Shut down Parliament...is it doing much at the moment anyway? Other than an initial burst of a day or two post-reopening from prorogation you'd be forgiven for thinking it *was* actually shut down.
Shut down Parliament...is it doing much at the moment anyway? Other than an initial burst of a day or two post-reopening from prorogation you'd be forgiven for thinking it *was* actually shut down.
Shut down Parliament? Are we sure that they're not being paid by Boris Johnson?
If the PM is defeated in a VONC under the FTPA in some circumstances he can legitimately remain PM for 14 days. This means there is no VOC in his or any other government during that period.
If HMQ is advised that Mr/Sir/Mrs/Miss/Ms/Lady X would be expected to have the confidence of the house HMQ will ask X to become PM and form a government. At that point the previously defeated PM has to resign. Within the 14 day period the new government has to win a VOC.
The tricky bit is if you have listened to the outpourings of LibDems and Tory 21 over the last month they all rule out Corbyn, so why should HMQ call him as the evidence available clearly shows there is no majority for him.
If you add into the mix Corbyn categorically ruling out anyone but himself, that rules out Beckett, Clarke, Milliband, Swinson, Harmon.
If there is nobody who it is thought can win a VOC, then it is legitimate for Johnson to stay as PM for the 14 days (and therefore the election campaign).
I assume on a VOC it has to be 50% + 1. Is that 50% of the members or 50% of those that vote (ie do our missing Irish friends count as well as any abstentions or absentees in the 100% figure).
That only leaves the Jocker in the Pack sitting on a woolsack.
The above in in my opinion, so probably wrong!
The key bits of action haven't even begun to happen yet. If it were a game of bridge, we'd still be in the auction, not the playing of the cards. If it were Sumo wrestling, we'd still be at the stage where the wrestlers were getting into position before the bout begins.
It's possible that the government's proposals might go somewhere. Alternatively, we're about to find ourselves at what definitely looks like the edge of a cliff, and someone's current position is going to change very quickly, and it's not going to matter, because it's going to be obviously the right thing to do in a crisis. That might be Corbyn deferring to a not-Corbyn temporary PM. Or not-Corbyn deferring to Corbyn. Or something even more insane than that.
I am not sure that declaring his support for the Poll Tax will do Johnson any favours. Opposition parties should be able to make good use of that.
The SNP will! The Tories instigated it first on Scotland as a social experiment on a grand scale. Boris Johnson cannot help but say the wrong thing. If he did not have the Brexit supporting media to save him. He would be in big trouble, taking the Tories down with him...
The poll tax was introduced first in Scotland because the 1986 domestic rates revaluation there had caused such uproar from those who had lost out resulting in the SCONs losing the votes of many homeowners.
"It is a period of civil war. REMAINER spaceships, striking from a hidden base, have won their first victory against the evil TORY EMPIRE. During the battle, Remainer spies managed to steal secret plans to the Tories' ultimate weapon, the NO-DEAL BREXIT, an armoured space station with enough power to destroy an entire nation's economy!
Pursued by the Tories' sinister agents, Princess NicolaAnnaJo Heidi races home aboard her battle-bus, custodian of the stolen plans that can save her Party and restore Freedom of Movement to the Continent…"
Recently reselected: Jess Philipps, Rachel Reeves, Tony Lloyd, Paula Sheriff, Wes Streeting, Thelma Walker, Ruth Smeeth, Gareth Snell, Sandy Martin, Sarah Jones, Tracy Barbin, Judith Cummins
Emma Lewell Buck (South Shields) apparently triggered
Has anyone been deselected?
So far they are only voting on "automatic reselection of sitting MP" or "open the selection to other candidates (sitting MP included)". If 1/3 of branches ask to open, a full selection will take place. None of the full selections started yet.
The MPs who failed to be automatically reselected so far are Diana Johsnon, Margaret Hodge, Roger Godsiff and apparently Emma Lewell Buck (there is some procedural disagreement on one vote held tonight)
"Soon we’ll all be cancelled Cancel culture is not about righting wrongs or making the world more tolerant — it's an addiction to power By Meghan Murphy"
I must admit snide comments at Extinction Rebellion and the like and pointing out the hypocrisy of eating at McDonald's aren't very helpful.
I'd love to see a constructive debate on the environment and the challenge of climate change and how we respond to it.
There's a strong argument for Government to actively champion human ingenuity by funding and supporting research into measures aimed at mitigating the impact of climate change and we know technology and innovation can and have achieved a lot.
That can be the carrot and I'm no fan of eco-authoritarianism but we cannot go on as we are without recognising the consequences of our actions, The way we work and live contributes in many cases to the environmental damage and there are areas that could be challenged if we were prepared to look at some of the fundamentals and ask some searching questions.
The IFS proposal to tax on actual miles driven rather than a blanket tax on fuel is not without merit though there are issues. How do we move to a less consumption based economic model which provides growth and prosperity?
Would Conservatives for example sign up to a de-carbonised economy? Would Labour?
Before booking their New Year break in the Caribbean no doubt...
The Extinction Rebellion is the most worthwhile political group at the moment....your Brexit supporting Boris idolatry is utterly grotesque and disgusting in comparison...
Trumpton should seek help. Just like the idiots on here who support him.
Who on here supports Trump? Name names....
HY, TG and more.
