Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The big development following TMay’s Russia statement is an ap

SystemSystem Posts: 6,199
edited March 14 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The big development following TMay’s Russia statement is an apparent divide within LAB over Corbyn’s response

Not a happy afternoon among Labour MPs – suggestions one of them will put down a motion backing the govt's position explicitly https://t.co/7wkEfa48ep

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,711

    kle4 said:

    I know plenty don't like its alleged positioning, but a general rule of thumb I have on if a genuine political storm is coming (merited or not) is if the main pages of the BBC news site have something on it. Nothing I can see on Labour troubles over Russia response yet, so for the moment I'd say Corbyn has nothing to worry about in terms of wider impact, but time will tell.

    BBC news is not holding back with reports of possible shadow cabinet resignations and the growing labour signatures to their EDM endorsing the PM and reaffirming that Russia is responsible
    I guess until more develops the website people have not elevated the story yet.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,867
    Second :(
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,720
    Greetings, comrades.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,867

    Greetings, comrades.

    Greetings, comrade Dancer!
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,647
    FPT

    kle4 said:

    I know plenty don't like its alleged positioning, but a general rule of thumb I have on if a genuine political storm is coming (merited or not) is if the main pages of the BBC news site have something on it. Nothing I can see on Labour troubles over Russia response yet, so for the moment I'd say Corbyn has nothing to worry about in terms of wider impact, but time will tell.

    BBC news is not holding back with reports of possible shadow cabinet resignations and the growing labour signatures to their EDM endorsing the PM and reaffirming that Russia is responsible
    I wish they would.
    The moderates should grow some and sit as “Real Labour” and a subscription set up for their support. I’d contribute.
  • He’s safe. 172 MPs said they had no confidence in Corbyn and like Churchill he kept buggering on and made net gains at the next election.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,720
    Mr. Walker, a wonderful idea, but I'll believe it when I see it.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,711

    FPT

    kle4 said:

    I know plenty don't like its alleged positioning, but a general rule of thumb I have on if a genuine political storm is coming (merited or not) is if the main pages of the BBC news site have something on it. Nothing I can see on Labour troubles over Russia response yet, so for the moment I'd say Corbyn has nothing to worry about in terms of wider impact, but time will tell.

    BBC news is not holding back with reports of possible shadow cabinet resignations and the growing labour signatures to their EDM endorsing the PM and reaffirming that Russia is responsible
    I wish they would.
    The moderates should grow some and sit as “Real Labour” and a subscription set up for their support. I’d contribute.
    I think the GE put paid to that idea. If they wouldn't do it when fearing electoral annihilation, a mere political firestorm at comments from the Leader won't make them do it now.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 4,552
    Labour Peer Brenda Dean (ex SOGAT print union) has died aged 74.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 897

    Greetings, comrades.

    Привет, товарищ
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,647

    He’s safe. 172 MPs said they had no confidence in Corbyn and like Churchill he kept buggering on and made net gains at the next election.

    The moderates are letting down the country - on this and a range of matters. When push comes to shove, it’s not enough to write letters.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,273

    Laura Kuenssberg

    Rumour that some Labour shadow front benchers might resign over the leader's statement today - let's wait and see - certainly a lot of anger around - uneasy truce in Labour party since election has been trashed by different instincts over Skripal case

    Today may well go down as the start of the end of Corbyn and the return to a sensible centre left labour party with all the benefits that would follow for the good of the Country
    The only way a change happens is if the membership turn against Jeremy Corbyn. So far a lot of those speaking out against Corbyn are moderates who have already done so in the past. As we saw in 2016 (and in 2015) the views of Labour moderates do not neccessarily reflect the views of Labour members.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,867
    kle4 said:

    FPT

    kle4 said:

    I know plenty don't like its alleged positioning, but a general rule of thumb I have on if a genuine political storm is coming (merited or not) is if the main pages of the BBC news site have something on it. Nothing I can see on Labour troubles over Russia response yet, so for the moment I'd say Corbyn has nothing to worry about in terms of wider impact, but time will tell.

    BBC news is not holding back with reports of possible shadow cabinet resignations and the growing labour signatures to their EDM endorsing the PM and reaffirming that Russia is responsible
    I wish they would.
    The moderates should grow some and sit as “Real Labour” and a subscription set up for their support. I’d contribute.
    I think the GE put paid to that idea. If they wouldn't do it when fearing electoral annihilation, a mere political firestorm at comments from the Leader won't make them do it now.
    He’s secure, and will prob only go at a time of his choosing.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,711

    He’s safe. 172 MPs said they had no confidence in Corbyn and like Churchill he kept buggering on and made net gains at the next election.

    The moderates are letting down the country - on this and a range of matters. When push comes to shove, it’s not enough to write letters.
    They didn't even used to do that, just leak anonymous comments about how unhappy they were!
  • RobD said:

    Second :(

    You can be first if you make a donation to Mr Smithson and renounce pineapple on pizza.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,934
    Just imagine if jezza and may were swapped positions today....rather than expelling Russians and freezing funds, jezza would have been inviting putin for a cup of tea and a chat.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 15,140

    He’s safe. 172 MPs said they had no confidence in Corbyn and like Churchill he kept buggering on and made net gains at the next election.

    The moderates are letting down the country - on this and a range of matters. When push comes to shove, it’s not enough to write letters.
    What can they do, cross the floor?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,720
    Mr. rpjs, alas, I know the alphabet (ish) but not the vocabulary.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,867

    RobD said:

    Second :(

    You can be first if you make a donation to Mr Smithson and renounce pineapple on pizza.
    Tempting.....

    What are OGH’s view on pineapple pizza anyway? I think we deserve to know!
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,273
    kle4 said:

    FPT

    kle4 said:

    I know plenty don't like its alleged positioning, but a general rule of thumb I have on if a genuine political storm is coming (merited or not) is if the main pages of the BBC news site have something on it. Nothing I can see on Labour troubles over Russia response yet, so for the moment I'd say Corbyn has nothing to worry about in terms of wider impact, but time will tell.

