lied to the public about it, is that example really that much more mad than now? It probably is madder now, but a Chancellor being lukewarm on official policy is probably not the sign of the end times.
That sign is JRM and Corbyn being favourites for the PM post.
It's definitely madder now. Rationality, experts, pragmatism all yesterday's news. We've moved to a position where faith in Brexit, faith in the Jezziah win the day.
Probably - but Hammond's lukewarm comments are not so amazingly unusual as to be indicative of those mad times.
Perhaps, though it is also possible there is a tax-credits type scenario where patients at the margin move in and out of eligibility, often without knowing it, depending whether or not they worked an extra shift one week.
ETA: not to mention a one-third false penalty rate is scandalous whatever the status of the other two thirds.
Prescription charges in England are at a penal level.
Precription charges do not come close to covering the cost for many items, though are inflated for others.
My gp seems to have too much time on his hands, since he has just, out of the blue, decided to prescribe me vitamin D in batches of 28 @£8.60. That's £112 a year, whereas I can get a year's supply for £7.99 elsewhere. Doesn't worry me because I am exempt anyway, but if there are low income people out there paying that for something whose benefits are so microscopic, I am happy to be outraged on their behalf. I am aware of the argument that some prescriptions are sold at a loss, but I'd love to see who wins overall.
RX Vitamin D (I’m assuming you are getting Adcal D3 or something) is stronger than the CHC formulation (although I am sceptical about the benefits)
There is a competition issue though since Takeda bought Adcal - their Nycomed unit owned the other main brand in the space and Gx versions haven’t mastered the chewable formulation that patients prefer
And if Hammond had said "yes, it is worth it" - he would have been bogged down in "so what has changed your mind about Brexit?". And if he had said "no, it is not worth it" he would have been bogged down in "so why do we have a Chancellor who does not believe it is right to implement the will of the voters? Plus, he'd be facing umpteen MPs calling for him to be fired.
Hammond would say the same formulation a thousand times a week, if asked.
Is Tom Newton Dunn really that naive about how politics works to think this is worth tweeting about?
Nah. The Chancellor giving the most lukewarm defence possible of government policy is a big deal that somehow we take for granted in these mad political times.
Nonsense. He's just speaking for a large section of the electorate - and indeed his own party.
And if Hammond had said "yes, it is worth it" - he would have been bogged down in "so what has changed your mind about Brexit?". And if he had said "no, it is not worth it" he would have been bogged down in "so why do we have a Chancellor who does not believe it is right to implement the will of the voters? Plus, he'd be facing umpteen MPs calling for him to be fired.
Hammond would say the same formulation a thousand times a week, if asked.
Is Tom Newton Dunn really that naive about how politics works to think this is worth tweeting about?
Nah. The Chancellor giving the most lukewarm defence possible of government policy is a big deal that somehow we take for granted in these mad political times.
Given we know how much Blair and Brown disagreed with each other and lied to the public about it, is that example really that much more mad than now? It probably is madder now, but a Chancellor being lukewarm on official policy is probably not the sign of the end times.
That sign is JRM and Corbyn being favourites for the PM post.
It's definitely madder now. Rationality, experts, pragmatism all yesterday's news. We've moved to a position where faith in Brexit, faith in the Jezziah win the day.
Probably - but Hammond's lukewarm comments are not so amazingly unusual as to be indicative of those mad times.
On the contrary .this is the time for leadership. This is not leadership.
Mr. Jonathan, stranger things have happened. Julian the Apostate was effectively plucked from a library to govern half the Roman Empire (largely on the basis that all the emperor's other male relatives were dead, but still). Even odder, he turned out to be really good at it.
Wiki
In 360, Julian was proclaimed Augustus by his soldiers at Lutetia (Paris), sparking a civil war with Constantius. However, Constantius died before the two could face each other in battle, and named Julian as his successor
1) Godsdamned soliders proclaiming their generals Augustus causing all manner of problems.
2) Awfully convenient Constantius dying but naming as his successor the guy he wsa about to fight in a civil war
And if Hammond had said "yes, it is worth it" - he would have been bogged down in "so what has changed your mind about Brexit?". And if he had said "no, it is not worth it" he would have been bogged down in "so why do we have a Chancellor who does not believe it is right to implement the will of the voters? Plus, he'd be facing umpteen MPs calling for him to be fired.
Hammond would say the same formulation a thousand times a week, if asked.
Is Tom Newton Dunn really that naive about how politics works to think this is worth tweeting about?
Nah. The Chancellor giving the most lukewarm defence possible of government policy is a big deal that somehow we take for granted in these mad political times.
Given we know how much Blair and Brown disagreed with each other and lied to the public about it, is that example really that much more mad than now? It probably is madder now, but a Chancellor being lukewarm on official policy is probably not the sign of the end times.
