They will have ironed the brownshirts as well, the junta is well down the road
Can you believe it?
They're assigning government busy bodies to check up on every single child in the country!
Like teachers?
Teachers, who should be working with parents to educate children, rather than against parents as glorified social workers snooping for the state, as if it were China or Soviet Russia.
That's already a teachers' job. Or are you saying teachers should ignore warning signs of abuse and neglect?
"Sure littlen Timmy kept coming to school late, mapnourished and covered in bruises but I didn't want to be a snoop"
Resorting to Straw Man tactics.....don't worry, I don't think anyone will notice....
As the farther of a young child I was genuinely concerned about the frankly apocalyptic hell scape vision No2NP kept handing me in leaflets so I read the law and the examples of its implementation by Lib Dem and Tory councils.
As a result I have zero problems with it and the only people raising stawmen are the people painting a picture of secret rooms full of anonymous masked snoops rather than identified health visitors and head teachers doing what they have always been doing just with more clarity and focus.
I have yet to read any criticism about NP that is actually about the NP as opposed to a general failing of the social care system.
Can someone explain Mr Clegg's thinking - how export tariffs affect domestic prices - or indeed import prices?
The price of chocolate, cheese and wine will increase sharply if Britain heads towards a so-called hard Brexit, according to Nick Clegg.
Speaking ahead of a Liberal Democrats food and drink Brexit impact report, he warned that Britain could only avoid tariffs on beef exports of 59%, chocolate at 38%, cheese at 40% and wine at 14%, with a soft Brexit.
Of course, Tusk has already explained that the alternative to 'Hard Brexit' is 'No Brexit'.....which evidently is what Mr Clegg is after.....
Britain could certainly unilaterally open its markets to imports from countries that charged tariffs on British exports. But does anyone think it would?
There are more sources of cheese, wine & chocolate than the EU.....
not decent ones that people want though
Nothing wrong with many Southern Hemisphere wines.
Free of the EU jackboot, you will be able to make yr camembert in Leicester and yr Toulouse sausage in Sutton Coldfield...
Except you wouldn't. This is the same as the Pol Roger "pints of champagne" story. The statute book won't magically revert back to New Year's Eve, 1972.
(I should have added an irony tag to that post)
I wasn't familiar with it. Was someone preventing the making of a 568.261ml bottle?
Must admit I am no expert. We do have Hokkaido camembert in Japan, however, so I assumed that this kind of thing might be possible
It's always been possible to make a 568.261ml bottle.
I'm sure a number of PBers found them on their doorstep this morning!
If Goldsmith does resign, I hope the local party deselect him.Hes the ultimate NIMBY and a big embarrassment for the Tories
Or a local very popular MP who is principled and does what he says he will do. Of course the Tories should deselect him and put someone in favour of the third runway up against him, it would be pointless to let him do a David Davis.
If Goldsmith does resign, I hope the local party deselect him.Hes the ultimate NIMBY and a big embarrassment for the Tories
Or a local very popular MP who is principled and does what he says he will do. Of course the Tories should deselect him and put someone in favour of the third runway up against him, it would be pointless to let him do a David Davis.
Actually, not putting someone up against Zac, given he'd be a reliably Brexit voice in the Commons might be a stroke of genius.
I think, in a three way battle, the LibDems would sneak through the middle, given that Richmond was 65:35 for Remain.
If Goldsmith does resign, I hope the local party deselect him.Hes the ultimate NIMBY and a big embarrassment for the Tories
Or a local very popular MP who is principled and does what he says he will do. Of course the Tories should deselect him and put someone in favour of the third runway up against him, it would be pointless to let him do a David Davis.
Actually, not putting someone up against Zac, given he'd be a reliably Brexit voice in the Commons might be a stroke of genius.
I think, in a three way battle, the LibDems would sneak through the middle, given that Richmond was 65:35 for Remain.
Yes, the Cons need to no-platform him. After the big news of them not fighting for the seat vs Zac has filtered through, the race would become a farce.
If Goldsmith does resign, I hope the local party deselect him.Hes the ultimate NIMBY and a big embarrassment for the Tories
Or a local very popular MP who is principled and does what he says he will do. Of course the Tories should deselect him and put someone in favour of the third runway up against him, it would be pointless to let him do a David Davis.
Actually, not putting someone up against Zac, given he'd be a reliably Brexit voice in the Commons might be a stroke of genius.
I think, in a three way battle, the LibDems would sneak through the middle, given that Richmond was 65:35 for Remain.
If the Tories don't put up a candidate against Zac they will be endorsing his stance.
Yesterday While flicking through several of the last threads I came accross one 'from a Bernie supporter...'. It was billed as 'an expose on Clinton's emails'. ALL ONE HOUR TWENTY MINUTES OF IT!
Foolishly I started listening...'Banks have to show more responsibility. They have to engage with the general public. They have to help small businesses etc etc'. Most of these revelations were followed by inanities like...WHAT..WHAT.....SHE WANTS TO MAKE US ADMIRE BANKERS!!!
Plato had posted this piece to show that Clinton was corrupt. It didn't. The quoted emails could have been written by Corbyn or even May. It's obvious that she had posted this ONE HOUR AND TWENTY MINUTE revelation without reading it. I realised that this was a pattern. Posts full of meaningless graffitti unedited and unread.
My point is this. The threads are now littered with what can only be described as the incoherent ramblings of an infatuated twelve year old. As I haven't been following PB for a while perhaps I'm the only person who was sucked in. But for any newcomers be warned. To avoid the pit I fell into see the word 'PLATO' and sail on past.
While a by-election would provide entertainment, and there could be further discomfort for TMay if LHR3 gets the go-ahead, this is much more important than a bit of political bickering.
Therefore, speaking from the greeny-red corner, I hope that the runway does not get built.
If Goldsmith does resign, I hope the local party deselect him.Hes the ultimate NIMBY and a big embarrassment for the Tories
Or a local very popular MP who is principled and does what he says he will do. Of course the Tories should deselect him and put someone in favour of the third runway up against him, it would be pointless to let him do a David Davis.
Actually, not putting someone up against Zac, given he'd be a reliably Brexit voice in the Commons might be a stroke of genius.
I think, in a three way battle, the LibDems would sneak through the middle, given that Richmond was 65:35 for Remain.
If the Tories don't put up a candidate against Zac they will be endorsing his stance.
I guess the danger is that they - the Conservatives - would appear to be attempting to have their cake and eat it. No to Heathrow! But elect a (effectively) Conservative candidate anyway!
Mr. Borough, it may be that things have bogged down, or that she's been asked by those she's with to stay silent for a little while to avoid giving warning of an imminent offensive or suchlike.
I sometimes get annoyed about the BBC. For instance, it maintained neutrality during the Brexit referendum run-up but now has reverted back to London posh. However, it still retains a sense of proportion about what is important and what isn't.
There seems to be some fuss on twitter about one of its programmes, Strictly come bake-off or something, being racist because they're eating all the black people first. Is that the one that Ed Balls is one? Plenty of flesh on him.
I expect it's the younger teens who inhabit twitter. Empty vessels make most noise goes the old proverb.
While a by-election would provide entertainment, and there could be further discomfort for TMay if LHR3 gets the go-ahead, this is much more important than a bit of political bickering.
Therefore, speaking from the greeny-red corner, I hope that the runway does not get built.
Speaking from the "wanting the best for the people of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" corner, I hope it does get the go ahead.
But she has given herself one advantage, which does suggest that she does have political sagacity. Her Chief Whip, Gavin Williamson, the party Chairman, Patrick McLoughlin, the head of her policy board, George Freeman, her PPS, George Hollingberry – they are all men of bottom, wisdom and judgment. They are all capable of telling her what she needs to hear but may not wish to hear, and telling no-one else about the conversation. Those were good appointments.
There are two final points. First, the new PM is formidable; there is steel. Second, she will need every molecule of that steel to deal with the difficulties ahead.
Incidentally, in considering the possibility that the polls could be wrong, Silver also mentions Brexit. He thinks there is more uncertainty than usual with the polls, given a larger number of undecided voters than usual (though he seems to think it's likelier that they are underestimating Clinton's support than Trump's). But he reckons that a polling error of the size seen with Brexit wouldn't be enough on its own to give Trump the election: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-where-the-race-stands-with-three-weeks-to-go/
He doesn't seem to understand that there is a difference between finding the support but assuming it won't all turn out, and not finding it there at all.