    BBC news is not holding back with reports of possible shadow cabinet resignations and the growing labour signatures to their EDM endorsing the PM and reaffirming that Russia is responsible
    I wish they would.
    The moderates should grow some and sit as “Real Labour” and a subscription set up for their support. I’d contribute.
    I think the GE put paid to that idea. If they wouldn't do it when fearing electoral annihilation, a mere political firestorm at comments from the Leader won't make them do it now.
    Exactly. I think it’s questionable just how much support Blairite social democracy would garner at a GE these days.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,867

    Just imagine if jezza and may were swapped positions today....rather than expelling Russians and freezing funds, jezza would have been inviting putin for a cup of tea and a chat.

    Na, you have to try and kill the PM and a good chunk of the Cabinet to be worthy of such an invitation.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 4,552
    Does beg the question what would actually happen in broader areas if Corbyn did become PM with a small majority.

    Moderate Lab MPs might not be willing to resign over this today - but does their reaction suggest that if Corbyn tried to do crazy stuff like say nationalisation without compensation then they might prevent such stuff going through?
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 7,596
    MaxPB said:

    He’s safe. 172 MPs said they had no confidence in Corbyn and like Churchill he kept buggering on and made net gains at the next election.

    The moderates are letting down the country - on this and a range of matters. When push comes to shove, it’s not enough to write letters.
    What can they do, cross the floor?
    Resign the whip. No election imminent (D.V.).

    They won't though.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,934
    The worrying thing is that even if the tories see out Corbygasm, by that time maomentum will have taken over the party and McIRA is still there.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,647
    MaxPB said:

    He’s safe. 172 MPs said they had no confidence in Corbyn and like Churchill he kept buggering on and made net gains at the next election.

    The moderates are letting down the country - on this and a range of matters. When push comes to shove, it’s not enough to write letters.
    What can they do, cross the floor?
    They should sit separately as “Real Labour” and refuse to follow the party whip, voting on a case by case basis. They would/should not elect a “leader” but declare they are waiting for a competent Labour leader who is true to the party’s traditions.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 6,380
    Do some think that Russia is still* some sort of Socialist utopia that needs to be defended by those on the left?

    *I know it never was. The 'still' refers to the 'think'.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,720
    Mr. Max, they could form a new party en mass. Worst case scenario, they have (if they all do it, who are moderate) the second party of opposition, and could simply become the Opposition. If they got the unions, they'd also have a solid funding base. And if the unions are owed money by Labour and called it in, that'd dent Corbyn's prospects.

    Big risk, though. And Labour types love their branding far more than the Conservatives do theirs. Can't see it happening. They should've done it last parliament.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 4,395
    edited March 14
    MaxPB said:

    He’s safe. 172 MPs said they had no confidence in Corbyn and like Churchill he kept buggering on and made net gains at the next election.

    The moderates are letting down the country - on this and a range of matters. When push comes to shove, it’s not enough to write letters.
    What can they do, cross the floor?
    Adding 172 MPs to the LD total would make them the official opposition. Swap Cable for Chukka and bob's-your-uncle.

    Just a thought :relaxed:
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 948

    Laura Kuenssberg

    Rumour that some Labour shadow front benchers might resign over the leader's statement today - let's wait and see - certainly a lot of anger around - uneasy truce in Labour party since election has been trashed by different instincts over Skripal case

    Today may well go down as the start of the end of Corbyn and the return to a sensible centre left labour party with all the benefits that would follow for the good of the Country
    The only way a change happens is if the membership turn against Jeremy Corbyn. So far a lot of those speaking out against Corbyn are moderates who have already done so in the past. As we saw in 2016 (and in 2015) the views of Labour moderates do not neccessarily reflect the views of Labour members.
    I think that's right - the only way things will change is if loyal allies turn against him. Apparently Chris Williamson MP MP didn't back Corbyn up earlier, maybe something in that?

    Can I also thank viewcode and co for the late night coverage of the Pennsylvania election last night? I couldn't post on my phone but was very insightful and ahead of the game I could see elsewhere.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,273

    Do some think that Russia is still* some sort of Socialist utopia that needs to be defended by those on the left?

    *I know it never was. The 'still' refers to the 'think'.

    +1.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 14,584

    Laura Kuenssberg

    Rumour that some Labour shadow front benchers might resign over the leader's statement today - let's wait and see - certainly a lot of anger around - uneasy truce in Labour party since election has been trashed by different instincts over Skripal case

    Today may well go down as the start of the end of Corbyn and the return to a sensible centre left labour party with all the benefits that would follow for the good of the Country
    The only way a change happens is if the membership turn against Jeremy Corbyn. So far a lot of those speaking out against Corbyn are moderates who have already done so in the past. As we saw in 2016 (and in 2015) the views of Labour moderates do not neccessarily reflect the views of Labour members.
    Very true but it is time that the moderates broke away from Corbyn - whether this is the catalyst time will see
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 20,148
    I was described on a stage on Saturday night as being part of a two man KGB assassination squad.

    Could be a useful attribute for some meetings.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,711
    MikeL said:

    Does beg the question what would actually happen in broader areas if Corbyn did become PM with a small majority.

    Moderate Lab MPs might not be willing to resign over this today - but does their reaction suggest that if Corbyn tried to do crazy stuff like say nationalisation without compensation then they might prevent such stuff going through?

    Seems perfectly possible. At least one Labour MP had the guts to go on record before the GE that they could not support Corbyn as PM, and even if they have calmed a little, it would surely be the case that unless he has a big majority he would face trouble from rebels. Possibly even more than now, since some may not be fans, but there's at least the need to defend the opposition brand and hammer the government to keep some in line, whereas once you are in government, well, yes speaking out more will hurt the party still, but at least you are in power and there's 5 years before the pain hits.
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,015
    Progress has clearly ordered a 3-line whip.This party within a party should be a proscribed organisation,a cancerous worm which needs expelling.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 4,552
    No, the safest thing for the country is that these Lab MPs do not resign the whip.