That sign is JRM and Corbyn being favourites for the PM post.
It's definitely madder now. Rationality, experts, pragmatism all yesterday's news. We've moved to a position where faith in Brexit, faith in the Jezziah win the day.
Probably - but Hammond's lukewarm comments are not so amazingly unusual as to be indicative of those mad times.
On the contrary .this is the time for leadership. This is not leadership.
And if Hammond had said "yes, it is worth it" - he would have been bogged down in "so what has changed your mind about Brexit?". And if he had said "no, it is not worth it" he would have been bogged down in "so why do we have a Chancellor who does not believe it is right to implement the will of the voters? Plus, he'd be facing umpteen MPs calling for him to be fired.
Hammond would say the same formulation a thousand times a week, if asked.
Is Tom Newton Dunn really that naive about how politics works to think this is worth tweeting about?
Nah. The Chancellor giving the most lukewarm defence possible of government policy is a big deal that somehow we take for granted in these mad political times.
Given we know how much Blair and Brown disagreed with each other and lied to the public about it, is that example really that much more mad than now? It probably is madder now, but a Chancellor being lukewarm on official policy is probably not the sign of the end times.
That sign is JRM and Corbyn being favourites for the PM post.
It's definitely madder now. Rationality, experts, pragmatism all yesterday's news. We've moved to a position where faith in Brexit, faith in the Jezziah win the day.
Probably - but Hammond's lukewarm comments are not so amazingly unusual as to be indicative of those mad times.
On the contrary .this is the time for leadership. This is not leadership.
Oh I agree - I'm merely stating lack of leadership is not itself a sign we are in mad times. The consequences of its lack are, however, more acute.
And if Hammond had said "yes, it is worth it" - he would have been bogged down in "so what has changed your mind about Brexit?". And if he had said "no, it is not worth it" he would have been bogged down in "so why do we have a Chancellor who does not believe it is right to implement the will of the voters? Plus, he'd be facing umpteen MPs calling for him to be fired.
Hammond would say the same formulation a thousand times a week, if asked.
Is Tom Newton Dunn really that naive about how politics works to think this is worth tweeting about?
Nah. The Chancellor giving the most lukewarm defence possible of government policy is a big deal that somehow we take for granted in these mad political times.
Nonsense. He's just speaking for a large section of the electorate - and indeed his own party.
He is THE Chancellor of the Exchequer. And he can't publicly get behind his own government? That's not good for them or us.
Reverting to form, the Scots? Well, SCON reached some dizzying heights (for them in recent decades) and can be proud if that.
LOL, Labour poll by Labour dummies, deluded half wits.
Well I did put it as a question mark. If Labour are not rapidly gaining on the SNP then presumably the Tories are still either maintaining parity with SLAB or exceeding them, or the SNP are reestablishing an even bigger lead.
Last real poll I saw had SNP slightly up , Labour up and Tories down. No signs yet of any move from SNP , though the absolute clowns in Labour probably believe they are popular. Looking at their conference in Dundee this weekend there were plenty of gaps and balconies were totally empty, so no sign of any popularity that I can see.
Mr. Charles, Takeda? Are they descendants of Shingen Takeda (or Takeda Shingen, if you like), the Tiger of Kai?
He was one of the foremost Japanese generals of the war-ridden 16th century. And people say videogames aren't educational.
Mr. kle4, Julian holds the record for the most flawless victory in any civil war. To be honest, I haven't read any serious allegations of foul play. Not impossible, but loads of people got sick and died at that time in history. If there were suspicions, they would've been raised after Julian died (he was the Apostate, so claims of evil pagan magic etc would've fit the narrative, if people really believed his predecessor was poisoned).
I'm guessing the tenor of the piece won't be agreeing with this guy.
'Speaking on a visit to Scotland to campaign for Vote Leave, he argued that control over fisheries agriculture and even immigration could be transferred to the Scottish Parliament after a Brexit vote.'
I see nothing unusual about that. He obviously is a remainer but recognises the vote and accepts it and is working to make it happen.
Indeed I am in the same place
But you have to wonder about the wisdom of a project that can't even win over people actively involved in it. When I get roped into working on something I don't really believe in I can usually find at least some redeeming feature.
Perhaps, though it is also possible there is a tax-credits type scenario where patients at the margin move in and out of eligibility, often without knowing it, depending whether or not they worked an extra shift one week.
ETA: not to mention a one-third false penalty rate is scandalous whatever the status of the other two thirds.
Prescription charges in England are at a penal level.
Substantially below the cost of medication
No. According to the published figures the average cost of a prescription is around £9. From April the charge in England will be £8.80. And the chances are that the expensive items are for long term treatment, where exemptions normally apply.