If Goldsmith does resign, I hope the local party deselect him.Hes the ultimate NIMBY and a big embarrassment for the Tories
Or a local very popular MP who is principled and does what he says he will do. Of course the Tories should deselect him and put someone in favour of the third runway up against him, it would be pointless to let him do a David Davis.
Actually, not putting someone up against Zac, given he'd be a reliably Brexit voice in the Commons might be a stroke of genius.
I think, in a three way battle, the LibDems would sneak through the middle, given that Richmond was 65:35 for Remain.
If the Tories don't put up a candidate against Zac they will be endorsing his stance.
Are his local party backing him? If so there could be an Official pro-Heathrow conservative and and an Unofficial anti-one. Seem to recall something like that’s happened before somewhere. Similar to but not quite the same as S.O. Davies in Merthyr many years ago.
No doubt someone will come along before long to explain why it would be better to explain that£16b on Heathrow rather than the NHS.
Airport expansion is not financed by public expenditure, but by airline charges and retail revenues. In theory this will be the case for R3, though in practice the government may have to stick in a billion or two.
With the key point that, like Hinckley or Trident renewal, this is a one off cost amortised over many years, not annual expenditure like health or welfare (or EU membership).
That's not true of HPC. The government isn't paying for it up front; instead the electricity purchasers of the UK are locked in to a 35 year, inflation linked, volumes guaranteed deal, that starts at more than twice the prevailing price of baseload electricity.
Based on an assumption that electricity costs were rising fast so by the time the contract started this guaranteed price would be the prevailing price anyway.
Instead the wholesale price of electricity started falling instead of rising anymore.
But she has given herself one advantage, which does suggest that she does have political sagacity. Her Chief Whip, Gavin Williamson, the party Chairman, Patrick McLoughlin, the head of her policy board, George Freeman, her PPS, George Hollingberry – they are all men of bottom, wisdom and judgment. They are all capable of telling her what she needs to hear but may not wish to hear, and telling no-one else about the conversation. Those were good appointments.
There are two final points. First, the new PM is formidable; there is steel. Second, she will need every molecule of that steel to deal with the difficulties ahead.
While a by-election would provide entertainment, and there could be further discomfort for TMay if LHR3 gets the go-ahead, this is much more important than a bit of political bickering.
Therefore, speaking from the greeny-red corner, I hope that the runway does not get built.
Speaking from the "wanting the best for the people of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" corner, I hope it does get the go ahead.
We don't need it - we can already transit through Amsterdam or Paris perfectly well.
No doubt someone will come along before long to explain why it would be better to explain that£16b on Heathrow rather than the NHS.
Airport expansion is not financed by public expenditure, but by airline charges and retail revenues. In theory this will be the case for R3, though in practice the government may have to stick in a billion or two.
With the key point that, like Hinckley or Trident renewal, this is a one off cost amortised over many years, not annual expenditure like health or welfare (or EU membership).
That's not true of HPC. The government isn't paying for it up front; instead the electricity purchasers of the UK are locked in to a 35 year, inflation linked, volumes guaranteed deal, that starts at more than twice the prevailing price of baseload electricity.
Yes, realised that was a poor example to use. More coffee required.
If Goldsmith does resign, I hope the local party deselect him.Hes the ultimate NIMBY and a big embarrassment for the Tories
Or a local very popular MP who is principled and does what he says he will do. Of course the Tories should deselect him and put someone in favour of the third runway up against him, it would be pointless to let him do a David Davis.
Actually, not putting someone up against Zac, given he'd be a reliably Brexit voice in the Commons might be a stroke of genius.
I think, in a three way battle, the LibDems would sneak through the middle, given that Richmond was 65:35 for Remain.
If the Tories don't put up a candidate against Zac they will be endorsing his stance.
Are his local party backing him? If so there could be an Official pro-Heathrow conservative and and an Unofficial anti-one. Seem to recall something like that’s happened before somewhere. Similar to but not quite the same as S.O. Davies in Merthyr many years ago.
No doubt Goldsmith's principled stand/tantrum (delete as appropriate) will have been factored in - I very much suspect once May has decided 'whats the right thing to do?' it won't matter a damn, one way or the other.....
I think the "regret" wording kind-of nudges towards a "yes", because it encourages you to think of the downsides and/or the claims that turned out to be lies.
It's entirely misleading anyway.
Q. Do you regret those eight pints you drank last night ? A. Yes Q. Are you going to drink eight pints next Friday ? A. You bet!
Just because you regret something (ie. recognise the negative consequences) doesn't mean you wouldn't have done it different, or would do it any different next time.
It's worse than that; you regret things for leading to undesirable consequences. A remainer who is now reconciled to leave wouldn't regret voting remain (because it did no harm), and a remainer who remains a remainer wouldn't either, because he did his best with his vote. He might regret not having done enough in other ways (donating to the Remain cause, canvassing, ranting on PB etc) but that is not the question asked. So, either stupid question, or question inspired by malice to produce skewed result.
I sometimes get annoyed about the BBC. For instance, it maintained neutrality during the Brexit referendum run-up but now has reverted back to London posh. However, it still retains a sense of proportion about what is important and what isn't.
There seems to be some fuss on twitter about one of its programmes, Strictly come bake-off or something, being racist because they're eating all the black people first. Is that the one that Ed Balls is one? Plenty of flesh on him.
I expect it's the younger teens who inhabit twitter. Empty vessels make most noise goes the old proverb.
I must be getting old.
Excellent.
I gather 80% of Twitter users don't talk about politics at all. I've one follower who tweets about knitting - every day
If Goldsmith does resign, I hope the local party deselect him.Hes the ultimate NIMBY and a big embarrassment for the Tories
Or a local very popular MP who is principled and does what he says he will do. Of course the Tories should deselect him and put someone in favour of the third runway up against him, it would be pointless to let him do a David Davis.
Actually, not putting someone up against Zac, given he'd be a reliably Brexit voice in the Commons might be a stroke of genius.
I think, in a three way battle, the LibDems would sneak through the middle, given that Richmond was 65:35 for Remain.
If the Tories don't put up a candidate against Zac they will be endorsing his stance.
Are his local party backing him? If so there could be an Official pro-Heathrow conservative and and an Unofficial anti-one. Seem to recall something like that’s happened before somewhere. Similar to but not quite the same as S.O. Davies in Merthyr many years ago.
No doubt Goldsmith's principled stand/tantrum (delete as appropriate) will have been factored in - I very much suspect once May has decided 'whats the right thing to do?' it won't matter a damn, one way or the other.....
Which is why the LibDems, whilst burnishing their long antipathy to R3, will endeavour to make the by-election about something else. Are there any other big issues going on?
Do all those from leafy south-west London opposed to the new runways, understand that the proposal is for development to the *north* of the existing airfield boundary?
It's Brentford that should be uspset, the development will see *fewer* planes over Richmond.
If Goldsmith does resign, I hope the local party deselect him.Hes the ultimate NIMBY and a big embarrassment for the Tories
Or a local very popular MP who is principled and does what he says he will do. Of course the Tories should deselect him and put someone in favour of the third runway up against him, it would be pointless to let him do a David Davis.
Actually, not putting someone up against Zac, given he'd be a reliably Brexit voice in the Commons might be a stroke of genius.
I think, in a three way battle, the LibDems would sneak through the middle, given that Richmond was 65:35 for Remain.
If the Tories don't put up a candidate against Zac they will be endorsing his stance.
Are his local party backing him? If so there could be an Official pro-Heathrow conservative and and an Unofficial anti-one. Seem to recall something like that’s happened before somewhere. Similar to but not quite the same as S.O. Davies in Merthyr many years ago.
No doubt Goldsmith's principled stand/tantrum (delete as appropriate) will have been factored in - I very much suspect once May has decided 'whats the right thing to do?' it won't matter a damn, one way or the other.....
RCS1000 - out of interest, how do you see your recent 'the Euro / EU are doing OK and not at risk' messages stacking up with the latest missive from Otmar Issing which is of a 'Euro can't go on forever so it won't' nature?
They will have ironed the brownshirts as well, the junta is well down the road
Can you believe it?
They're assigning government busy bodies to check up on every single child in the country!
Like teachers?
Scottish education going so well, is it?