    If they resign the whip they will 100% get deselected.

    If they sit tight, a few might get deselected but vast majority won't - so they'll be in the next Parliament and provide crucial safety net for the country if Corbyn gets small majority.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,711

    kle4 said:

    FPT

    kle4 said:

    I know plenty don't like its alleged positioning, but a general rule of thumb I have on if a genuine political storm is coming (merited or not) is if the main pages of the BBC news site have something on it. Nothing I can see on Labour troubles over Russia response yet, so for the moment I'd say Corbyn has nothing to worry about in terms of wider impact, but time will tell.

    BBC news is not holding back with reports of possible shadow cabinet resignations and the growing labour signatures to their EDM endorsing the PM and reaffirming that Russia is responsible
    I wish they would.
    The moderates should grow some and sit as “Real Labour” and a subscription set up for their support. I’d contribute.
    I think the GE put paid to that idea. If they wouldn't do it when fearing electoral annihilation, a mere political firestorm at comments from the Leader won't make them do it now.
    Exactly. I think it’s questionable just how much support Blairite social democracy would garner at a GE these days.
    A trend across many places in Europe, apparently, beyond a few notable exceptions.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 14,584

    MaxPB said:

    He’s safe. 172 MPs said they had no confidence in Corbyn and like Churchill he kept buggering on and made net gains at the next election.

    The moderates are letting down the country - on this and a range of matters. When push comes to shove, it’s not enough to write letters.
    What can they do, cross the floor?
    They should sit separately as “Real Labour” and refuse to follow the party whip, voting on a case by case basis. They would/should not elect a “leader” but declare they are waiting for a competent Labour leader who is true to the party’s traditions.
    Agree with that
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 18,108

    MaxPB said:

    He’s safe. 172 MPs said they had no confidence in Corbyn and like Churchill he kept buggering on and made net gains at the next election.

    The moderates are letting down the country - on this and a range of matters. When push comes to shove, it’s not enough to write letters.
    What can they do, cross the floor?
    They should sit separately as “Real Labour” and refuse to follow the party whip, voting on a case by case basis. They would/should not elect a “leader” but declare they are waiting for a competent Labour leader who is true to the party’s traditions.
    Then they would all be facing deselection and a Momentum opponent.

    Which would be fun....
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,711

    Progress has clearly ordered a 3-line whip.This party within a party should be a proscribed organisation,a cancerous worm which needs expelling.

    Are some internal pressure groups ok and not others? I'm confused.
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,681
    Vote Corbyn - get Putin!
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,647
    MikeL said:

    No, the safest thing for the country is that these Lab MPs do not resign the whip.

    If they resign the whip they will 100% get deselected.

    If they sit tight, a few might get deselected but vast majority won't - so they'll be in the next Parliament and provide crucial safety net for the country if Corbyn gets small majority.

    Conversely, by lending their official support to Corbyn, they make it more likely that he will enter Number 10.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 4,395

    Progress has clearly ordered a 3-line whip.This party within a party should be a proscribed organisation,a cancerous worm which needs expelling.

    I suppose I have to mention the 'm' word here.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 22,436
    "Back in January, Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson was accused of paranoia and scaremongering after claiming that Russia was in a position to conduct cyber warfare against Britain which could kill ‘thousands and thousands’ of people. Then in February emerged evidence that Russia had conducted a cyber attack against Ukraine. Williamson is not looking so paranoid now. It might be that the response the government really needs is to boost Britain’s defences against cyber attack – and develop the means, if attacked in this way, to reply in kind."

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/03/gavin-williamson-was-right-to-be-paranoid-about-russia/
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,647
    edited March 14
    Deleted. Nesting mightmare.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 4,395

    MikeL said:

    No, the safest thing for the country is that these Lab MPs do not resign the whip.

    If they resign the whip they will 100% get deselected.

    If they sit tight, a few might get deselected but vast majority won't - so they'll be in the next Parliament and provide crucial safety net for the country if Corbyn gets small majority.

    Conversely, by lending their official support to Corbyn, they make it more likely that he will enter Number 10.
    You overestimate the willingness of a politician (or anybody else) to fall on their sword.
  • felix said:

    Vote Corbyn - get Putin!

    Brilliant.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,934
    felix said:

    Vote Corbyn - get Putin!

    Vote Corbyn - Get Putin's idiot lapdog...
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 15,140


    QED.

    You might not like to hear it. However, it's the truth. We had no real allies in the EU, the ones we did have were flaky and deserted at the first sign of trouble.

    The underlying reason was because we have never been on the same page as them, we never wanted to integrate into the political project.

    Look at it this way, the UK is the most in favour of free trade and we have the biggest financial services sector in the whole EU, yet every time the commissioner was chosen, the EU went for someone specifically hostile to our interests.

    Last time in an even bigger insult than usual we got a junior position, the second largest economy in the wholr bloc and we get a junior commissioner.

    As I said, we had no influence and no friends. This situation won't change after we leave.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 4,552

    MikeL said:

    No, the safest thing for the country is that these Lab MPs do not resign the whip.

    If they resign the whip they will 100% get deselected.

    If they sit tight, a few might get deselected but vast majority won't - so they'll be in the next Parliament and provide crucial safety net for the country if Corbyn gets small majority.

    Conversely, by lending their official support to Corbyn, they make it more likely that he will enter Number 10.
    I don't think it makes much difference - party brands are so strong that any individual resignations by people who 99% of the public have never heard of just don't matter.

    The over-riding point is that it is absolutely vital that the likes of Umunna, Kendall, Cooper, Leslie, Woodcock etc are in the next Parliament.

    The entire future of the country might depend upon it.
  • felix said:

    Vote Corbyn - get Putin!

    Vote Corbyn - Get Putin's idiot lapdog...
    I can see a billboard with Corbyn in Putin's pocket....
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,934

    felix said:

    Vote Corbyn - get Putin!