Mr. Jonathan, stranger things have happened. Julian the Apostate was effectively plucked from a library to govern half the Roman Empire (largely on the basis that all the emperor's other male relatives were dead, but still). Even odder, he turned out to be really good at it.
Wiki
In 360, Julian was proclaimed Augustus by his soldiers at Lutetia (Paris), sparking a civil war with Constantius. However, Constantius died before the two could face each other in battle, and named Julian as his successor
1) Godsdamned soliders proclaiming their generals Augustus causing all manner of problems.
2) Awfully convenient Constantius dying but naming as his successor the guy he wsa about to fight in a civil war
The easy way to think about it is that the Empire was no such thing; it was a democratic republic, with the catch that only the military got to vote.
And if Hammond had said "yes, it is worth it" - he would have been bogged down in "so what has changed your mind about Brexit?". And if he had said "no, it is not worth it" he would have been bogged down in "so why do we have a Chancellor who does not believe it is right to implement the will of the voters? Plus, he'd be facing umpteen MPs calling for him to be fired.
Hammond would say the same formulation a thousand times a week, if asked.
Is Tom Newton Dunn really that naive about how politics works to think this is worth tweeting about?
Nah. The Chancellor giving the most lukewarm defence possible of government policy is a big deal that somehow we take for granted in these mad political times.
Nonsense. He's just speaking for a large section of the electorate - and indeed his own party.
He is THE Chancellor of the Exchequer. And he can't publicly get behind his own government? That's not good for them or us.
I did not hear him say anything other than he supports TM and the government in his interview this morning
Mr. Charles, Takeda? Are they descendants of Shingen Takeda (or Takeda Shingen, if you like), the Tiger of Kai?
He was one of the foremost Japanese generals of the war-ridden 16th century. And people say videogames aren't educational.
Mr. kle4, Julian holds the record for the most flawless victory in any civil war. To be honest, I haven't read any serious allegations of foul play. Not impossible, but loads of people got sick and died at that time in history. If there were suspicions, they would've been raised after Julian died (he was the Apostate, so claims of evil pagan magic etc would've fit the narrative, if people really believed his predecessor was poisoned).
Numerian's death was more suspicious.
Video games have taught me at least the broad strokes of many periods of history. Very educational. Age of Mythology taught me how the Atlantians turned to Titan worship after they were betrayed by Poseidon, then led retaliatory strikes on the Egyptian and Norse deities after former allies attached them.
And really I was more thinking about how the grunts in a civil war feel when one guy dies and names the guy he was fighting as his successor. Must feel like a bit of a waste of time.
Perhaps, though it is also possible there is a tax-credits type scenario where patients at the margin move in and out of eligibility, often without knowing it, depending whether or not they worked an extra shift one week.
ETA: not to mention a one-third false penalty rate is scandalous whatever the status of the other two thirds.
Prescription charges in England are at a penal level.
Precription charges do not come close to covering the cost for many items, though are inflated for others.
Why should they?
I have no particular axe to grind on this, and only something like a quarter of prescriptions incur a charge, just pointing out that the charges are not penal.
I submit that the degree to which prescription charges cover the costs of the drugs bears no relationship to their affordability, and hence whether they can be considered penal.
I'm guessing the tenor of the piece won't be agreeing with this guy.
'Speaking on a visit to Scotland to campaign for Vote Leave, he argued that control over fisheries agriculture and even immigration could be transferred to the Scottish Parliament after a Brexit vote.'
I see nothing unusual about that. He obviously is a remainer but recognises the vote and accepts it and is working to make it happen.
Indeed I am in the same place
But you have to wonder about the wisdom of a project that can't even win over people actively involved in it. When I get roped into working on something I don't really believe in I can usually find at least some redeeming feature.
It is a belief in democracy that trumps everything and it is important to do the best you can to respect that democracy
Mr. Z, Augustus is to blame for that, and Tiberius. The former didn't set up any legal means of succession because he was busy pretending he was just first amongst equals and not an emperor. The latter invented the donative, perhaps the single most stupid and destructive policy needlessly introduced in Roman history.
The donative is a bonus paid to the army when there's a new emperor. It turned out not to be great for imperial life expectancy. And the sums grew so large it actually caused emperors to have to devalue the currency to pay it, and led to spikes (exceeding 0.1%) in inflation that made it difficult for the poor to afford food.
And if Hammond had said "yes, it is worth it" - he would have been bogged down in "so what has changed your mind about Brexit?". And if he had said "no, it is not worth it" he would have been bogged down in "so why do we have a Chancellor who does not believe it is right to implement the will of the voters? Plus, he'd be facing umpteen MPs calling for him to be fired.
Hammond would say the same formulation a thousand times a week, if asked.
Is Tom Newton Dunn really that naive about how politics works to think this is worth tweeting about?
Nah. The Chancellor giving the most lukewarm defence possible of government policy is a big deal that somehow we take for granted in these mad political times.