Education better in Scotland? Bloody Eurocrats lying, LYING I TELLS YA, just to annoy honest, Yeoman Englishmen.
'Scots have 'BETTER quality of life than English' as they're liberal, EU bureucrats say
Both countries – which benefit from extra grants and funds from the Government as part of the Barnett formula – are also more tolerant to minority groups and have a better schools system and environment, the report claims.'
There are a myriad of polls being posted on here,. Unless you are "in the know" it doesn't seem that one can draw any conclusions from them. Perhaps they need a statement as to whether they are good or bad, or some way of interpreting them.
National polls are nowhere near as important in the US as the UK as far as predicting the outcome because of the electoral college system. You have to look in depth at the polling in the individual states, particularly those that a candidate will need to win to reach 270 electoral college votes.
Once you do this analysis you can arrive at the states that are likely to determine the outcome. This year Clinton can still win even if she loses a couple of the key states - she could lose key battlegrounds like Ohio, Florida,, New Hampshire and Iowa and still reach 270. Trump cannot afford to lose one and he is trailing in most of them and by quite considerable margins in some cases.
If Goldsmith does resign, I hope the local party deselect him.Hes the ultimate NIMBY and a big embarrassment for the Tories
Or a local very popular MP who is principled and does what he says he will do. Of course the Tories should deselect him and put someone in favour of the third runway up against him, it would be pointless to let him do a David Davis.
Actually, not putting someone up against Zac, given he'd be a reliably Brexit voice in the Commons might be a stroke of genius.
I think, in a three way battle, the LibDems would sneak through the middle, given that Richmond was 65:35 for Remain.
If the Tories don't put up a candidate against Zac they will be endorsing his stance.
Are his local party backing him? If so there could be an Official pro-Heathrow conservative and and an Unofficial anti-one. Seem to recall something like that’s happened before somewhere. Similar to but not quite the same as S.O. Davies in Merthyr many years ago.
No doubt Goldsmith's principled stand/tantrum (delete as appropriate) will have been factored in - I very much suspect once May has decided 'whats the right thing to do?' it won't matter a damn, one way or the other.....
O/T, but. For family reasons I look at the website of a school in Bangkok which caters for students of many nationalities, and this appeared on the website this morning
'In some Year 13 English classes the students have been exploring ‘The Phenomenon of Trump’ as part of their IB Language and Literature course. They have been looking closely at the socio-economic, political, racial, gender and psychological aspects that have led to Donald Trump being the rival to Hilary Clinton as the next President of the US.
From a language perspective, the students' most important task has been to explore Trump’s discourse and the language of 21st Century politics while considering what language reveals about the political world we live in today.
Students have been exploring many areas of the presidential race including debates, campaign marketing and linguistic use of voters on both sides.’
I wonder what their end of term essays will be like!
RCS1000 - out of interest, how do you see your recent 'the Euro / EU are doing OK and not at risk' messages stacking up with the latest missive from Otmar Issing which is of a 'Euro can't go on forever so it won't' nature?
I read that article - all it was really saying is that Greece should have gone during its crisis (or never joined, and maybe the Irish would be better with the £. Both changes would probably have made the € more secure; there was nothing there to challenge the future of a currency covering core EU.
While a by-election would provide entertainment, and there could be further discomfort for TMay if LHR3 gets the go-ahead, this is much more important than a bit of political bickering.
Therefore, speaking from the greeny-red corner, I hope that the runway does not get built.
Speaking from the "wanting the best for the people of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" corner, I hope it does get the go ahead.
We don't need it - we can already transit through Amsterdam or Paris perfectly well.
Given how long it takes to do anything in the UK, I would give the go-ahead to both Heathrow and Gatwick (in any case, why shouldn't airports compete with each other?) and also start feasibility studies on Boris Island or somesuch.
Very interesting to see that the SNP are now saying (FT, Times) that a soft Brexit won't trigger another ref.
God I love the smell of constitutional zugzwang in the morning.
They said that from the off, the language, when it came down to IndyRef trigger, was always about the single market rather than the EU per say
It's really a piece of sophistry - their desire for independence is not predicated on the manner of the Brexit deal. Their ability to win it is. The threat is hollow.
While a by-election would provide entertainment, and there could be further discomfort for TMay if LHR3 gets the go-ahead, this is much more important than a bit of political bickering.
Therefore, speaking from the greeny-red corner, I hope that the runway does not get built.
Speaking from the "wanting the best for the people of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" corner, I hope it does get the go ahead.
We don't need it - we can already transit through Amsterdam or Paris perfectly well.
Given how long it takes to do anything in the UK, I would give the go-ahead to both Heathrow and Gatwick (in any case, why shouldn't airports compete with each other?) and also start feasibility studies on Boris Island or somesuch.
Boris Island ? Isn't that pretty close to Paris and Amsterdam ?
They will have ironed the brownshirts as well, the junta is well down the road
Can you believe it?
They're assigning government busy bodies to check up on every single child in the country!
Like teachers?
Scottish education going so well, is it?
Education better in Scotland? Bloody Eurocrats lying, LYING I TELLS YA, just to annoy honest, Yeoman Englishmen.
'Scots have 'BETTER quality of life than English' as they're liberal, EU bureucrats say
Both countries – which benefit from extra grants and funds from the Government as part of the Barnett formula – are also more tolerant to minority groups and have a better schools system and environment, the report claims.'
Don't we have the right to set our tariffs at any level we wish?
Yes -but unless there is a comprehensive trade deal with any particular nation (or Bloc) which significantly opens the economy to that nation, then we are not allowed to operate any kind of preferential tariff. Therefore , Most Favoured Nation status will apply to the EU, as it will to any other country.
Aaron Simmons Genuinely jaw-dropping statement from NUS on Home Affairs report on antisemitism. The "reality" for Jewish students is far-left antisemitism https://t.co/BqG0VrlvIo
While a by-election would provide entertainment, and there could be further discomfort for TMay if LHR3 gets the go-ahead, this is much more important than a bit of political bickering.
Therefore, speaking from the greeny-red corner, I hope that the runway does not get built.
Speaking from the "wanting the best for the people of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" corner, I hope it does get the go ahead.
We don't need it - we can already transit through Amsterdam or Paris perfectly well.
You might enjoy this article from the morning's Telegraph:
Personally, I don't particularly care about expanding Heathrow but I do wonder about the wisdom of attracting even more people to a transport infrastructure that already cannot cope. Further the public money that will need to be spent outside the airport perimeter is going to be massive and that might perhaps be better used elsewhere.
If Goldsmith does resign, I hope the local party deselect him.Hes the ultimate NIMBY and a big embarrassment for the Tories
Or a local very popular MP who is principled and does what he says he will do. Of course the Tories should deselect him and put someone in favour of the third runway up against him, it would be pointless to let him do a David Davis.
Actually, not putting someone up against Zac, given he'd be a reliably Brexit voice in the Commons might be a stroke of genius.
I think, in a three way battle, the LibDems would sneak through the middle, given that Richmond was 65:35 for Remain.
If the Tories don't put up a candidate against Zac they will be endorsing his stance.
Are his local party backing him? If so there could be an Official pro-Heathrow conservative and and an Unofficial anti-one. Seem to recall something like that’s happened before somewhere. Similar to but not quite the same as S.O. Davies in Merthyr many years ago.
No doubt Goldsmith's principled stand/tantrum (delete as appropriate) will have been factored in - I very much suspect once May has decided 'whats the right thing to do?' it won't matter a damn, one way or the other.....
Which is why the LibDems, whilst burnishing their long antipathy to R3, will endeavour to make the by-election about something else. Are there any other big issues going on?
RCS1000 - out of interest, how do you see your recent 'the Euro / EU are doing OK and not at risk' messages stacking up with the latest missive from Otmar Issing which is of a 'Euro can't go on forever so it won't' nature?
Nothing can go on forever, and I agree with him about a lot of the issues with the Euro.
However, I think everyone tends to underestimate power of the cycle. The Eurozone has been through a seven year, utterly horrendous, deleveraging cycle. Savings rates have been at elevated levels, countries have had to refocus from borrowing-and-spending, towards saving-and-exporting.
Devaluation has happened, and it's been incredibly painful because it's happened via falls in real wage levels. In Spain, Portugal, and Greece, real wages have fallen sharply. That is devaluation.