I do not support Trump as such (I would probably vote for Kasich if he ran) but nor do I think he is the devil incarnate and in fact his foreign policy statement tonight of US withdrawal from interfering in Syria now ISIS is beaten is something leftwingers would have applauded 4 years ago
You said you’d vote for Trumpton over any Democrat challenger save Biden.
I must admit snide comments at Extinction Rebellion and the like and pointing out the hypocrisy of eating at McDonald's aren't very helpful.
I'd love to see a constructive debate on the environment and the challenge of climate change and how we respond to it.
There's a strong argument for Government to actively champion human ingenuity by funding and supporting research into measures aimed at mitigating the impact of climate change and we know technology and innovation can and have achieved a lot.
That can be the carrot and I'm no fan of eco-authoritarianism but we cannot go on as we are without recognising the consequences of our actions, The way we work and live contributes in many cases to the environmental damage and there are areas that could be challenged if we were prepared to look at some of the fundamentals and ask some searching questions.
The IFS proposal to tax on actual miles driven rather than a blanket tax on fuel is not without merit though there are issues. How do we move to a less consumption based economic model which provides growth and prosperity?
Would Conservatives for example sign up to a de-carbonised economy? Would Labour?
What did TMay put through just before she left?
I'm sure there was a big carbon promise (don't think I could call it a plan).
I must admit snide comments at Extinction Rebellion and the like and pointing out the hypocrisy of eating at McDonald's aren't very helpful.
I'd love to see a constructive debate on the environment and the challenge of climate change and how we respond to it.
There's a strong argument for Government to actively champion human ingenuity by funding and supporting research into measures aimed at mitigating the impact of climate change and we know technology and innovation can and have achieved a lot.
That can be the carrot and I'm no fan of eco-authoritarianism but we cannot go on as we are without recognising the consequences of our actions, The way we work and live contributes in many cases to the environmental damage and there are areas that could be challenged if we were prepared to look at some of the fundamentals and ask some searching questions.
The IFS proposal to tax on actual miles driven rather than a blanket tax on fuel is not without merit though there are issues. How do we move to a less consumption based economic model which provides growth and prosperity?
Would Conservatives for example sign up to a de-carbonised economy? Would Labour?
Worst scenario possible for those that care about the environment is for a leftist Marxist group to use it as a flimsy cover for their left wing agenda.
I must admit snide comments at Extinction Rebellion and the like and pointing out the hypocrisy of eating at McDonald's aren't very helpful.
I think we all know the vast majority of the Extinction Rebellion crowd would be utterly horrified at the the actual impact of the policies of their 'cause'.
Many of the attendees are just middle-class virtue signalers delighted to have an opportunity to burnish their credentials on social media.
Would Conservatives for example sign up to a de-carbonised economy? Would Labour?
I would. Sure.
As long as it's done over 30 years and not 6. No problem
I'm certain by the end of the century the world will have decarbonized. It will happen through ingenuity, progress, advancement and good old fashioned captialism (companies will make more money without carbon than they would with)
People wandering around Westminster in fancy dress costumes and blocking roads and bridges makes no difference to this development which is already well under way.
I'm sure there was a big carbon promise (don't think I could call it a plan).
Is Johnson going to put a de-carbonised economy at the heart of Global Britain? I doubt it. He may talk the environmental talk but his desire to be popular with the core Tory vote means he'll never do anything of any real significance.
The challenge of climate change impacts on all aspects of policy including tax, spending, housing, transport and health (for starters). I see little or no coherent thinking from the New Conservatives (or indeed the Corbynite Marxists) on these critical issues.
Under the Act it is Parliament - not the PM - which makes the decision to accept or not whatever extension the EU is offering.
So the EU could offer a 5-year extension, say, and the PM could whip his MPs against it.
I doubt this will be the EU’s offer, though.
If the PM breaks any of the undertakings given to the Court, yes, he would be in contempt. I expect his legal team and the A-G would resign.
It would not be perjury because he is not giving evidence. But breaking an undertaking to a Court is very serious indeed, especially for a PM.
"It would not be perjury because he is not giving evidence. But breaking an undertaking to a Court is very serious indeed, especially for a PM."
So nothing would actually happen to him? Then who cares? If his opponents can use legal niceties to ensnare him, he is perfectly entitled to use his own to escape...
Please learn to read - she said that he would be in contempt but would not be guilty of perjury.
People have been jailed for contempt. You might want to check why Tommy Robinson is doing time....
This is a pretty convincing account of No 10's position by James Forsythe. Concludes: Those who pushed the Benn Act intended to sabotage a deal and they’ve probably succeeded. So the main effect of it will probably be to help us win an election by uniting the leave vote and then a no deal Brexit. History is full of such ironies and tragedies.
Unlike Grieve, who I think is done for, I actually have a feeling Heidi might retain this one.
Jon Craig on Sky News said that he expects her to fight another seat. That would surprise me. As you say, her seat might be in reach for the Lib Dems, but then I expected Chuka to fight Streatham.
Boris and Cummings would love it. "There is only one political leader in Westminster serious about delivering Brexit. The rest are just intent on messing about, losing your jobs and our investment in their wake... "
Typo fixed
Ha fucking ha...... Are you shallow or what?
I'm sorry, but I was not aware that Brexit was a job-protection scheme. Quite the contrary. I have had Leavers on PB assure me that even if Brexit meant people losing jobs and sitting in houses with no electric that that was better than being in the EU.