    Vote Corbyn - Get Putin's idiot lapdog...
    I can see a billboard with Corbyn in Putin's pocket....
    If Putin needed any help getting re-election, I can see that going down really well in Russia...Could have a whole set of them, Trump, Corbyn, ...
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 948
    MikeL said:

    MikeL said:

    No, the safest thing for the country is that these Lab MPs do not resign the whip.

    If they resign the whip they will 100% get deselected.

    If they sit tight, a few might get deselected but vast majority won't - so they'll be in the next Parliament and provide crucial safety net for the country if Corbyn gets small majority.

    Conversely, by lending their official support to Corbyn, they make it more likely that he will enter Number 10.
    I don't think it makes much difference - party brands are so strong that any individual resignations by people who 99% of the public have never heard of just don't matter.

    The over-riding point is that it is absolutely vital that the likes of Umunna, Kendall, Cooper, Leslie, Woodcock etc are in the next Parliament.

    The entire future of the country might depend upon it.
    Would you make the same argument about Soubry, Morgan, Wollaston, Ken Clarke, Grieve & co in this one?
  • glwglw Posts: 4,316
    edited March 14
    AndyJS said:

    "Back in January, Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson was accused of paranoia and scaremongering after claiming that Russia was in a position to conduct cyber warfare against Britain which could kill ‘thousands and thousands’ of people. Then in February emerged evidence that Russia had conducted a cyber attack against Ukraine. Williamson is not looking so paranoid now. It might be that the response the government really needs is to boost Britain’s defences against cyber attack – and develop the means, if attacked in this way, to reply in kind."

    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/03/gavin-williamson-was-right-to-be-paranoid-about-russia/

    It's quite widely known that Russia has been conducting exploratory cyberattacks on infrastructure control systems. There's nothing paranoid about it. The first shots of a future war will be the lights going off.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 18,108

    felix said:

    Vote Corbyn - get Putin!

    Vote Corbyn - Get Putin's idiot lapdog...
    I can see a billboard with Corbyn in Putin's pocket....
    Someone should mock that up. Who knows, OGH might use it as a thread header....
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,910
    MaxPB said:


    QED.

    You might not like to hear it. However, it's the truth. We had no real allies in the EU, the ones we did have were flaky and deserted at the first sign of trouble.

    The underlying reason was because we have never been on the same page as them, we never wanted to integrate into the political project.

    Look at it this way, the UK is the most in favour of free trade and we have the biggest financial services sector in the whole EU, yet every time the commissioner was chosen, the EU went for someone specifically hostile to our interests.

    Last time in an even bigger insult than usual we got a junior position, the second largest economy in the wholr bloc and we get a junior commissioner.

    As I said, we had no influence and no friends. This situation won't change after we leave.
    You are using the word we in a way that excludes everyone who disagrees with you...

    You also seem to have overlooked the fact that the Commissioner for Financial Services at the time of the referendum was British - Jonathan Hill - which undermines your whole argument.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,934
    What is bizarre, I bet the cult all hate Trump and bang on about how he only got elected because of Russian interference, but Jezza's taking his lines from the Russian response crib sheet....no thats just the UK media bias against him.
  • felix said:

    Vote Corbyn - get Putin!

    Vote Corbyn - Get Putin's idiot lapdog...
    I can see a billboard with Corbyn in Putin's pocket....
    Someone should mock that up. Who knows, OGH might use it as a thread header....
    Choosing the pictures for thread headers is a real joy.

    One I didn’t realise existed until I started choosing them.

    Someone once complained about my choice to Mike.

    Who knew that a picture of Ed Miliband eating a bacon sarnie could offend so many people.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,720
    Mr. Eagles, did he put tomato sauce in it?

    Proper bacon sarnies have tomato sauce.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 4,552
    edited March 14
    tpfkar said:

    MikeL said:

    MikeL said:

    No, the safest thing for the country is that these Lab MPs do not resign the whip.

    If they resign the whip they will 100% get deselected.

    If they sit tight, a few might get deselected but vast majority won't - so they'll be in the next Parliament and provide crucial safety net for the country if Corbyn gets small majority.

    Conversely, by lending their official support to Corbyn, they make it more likely that he will enter Number 10.
    I don't think it makes much difference - party brands are so strong that any individual resignations by people who 99% of the public have never heard of just don't matter.

    The over-riding point is that it is absolutely vital that the likes of Umunna, Kendall, Cooper, Leslie, Woodcock etc are in the next Parliament.

    The entire future of the country might depend upon it.
    Would you make the same argument about Soubry, Morgan, Wollaston, Ken Clarke, Grieve & co in this one?
    I don't personally believe that the threat posed by the current Con leadership is as great as the current Lab leadership - but the same principle applies - moderating forces will always provide an important check.

    In terms of the specifics I'm personally worried about Corbyn doing a whole pile of stuff not in the Lab manifesto whereas in my view May isn't doing major stuff not in the Con manifesto.

    Whether that fear is unjustified well who knows - but my view is that IF Corbyn tries to remove Bank of England independence, go on a massive money printing exercise and impose exchange controls then Umunna, Kendall, Cooper, Leslie, Woodcock etc would stop him.

    So I want them there as insurance.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,720
    F1: Ladbrokes has some season match bets up. The only one that seems remotely interesting is Leclerc to beat Ericsson at 1.72. However, whilst I think that has a good chance of success, tying up money for a whole season, with the possibility of losing if there's high attrition at somewhere like Monaco, doesn't appeal.
  • Mr. Eagles, did he put tomato sauce in it?

    Proper bacon sarnies have tomato sauce.

    I can’t see any tomato sauce.

    image
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,934
    MikeL said:

    tpfkar said:

    MikeL said:

    MikeL said:

    No, the safest thing for the country is that these Lab MPs do not resign the whip.

    If they resign the whip they will 100% get deselected.

    If they sit tight, a few might get deselected but vast majority won't - so they'll be in the next Parliament and provide crucial safety net for the country if Corbyn gets small majority.

    Conversely, by lending their official support to Corbyn, they make it more likely that he will enter Number 10.
    I don't think it makes much difference - party brands are so strong that any individual resignations by people who 99% of the public have never heard of just don't matter.