My personal view is that (1) the marginal utility of saving diminishes with each incremental Euro saved, and (2) excessive savings rates are a reflection of concerns about unemployment. As unemployment rates fall in most peripheral countries, and savings balances swell, then consumer spending will start to pick up. This then feeds a positive feedback loop, lowers savings rates, and economic growth accelerates.
Of course, this doesn't solve any of the fundamental problems. Professor Issing outlines the major challenges to the Eurozone, and all his criticisms are correct. But the Eurozone is coming from a cyclically depressed point, with consumer debt well down on 2007 levels, and with pretty much every country (except France) now running a current account surplus.
That - I would guess - sets the zone up for a period of above trend growth.
Very interesting to see that the SNP are now saying (FT, Times) that a soft Brexit won't trigger another ref.
God I love the smell of constitutional zugzwang in the morning.
They said that from the off, the language, when it came down to IndyRef trigger, was always about the single market rather than the EU per say
It's really a piece of sophistry - their desire for independence is not predicated on the manner of the Brexit deal. Their ability to win it is. The threat is hollow.
Always good to get informed, in depth analysis with all the extra PB insight and objectivity that distance provides.
If Goldsmith does resign, I hope the local party deselect him.Hes the ultimate NIMBY and a big embarrassment for the Tories
Or a local very popular MP who is principled and does what he says he will do. Of course the Tories should deselect him and put someone in favour of the third runway up against him, it would be pointless to let him do a David Davis.
Actually, not putting someone up against Zac, given he'd be a reliably Brexit voice in the Commons might be a stroke of genius.
I think, in a three way battle, the LibDems would sneak through the middle, given that Richmond was 65:35 for Remain.
If the Tories don't put up a candidate against Zac they will be endorsing his stance.
Are his local party backing him? If so there could be an Official pro-Heathrow conservative and and an Unofficial anti-one. Seem to recall something like that’s happened before somewhere. Similar to but not quite the same as S.O. Davies in Merthyr many years ago.
No doubt Goldsmith's principled stand/tantrum (delete as appropriate) will have been factored in - I very much suspect once May has decided 'whats the right thing to do?' it won't matter a damn, one way or the other.....
Which is why the LibDems, whilst burnishing their long antipathy to R3, will endeavour to make the by-election about something else. Are there any other big issues going on?
Yes. The unelected PM.
Erm...she was elected as MP for Maidenhead. ...or are you saying she wasn't elected as PM? An attribute she shares with every other PM we've ever had in our parliamentary system.
O/T, but. For family reasons I look at the website of a school in Bangkok which caters for students of many nationalities, and this appeared on the website this morning
'In some Year 13 English classes the students have been exploring ‘The Phenomenon of Trump’ as part of their IB Language and Literature course. They have been looking closely at the socio-economic, political, racial, gender and psychological aspects that have led to Donald Trump being the rival to Hilary Clinton as the next President of the US.
From a language perspective, the students' most important task has been to explore Trump’s discourse and the language of 21st Century politics while considering what language reveals about the political world we live in today.
Students have been exploring many areas of the presidential race including debates, campaign marketing and linguistic use of voters on both sides.’
I wonder what their end of term essays will be like!
The best will be very good, I should think. A very interesting and challenging project for the students that gives them more chance of learning about the English language and its use that bashing through King Lear. Year 13? Is that what we would know as the Upper Sixth?
While a by-election would provide entertainment, and there could be further discomfort for TMay if LHR3 gets the go-ahead, this is much more important than a bit of political bickering.
Therefore, speaking from the greeny-red corner, I hope that the runway does not get built.
Speaking from the "wanting the best for the people of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" corner, I hope it does get the go ahead.
I support R3. Good for business and good for jobs. More surrounding areas will become Labour.
Don't we have the right to set our tariffs at any level we wish?
We can only have a single common external tariff structure for nations which are not considered a MFN. So if the EU isn't a MFN then we wouldn't be able to drop our tariffs for them without taking the Minford route if just not having any tariffs. That's why a trade deal with the EU or even just bilateral tariff elimination would be desirable. Having our EU import tariffs set the same level as everyone else wouldn't be a good idea as it would cause massive price inflation since 50% of our goods imported with zero tariffs currently would be subject to a new tariff.
Thanks RCS1000! My default assumption is always that the Euro is going to come apart because it is a nonsense. But...even if economics must beat politics in the end I am always surprised by how resilient the beast is. The Euro is like a baddy in a horror movie - you're never quite sure how fatally injured it is! I conclude that the final death isn't going to happen anytime soon.
Don't we have the right to set our tariffs at any level we wish?
We are a signatory to the WTO Treaty of 1995.
The core component of that treaty is that tariffs cannot be discriminatory. You can set them at whatever level you like, but for countries that you do not have special arrangements with (which it defines either as Most Favoured Nation, or Free Trade Agreement) the you must have the same tariffs.
This does not mean that wine or anything else need be more expensive; just that we cannot set tariffs on French and American wine - absent deals with those countries - at different rates.
Labour's candidate in Witney slightly undone in his attitude to Corbyn. No confidence then confidence. Won't affect anything except make his opponents chuckle
While a by-election would provide entertainment, and there could be further discomfort for TMay if LHR3 gets the go-ahead, this is much more important than a bit of political bickering.
Therefore, speaking from the greeny-red corner, I hope that the runway does not get built.
Speaking from the "wanting the best for the people of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" corner, I hope it does get the go ahead.
We don't need it - we can already transit through Amsterdam or Paris perfectly well.
Given how long it takes to do anything in the UK, I would give the go-ahead to both Heathrow and Gatwick (in any case, why shouldn't airports compete with each other?) and also start feasibility studies on Boris Island or somesuch.
Boris Island ? Isn't that pretty close to Paris and Amsterdam ?
BI is a complete non-starter for a whole host of reasons:
Wrong side of London for customers Cost, inc transport links. Airspace close to AMS and CDG Estuary birds (remember Sully?) One very large sunken warship that's in the way (USS Montgomery)
The optimal clean-slate place for a new four-runway airport would be between the M1 and M40 just south of Bletchley, with new links to both motorways, the West Cost Main Line and HS2. It'll never happen either, so let's just get on with expanding LHR - and quickly!
There are a myriad of polls being posted on here,. Unless you are "in the know" it doesn't seem that one can draw any conclusions from them. Perhaps they need a statement as to whether they are good or bad, or some way of interpreting them.
National polls are nowhere near as important in the US as the UK as far as predicting the outcome because of the electoral college system. You have to look in depth at the polling in the individual states, particularly those that a candidate will need to win to reach 270 electoral college votes.
People say this a lot but I don't really think it's true. People love playing around with the maps but the swing state polling is unreliable enough that you can't really reliably predict which state will end up putting the winner over the edge. For example, last time around the state polling showed Romney getting an extra-small swing in Ohio and people thought that would be Obama's firewall, but it ended up swinging much the same way as everywhere else, and not being the tipping-point state at all.
The swing states are quite diverse and the demographics within them move consistently nationally, so generally if you're gaining in one compared to the national picture you're losing in another. Basically if you're winning the popular vote you'll probably win the electoral college, and within a few percent that goes from probably to definitely.
The wildcard in this election is that one candidate has an effective ground operation while the other has a clown car. We don't really know how important that is: normally the ground operation cancels out, because both sides have one. That may mean Hillary over-performs in swing states in general. But that probably won't show up in the polls.
No mention of Goldsmith's mayoral campaign? Surely he's damaged goods now?
It is certainly true that Zak is no longer the golden boy after his mayoral campaign, and his stock will have sunk a bit with ethnic minority voters in particular. But Richmond is one of the least diverse Boroughs and I would be surprised if all that became a huge issue in the by-election. It may mean some left-leaning voters are particularly keen to see him lose, which could help the LibDems a little. Edit/probably it all gets thrown into the mix with Zak being a Brexiter and the current government appearing less liberal than the last. Richmond is liberal Tory Remainer-land after all.
LHR3 will be built. You can sense a national consensus forming. Boris has backed down. The celts explicitly want it. Build the damn thing already. Throw brexit Britain open for biz
Boris was never really bothered anyway. He just had the tricky task of building a broad enough coalition to beat Livingstone, and desperately needed SW London. His current constituents probably support R3 since most of them work there.
Thanks RCS1000! My default assumption is always that the Euro is going to come apart because it is a nonsense. But...even if economics must beat politics in the end I am always surprised by how resilient the beast is. The Euro is like a baddy in a horror movie - you're never quite sure how fatally injured it is! I conclude that the final death isn't going to happen anytime soon.