Repeatedly over the years, Leavers keep telling us that the Remainer mistake is to mistake Brexit for anything to do with economics - it is instead a matter of principle, a visceral need for sovereignty.
So do not start getting high and mighty about the economics of Brexit, Leavers sank that boat long ago.
In Steven Pinker's latest book he devotes a large chapter to how the eco-fascists are just wrong. If we were to adapt their demands on food i.e. all "natural", all organic, no meat, we would reverse 100s of years efficiencies in farming techniques.
Over the past 50 years especially, despite the population rising, it now takes far less land to grow the same amount of crops, and also the ability to grow crops in many areas where they weren't previously able to e.g. GM crops in Africa has resulted in basically elimination of famine.
So if we reversed all this, we would then need to massively expand the amount of farm land required to feed our global population and the only way to do so is of course to cut down more forests, need to go back to shipping food to large parts of Africa, etc, etc etc.
This is a pretty convincing account of No 10's position by James Forsythe. Concludes: Those who pushed the Benn Act intended to sabotage a deal and they’ve probably succeeded. So the main effect of it will probably be to help us win an election by uniting the leave vote and then a no deal Brexit. History is full of such ironies and tragedies.
Then, if they win, what was formerly known as the Conservative Party will own the economic depression that follows.
Good luck with the farmers keeping their peace when half of them are wiped out.
Depending on the size of any majority (if any) they may have to deal with the day-to-day consequences for several years, before an electoral wipeout that will last a generation or more.
“Those who supported delay will face the inevitable consequences of being seen to interfere in domestic politics in a deeply unpopular way by colluding with a Parliament that is as popular as the clap.“
This is a pretty convincing account of No 10's position by James Forsythe. Concludes: Those who pushed the Benn Act intended to sabotage a deal and they’ve probably succeeded. So the main effect of it will probably be to help us win an election by uniting the leave vote and then a no deal Brexit. History is full of such ironies and tragedies.
That makes no sense. If they genuinely believe the threat of no deal will elicit an acceptable deal, then anything that helps them win a majority will help them get a deal, unless of course they are lying...
If the GE is framed against a backdrop such as described then some jaw dropping seat changes are nailed on and it will be a very entertaining all night watch!
I don't find this terrible, unless she was forced into this against her will. And as far as we can tell, she seems terribly, bizarrely, awfully sincere in her beliefs.
Put it like this, this seems rather more mild than what Serena & Venus Williams' father put them through. (Or indeed, any one of a thousand pushy parents here in LA who chuck their kids in for every audition around.)
In Steven Pinker's latest book he devotes a large chapter to how the eco-fascists are just wrong. If we were to adapt their demands on food i.e. all "natural", all organic, no meat, we would reverse 100s of years efficiencies in farming techniques.
Over the past 50 years especially, despite the population rising, it now takes far less land to grow the same amount of crops, and also the ability to grow crops in many areas where they weren't previously able to e.g. GM crops in Africa has resulted in basically elimination of famine.
So if we reversed all this, we would then need to massively expand the amount of farm land required to feed our global population and the only way to do so is of course to cut down more forests, need to go back to shipping food to large parts of Africa, etc, etc etc.
I am not sure that declaring his support for the Poll Tax will do Johnson any favours. Opposition parties should be able to make good use of that.
The SNP will! The Tories instigated it first on Scotland as a social experiment on a grand scale. Boris Johnson cannot help but say the wrong thing. If he did not have the Brexit supporting media to save him. He would be in big trouble, taking the Tories down with him...
The poll tax was introduced first in Scotland because the 1986 domestic rates revaluation there had caused such uproar from those who had lost out resulting in the SCONs losing the votes of many homeowners.
Do any of the PB oldies or PB Scots know why the Scottish domestic rates revaluation was allowed to happen in 1986 ?
The ones for England & Wales in 1978 and 1983 had both been cancelled.
Likewise council tax bands are still based on 1991 valuations.
Sorry, but your understanding is mistaken. Labour WILL offer a referendum, offering what we think is a non-disastrous variety of Brexit or Remain. In principle, the party reserves the right to make a recommendation either way, depending on what the deal looks like, but in either case the choice will be up to voters. What Corbyn recommends himself will be interesting, but it won't be up to him to decide the outcome, any more than Cameron's view decided the last referendum.
None of that, however, will happen if the opposition vote is split in Con-Lab and Lab-Con marginals. Nor will a LibDem grasp on the balance of power. We'll simply get a humungous Johnson majority and a No Deal Brexit.
The bit I don't get is Labour presumably will seek to renegotiate the A50 Withdrawal Agreement (presumably the EU will agree to this re-negotiation).
Out of the process will come a new Withdrawal Agreement (the bit we have to do before the Political Declaration) but the way you put it Labour will be neutral (?) just as the Conservatives were in 2016.
The options as you state them mean if you reject the new WA you are supporting Remain which presumably means revoking A50 and returning to the EU as though 23/6/16 never happened.
There's little in that for the diehard No Dealers so how does this begin to mend the division and vitriol?
Labour campaigned against the renegotiated terms recommended by its own Government at the 1975 Referendum - leading Anti-Marketeers being Tony Benn, Michael Foot, Barbara Castle, Peter Shore and Judith Hart.
“Those who supported delay will face the inevitable consequences of being seen to interfere in domestic politics in a deeply unpopular way by colluding with a Parliament that is as popular as the clap.“
This is a pretty convincing account of No 10's position by James Forsythe. Concludes: Those who pushed the Benn Act intended to sabotage a deal and they’ve probably succeeded. So the main effect of it will probably be to help us win an election by uniting the leave vote and then a no deal Brexit. History is full of such ironies and tragedies.