Nonsense. He's just speaking for a large section of the electorate - and indeed his own party.
He is THE Chancellor of the Exchequer. And he can't publicly get behind his own government? That's not good for them or us.
The policy of the government *is* that the people have voted to leave and that they will implement it
And if Hammond had said "yes, it is worth it" - he would have been bogged down in "so what has changed your mind about Brexit?". And if he had said "no, it is not worth it" he would have been bogged down in "so why do we have a Chancellor who does not believe it is right to implement the will of the voters? Plus, he'd be facing umpteen MPs calling for him to be fired.
Hammond would say the same formulation a thousand times a week, if asked.
Is Tom Newton Dunn really that naive about how politics works to think this is worth tweeting about?
Nah. The Chancellor giving the most lukewarm defence possible of government policy is a big deal that somehow we take for granted in these mad political times.
Nonsense. He's just speaking for a large section of the electorate - and indeed his own party.
He is THE Chancellor of the Exchequer. And he can't publicly get behind his own government? That's not good for them or us.
The policy of the government *is* that the people have voted to leave and that they will implement it
Perhaps, though it is also possible there is a tax-credits type scenario where patients at the margin move in and out of eligibility, often without knowing it, depending whether or not they worked an extra shift one week.
ETA: not to mention a one-third false penalty rate is scandalous whatever the status of the other two thirds.
Prescription charges in England are at a penal level.
Substantially below the cost of medication
No. According to the published figures the average cost of a prescription is around £9. From April the charge in England will be £8.80. And the chances are that the expensive items are for long term treatment, where exemptions normally apply.
Average numbers make no sense here.
People who are not on exemptions (ie young and generally healthy) will be getting the more expensive innovative medicines rather than generics
@AllieHBNews: BREAKING - Up to 500 #Salisbury drinker at The Mill Pub & diners at Zizzi restaurant told to wash possessions as a precaution after nerve agent traces found - more @bbcnews
Perhaps, though it is also possible there is a tax-credits type scenario where patients at the margin move in and out of eligibility, often without knowing it, depending whether or not they worked an extra shift one week.
ETA: not to mention a one-third false penalty rate is scandalous whatever the status of the other two thirds.
Prescription charges in England are at a penal level.
Precription charges do not come close to covering the cost for many items, though are inflated for others.
Why should they?
I have no particular axe to grind on this, and only something like a quarter of prescriptions incur a charge, just pointing out that the charges are not penal.
I submit that the degree to which prescription charges cover the costs of the drugs bears no relationship to their affordability, and hence whether they can be considered penal.
"only something like a quarter of prescriptions incur a charge" is part of what makes it penal, and there are lots of people for whom £8.60 per month per medication is not a trivial sum.
Perhaps, though it is also possible there is a tax-credits type scenario where patients at the margin move in and out of eligibility, often without knowing it, depending whether or not they worked an extra shift one week.
ETA: not to mention a one-third false penalty rate is scandalous whatever the status of the other two thirds.
Prescription charges in England are at a penal level.
Precription charges do not come close to covering the cost for many items, though are inflated for others.
Why should they?
I have no particular axe to grind on this, and only something like a quarter of prescriptions incur a charge, just pointing out that the charges are not penal.
I submit that the degree to which prescription charges cover the costs of the drugs bears no relationship to their affordability, and hence whether they can be considered penal.
"only something like a quarter of prescriptions incur a charge" is part of what makes it penal, and there are lots of people for whom £8.60 per month per medication is not a trivial sum.
The reason that most prescriptions are exempt is that repeat prescriptions are usually outside it. So they won't be paying £8.60 per month per medication.
@AllieHBNews: BREAKING - Up to 500 #Salisbury drinker at The Mill Pub & diners at Zizzi restaurant told to wash possessions as a precaution after nerve agent traces found - more @bbcnews
It has been a week, who would not have already washed their clothes, at best maybe coats or jackets may need washing.
Perhaps, though it is also possible there is a tax-credits type scenario where patients at the margin move in and out of eligibility, often without knowing it, depending whether or not they worked an extra shift one week.
ETA: not to mention a one-third false penalty rate is scandalous whatever the status of the other two thirds.
Prescription charges in England are at a penal level.
Substantially below the cost of medication
No. According to the published figures the average cost of a prescription is around £9. From April the charge in England will be £8.80. And the chances are that the expensive items are for long term treatment, where exemptions normally apply.
Average numbers make no sense here.
People who are not on exemptions (ie young and generally healthy) will be getting the more expensive innovative medicines rather than generics
Not my memory, although I’m out-of-date. Expensive, innovative medicines go to people with complex conditions. Of course cutting down on antibiotic prescribing may change the picture a bit.