    The over-riding point is that it is absolutely vital that the likes of Umunna, Kendall, Cooper, Leslie, Woodcock etc are in the next Parliament.

    The entire future of the country might depend upon it.
    Would you make the same argument about Soubry, Morgan, Wollaston, Ken Clarke, Grieve & co in this one?
    I don't personally believe that the threat posed by the current Con leadership is as great as the current Lab leadership - but the same principle applies - moderating forces will always provide an important check.

    In terms of the specifics I'm personally worried about Corbyn doing a whole pile of stuff not in the Lab manifesto whereas in my view May isn't doing major stuff not in the Con manifesto.

    Whether that fear is unjustified well who knows - but my view is that IF Corbyn tries to remove Bank of England independence, go on a massive money printing exercise and impose exchange controls than Umunna, Kendall, Cooper, Leslie, Woodcock etc would stop him.

    So I want them there as insurance.
    It isn't Corbyn you have to worry out, when it comes to financial swizzery, it is McDonnell.
  • I was described on a stage on Saturday night as being part of a two man KGB assassination squad.

    Could be a useful attribute for some meetings.

    You should definitely put that on your bio page on your firm’s website, and your LinkedIn profile too.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 897

    Mr. rpjs, alas, I know the alphabet (ish) but not the vocabulary.

    I just pick up a few things from my wife, who's learning Russian (for fun) and is getting quite good at it now. Not quite enough to be a translator for the occupation forces but hopefully will be by the time they arrive.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 4,552

    MikeL said:

    tpfkar said:

    MikeL said:

    MikeL said:

    No, the safest thing for the country is that these Lab MPs do not resign the whip.

    If they resign the whip they will 100% get deselected.

    If they sit tight, a few might get deselected but vast majority won't - so they'll be in the next Parliament and provide crucial safety net for the country if Corbyn gets small majority.

    Conversely, by lending their official support to Corbyn, they make it more likely that he will enter Number 10.
    I don't think it makes much difference - party brands are so strong that any individual resignations by people who 99% of the public have never heard of just don't matter.

    The over-riding point is that it is absolutely vital that the likes of Umunna, Kendall, Cooper, Leslie, Woodcock etc are in the next Parliament.

    The entire future of the country might depend upon it.
    Would you make the same argument about Soubry, Morgan, Wollaston, Ken Clarke, Grieve & co in this one?
    I don't personally believe that the threat posed by the current Con leadership is as great as the current Lab leadership - but the same principle applies - moderating forces will always provide an important check.

    In terms of the specifics I'm personally worried about Corbyn doing a whole pile of stuff not in the Lab manifesto whereas in my view May isn't doing major stuff not in the Con manifesto.

    Whether that fear is unjustified well who knows - but my view is that IF Corbyn tries to remove Bank of England independence, go on a massive money printing exercise and impose exchange controls than Umunna, Kendall, Cooper, Leslie, Woodcock etc would stop him.

    So I want them there as insurance.
    It isn't Corbyn you have to worry out, when it comes to financial swizzery, it is McDonnell.
    Sure, I'm talking about a Corbyn led Govt, with McDonnell as Chancellor.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 22,436
    https://news.sky.com/story/live-spy-poison-deadline-passes-as-russia-threatens-response-11289189

    "Nerve agent case widens to Dorset

    A recovery vehicle used to tow Sergei Skripal's car is being removed by police and military in Gillingham, Dorset."
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,225

    FPT

    kle4 said:

    I know plenty don't like its alleged positioning, but a general rule of thumb I have on if a genuine political storm is coming (merited or not) is if the main pages of the BBC news site have something on it. Nothing I can see on Labour troubles over Russia response yet, so for the moment I'd say Corbyn has nothing to worry about in terms of wider impact, but time will tell.

    BBC news is not holding back with reports of possible shadow cabinet resignations and the growing labour signatures to their EDM endorsing the PM and reaffirming that Russia is responsible
    I wish they would.
    The moderates should grow some and sit as “Real Labour” and a subscription set up for their support. I’d contribute.
    I like the sound of that phrase used by one of them "My Labour". MyLabour would be in tune with modern usage.

    Good evening, everybody.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,720
    edited March 14
    Mr. Eagles, the mystery is solved!

    Ed Miliband was clearly thinking "Oh no, they forgot the tomato sauce!" and, entirely understandably, pulled a disapproving face.

    I'm glad we finally cleared that up.

    Mr. rpjs, I tried teaching myself Russian once. I remain uncertain whether I'm a poor student or a poor teacher :p

    Edited extra bit: good evening, Miss JGP.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,711
    rpjs said:

    Mr. rpjs, alas, I know the alphabet (ish) but not the vocabulary.

    I just pick up a few things from my wife, who's learning Russian (for fun) and is getting quite good at it now. Not quite enough to be a translator for the occupation forces but hopefully will be by the time they arrive.
    Well, at least you'll be prepared. As a coward, I would be happy to spy on my neighbours for them.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,934
    edited March 14
    The Securities and Exchange Commission has charged Theranos, the Silicon Valley-based blood testing company, its founder and chief executive Elizabeth Holmes, and former president Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani, with raising more than $700m from investors through an elaborate, years-long fraud.
  • NHantsNHants Posts: 6

    felix said:

    Vote Corbyn - get Putin!

    Vote Corbyn - Get Putin's idiot lapdog...
    I can see a billboard with Corbyn in Putin's pocket....
    Someone should mock that up. Who knows, OGH might use it as a thread header....
    Jez as Putin's puppet?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 3,938
    Afternoon all :)

    A fairly predictable and limited response from the Prime Minister. We'll go to the World Cup even if Prince William doesn't and I suspect most people will watch it and cheer England on as much as ever. Presumably if it's a Russia vs Germany final we'll all have to find something else to do.

    It's perfectly reasonable to argue defence resources could be better spent on the NCSC than on additional nuclear missiles if it's our belief a cyber attack is more probable than a nuclear attack. I also suspect Russian systems are as vulnerable as those of the West to cyber attack and we have the capability but don't show it off.