Bozo didn’t even bother to try and get a deal until after the Benn Act was passed , this is yet more desperate attempts by the government to avoid blame .
This is a pretty convincing account of No 10's position by James Forsythe. Concludes: Those who pushed the Benn Act intended to sabotage a deal and they’ve probably succeeded. So the main effect of it will probably be to help us win an election by uniting the leave vote and then a no deal Brexit. History is full of such ironies and tragedies.
That makes no sense. If they genuinely believe the threat of no deal will elicit an acceptable deal, then anything that helps them win a majority will help them get a deal, unless of course they are lying...
Not sure you're addressing the substance of the quoted article. Did you read it?
I don't find this terrible, unless she was forced into this against her will. And as far as we can tell, she seems terribly, bizarrely, awfully sincere in her beliefs.
Put it like this, this seems rather more mild than what Serena & Venus Williams' father put them through. (Or indeed, any one of a thousand pushy parents here in LA who chuck their kids in for every audition around.)
Tennis in particular seems littered with tales of fathers brutally pushing their kids at all costs in an attempt to get them into the pros. Jennifer Capriati, Mary Pierce, Jelena Dokic, Bartoli, Bernard Tomic to name but a few.
This is a pretty convincing account of No 10's position by James Forsythe. Concludes: Those who pushed the Benn Act intended to sabotage a deal and they’ve probably succeeded. So the main effect of it will probably be to help us win an election by uniting the leave vote and then a no deal Brexit. History is full of such ironies and tragedies.
Bozo didn’t even bother to try and get a deal until after the Benn Act was passed , this is yet more desperate attempts by the government to avoid blame .
Is this the same WA that the EU has shredded to bits and then someone subsequently leaked to The Grauniad?
No, the original one rejected by the Commons three times but which may look very attractive as the cliff edge of No Deal beckons.
Thanks.
BTW - your other point that "... The EU will presumably offer another extension which Boris will presumably reject as the ditch looks so inviting ... " - not only would that put Boris in contempt of Parliament, but if I understand this morning's Court case, it only stopped because the PM reassured the Court that he would not frustrate the Benn Act. If he does, then surely he would be in Contempt or possibly even perjury if the reassurance was a sworn statement?
Perhaps one of our many lawyers could weigh in on this?
Under the Act it is Parliament - not the PM - which makes the decision to accept or not whatever extension the EU is offering.
So the EU could offer a 5-year extension, say, and the PM could whip his MPs against it.
I doubt this will be the EU’s offer, though.
If the PM breaks any of the undertakings given to the Court, yes, he would be in contempt. I expect his legal team and the A-G would resign.
It would not be perjury because he is not giving evidence. But breaking an undertaking to a Court is very serious indeed, especially for a PM.
"It would not be perjury because he is not giving evidence. But breaking an undertaking to a Court is very serious indeed, especially for a PM."
So nothing would actually happen to him? Then who cares? If his opponents can use legal niceties to ensnare him, he is perfectly entitled to use his own to escape...
His opponents are not using legal niceties to ensnare him, unless you think that the PM agreeing to comply with the law and saying so to a judge is some sort of trap.
The courts have all the powers necessary to deal with those who break such undertakings. One hopes that they don’t need to be used against a PM of Britain. We are not some sort of banana republic.
As to who cares about the rule of law? Well most decent civilized people who have an understanding of how horrible life is without it. But I hope that was a rhetorical question on your part.
"ComRes’s latest voting intention puts the Conservatives on 33 per cent, six percentage points ahead of Labour on 27 per cent. The Lib Dems are two percentage points up on 22 per cent while the Brexit Party remains on 13 per cent. If the parties were to achieve these vote shares at a general election, it would result in the Tories winning an eight seat majority, according to Electoral Calculus." [Green 3, SNP 4, UKIP 1]
Differences are with the previous ComRes for the Telegraph with fieldwork 6-8 Sept, not the most recent ComRes which had the Tories on 27%. 33% is 2% higher for the Tories than any other ComRes poll since Johnson became leader.
Would Conservatives for example sign up to a de-carbonised economy? Would Labour?
I would. Sure.
As long as it's done over 30 years and not 6. No problem
I'm certain by the end of the century the world will have decarbonized. It will happen through ingenuity, progress, advancement and good old fashioned capitalism (companies will make more money without carbon than they would with)
Indeed but the rate of climate change and its impacts might not allow such a leisurely approach. Suppose we said a de-carbonised economy by 2035 - probably viable but it would need some good old-fashioned State intervention to get things moving.
I agree human ingenuity and innovation is or are the answer but they need to be actively encouraged and not just reliant on market forces,
Would Conservatives for example sign up to a de-carbonised economy? Would Labour?
I would. Sure.
As long as it's done over 30 years and not 6. No problem
I'm certain by the end of the century the world will have decarbonized. It will happen through ingenuity, progress, advancement and good old fashioned captialism (companies will make more money without carbon than they would with)
People wandering around Westminster in fancy dress costumes and blocking roads and bridges makes no difference to this development which is already well under way.
Well said!
We are already rapidly progressing towards such a state already. Especially if you consider offsetting then electricity could be carbon neutral within a decade, the internal combustion engine for new vehicles could be history within a decade.