Perhaps, though it is also possible there is a tax-credits type scenario where patients at the margin move in and out of eligibility, often without knowing it, depending whether or not they worked an extra shift one week.
ETA: not to mention a one-third false penalty rate is scandalous whatever the status of the other two thirds.
Prescription charges in England are at a penal level.
Precription charges do not come close to covering the cost for many items, though are inflated for others.
Why should they?
I have no particular axe to grind on this, and only something like a quarter of prescriptions incur a charge, just pointing out that the charges are not penal.
I submit that the degree to which prescription charges cover the costs of the drugs bears no relationship to their affordability, and hence whether they can be considered penal.
"only something like a quarter of prescriptions incur a charge" is part of what makes it penal, and there are lots of people for whom £8.60 per month per medication is not a trivial sum.
Perhaps, though it is also possible there is a tax-credits type scenario where patients at the margin move in and out of eligibility, often without knowing it, depending whether or not they worked an extra shift one week.
ETA: not to mention a one-third false penalty rate is scandalous whatever the status of the other two thirds.
Prescription charges in England are at a penal level.
Precription charges do not come close to covering the cost for many items, though are inflated for others.
Why should they?
I have no particular axe to grind on this, and only something like a quarter of prescriptions incur a charge, just pointing out that the charges are not penal.
I submit that the degree to which prescription charges cover the costs of the drugs bears no relationship to their affordability, and hence whether they can be considered penal.
"only something like a quarter of prescriptions incur a charge" is part of what makes it penal, and there are lots of people for whom £8.60 per month per medication is not a trivial sum.
The reason that most prescriptions are exempt is that repeat prescriptions are usually outside it. So they won't be paying £8.60 per month per medication.
The big problem used to be with the Just About Managing who had a ‘one-off' surgery visit and came out with a prescription for three or four items. Especially if it was in the third week of the month.
@AllieHBNews: BREAKING - Up to 500 #Salisbury drinker at The Mill Pub & diners at Zizzi restaurant told to wash possessions as a precaution after nerve agent traces found - more @bbcnews
It has been a week, who would not have already washed their clothes, at best maybe coats or jackets may need washing.
I would have thought Zizzi would have washed their place down as well. Unlkess they’ve been told not to!
Morning all. This is a cry for help. I have an idea for a series of non-partisan thread headers based around the swings at the last election. However, in order to do these, I need to produce some maps. Sadly, my cartographic skills are pretty much non-existent and despite some helpful information from @tlg86 I have to recognise my talents lie elsewhere. Is there someone out there more skilled who would be able to work with me on this?
There are several ways to build a map using a PC, in ascending order of difficulty as follows:
* STUPID-BUT-WORKS. Go to wikipedia, go to the area you want, click on the image, click on "more details", download the PNG version, open it up in Microsoft Paint (or its Apple equivalent), draw your map.
* SVG EDITORS. Maps made out of thin lines with no shading are "vector graphics" maps: maps which are held in text as the coordinates of the corners and instructions on how to draw the lines. If you go to Wikipedia, blah-de-blah and download the SVG version, then if you download a vector graphics editor (such as the free Inkscape[1][2] or the proprietary CorelDraw) you can edit it manually.
* DOWNLOAD R STUDIO OR ARCGIS AND LEARN HOW TO USE IT. I won't go into this.
Off the top of my head I'd go with https://www.datawrapper.de/ . It's free, simple and produces good-enough stuff. But the stupid-but-works approach still works and I have used it IRL.
Firstly, apologies for not answering the question you asked: you were asking for someone to help, but my reply told you how to do it yourself. Since that is answering a question you didn't ask, I need to apologise
Perhaps, though it is also possible there is a tax-credits type scenario where patients at the margin move in and out of eligibility, often without knowing it, depending whether or not they worked an extra shift one week.
ETA: not to mention a one-third false penalty rate is scandalous whatever the status of the other two thirds.
Prescription charges in England are at a penal level.
Substantially below the cost of medication
No. According to the published figures the average cost of a prescription is around £9. From April the charge in England will be £8.80. And the chances are that the expensive items are for long term treatment, where exemptions normally apply.
Average numbers make no sense here.
People who are not on exemptions (ie young and generally healthy) will be getting the more expensive innovative medicines rather than generics
Not my memory, although I’m out-of-date. Expensive, innovative medicines go to people with complex conditions. Of course cutting down on antibiotic prescribing may change the picture a bit.
Outside of antiobiotics (which are cheap) and corticosteroids (which are also cheap) anyone in their 30s or 40s is getting something more complicated.
Reverting to form, the Scots? Well, SCON reached some dizzying heights (for them in recent decades) and can be proud if that.
LOL, Labour poll by Labour dummies, deluded half wits.
Well I did put it as a question mark. If Labour are not rapidly gaining on the SNP then presumably the Tories are still either maintaining parity with SLAB or exceeding them, or the SNP are reestablishing an even bigger lead.