Don't forget that for 150 years until 1930, and then for the 30 years following WW2, governments essentially had no control of their currencies, anchoring them to gold in each case. Of course, that broke down eventually, but it took a long, long time.
O/T, but. For family reasons I look at the website of a school in Bangkok which caters for students of many nationalities, and this appeared on the website this morning
'In some Year 13 English classes the students have been exploring ‘The Phenomenon of Trump’ as part of their IB Language and Literature course. They have been looking closely at the socio-economic, political, racial, gender and psychological aspects that have led to Donald Trump being the rival to Hilary Clinton as the next President of the US.
From a language perspective, the students' most important task has been to explore Trump’s discourse and the language of 21st Century politics while considering what language reveals about the political world we live in today.
Students have been exploring many areas of the presidential race including debates, campaign marketing and linguistic use of voters on both sides.’
I wonder what their end of term essays will be like!
The best will be very good, I should think. A very interesting and challenging project for the students that gives them more chance of learning about the English language and its use that bashing through King Lear. Year 13? Is that what we would know as the Upper Sixth?
I suspect that, given the wide range of backgrounds of the students as well, there will be some interesting work. According to “the education website” yes, it is the Upper VIth.
It’s very interesting to visit that school. Fully comprehensive, in that anyone who can afford the fees can go, but as a policy only about a third of the children have both parents Thai. As a result there are a lot of expat children, and a lot of children of mixed marriages. My wife, a retired infants teacher is very impressed both with the standard of the children’s work and wityh the facilities available. My grandchildren have a very wide range of friends, although very often friendships are broken when parents tours, either commercial or diplomatic, come to an end.
While a by-election would provide entertainment, and there could be further discomfort for TMay if LHR3 gets the go-ahead, this is much more important than a bit of political bickering.
Therefore, speaking from the greeny-red corner, I hope that the runway does not get built.
Speaking from the "wanting the best for the people of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" corner, I hope it does get the go ahead.
We don't need it - we can already transit through Amsterdam or Paris perfectly well.
Given how long it takes to do anything in the UK, I would give the go-ahead to both Heathrow and Gatwick (in any case, why shouldn't airports compete with each other?) and also start feasibility studies on Boris Island or somesuch.
Boris Island ? Isn't that pretty close to Paris and Amsterdam ?
BI is a complete non-starter for a whole host of reasons:
Wrong side of London for customers Cost, inc transport links. Airspace close to AMS and CDG Estuary birds (remember Sully?) One very large sunken warship that's in the way (USS Montgomery)
The optimal clean-slate place for a new four-runway airport would be between the M1 and M40 just south of Bletchley, with new links to both motorways, the West Cost Main Line and HS2. It'll never happen either, so let's just get on with expanding LHR - and quickly!
Don't we have the right to set our tariffs at any level we wish?
This does not mean that wine or anything else need be more expensive; just that we cannot set tariffs on French and American wine - absent deals with those countries - at different rates.
So the comment that 'we'd have to have the same tariffs on imports from the EU as they do on exports from us' is wrong?
Similarly we could, for arguments sake, set high tariffs on wine, then sign up MFN deals with Australia, New Zealand, Chile & South Africa, and leave the EU to stew in its own wine lake?
The key question regarding Zac is whether he would stand as an independent or seek to be reselected as the Conservative candidate. The Sun article which Mike links to says that he'd stand as an independent, but it's unclear whether that is based on what Zac has said or is simply the journalist's assumption.
It is important to realise that the local party is unlikely to want anyone other than Zac, and certainly unlikely to want anyone who isn't as strongly anti-R3 as he is. That doesn't seem to leave any good options for CCHQ. Of the available options, fudging things so that he stands again as the Conservative candidate would be the least bad.
The relatively brief attempt at disciplining and professionalising Trump's campaign seems to have been abandoned. This is a disaster for the Republicans who must seriously fear the down ticket consequences.
The Fix has also abandoned any attempt to be objective - he's got so OTT, I've unfollowed him on Twitter - I used to like his stuff too. This election is like Brexit with knobs on.
I don't detect any great enthusiasm for Hilary. I just think Cillizza sees politics as a business and a skill and Trump is just not playing the game. No doubt that is a major part of his attraction for some but the rules of that game were determined by what works, what wins and what is a useful way of spending your energy in the run up to the election. Trump just doesn't get it and he will pay the price.
I certainly don't give Trump any points for playing the game as was and he's clearly irked about sex allegations. He needs to stop talking about it.
There's so much wrong with this election, it's mindbending. Last night the GOP campaign office in Orange County was fire bombed and Nazis accusation graffiti sprayed on walls.
I said yesterday I was concerned about civil unrest whatever the outcome. It's already started.
After its all kicked off and stalemate has settled in the protagonists will all have to be invited to Lancaster House for constitutional talks and Fatty Soames dispatched to the White House as viceroy to organise free and fair elections.
Sticking points likely to be the return to legality and land reform to give the native Americans their farmland back.
He doesn't seem to understand that there is a difference between finding the support but assuming it won't all turn out, and not finding it there at all.
Why on earth would you think he doesn't understand that?
He doesn't seem to understand that there is a difference between finding the support but assuming it won't all turn out, and not finding it there at all.
Why on earth would you think he doesn't understand that?
Because he explicitly tries to translate the polling error seen in Brexit - which was due to the former - to the US, where if anything it is the other side's voters that are assumed to be less reliable in turning out.
While a by-election would provide entertainment, and there could be further discomfort for TMay if LHR3 gets the go-ahead, this is much more important than a bit of political bickering.
Therefore, speaking from the greeny-red corner, I hope that the runway does not get built.
Speaking from the "wanting the best for the people of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" corner, I hope it does get the go ahead.
We don't need it - we can already transit through Amsterdam or Paris perfectly well.
Given how long it takes to do anything in the UK, I would give the go-ahead to both Heathrow and Gatwick (in any case, why shouldn't airports compete with each other?) and also start feasibility studies on Boris Island or somesuch.
Boris Island ? Isn't that pretty close to Paris and Amsterdam ?
BI is a complete non-starter for a whole host of reasons:
Wrong side of London for customers Cost, inc transport links. Airspace close to AMS and CDG Estuary birds (remember Sully?) One very large sunken warship that's in the way (USS Montgomery)
The optimal clean-slate place for a new four-runway airport would be between the M1 and M40 just south of Bletchley, with new links to both motorways, the West Cost Main Line and HS2. It'll never happen either, so let's just get on with expanding LHR - and quickly!
And the Montgomery is full of rotting explosives.
I think the 'optimal' airport came moderately close to happening in about 1971 under the Heath government. I'm almost certain the site was in Bucks. Meanwhile a site in the Thames estuary was also considered: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maplin_Sands
This is all seriously 'goes around, comes around'.
Despite being in the 'south', I'm closer in travel time to Manchester than Gatwick (train from Reading takes 75 mins., aargh) or Heathrow (bus needed from Reading), so please expand Manchester.
The key question regarding Zac is whether he would stand as an independent or seek to be reselected as the Conservative candidate. The Sun article which Mike links to says that he'd stand as an independent, but it's unclear whether that is based on what Zac has said or is simply the journalist's assumption.
It is important to realise that the local party is unlikely to want anyone other than Zac, and certainly unlikely to want anyone who isn't as strongly anti-R3 as he is. That doesn't seem to leave any good options for CCHQ. Of the available options, fudging things so that he stands again as the Conservative candidate would be the least bad.
His platform would be 'Re-Elect me and I will be ignored by my Party. If you want to punish them for going ahead with runway 3 boot me out'
The key question regarding Zac is whether he would stand as an independent or seek to be reselected as the Conservative candidate. The Sun article which Mike links to says that he'd stand as an independent, but it's unclear whether that is based on what Zac has said or is simply the journalist's assumption.
It is important to realise that the local party is unlikely to want anyone other than Zac, and certainly unlikely to want anyone who isn't as strongly anti-R3 as he is. That doesn't seem to leave any good options for CCHQ. Of the available options, fudging things so that he stands again as the Conservative candidate would be the least bad.
Whilst that may create a few tricky questions all round, I suspect you are right - not least because Zak has said on record that he now regrets making the promise and would only go through with it so as not to break it. So he'll just want to get it over with, rather than make some heroic anti-government stand.