Which leaves some tougher challenges - agriculture oddly enough and aviation, both of which have opportunities for offsetting too. The idea of going vegan to save the planet is absolutely stark, raving bonkers!
His opponents are not using legal niceties to ensnare him, unless you think that the PM agreeing to comply with the law and saying so to a judge is some sort of trap.
The courts have all the powers necessary to deal with those who break such undertakings. One hopes that they don’t need to be used against a PM of Britain. We are not some sort of banana republic.
As to who cares about the rule of law? Well most decent civilized people who have an understanding of how horrible life is without it. But I hope that was a rhetorical question on your part.
Most decent, civilized people recognize a politician who is trying to implement the democratic will of over 17 million voters.
And the polling is reflecting this I am afraid to say.
Straight from Goebbels playbook....who himself copied it from the Romans..in fact let's have a games on 1st November....we can see if we scrape together some lions (if they still exist), starve them and throw in the Tory Brexit rebels....Rory could be an appetiser....facilitated by BoJo...
I am not sure that declaring his support for the Poll Tax will do Johnson any favours. Opposition parties should be able to make good use of that.
The SNP will! The Tories instigated it first on Scotland as a social experiment on a grand scale. Boris Johnson cannot help but say the wrong thing. If he did not have the Brexit supporting media to save him. He would be in big trouble, taking the Tories down with him...
The poll tax was introduced first in Scotland because the 1986 domestic rates revaluation there had caused such uproar from those who had lost out resulting in the SCONs losing the votes of many homeowners.
I always thought the poll tax was supposed to replace the irrational rates system, the latter having accumulated many anomalies over the decades.
Yet they rationalised the Scots system, but left the English one alone.
And then what do they do? They gave the Scots the poll tax first. So much for it being a rational replacement of the rates system.
I still remember the tartan-clad guinea pigs in Steve Bell's cartoon strip.
This is a pretty convincing account of No 10's position by James Forsythe. Concludes: Those who pushed the Benn Act intended to sabotage a deal and they’ve probably succeeded. So the main effect of it will probably be to help us win an election by uniting the leave vote and then a no deal Brexit. History is full of such ironies and tragedies.
Yes, Benn Act probably a blunder. Gives Johnson an excuse for failing to get a Deal. Allows him to claim he would have succeeded if left to his own devices. Utter tosh of course but many of the more gullible will believe it. And it is the LEAVE vote he is chasing remember.
If the GE is framed against a backdrop such as described then some jaw dropping seat changes are nailed on and it will be a very entertaining all night watch!
As long as Cummings gives parliament the time to form a 'Government Of All The Losers' before dropping the hammer then the Tories are home and hosed at the next GE.
Remainers are going to get rag-dolled at the next election and yet they seem unable to see what is coming.
His opponents are not using legal niceties to ensnare him, unless you think that the PM agreeing to comply with the law and saying so to a judge is some sort of trap.
The courts have all the powers necessary to deal with those who break such undertakings. One hopes that they don’t need to be used against a PM of Britain. We are not some sort of banana republic.
As to who cares about the rule of law? Well most decent civilized people who have an understanding of how horrible life is without it. But I hope that was a rhetorical question on your part.
Most decent, civilized people recognize a politician who is trying to implement the democratic will of over 17 million voters.
And the polling is reflecting this I am afraid to say.
Are you training to Bellend of the year?...if you are, you are doing rather well..This year to achieve such an accolade, you really need to push the boundaries of bellendness....
Allen "suggests at least 20 more ‘one-nation' Tories would like to follow suit"
That would make them larger than the SNP.
At that point multiple cats really would be set among the avium columbidae.
We've heard a lot about defections to the LDs. They've gained a few, sure, but 20 more? I doubt it. A slow drip drip until there is an election is about the best they can hope for.
I am not sure that declaring his support for the Poll Tax will do Johnson any favours. Opposition parties should be able to make good use of that.
The SNP will! The Tories instigated it first on Scotland as a social experiment on a grand scale. Boris Johnson cannot help but say the wrong thing. If he did not have the Brexit supporting media to save him. He would be in big trouble, taking the Tories down with him...
The poll tax was introduced first in Scotland because the 1986 domestic rates revaluation there had caused such uproar from those who had lost out resulting in the SCONs losing the votes of many homeowners.
Do any of the PB oldies or PB Scots know why the Scottish domestic rates revaluation was allowed to happen in 1986 ?
The ones for England & Wales in 1978 and 1983 had both been cancelled.
Likewise council tax bands are still based on 1991 valuations.
I'd be interested to know too - wasn't paying much attention at the time ...
His opponents are not using legal niceties to ensnare him, unless you think that the PM agreeing to comply with the law and saying so to a judge is some sort of trap.
The courts have all the powers necessary to deal with those who break such undertakings. One hopes that they don’t need to be used against a PM of Britain. We are not some sort of banana republic.
As to who cares about the rule of law? Well most decent civilized people who have an understanding of how horrible life is without it. But I hope that was a rhetorical question on your part.
Most decent, civilized people recognize a politician who is trying to implement the democratic will of over 17 million voters.
And the polling is reflecting this I am afraid to say.
Most decent civilized people recognize that if you want to claim that you are implementing the democratic will of the people you need to do so legally.
Unless you are talking about those “democracies” without the rule of law.
His opponents are not using legal niceties to ensnare him, unless you think that the PM agreeing to comply with the law and saying so to a judge is some sort of trap.