    As for Labour, Corbyn is at least consistent for all most people think he's wrong. At some point (perhaps when we go looking for a favourable trade deal), we'll need to mend fences with Moscow once the memory and the indignation fades.
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 6,494

    MaxPB said:


    QED.

    You might not like to hear it. However, it's the truth. We had no real allies in the EU, the ones we did have were flaky and deserted at the first sign of trouble.

    The underlying reason was because we have never been on the same page as them, we never wanted to integrate into the political project.

    Look at it this way, the UK is the most in favour of free trade and we have the biggest financial services sector in the whole EU, yet every time the commissioner was chosen, the EU went for someone specifically hostile to our interests.

    Last time in an even bigger insult than usual we got a junior position, the second largest economy in the wholr bloc and we get a junior commissioner.

    As I said, we had no influence and no friends. This situation won't change after we leave.
    You are using the word we in a way that excludes everyone who disagrees with you...

    You also seem to have overlooked the fact that the Commissioner for Financial Services at the time of the referendum was British - Jonathan Hill - which undermines your whole argument.
    That's true, but we should remember the post was only created in 2014. So, at best, it's a partial undermining of Max's argument (though I disagree we had zero influence).
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 4,395

    The Securities and Exchange Commission has charged Theranos, the Silicon Valley-based blood testing company, its founder and chief executive Elizabeth Holmes, and former president Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani, with raising more than $700m from investors through an elaborate, years-long fraud.

    Is that general news, or is there something I should know about those two people which I (clearly) don't!
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 6,494
    edited March 14
    kle4 said:

    rpjs said:

    Mr. rpjs, alas, I know the alphabet (ish) but not the vocabulary.

    I just pick up a few things from my wife, who's learning Russian (for fun) and is getting quite good at it now. Not quite enough to be a translator for the occupation forces but hopefully will be by the time they arrive.
    Well, at least you'll be prepared. As a coward, I would be happy to spy on my neighbours for them.
    Unfortunately, in order to uphold my family tradition, I would be required to die fighting the Rooskis. It's hard to be the scion of patriotic yeomanry who seem to be singularly untalented at bullet-dodging.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 2,322
    MikeL said:

    No, the safest thing for the country is that these Lab MPs do not resign the whip.

    If they resign the whip they will 100% get deselected.

    If they sit tight, a few might get deselected but vast majority won't - so they'll be in the next Parliament and provide crucial safety net for the country if Corbyn gets small majority.

    If they resign the whip they won't need de selecting.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,647
    MaxPB said:


    QED.

    You might not like to hear it. However, it's the truth. We had no real allies in the EU, the ones we did have were flaky and deserted at the first sign of trouble.

    The underlying reason was because we have never been on the same page as them, we never wanted to integrate into the political project.

    Look at it this way, the UK is the most in favour of free trade and we have the biggest financial services sector in the whole EU, yet every time the commissioner was chosen, the EU went for someone specifically hostile to our interests.

    Last time in an even bigger insult than usual we got a junior position, the second largest economy in the wholr bloc and we get a junior commissioner.

    As I said, we had no influence and no friends. This situation won't change after we leave.
    “No real allies”.
    “Zero influence.”

    That’s Brexitism in a nutshell. Defeatist, isolationist, if not nihilistic. And what makes you think that? As I said, it’s borne of a perverted nostalgia for another, presumably Britain-led, Union.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,910
    John_M said:

    MaxPB said:


    QED.

    You might not like to hear it. However, it's the truth. We had no real allies in the EU, the ones we did have were flaky and deserted at the first sign of trouble.

    The underlying reason was because we have never been on the same page as them, we never wanted to integrate into the political project.

    Look at it this way, the UK is the most in favour of free trade and we have the biggest financial services sector in the whole EU, yet every time the commissioner was chosen, the EU went for someone specifically hostile to our interests.

    Last time in an even bigger insult than usual we got a junior position, the second largest economy in the wholr bloc and we get a junior commissioner.

    As I said, we had no influence and no friends. This situation won't change after we leave.
    You are using the word we in a way that excludes everyone who disagrees with you...

    You also seem to have overlooked the fact that the Commissioner for Financial Services at the time of the referendum was British - Jonathan Hill - which undermines your whole argument.
    That's true, but we should remember the post was only created in 2014. So, at best, it's a partial undermining of Max's argument (though I disagree we had zero influence).
    In the past we’ve had the trade commissioner post as well as president of the commission. In any case it’s clear that the only thing reducing our relevance was the fact that we weren’t in the Euro.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 14,584
    stodge said:

    Afternoon all :)

    A fairly predictable and limited response from the Prime Minister. We'll go to the World Cup even if Prince William doesn't and I suspect most people will watch it and cheer England on as much as ever. Presumably if it's a Russia vs Germany final we'll all have to find something else to do.

    It's perfectly reasonable to argue defence resources could be better spent on the NCSC than on additional nuclear missiles if it's our belief a cyber attack is more probable than a nuclear attack. I also suspect Russian systems are as vulnerable as those of the West to cyber attack and we have the capability but don't show it off.

    As for Labour, Corbyn is at least consistent for all most people think he's wrong. At some point (perhaps when we go looking for a favourable trade deal), we'll need to mend fences with Moscow once the memory and the indignation fades.

    Not sure about the World Cup. Stephen Kinnock has asked for a widescale boycott and Germany's leading paper is saying Germany should not take part.

    Lots more to come on this over the next weeks and months
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,711
    stodge said:

    At some point (perhaps when we go looking for a favourable trade deal), we'll need to mend fences with Moscow once the memory and the indignation fades.

    Is indignation really the right word for it? Our government believes it has sufficient evidence to suggest, at a minimum, Russian negligent culpability in a brazen attempted murder. Indignation seems pretty low level and inadvertently suggests what you rightly point out as a limited response as being almost unreasonable, due to us merely being indignant.

    Yes, fences will be mended, just as they are when we have wars with people as well. There's stages to go through, unless one disputes the core facts as presented from our intelligence services though.