While a by-election would provide entertainment, and there could be further discomfort for TMay if LHR3 gets the go-ahead, this is much more important than a bit of political bickering.
Therefore, speaking from the greeny-red corner, I hope that the runway does not get built.
Speaking from the "wanting the best for the people of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" corner, I hope it does get the go ahead.
We don't need it - we can already transit through Amsterdam or Paris perfectly well.
Given how long it takes to do anything in the UK, I would give the go-ahead to both Heathrow and Gatwick (in any case, why shouldn't airports compete with each other?) and also start feasibility studies on Boris Island or somesuch.
Boris Island ? Isn't that pretty close to Paris and Amsterdam ?
BI is a complete non-starter for a whole host of reasons:
Wrong side of London for customers Cost, inc transport links. Airspace close to AMS and CDG Estuary birds (remember Sully?) One very large sunken warship that's in the way (USS Montgomery)
The optimal clean-slate place for a new four-runway airport would be between the M1 and M40 just south of Bletchley, with new links to both motorways, the West Cost Main Line and HS2. It'll never happen either, so let's just get on with expanding LHR - and quickly!
And the Montgomery is full of rotting explosives.
I think the 'optimal' airport came moderately close to happening in about 1971 under the Heath government. I'm almost certain the site was in Bucks. Meanwhile a site in the Thames estuary was also considered: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maplin_Sands
This is all seriously 'goes around, comes around'.
Despite being in the 'south', I'm closer in travel time to Manchester than Gatwick (train from Reading takes 75 mins., aargh) or Heathrow (bus needed from Reading), so please expand Manchester.
Bucks/Beds border, IIRC. Maplin Sands is pretty well Boris Island.
Ouch. What on Earth was she thinking, to get involved with Corbyn's mob?
She's a moron. Always was. What Lenin called a "useful idiot". In this case Corbyn's useful idiot. The big surprise is why anyone took her seriously. There was a very amusing and excoriating take down of her in the Times quite a few years back. I have a copy of it somewhere. Anyone reading that would not have been in the least bit surprised at her recent actions.
Very interesting to see that the SNP are now saying (FT, Times) that a soft Brexit won't trigger another ref.
God I love the smell of constitutional zugzwang in the morning.
Brexit completely screws sindependence. The Nats know it, hence the first signs of concealed infighting at their conference.
If it's hard Brexit then that's it. Scots won't be able to leave its biggest single market of all - the U.K. - only to find themselves clamouring to enter an inferior single market, the EU - and re-entrance to the EU is not easy or simple, see the Spanish talk of vetoes today.
If it's soft Brexit the Scots will breathe a huge sigh of relief and the appetite for another wrenching referendum and massive constitutional and political chaos will be zero. The vote would lose badly.
Add in the currency issues, oil, deficit, etc, and Independence in Scotland is likely finished for the foreseeable.
If you missed it, latest dissection of Salmond's bluster:
Alex Salmond once proudly boasted of his ability to put “a gloss on statistics or any economic figure” to build a political case. It's an assertion predicated on his belief that ordinary voters just aren't smart enough to spot when they're being misled by him, on the toweringly arrogant assumption that he's simply too smart for us.
While a by-election would provide entertainment, and there could be further discomfort for TMay if LHR3 gets the go-ahead, this is much more important than a bit of political bickering.
Therefore, speaking from the greeny-red corner, I hope that the runway does not get built.
Speaking from the "wanting the best for the people of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" corner, I hope it does get the go ahead.
We don't need it - we can already transit through Amsterdam or Paris perfectly well.
Given how long it takes to do anything in the UK, I would give the go-ahead to both Heathrow and Gatwick (in any case, why shouldn't airports compete with each other?) and also start feasibility studies on Boris Island or somesuch.
Boris Island ? Isn't that pretty close to Paris and Amsterdam ?
BI is a complete non-starter for a whole host of reasons:
Wrong side of London for customers Cost, inc transport links. Airspace close to AMS and CDG Estuary birds (remember Sully?) One very large sunken warship that's in the way (USS Montgomery)
The optimal clean-slate place for a new four-runway airport would be between the M1 and M40 just south of Bletchley, with new links to both motorways, the West Cost Main Line and HS2. It'll never happen either, so let's just get on with expanding LHR - and quickly!
And the Montgomery is full of rotting explosives.
I think the 'optimal' airport came moderately close to happening in about 1971 under the Heath government. I'm almost certain the site was in Bucks. Meanwhile a site in the Thames estuary was also considered: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maplin_Sands
This is all seriously 'goes around, comes around'.
Despite being in the 'south', I'm closer in travel time to Manchester than Gatwick (train from Reading takes 75 mins., aargh) or Heathrow (bus needed from Reading), so please expand Manchester.
Bucks/Beds border, IIRC. Maplin Sands is pretty well Boris Island.
Maplin sands are on the north side of the Estuary beyond Southend. Boris Island was supposed to be on the south side somewhere near St Mary's Marsh, where I learned practice forced landings whilst training for my PPL. edit/ or a little further out into the estuary on the southern side, according to Wikipedia
If Goldsmith does resign, I hope the local party deselect him.Hes the ultimate NIMBY and a big embarrassment for the Tories
Or a local very popular MP who is principled and does what he says he will do. Of course the Tories should deselect him and put someone in favour of the third runway up against him, it would be pointless to let him do a David Davis.
Actually, not putting someone up against Zac, given he'd be a reliably Brexit voice in the Commons might be a stroke of genius.
I think, in a three way battle, the LibDems would sneak through the middle, given that Richmond was 65:35 for Remain.
If the Tories don't put up a candidate against Zac they will be endorsing his stance.
Are his local party backing him? If so there could be an Official pro-Heathrow conservative and and an Unofficial anti-one. Seem to recall something like that’s happened before somewhere. Similar to but not quite the same as S.O. Davies in Merthyr many years ago.
No doubt Goldsmith's principled stand/tantrum (delete as appropriate) will have been factored in - I very much suspect once May has decided 'whats the right thing to do?' it won't matter a damn, one way or the other.....
Which is why the LibDems, whilst burnishing their long antipathy to R3, will endeavour to make the by-election about something else. Are there any other big issues going on?
Yes. The unelected PM.
Conservative MPs voted for her a couple of times in their leadership elections.
The key question regarding Zac is whether he would stand as an independent or seek to be reselected as the Conservative candidate. The Sun article which Mike links to says that he'd stand as an independent, but it's unclear whether that is based on what Zac has said or is simply the journalist's assumption.
It is important to realise that the local party is unlikely to want anyone other than Zac, and certainly unlikely to want anyone who isn't as strongly anti-R3 as he is. That doesn't seem to leave any good options for CCHQ. Of the available options, fudging things so that he stands again as the Conservative candidate would be the least bad.
His platform would be 'Re-Elect me and I will be ignored by my Party. If you want to punish them for going ahead with runway 3 boot me out'
Since he (and indeed any other Richmond MP) wouldn't have the power to stop the runway, whoever is elected will be 'ignored', and rightly so - Richmond doesn't have a veto on transport policy; its views have no more weight than anyone else's. But he can honestly and reasonably say that he'll continue to do everything he can to oppose the new runway. Richmond voters will support him in that.
Similarly we could, for arguments sake, set high tariffs on wine, then sign up MFN deals with Australia, New Zealand, Chile & South Africa, and leave the EU to stew in its own wine lake?
Yes but. Signing trade deals sounds easy and consist mostly of discussing appropriate tariff rates. Sadly, it is not.
I can't think of any bilateral trade negotiation that has concluded in less than about four years. It always amuses me that the Maldives-China negotiations are onto their third or fourth round, and have dragged on for almost five years. How can the volume of trade between those countries possibly justify that commitment of time?
And here's the issue. The US government, for example, cannot make exemptions in deals with the UK that it has not made in deals with South Korea and Australia. So, we'd be starting with tens of thousands of words of treaty, many of which would be extremely unpalatble for the UK.
There are four countries where I reckon we could make very rapid progress towards a Free Trade deal: Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Korea. (In the case of the last, there is already a comprehensive EU-ROK deal in place, so it would not be incremental. It is also possible that Canada-EU gets agreed this week.)