The courts have all the powers necessary to deal with those who break such undertakings. One hopes that they don’t need to be used against a PM of Britain. We are not some sort of banana republic.
As to who cares about the rule of law? Well most decent civilized people who have an understanding of how horrible life is without it. But I hope that was a rhetorical question on your part.
Most decent, civilized people recognize a politician who is trying to implement the democratic will of over 17 million voters.
And the polling is reflecting this I am afraid to say.
Are you training to Bellend of the year?...if you are, you are doing rather well..This year to achieve such an accolade, you really need to push the boundaries of bellendness....
Failure to understand and even empathise with opposing views is why remain lost - and Labour elected Jezza.
No deal Brexit to cost 15 billion pounds for business in terms of new customs declarations. This was a conservative estimate as it didn’t include new vat rules . The lunacy continues !
If the GE is framed against a backdrop such as described then some jaw dropping seat changes are nailed on and it will be a very entertaining all night watch!
As long as Cummings gives parliament the time to form a 'Government Of All The Losers' before dropping the hammer then the Tories are home and hosed at the next GE.
Remainers are going to get rag-dolled at the next election and yet they seem unable to see what is coming.
No, no, no! It is pea-brained, little Englanders like you who will be a little surprised at the next GE.
If the GE is framed against a backdrop such as described then some jaw dropping seat changes are nailed on and it will be a very entertaining all night watch!
As long as Cummings gives parliament the time to form a 'Government Of All The Losers' before dropping the hammer then the Tories are home and hosed at the next GE.
Remainers are going to get rag-dolled at the next election and yet they seem unable to see what is coming.
No, no, no! It is pea-brained, little Englanders like you who will be a little surprised at the next GE.
Counting your chickens far too early my friend.
I thought it was well accepted that Sunny Jim was dialling in from Nizhny Novgorod.
No deal Brexit to cost 15 billion pounds for business in terms of new customs declarations. This was a conservative estimate as it didn’t include new vat rules . The lunacy continues !
His opponents are not using legal niceties to ensnare him, unless you think that the PM agreeing to comply with the law and saying so to a judge is some sort of trap.
The courts have all the powers necessary to deal with those who break such undertakings. One hopes that they don’t need to be used against a PM of Britain. We are not some sort of banana republic.
As to who cares about the rule of law? Well most decent civilized people who have an understanding of how horrible life is without it. But I hope that was a rhetorical question on your part.
Most decent, civilized people recognize a politician who is trying to implement the democratic will of over 17 million voters.
And the polling is reflecting this I am afraid to say.
Are you training to Bellend of the year?...if you are, you are doing rather well..This year to achieve such an accolade, you really need to push the boundaries of bellendness....
Failure to understand and even empathise with opposing views is why remain lost - and Labour elected Jezza.
The man who luxuriates in Loyalist sectarian iconography calls for love across the barricades.
"ComRes’s latest voting intention puts the Conservatives on 33 per cent, six percentage points ahead of Labour on 27 per cent. The Lib Dems are two percentage points up on 22 per cent while the Brexit Party remains on 13 per cent. If the parties were to achieve these vote shares at a general election, it would result in the Tories winning an eight seat majority, according to Electoral Calculus." [Green 3, SNP 4, UKIP 1]
Differences are with the previous ComRes for the Telegraph with fieldwork 6-8 Sept, not the most recent ComRes which had the Tories on 27%. 33% is 2% higher for the Tories than any other ComRes poll since Johnson became leader.
On UNS, this poll implies 20 Tory gains from Labour - though 13 would enjoy first term incumbency - offset by 17 losses to LDs and circa 10 to SNP - leaving the Tories with 311 seats.
No deal Brexit to cost 15 billion pounds for business in terms of new customs declarations. This was a conservative estimate as it didn’t include new vat rules . The lunacy continues !
Out of interest, do show us you working.
I'd like to know how you estimated this figure of 15 billion pounds.
I am always keen to see quantitive reasoning applied to solve real-life questions involving numerical data.
His opponents are not using legal niceties to ensnare him, unless you think that the PM agreeing to comply with the law and saying so to a judge is some sort of trap.
The courts have all the powers necessary to deal with those who break such undertakings. One hopes that they don’t need to be used against a PM of Britain. We are not some sort of banana republic.
As to who cares about the rule of law? Well most decent civilized people who have an understanding of how horrible life is without it. But I hope that was a rhetorical question on your part.
Most decent, civilized people recognize a politician who is trying to implement the democratic will of over 17 million voters.
And the polling is reflecting this I am afraid to say.
Are you training to Bellend of the year?...if you are, you are doing rather well..This year to achieve such an accolade, you really need to push the boundaries of bellendness....
Failure to understand and even empathise with opposing views is why remain lost - and Labour elected Jezza.
Brexit has already right royally fucked me over.....
So, it is hardly surprising that I struggle to empathise with the point of view of those who do not understand the implications of this terrible policy....
Try to explain the differences in the customs union/single market and the implications on the Island of Ireland to each and every of the 17.4m people who voted to leave....
This is a pretty convincing account of No 10's position by James Forsythe. Concludes: Those who pushed the Benn Act intended to sabotage a deal and they’ve probably succeeded. So the main effect of it will probably be to help us win an election by uniting the leave vote and then a no deal Brexit. History is full of such ironies and tragedies.