  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,647
    John_M said:

    MaxPB said:


    QED.

    You might not like to hear it. However, it's the truth. We had no real allies in the EU, the ones we did have were flaky and deserted at the first sign of trouble.

    The underlying reason was because we have never been on the same page as them, we never wanted to integrate into the political project.

    Look at it this way, the UK is the most in favour of free trade and we have the biggest financial services sector in the whole EU, yet every time the commissioner was chosen, the EU went for someone specifically hostile to our interests.

    Last time in an even bigger insult than usual we got a junior position, the second largest economy in the wholr bloc and we get a junior commissioner.

    As I said, we had no influence and no friends. This situation won't change after we leave.
    You are using the word we in a way that excludes everyone who disagrees with you...

    You also seem to have overlooked the fact that the Commissioner for Financial Services at the time of the referendum was British - Jonathan Hill - which undermines your whole argument.
    That's true, but we should remember the post was only created in 2014. So, at best, it's a partial undermining of Max's argument (though I disagree we had zero influence).
    It’s not a partial undermining.
    It directly contradicts Max’s claim that, on Finance, every Commissioner appointment was hostile to our interests.

    Perhaps, to be charitable, Max was actually including Jonathan Hill in that!
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 6,085

    (((Dan Hodges)))
    ‏VERIFIED ACCOUNT @DPJHodges

    Labour MP tells @BethRigby they have zero confidence in Jeremy Corbyn over national security. In which case they have an obligation to resign the Labour-whip. National security is the primary responsibility of any government or opposition.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 20,280
    Anorak said:

    The Securities and Exchange Commission has charged Theranos, the Silicon Valley-based blood testing company, its founder and chief executive Elizabeth Holmes, and former president Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani, with raising more than $700m from investors through an elaborate, years-long fraud.

    Is that general news, or is there something I should know about those two people which I (clearly) don't!
    The Theranos scandal has been going on for some time, and is a classic example of how people can dupe the media, investors and even, in a few cases, other scientists. It'll be a case study for both bad'uns and good 'uns for years.

    I don't know enough to say that Holmes was onto something or not; but it is clear that if she had, it did not work in practice.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theranos
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,711
    edited March 14


    (((Dan Hodges)))
    ‏VERIFIED ACCOUNT @DPJHodges

    Labour MP tells @BethRigby they have zero confidence in Jeremy Corbyn over national security. In which case they have an obligation to resign the Labour-whip. National security is the primary responsibility of any government or opposition.

    It's a fair point if that is what they said and they meant it - all parties are coalitions and you'll accept some very bad stuff as it is better than risking letting in other lot, but if you don't think they can manage our national security, that is bad, and you need to take action.

    If they are exaggerating how little confidence in him they have on the issue, then they should still resign the labour whip for making such a massive accusation which they don't even really believe.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 7,596

    Anorak said:

    The Securities and Exchange Commission has charged Theranos, the Silicon Valley-based blood testing company, its founder and chief executive Elizabeth Holmes, and former president Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani, with raising more than $700m from investors through an elaborate, years-long fraud.

    Is that general news, or is there something I should know about those two people which I (clearly) don't!
    The Theranos scandal has been going on for some time, and is a classic example of how people can dupe the media, investors and even, in a few cases, other scientists. It'll be a case study for both bad'uns and good 'uns for years.

    I don't know enough to say that Holmes was onto something or not; but it is clear that if she had, it did not work in practice.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theranos
    Bigger lies are easier to sell than little ones...
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 6,494
    edited March 14

    John_M said:

    MaxPB said:


    QED.

    You might not like to hear it. However, it's the truth. We had no real allies in the EU, the ones we did have were flaky and deserted at the first sign of trouble.

    The underlying reason was because we have never been on the same page as them, we never wanted to integrate into the political project.

    Look at it this way, the UK is the most in favour of free trade and we have the biggest financial services sector in the whole EU, yet every time the commissioner was chosen, the EU went for someone specifically hostile to our interests.

    Last time in an even bigger insult than usual we got a junior position, the second largest economy in the wholr bloc and we get a junior commissioner.

    As I said, we had no influence and no friends. This situation won't change after we leave.
    You are using the word we in a way that excludes everyone who disagrees with you...

    You also seem to have overlooked the fact that the Commissioner for Financial Services at the time of the referendum was British - Jonathan Hill - which undermines your whole argument.
    That's true, but we should remember the post was only created in 2014. So, at best, it's a partial undermining of Max's argument (though I disagree we had zero influence).
    In the past we’ve had the trade commissioner post as well as president of the commission. In any case it’s clear that the only thing reducing our relevance was the fact that we weren’t in the Euro.
    That's the heart of the issue for me. Quite rightly, the EU is going to be driven by the interests of the Eurozone. The UK is isolated by virtue of its opt out (Denmark has one, but in practice its a member of ERM II so it could adopt the Euro virtually overnight).

    I'm interested (because I'm sad that way) as to how the EU proceeds to enforce the entry conditions for the various Euro holdouts. Other than that, I'm Brexited out for today.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 20,280
    As I said years ago during the Syria debate: the use of biological and chemical weapons should not go unpunished.

    In fact, I also said that if we did not punish Assad for their use, we'd see them used again in other arenas. Which seemed obvious at the time, and sadly has been proved correct.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 18,108

    What is bizarre, I bet the cult all hate Trump and bang on about how he only got elected because of Russian interference, but Jezza's taking his lines from the Russian response crib sheet....no thats just the UK media bias against him.

    Momentum should sell their own version of Twister.....
  • TheValiantTheValiant Posts: 152

    Do some think that Russia is still* some sort of Socialist utopia that needs to be defended by those on the left?

    *I know it never was. The 'still' refers to the 'think'.

    The Soviet Union, the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic and the Russian Federation have not been particularly socialist for a very long time (probs since Khrushchev. They have been very authoritarian however.


  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 18,108

    Anorak said:

    The Securities and Exchange Commission has charged Theranos, the Silicon Valley-based blood testing company, its founder and chief executive Elizabeth Holmes, and former president Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani, with raising more than $700m from investors through an elaborate, years-long fraud.