The key question regarding Zac is whether he would stand as an independent or seek to be reselected as the Conservative candidate. The Sun article which Mike links to says that he'd stand as an independent, but it's unclear whether that is based on what Zac has said or is simply the journalist's assumption.
It is important to realise that the local party is unlikely to want anyone other than Zac, and certainly unlikely to want anyone who isn't as strongly anti-R3 as he is. That doesn't seem to leave any good options for CCHQ. Of the available options, fudging things so that he stands again as the Conservative candidate would be the least bad.
It would be much healthier for democracy if the 'wet' wing of the Tory from Osborne and Clarke to Goldsmith and TSE left and joined the Libdems.
It would stop the libdems tilting too far left and enable them to replace Labour as official opposition and perhaps one day even gain power.
The problem that the collapse of the old liberals has caused is that ambitious metropolitan liberals have for years joined the Tory party rather than the Libs/Libdems as there was no chance of getting into power in the Libs.
Now that Labour are imploding into irrelevance (the main reason being the discrediting of their philosophy, socialism, and the end of mass unskilled labour which gave rise to it), the only alternative to a one party Tory state is for the Libdems to be electable.
If Theresa May succeeds in eating into once solid Labour urban working class seats, it leaves the way forward to the Lib Dems to claim the wealthy urban seats as well as their traditional rural feifdoms.
After Zak's disgraced mayoral campaign this is perfectly set up for the Lib Dems to do a reverse Smethwick. Mobilise the anti racist vote. With a split Tory vote they must be in with a chance
The key question regarding Zac is whether he would stand as an independent or seek to be reselected as the Conservative candidate. The Sun article which Mike links to says that he'd stand as an independent, but it's unclear whether that is based on what Zac has said or is simply the journalist's assumption.
It is important to realise that the local party is unlikely to want anyone other than Zac, and certainly unlikely to want anyone who isn't as strongly anti-R3 as he is. That doesn't seem to leave any good options for CCHQ. Of the available options, fudging things so that he stands again as the Conservative candidate would be the least bad.
It would be much healthier for democracy if the 'wet' wing of the Tory from Osborne and Clarke to Goldsmith and TSE left and joined the Libdems.
It would stop the libdems tilting too far left and enable them to replace Labour as official opposition and perhaps one day even gain power.
The problem that the collapse of the old liberals has caused is that ambitious metropolitan liberals have for years joined the Tory party rather than the Libs/Libdems as there was no chance of getting into power in the Libs.
Now that Labour are imploding into irrelevance (the main reason being the discrediting of their philosophy, socialism, and the end of mass unskilled labour which gave rise to it), the only alternative to a one party Tory state is for the Libdems to be electable.
If Theresa May succeeds in eating into once solid Labour urban working class seats, it leaves the way forward to the Lib Dems to claim the wealthy urban seats as well as their traditional rural feifdoms.
The LibDems ought to go on a fact finding trip to Canada to see how it is done.
The key question regarding Zac is whether he would stand as an independent or seek to be reselected as the Conservative candidate. The Sun article which Mike links to says that he'd stand as an independent, but it's unclear whether that is based on what Zac has said or is simply the journalist's assumption.
It is important to realise that the local party is unlikely to want anyone other than Zac, and certainly unlikely to want anyone who isn't as strongly anti-R3 as he is. That doesn't seem to leave any good options for CCHQ. Of the available options, fudging things so that he stands again as the Conservative candidate would be the least bad.
His platform would be 'Re-Elect me and I will be ignored by my Party. If you want to punish them for going ahead with runway 3 boot me out'
Since he (and indeed any other Richmond MP) wouldn't have the power to stop the runway, whoever is elected will be 'ignored', and rightly so - Richmond doesn't have a veto on transport policy; its views have no more weight than anyone else's. But he can honestly and reasonably say that he'll continue to do everything he can to oppose the new runway. Richmond voters will support him in that.
I agree with the first part of your first sentence. From the point of view of an angry voter might they not want to punish the party that is building the new runway? Might they not think that re-electing a Conservative MP wouldn't be punishing that party at all?
While a by-election would provide entertainment, and there could be further discomfort for TMay if LHR3 gets the go-ahead, this is much more important than a bit of political bickering.
Therefore, speaking from the greeny-red corner, I hope that the runway does not get built.
Speaking from the "wanting the best for the people of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" corner, I hope it does get the go ahead.
We don't need it - we can already transit through Amsterdam or Paris perfectly well.
Given how long it takes to do anything in the UK, I would give the go-ahead to both Heathrow and Gatwick (in any case, why shouldn't airports compete with each other?) and also start feasibility studies on Boris Island or somesuch.
Boris Island ? Isn't that pretty close to Paris and Amsterdam ?
BI is a complete non-starter for a whole host of reasons:
Wrong side of London for customers Cost, inc transport links. Airspace close to AMS and CDG Estuary birds (remember Sully?) One very large sunken warship that's in the way (USS Montgomery)
The optimal clean-slate place for a new four-runway airport would be between the M1 and M40 just south of Bletchley, with new links to both motorways, the West Cost Main Line and HS2. It'll never happen either, so let's just get on with expanding LHR - and quickly!
And the Montgomery is full of rotting explosives.
I think the 'optimal' airport came moderately close to happening in about 1971 under the Heath government. I'm almost certain the site was in Bucks. Meanwhile a site in the Thames estuary was also considered: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maplin_Sands
This is all seriously 'goes around, comes around'.
Despite being in the 'south', I'm closer in travel time to Manchester than Gatwick (train from Reading takes 75 mins., aargh) or Heathrow (bus needed from Reading), so please expand Manchester.
Bucks/Beds border, IIRC. Maplin Sands is pretty well Boris Island.
Maplin sands are on the north side of the Estuary beyond Southend. Boris Island was supposed to be on the south side somewhere near St Mary's Marsh, where I learned practice forced landings whilst training for my PPL. edit/ or a little further out into the estuary on the southern side, according to Wikipedia
The key question regarding Zac is whether he would stand as an independent or seek to be reselected as the Conservative candidate. The Sun article which Mike links to says that he'd stand as an independent, but it's unclear whether that is based on what Zac has said or is simply the journalist's assumption.
It is important to realise that the local party is unlikely to want anyone other than Zac, and certainly unlikely to want anyone who isn't as strongly anti-R3 as he is. That doesn't seem to leave any good options for CCHQ. Of the available options, fudging things so that he stands again as the Conservative candidate would be the least bad.
It would be much healthier for democracy if the 'wet' wing of the Tory from Osborne and Clarke to Goldsmith and TSE left and joined the Libdems.
It would stop the libdems tilting too far left and enable them to replace Labour as official opposition and perhaps one day even gain power.
The problem that the collapse of the old liberals has caused is that ambitious metropolitan liberals have for years joined the Tory party rather than the Libs/Libdems as there was no chance of getting into power in the Libs.
Now that Labour are imploding into irrelevance (the main reason being the discrediting of their philosophy, socialism, and the end of mass unskilled labour which gave rise to it), the only alternative to a one party Tory state is for the Libdems to be electable.
If Theresa May succeeds in eating into once solid Labour urban working class seats, it leaves the way forward to the Lib Dems to claim the wealthy urban seats as well as their traditional rural feifdoms.
But the Conservatives themselves would always prefer the opponent they have. FPTP+Labour is pretty much the perfect setup for the Tories.
The key question regarding Zac is whether he would stand as an independent or seek to be reselected as the Conservative candidate. The Sun article which Mike links to says that he'd stand as an independent, but it's unclear whether that is based on what Zac has said or is simply the journalist's assumption.
It is important to realise that the local party is unlikely to want anyone other than Zac, and certainly unlikely to want anyone who isn't as strongly anti-R3 as he is. That doesn't seem to leave any good options for CCHQ. Of the available options, fudging things so that he stands again as the Conservative candidate would be the least bad.
His platform would be 'Re-Elect me and I will be ignored by my Party. If you want to punish them for going ahead with runway 3 boot me out'
Since he (and indeed any other Richmond MP) wouldn't have the power to stop the runway, whoever is elected will be 'ignored', and rightly so - Richmond doesn't have a veto on transport policy; its views have no more weight than anyone else's. But he can honestly and reasonably say that he'll continue to do everything he can to oppose the new runway. Richmond voters will support him in that.
I agree with the first part of your first sentence. From the point of view of an angry voter might they not want to punish the party that is building the new runway? Might they not think that re-electing a Conservative MP wouldn't be punishing that party at all?