Yes, Benn Act probably a blunder. Gives Johnson an excuse for failing to get a Deal. Allows him to claim he would have succeeded if left to his own devices. Utter tosh of course but many of the more gullible will believe it. And it is the LEAVE vote he is chasing remember.
Also Farage is running around saying Boris is weak on leaving and getting not much airtime, whilst the rebel alliance is with parliamentary motions, lawfare, etc on the TV saying Boris is going to no deal. Totally stupid from the remain campaign because they need Farage to take votes of Boris, yet they are fighting each other for who is the hardest remainer.
The pro-EU lot were incompetent in the ref and they are just as pants now, notgot a clue.
His opponents are not using legal niceties to ensnare him, unless you think that the PM agreeing to comply with the law and saying so to a judge is some sort of trap.
The courts have all the powers necessary to deal with those who break such undertakings. One hopes that they don’t need to be used against a PM of Britain. We are not some sort of banana republic.
As to who cares about the rule of law? Well most decent civilized people who have an understanding of how horrible life is without it. But I hope that was a rhetorical question on your part.
Most decent, civilized people recognize a politician who is trying to implement the democratic will of over 17 million voters.
And the polling is reflecting this I am afraid to say.
Are you training to Bellend of the year?...if you are, you are doing rather well..This year to achieve such an accolade, you really need to push the boundaries of bellendness....
Failure to understand and even empathise with opposing views is why remain lost - and Labour elected Jezza.
Brexit has already right royally fucked me over.....
So, it is hardly surprising that I struggle to empathise with the point of view of those who do not understand the implications of this terrible policy....
Try to explain the differences in the customs union/single market and the implications on the Island of Ireland to each and every of the 17.4m people who voted to leave....
A significant proportion (>50%) of the 17.4m just wanted no more f*cking immigration. These better looking and better skilled foreigners, 'darkies' and all-sorts coming into our country, taking our jobs and stealing our women etc. etc.
No deal Brexit to cost 15 billion pounds for business in terms of new customs declarations. This was a conservative estimate as it didn’t include new vat rules . The lunacy continues !
Out of interest, do show us you working.
I'd like to know how you estimated this figure of 15 billion pounds.
I am always keen to see quantitive reasoning applied to solve real-life questions involving numerical data.
Its in the FT . It’s the figures which have been released by the HMRC. I know Leavers don’t do experts and would rather chat with Babs at the local chippie who apparently knows more !
I don't find this terrible, unless she was forced into this against her will. And as far as we can tell, she seems terribly, bizarrely, awfully sincere in her beliefs.
Put it like this, this seems rather more mild than what Serena & Venus Williams' father put them through. (Or indeed, any one of a thousand pushy parents here in LA who chuck their kids in for every audition around.)
I think you’re missing the point. It’s classic concern trolling - that is all.
I am not sure that declaring his support for the Poll Tax will do Johnson any favours. Opposition parties should be able to make good use of that.
The SNP will! The Tories instigated it first on Scotland as a social experiment on a grand scale. Boris Johnson cannot help but say the wrong thing. If he did not have the Brexit supporting media to save him. He would be in big trouble, taking the Tories down with him...
The poll tax was introduced first in Scotland because the 1986 domestic rates revaluation there had caused such uproar from those who had lost out resulting in the SCONs losing the votes of many homeowners.
Do any of the PB oldies or PB Scots know why the Scottish domestic rates revaluation was allowed to happen in 1986 ?
The ones for England & Wales in 1978 and 1983 had both been cancelled.
Likewise council tax bands are still based on 1991 valuations.
I'd be interested to know too - wasn't paying much attention at the time ...
More unhinged nonsense from an apparent source in no 10 . I think the men in white coats need to be called . Aswell as a page long diatribe apparently the Tories will go full on no deal in their election manifesto . Good luck with that !
Comments
At that point multiple cats really would be set among the avium columbidae.
Recently reselected: Jess Philipps, Rachel Reeves, Tony Lloyd, Paula Sheriff, Wes Streeting, Thelma Walker, Ruth Smeeth, Gareth Snell, Sandy Martin, Sarah Jones, Tracy Barbin, Judith Cummins, Rushanara Ali
Emma Lewell Buck (South Shields) apparently triggered
Oh I forgot, the Maomentumers want a nationalized Pret, problem solved.
It's possible that the government's proposals might go somewhere. Alternatively, we're about to find ourselves at what definitely looks like the edge of a cliff, and someone's current position is going to change very quickly, and it's not going to matter, because it's going to be obviously the right thing to do in a crisis. That might be Corbyn deferring to a not-Corbyn temporary PM. Or not-Corbyn deferring to Corbyn. Or something even more insane than that.
I don't think there's any way of telling.
https://www.debka.com/
Pursued by the Tories' sinister agents, Princess Nicola Anna Jo Heidi races home aboard her battle-bus, custodian of the stolen plans that can save her Party and restore Freedom of Movement to the Continent…"
The MPs who failed to be automatically reselected so far are Diana Johsnon, Margaret Hodge, Roger Godsiff and apparently Emma Lewell Buck (there is some procedural disagreement on one vote held tonight)
I'd love to see a constructive debate on the environment and the challenge of climate change and how we respond to it.
There's a strong argument for Government to actively champion human ingenuity by funding and supporting research into measures aimed at mitigating the impact of climate change and we know technology and innovation can and have achieved a lot.