    Is that general news, or is there something I should know about those two people which I (clearly) don't!
    The Theranos scandal has been going on for some time, and is a classic example of how people can dupe the media, investors and even, in a few cases, other scientists. It'll be a case study for both bad'uns and good 'uns for years.

    I don't know enough to say that Holmes was onto something or not; but it is clear that if she had, it did not work in practice.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theranos
    "By June 2016, it was estimated that Holmes' personal net worth had dropped from $4.5 billion to $0."

    That's gotta hurt.

    Are you watching, Russki oligarchs?
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 4,395

    Anorak said:

    The Securities and Exchange Commission has charged Theranos, the Silicon Valley-based blood testing company, its founder and chief executive Elizabeth Holmes, and former president Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani, with raising more than $700m from investors through an elaborate, years-long fraud.

    Is that general news, or is there something I should know about those two people which I (clearly) don't!
    The Theranos scandal has been going on for some time, and is a classic example of how people can dupe the media, investors and even, in a few cases, other scientists. It'll be a case study for both bad'uns and good 'uns for years.

    I don't know enough to say that Holmes was onto something or not; but it is clear that if she had, it did not work in practice.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theranos
    Interesting indeed; not sure how that one passed me by. As the lovely Jennifer Lawrence will be starring in the movie, I will be keeping an eye on the topic.

    And where did all the money go? A $0.5k fine for a $700m fraud?!? And the company is still going?! Odd. I will have to read more later.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 15,140

    MaxPB said:


    QED.

    You might not like to hear it. However, it's the truth. We had no real allies in the EU, the ones we did have were flaky and deserted at the first sign of trouble.

    The underlying reason was because we have never been on the same page as them, we never wanted to integrate into the political project.

    Look at it this way, the UK is the most in favour of free trade and we have the biggest financial services sector in the whole EU, yet every time the commissioner was chosen, the EU went for someone specifically hostile to our interests.

    Last time in an even bigger insult than usual we got a junior position, the second largest economy in the wholr bloc and we get a junior commissioner.

    As I said, we had no influence and no friends. This situation won't change after we leave.
    You are using the word we in a way that excludes everyone who disagrees with you...

    You also seem to have overlooked the fact that the Commissioner for Financial Services at the time of the referendum was British - Jonathan Hill - which undermines your whole argument.
    That's the junior position I was referring to.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 15,140

    John_M said:

    MaxPB said:


    QED.

    You might not like to hear it. However, it's the truth. We had no real allies in the EU, the ones we did have were flaky and deserted at the first sign of trouble.

    The underlying reason was because we have never been on the same page as them, we never wanted to integrate into the political project.

    Look at it this way, the UK is the most in favour of free trade and we have the biggest financial services sector in the whole EU, yet every time the commissioner was chosen, the EU went for someone specifically hostile to our interests.

    Last time in an even bigger insult than usual we got a junior position, the second largest economy in the wholr bloc and we get a junior commissioner.

    As I said, we had no influence and no friends. This situation won't change after we leave.
    You are using the word we in a way that excludes everyone who disagrees with you...

    You also seem to have overlooked the fact that the Commissioner for Financial Services at the time of the referendum was British - Jonathan Hill - which undermines your whole argument.
    That's true, but we should remember the post was only created in 2014. So, at best, it's a partial undermining of Max's argument (though I disagree we had zero influence).
    It’s not a partial undermining.
    It directly contradicts Max’s claim that, on Finance, every Commissioner appointment was hostile to our interests.

    Perhaps, to be charitable, Max was actually including Jonathan Hill in that!
    No, the problem with that post was that it was a junior position, not reporting directly to the commission president. It was pointed out at the time as well.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,711
    Anorak said:
    Challenging the power of what?

    Is Galloway back inLabour yet?
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 750
    Anorak said:

    Up there with David Icke

    Indeed - I was reading some of his twitter replies yesterday. He always was a bit unhinged, but now he's gone full blown conspiracyloon.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 4,395
    kle4 said:

    Anorak said:
    Challenging the power of what?

    Is Galloway back inLabour yet?
    Has the Cat in the Hat come back? No yet, but watch this space!
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 19,910
    MaxPB said:

    John_M said:

    MaxPB said:


    QED.

    You might not like to hear it. However, it's the truth. We had no real allies in the EU, the ones we did have were flaky and deserted at the first sign of trouble.

    The underlying reason was because we have never been on the same page as them, we never wanted to integrate into the political project.

    Look at it this way, the UK is the most in favour of free trade and we have the biggest financial services sector in the whole EU, yet every time the commissioner was chosen, the EU went for someone specifically hostile to our interests.

    Last time in an even bigger insult than usual we got a junior position, the second largest economy in the wholr bloc and we get a junior commissioner.

    As I said, we had no influence and no friends. This situation won't change after we leave.
    You are using the word we in a way that excludes everyone who disagrees with you...

    You also seem to have overlooked the fact that the Commissioner for Financial Services at the time of the referendum was British - Jonathan Hill - which undermines your whole argument.
    That's true, but we should remember the post was only created in 2014. So, at best, it's a partial undermining of Max's argument (though I disagree we had zero influence).
    It’s not a partial undermining.
    It directly contradicts Max’s claim that, on Finance, every Commissioner appointment was hostile to our interests.

    Perhaps, to be charitable, Max was actually including Jonathan Hill in that!
    No, the problem with that post was that it was a junior position, not reporting directly to the commission president. It was pointed out at the time as well.
    On paper Cathy Ashton was the second most powerful person in the commission. We need to nominate better quality people...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 18,108
    Anorak said:
    Corbyn's problem is that he is an arsewipe atop that steaming pile....
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 4,395
    edited March 14

    Anorak said:
    Corbyn's problem is that he is an arsewipe atop that steaming pile....
    Bear in mind he used to be at the bottom of the steaming pile (it's like something out of Dante). No wonder he's so bitter.
This discussion has been closed.