Problem for the SNP is the weakness of the Independence argument. Now that the mess of Brexit is becoming painfully obvious, Independence is less likely except to the hard core minority. Sturgeon and Murrell recognise this, and they are attempting to change the SNP into being seen as the "natural Party of Government" with the professionalism of the cabinet. Unfortunately, too many of Sturgeon's old friends are in there, have built up power bases of their own, and have been promoted to a level of their incompetence. While many of those, both on the Holyrood and Westminster backbenches are talented, wasted by not being in the Leader's clique and knowing that the next iScotRef will be sometime from the mid 2020's2 if ever.
Davidson and Leonard will be attempting to peel away the SNP support, and it is beginning to look quite easy to do.
The announcement about washing clothing and possessions by the Chief Medical Officer must be a worry to many in Salisbury. She went on to say the risk is low but exposure to the agent over time could cause health issues
SNP would still have most MPs on that poll though and Labour would likely still need their support on confidence and supply.
A rather sycophantic quote attached to that poll " senior Labour insider said, “this is very encouraging and confirms the increasing support for Labour in Scotland under Jeremy Corbyn and Richard Leonard and their message of hope and transformation for the many now the few. "We still have much to do but this poll and other recent ones are evidence of a remarkable increase in support from just over a year ago and signifies the significant progress being made by Labour in Scotland."
Yet unless Labour again wins most seats in Scotland it is unlikely to be able to win a majority across the whole of the UK even if Corbyn is still able to become PM with SNP support.
The announcement about washing clothing and possessions by the Chief Medical Officer must be a worry to many in Salisbury. She went on to say the risk is low but exposure to the agent over time could cause health issues
It does seem to have been a slow acting agent, as it took some hours to affect the victims, hence the multiple contaminated sites.
Oh, I forgot "download a data visualisation tool such as Tableau" (see https://public.tableau.com ). Good for the medium term, but if you have a today deadline probably best to go with datawrapper. Unless somebody thinks differently...?
Perhaps, though it is also possible there is a tax-credits type scenario where patients at the margin move in and out of eligibility, often without knowing it, depending whether or not they worked an extra shift one week.
ETA: not to mention a one-third false penalty rate is scandalous whatever the status of the other two thirds.
Prescription charges in England are at a penal level.
Substantially below the cost of medication
No. According to the published figures the average cost of a prescription is around £9. From April the charge in England will be £8.80. And the chances are that the expensive items are for long term treatment, where exemptions normally apply.
Average numbers make no sense here.
People who are not on exemptions (ie young and generally healthy) will be getting the more expensive innovative medicines rather than generics
Not my memory, although I’m out-of-date. Expensive, innovative medicines go to people with complex conditions. Of course cutting down on antibiotic prescribing may change the picture a bit.
Outside of antiobiotics (which are cheap) and corticosteroids (which are also cheap) anyone in their 30s or 40s is getting something more complicated.
If people in their 30-40’s are getting something more complicated then the chances are they’ve either got prepayment certificates or are exempt because of their condition. As I said it’s a few years now, thankfully, since I took prescription charges from people, but I can only quote my recollections of what happened in practice. And I can’t go down to my friend in the local pharmacy today and check on the current situation!
Perhaps, though it is also possible there is a tax-credits type scenario where patients at the margin move in and out of eligibility, often without knowing it, depending whether or not they worked an extra shift one week.
ETA: not to mention a one-third false penalty rate is scandalous whatever the status of the other two thirds.
Prescription charges in England are at a penal level.
Substantially below the cost of medication
No. According to the published figures the average cost of a prescription is around £9. From April the charge in England will be £8.80. And the chances are that the expensive items are for long term treatment, where exemptions normally apply.
Average numbers make no sense here.
People who are not on exemptions (ie young and generally healthy) will be getting the more expensive innovative medicines rather than generics
The announcement about washing clothing and possessions by the Chief Medical Officer must be a worry to many in Salisbury. She went on to say the risk is low but exposure to the agent over time could cause health issues
It does seem to have been a slow acting agent, as it took some hours to affect the victims, hence the multiple contaminated sites.
It adds to the theory that they could have been contaminated even at home and that they had a meal and then went to a pub before being overwhelmed. Very scary really.
Also , is it possible to recover from this exposure to live a reasonable healthy life
SNP would still have most MPs on that poll though and Labour would likely still need their support on confidence and supply.
A rather sycophantic quote attached to that poll " senior Labour insider said, “this is very encouraging and confirms the increasing support for Labour in Scotland under Jeremy Corbyn and Richard Leonard and their message of hope and transformation for the many now the few. "We still have much to do but this poll and other recent ones are evidence of a remarkable increase in support from just over a year ago and signifies the significant progress being made by Labour in Scotland."