That can be the carrot and I'm no fan of eco-authoritarianism but we cannot go on as we are without recognising the consequences of our actions, The way we work and live contributes in many cases to the environmental damage and there are areas that could be challenged if we were prepared to look at some of the fundamentals and ask some searching questions.
The IFS proposal to tax on actual miles driven rather than a blanket tax on fuel is not without merit though there are issues. How do we move to a less consumption based economic model which provides growth and prosperity?
Would Conservatives for example sign up to a de-carbonised economy? Would Labour?
https://www.mcdonalds.com/gb/en-gb/product/the-spicy-veggie-one.html
Or to put it in slightly cruder vernacular; they are the lights on 2am night club pick up.
I'm sure there was a big carbon promise (don't think I could call it a plan).
Many of the attendees are just middle-class virtue signalers delighted to have an opportunity to burnish their credentials on social media.
As long as it's done over 30 years and not 6. No problem
I'm certain by the end of the century the world will have decarbonized. It will happen through ingenuity, progress, advancement and good old fashioned captialism (companies will make more money without carbon than they would with)
People wandering around Westminster in fancy dress costumes and blocking roads and bridges makes no difference to this development which is already well under way.
The challenge of climate change impacts on all aspects of policy including tax, spending, housing, transport and health (for starters). I see little or no coherent thinking from the New Conservatives (or indeed the Corbynite Marxists) on these critical issues.
People have been jailed for contempt. You might want to check why Tommy Robinson is doing time....
Wow. Deal dies end of this week.
This will be the most brutal GE in decades.
Concludes: Those who pushed the Benn Act intended to sabotage a deal and they’ve probably succeeded. So the main effect of it will probably be to help us win an election by uniting the leave vote and then a no deal Brexit. History is full of such ironies and tragedies.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/10/how-number-10-view-the-state-of-the-negotiations/
Over the past 50 years especially, despite the population rising, it now takes far less land to grow the same amount of crops, and also the ability to grow crops in many areas where they weren't previously able to e.g. GM crops in Africa has resulted in basically elimination of famine.
So if we reversed all this, we would then need to massively expand the amount of farm land required to feed our global population and the only way to do so is of course to cut down more forests, need to go back to shipping food to large parts of Africa, etc, etc etc.
Good luck with the farmers keeping their peace when half of them are wiped out.
Depending on the size of any majority (if any) they may have to deal with the day-to-day consequences for several years, before an electoral wipeout that will last a generation or more.
Put it like this, this seems rather more mild than what Serena & Venus Williams' father put them through. (Or indeed, any one of a thousand pushy parents here in LA who chuck their kids in for every audition around.)
Good evening and good night.
The ones for England & Wales in 1978 and 1983 had both been cancelled.
Likewise council tax bands are still based on 1991 valuations.
https://twitter.com/MrMo_J/status/1181273415950442496?s=20
The courts have all the powers necessary to deal with those who break such undertakings. One hopes that they don’t need to be used against a PM of Britain. We are not some sort of banana republic.
As to who cares about the rule of law? Well most decent civilized people who have an understanding of how horrible life is without it. But I hope that was a rhetorical question on your part.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/10/07/parliament-remain-mps-will-blamed-boris-johnson-brexit-delay/
"ComRes’s latest voting intention puts the Conservatives on 33 per cent, six percentage points ahead of Labour on 27 per cent. The Lib Dems are two percentage points up on 22 per cent while the Brexit Party remains on 13 per cent. If the parties were to achieve these vote shares at a general election, it would result in the Tories winning an eight seat majority, according to Electoral Calculus." [Green 3, SNP 4, UKIP 1]
Differences are with the previous ComRes for the Telegraph with fieldwork 6-8 Sept, not the most recent ComRes which had the Tories on 27%. 33% is 2% higher for the Tories than any other ComRes poll since Johnson became leader.
I agree human ingenuity and innovation is or are the answer but they need to be actively encouraged and not just reliant on market forces,
We are already rapidly progressing towards such a state already. Especially if you consider offsetting then electricity could be carbon neutral within a decade, the internal combustion engine for new vehicles could be history within a decade.
Which leaves some tougher challenges - agriculture oddly enough and aviation, both of which have opportunities for offsetting too. The idea of going vegan to save the planet is absolutely stark, raving bonkers!
And the polling is reflecting this I am afraid to say.
Yet they rationalised the Scots system, but left the English one alone.
And then what do they do? They gave the Scots the poll tax first. So much for it being a rational replacement of the rates system.
I still remember the tartan-clad guinea pigs in Steve Bell's cartoon strip.
Remainers are going to get rag-dolled at the next election and yet they seem unable to see what is coming.
A slow drip drip until there is an election is about the best they can hope for.
Unless you are talking about those “democracies” without the rule of law.
Counting your chickens far too early my friend.
I'd like to know how you estimated this figure of 15 billion pounds.
I am always keen to see quantitive reasoning applied to solve real-life questions involving numerical data.
So, it is hardly surprising that I struggle to empathise with the point of view of those who do not understand the implications of this terrible policy....
Try to explain the differences in the customs union/single market and the implications on the Island of Ireland to each and every of the 17.4m people who voted to leave....
The pro-EU lot were incompetent in the ref and they are just as pants now, notgot a clue.
It’s classic concern trolling - that is all.
prorogued
http://www.scottishgovernmentyearbooks.ed.ac.uk/record/22984/1/1987_4_Ratingrevalutationrevisited.pdf