Yet unless Labour again wins most seats in Scotland it is unlikely to be able to win a majority across the whole of the UK even if Corbyn is still able to become PM with SNP support.
The history of the SNP and Labour Party means that at a National level, relations will be severely distrustful. At a local government level, there is sometimes a marriage of convenience but the treaty documents are very, very detailed In Edinburgh, we saw the rings the SNP ran round a previous LibDem senior coalition led council. At a following council election, the LibDems were decimated, with even the LibDem leader losing her seat. Lessons were learned
WOOO just backed David Miliband to be next Lab leader.
Great bet.
Obvious potential.
If David Miliband could not get elected Labour leader in 2010 he is not going to be next Labour leader now after the Momentum infiltration
Yeah, it's a time warp where I laid him out as far as my budget would allow at 8/1 (when he wasn't an MP!) and now I'm backing at 35/1 (when he still isn't an MP) because I don't like big red numbers.
Reverting to form, the Scots? Well, SCON reached some dizzying heights (for them in recent decades) and can be proud if that.
LOL, Labour poll by Labour dummies, deluded half wits.
Well I did put it as a question mark. If Labour are not rapidly gaining on the SNP then presumably the Tories are still either maintaining parity with SLAB or exceeding them, or the SNP are reestablishing an even bigger lead.
Problem for the SNP is the weakness of the Independence argument. Now that the mess of Brexit is becoming painfully obvious, Independence is less likely except to the hard core minority. Sturgeon and Murrell recognise this, and they are attempting to change the SNP into being seen as the "natural Party of Government" with the professionalism of the cabinet. Unfortunately, too many of Sturgeon's old friends are in there, have built up power bases of their own, and have been promoted to a level of their incompetence. While many of those, both on the Holyrood and Westminster backbenches are talented, wasted by not being in the Leader's clique and knowing that the next iScotRef will be sometime from the mid 2020's2 if ever.
Davidson and Leonard will be attempting to peel away the SNP support, and it is beginning to look quite easy to do.
Hello Neil, how are book sales of your tripe going , any Hope left
Comments
So:
Bercow can choose not to call a motion of no confidence in himself.
He can refuse to put it to the vote.
If there is a vote in the Commons it will be publicly recorded, giving him a handy list of enemies.
If he loses a VoC he is not obliged to resign.
etc...
Could a deputy speaker call a motion of no confidence in his boss? That would be considered somewhat unparliamentary and cause even more problems.
Anyone else have any idea of how to get rid of him? Could he be censured as an MP for the abuse claims, and suspended from Parliament under a process from which would be obliged to recuse himself?
I really do have to go. Have a good morning.
But no reign lasts forever. His actions may have secured him longevity at the cost of a peaceful transition and stable retirement.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/03/09/us/politics/robert-lighthizer-trade.html
Or maybe hell just get rid of the restrictions next time.
Whilst not democratic, it was stable.
Mr. kle4, there were interesting rumours that Putin was thinking of inviting Prince Michael of Kent to become Czar. Having a permanent ceremonial head of state would've enabled Putin to take on a political position on a permanent basis.
Whatever else we think of Putin, he's very sharp. It will be interesting to see how he manages his exit.
Ah, and it turns out that tax credits and Universal Credit can qualify for free prescriptions, which surely raises the likelihood of cock-up rather than conspiracy.
https://www.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/help-nhs-prescription-costs/free-nhs-prescriptions
ETA: not to mention a one-third false penalty rate is scandalous whatever the status of the other two thirds.
A reconstruction of the Politburo system.
Indeed I am in the same place
(It’s a new policy - part of the Open Britain campaign)
Hammond would say the same formulation a thousand times a week, if asked.
Is Tom Newton Dunn really that naive about how politics works to think this is worth tweeting about?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-5485917/DAN-HODGES-Corbyn-anit-Semetic-pals-smashed-moral-compass.html
I gather Marr didn't quiz McD on all this.
(AV Dicey is, naturally, on my bedside table for easy reference)
Page 61 'Reflections upon the character or actions of the Speaker may be punished as breaches of privilege. His action cannot be criticised incidentally in debate or upon any form of proceeding except a substantive motion
If Bercow is to go, it is recommended they give at least 10 days' notice. As it notes 'On the last two occasions in 2000 and 2009, considerable notice of the retirement of the Speaker was given'. So come on Bercow, tell us your plans!
In all seriousness we seem to get by mostly fine without term limits, it's damn hard to stay at the top of our politics for more than a few terms, but I can see why democracies and less personally focused dictatorships find them to be a good thing.
That sign is JRM and Corbyn being favourites for the PM post.
There is a competition issue though since Takeda bought Adcal - their Nycomed unit owned the other main brand in the space and Gx versions haven’t mastered the chewable formulation that patients prefer
In 360, Julian was proclaimed Augustus by his soldiers at Lutetia (Paris), sparking a civil war with Constantius. However, Constantius died before the two could face each other in battle, and named Julian as his successor
1) Godsdamned soliders proclaiming their generals Augustus causing all manner of problems.
2) Awfully convenient Constantius dying but naming as his successor the guy he wsa about to fight in a civil war
He was one of the foremost Japanese generals of the war-ridden 16th century. And people say videogames aren't educational.
Mr. kle4, Julian holds the record for the most flawless victory in any civil war. To be honest, I haven't read any serious allegations of foul play. Not impossible, but loads of people got sick and died at that time in history. If there were suspicions, they would've been raised after Julian died (he was the Apostate, so claims of evil pagan magic etc would've fit the narrative, if people really believed his predecessor was poisoned).
Numerian's death was more suspicious.
Bolivia has deployed an unusual weapon in a maritime dispute with Chile - a colossal flag stretching about 200 km (124 miles).
As you do
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-43358322
'Speaking on a visit to Scotland to campaign for Vote Leave, he argued that control over fisheries agriculture and even immigration could be transferred to the Scottish Parliament after a Brexit vote.'
And really I was more thinking about how the grunts in a civil war feel when one guy dies and names the guy he was fighting as his successor. Must feel like a bit of a waste of time.
The donative is a bonus paid to the army when there's a new emperor. It turned out not to be great for imperial life expectancy. And the sums grew so large it actually caused emperors to have to devalue the currency to pay it, and led to spikes (exceeding 0.1%) in inflation that made it difficult for the poor to afford food.
People who are not on exemptions (ie young and generally healthy) will be getting the more expensive innovative medicines rather than generics
Great bet.
Obvious potential.
"It's probably nothing, but there might be a nerve agent on your clothes. Probably best if they have a wash."
Of course cutting down on antibiotic prescribing may change the picture a bit.
* STUPID-BUT-WORKS. Go to wikipedia, go to the area you want, click on the image, click on "more details", download the PNG version, open it up in Microsoft Paint (or its Apple equivalent), draw your map.
* ONLINE MAP CREATION. You register online and use an online map creator, downloading the image when you are finished. See https://www.datawrapper.de/ or https://www.scribblemaps.com
* SVG EDITORS. Maps made out of thin lines with no shading are "vector graphics" maps: maps which are held in text as the coordinates of the corners and instructions on how to draw the lines. If you go to Wikipedia, blah-de-blah and download the SVG version, then if you download a vector graphics editor (such as the free Inkscape[1][2] or the proprietary CorelDraw) you can edit it manually.
* DOWNLOAD A MAP CREATOR APP. See https://mapchart.net/
* DOWNLOAD R STUDIO OR ARCGIS AND LEARN HOW TO USE IT. I won't go into this.
Off the top of my head I'd go with https://www.datawrapper.de/ . It's free, simple and produces good-enough stuff. But the stupid-but-works approach still works and I have used it IRL.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:How_to_draw_a_diagram_with_Inkscape
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inkscape
Firstly, apologies for not answering the question you asked: you were asking for someone to help, but my reply told you how to do it yourself. Since that is answering a question you didn't ask, I need to apologise
Secondly, datawrapper is probably your best bet. It has a map of constituencies (see https://blog.datawrapper.de/new-uk-election-maps-in-datawrapper/ ) so a hour or two should see you ready to rock.
Davidson and Leonard will be attempting to peel away the SNP support, and it is beginning to look quite easy to do.
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.jesip.org.uk/uploads/media/pdf/CBRN%20JOPs/IOR_Guidance_V2_July_2015.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjcpJXYj-TZAhVnD8AKHX7VANwQFjAAegQICRAB&usg=AOvVaw1Zu0RlScbYnn0u0AUdTWFc
FWIW this is the Home Office guidance that was recirculated on Friday in how to deal with suspected NBC contamination.
A rather sycophantic quote attached to that poll " senior Labour insider said, “this is very encouraging and confirms the increasing support for Labour in Scotland under Jeremy Corbyn and Richard Leonard and their message of hope and transformation for the many now the few.
"We still have much to do but this poll and other recent ones are evidence of a remarkable increase in support from just over a year ago and signifies the significant progress being made by Labour in Scotland."
Yet unless Labour again wins most seats in Scotland it is unlikely to be able to win a majority across the whole of the UK even if Corbyn is still able to become PM with SNP support.
Oh, I forgot "download a data visualisation tool such as Tableau" (see https://public.tableau.com ). Good for the medium term, but if you have a today deadline probably best to go with datawrapper. Unless somebody thinks differently...?
Also , is it possible to recover from this exposure to live a reasonable healthy life
Don't worry, I haven't gone insane...