Why would Richmond vote for Zac Goldsmith when there is only an election because he has failed to stop LHR 3?
Comments
As a result I have zero problems with it and the only people raising stawmen are the people painting a picture of secret rooms full of anonymous masked snoops rather than identified health visitors and head teachers doing what they have always been doing just with more clarity and focus.
I have yet to read any criticism about NP that is actually about the NP as opposed to a general failing of the social care system.
Of course the Tories should deselect him and put someone in favour of the third runway up against him, it would be pointless to let him do a David Davis.
I think, in a three way battle, the LibDems would sneak through the middle, given that Richmond was 65:35 for Remain.
Foolishly I started listening...'Banks have to show more responsibility. They have to engage with the general public. They have to help small businesses etc etc'. Most of these revelations were followed by inanities like...WHAT..WHAT.....SHE WANTS TO MAKE US ADMIRE BANKERS!!!
Plato had posted this piece to show that Clinton was corrupt. It didn't. The quoted emails could have been written by Corbyn or even May. It's obvious that she had posted this ONE HOUR AND TWENTY MINUTE revelation without reading it. I realised that this was a pattern. Posts full of meaningless graffitti unedited and unread.
My point is this. The threads are now littered with what can only be described as the incoherent ramblings of an infatuated twelve year old. As I haven't been following PB for a while perhaps I'm the only person who was sucked in. But for any newcomers be warned. To avoid the pit I fell into see the word 'PLATO' and sail on past.
Therefore, speaking from the greeny-red corner, I hope that the runway does not get built.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/37673337/donald-trump-says-saturday-night-live-spoof-stinks
There seems to be some fuss on twitter about one of its programmes, Strictly come bake-off or something, being racist because they're eating all the black people first. Is that the one that Ed Balls is one? Plenty of flesh on him.
I expect it's the younger teens who inhabit twitter. Empty vessels make most noise goes the old proverb.
I must be getting old.
http://reaction.life/three-brexiteer-wheeze-unravels-may/?sf
Arguing she's got a composite Willie:
But she has given herself one advantage, which does suggest that she does have political sagacity. Her Chief Whip, Gavin Williamson, the party Chairman, Patrick McLoughlin, the head of her policy board, George Freeman, her PPS, George Hollingberry – they are all men of bottom, wisdom and judgment. They are all capable of telling her what she needs to hear but may not wish to hear, and telling no-one else about the conversation. Those were good appointments.
There are two final points. First, the new PM is formidable; there is steel. Second, she will need every molecule of that steel to deal with the difficulties ahead.
Instead the wholesale price of electricity started falling instead of rising anymore.
No doubt Goldsmith's principled stand/tantrum (delete as appropriate) will have been factored in - I very much suspect once May has decided 'whats the right thing to do?' it won't matter a damn, one way or the other.....
Excellent.
I gather 80% of Twitter users don't talk about politics at all. I've one follower who tweets about knitting - every day
It's Brentford that should be uspset, the development will see *fewer* planes over Richmond.
Welcome back. You're been missed.
There's something refreshing about someone with your blinkered certainty. Like the old black and white cowboy films I used to enjoy.
God I love the smell of constitutional zugzwang in the morning.
'Scots have 'BETTER quality of life than English' as they're liberal, EU bureucrats say
Both countries – which benefit from extra grants and funds from the Government as part of the Barnett formula – are also more tolerant to minority groups and have a better schools system and environment, the report claims.'
http://tinyurl.com/jzddyut
What's that, the ONS are also saying Scots' education is better? Traitors, pinkos and closet Nats the lot of them.
'Scotland the best educated country in Europe, claims ONS report'
http://tinyurl.com/lleo66m
Under WTO rules, tariffs will also apply to all imports into the UK until a trade deal with the EU is struck.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1990318/marmite-just-the-tip-of-the-iceberg-as-brits-face-forking-out-far-more-for-chocolate-cheese-and-wine-under-a-hard-brexit-nick-clegg-claims/
Don't we have the right to set our tariffs at any level we wish?
Once you do this analysis you can arrive at the states that are likely to determine the outcome. This year Clinton can still win even if she loses a couple of the key states - she could lose key battlegrounds like Ohio, Florida,, New Hampshire and Iowa and still reach 270. Trump cannot afford to lose one and he is trailing in most of them and by quite considerable margins in some cases.
'In some Year 13 English classes the students have been exploring ‘The Phenomenon of Trump’ as part of their IB Language and Literature course. They have been looking closely at the socio-economic, political, racial, gender and psychological aspects that have led to Donald Trump being the rival to Hilary Clinton as the next President of the US.
From a language perspective, the students' most important task has been to explore Trump’s discourse and the language of 21st Century politics while considering what language reveals about the political world we live in today.
Students have been exploring many areas of the presidential race including debates, campaign marketing and linguistic use of voters on both sides.’
I wonder what their end of term essays will be like!
Genuinely jaw-dropping statement from NUS on Home Affairs report on antisemitism. The "reality" for Jewish students is far-left antisemitism https://t.co/BqG0VrlvIo
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/16/would-you-rather-have-a-third-runway-at-heathrow-or-your-pothole/
Personally, I don't particularly care about expanding Heathrow but I do wonder about the wisdom of attracting even more people to a transport infrastructure that already cannot cope. Further the public money that will need to be spent outside the airport perimeter is going to be massive and that might perhaps be better used elsewhere.
However, I think everyone tends to underestimate power of the cycle. The Eurozone has been through a seven year, utterly horrendous, deleveraging cycle. Savings rates have been at elevated levels, countries have had to refocus from borrowing-and-spending, towards saving-and-exporting.
Devaluation has happened, and it's been incredibly painful because it's happened via falls in real wage levels. In Spain, Portugal, and Greece, real wages have fallen sharply. That is devaluation.
My personal view is that (1) the marginal utility of saving diminishes with each incremental Euro saved, and (2) excessive savings rates are a reflection of concerns about unemployment. As unemployment rates fall in most peripheral countries, and savings balances swell, then consumer spending will start to pick up. This then feeds a positive feedback loop, lowers savings rates, and economic growth accelerates.
Of course, this doesn't solve any of the fundamental problems. Professor Issing outlines the major challenges to the Eurozone, and all his criticisms are correct. But the Eurozone is coming from a cyclically depressed point, with consumer debt well down on 2007 levels, and with pretty much every country (except France) now running a current account surplus.
That - I would guess - sets the zone up for a period of above trend growth.
Always good to get informed, in depth analysis with all the extra PB insight and objectivity that distance provides.
Oh, silly me, Tories always increase VAT, don't they.
...or are you saying she wasn't elected as PM? An attribute she shares with every other PM we've ever had in our parliamentary system.
My default assumption is always that the Euro is going to come apart because it is a nonsense. But...even if economics must beat politics in the end I am always surprised by how resilient the beast is. The Euro is like a baddy in a horror movie - you're never quite sure how fatally injured it is! I conclude that the final death isn't going to happen anytime soon.
The core component of that treaty is that tariffs cannot be discriminatory. You can set them at whatever level you like, but for countries that you do not have special arrangements with (which it defines either as Most Favoured Nation, or Free Trade Agreement) the you must have the same tariffs.
This does not mean that wine or anything else need be more expensive; just that we cannot set tariffs on French and American wine - absent deals with those countries - at different rates.
Go to Twitter/witneyleaks
Wrong side of London for customers
Cost, inc transport links.
Airspace close to AMS and CDG
Estuary birds (remember Sully?)
One very large sunken warship that's in the way (USS Montgomery)
The optimal clean-slate place for a new four-runway airport would be between the M1 and M40 just south of Bletchley, with new links to both motorways, the West Cost Main Line and HS2. It'll never happen either, so let's just get on with expanding LHR - and quickly!
The swing states are quite diverse and the demographics within them move consistently nationally, so generally if you're gaining in one compared to the national picture you're losing in another. Basically if you're winning the popular vote you'll probably win the electoral college, and within a few percent that goes from probably to definitely.
The wildcard in this election is that one candidate has an effective ground operation while the other has a clown car. We don't really know how important that is: normally the ground operation cancels out, because both sides have one. That may mean Hillary over-performs in swing states in general. But that probably won't show up in the polls.
It’s very interesting to visit that school. Fully comprehensive, in that anyone who can afford the fees can go, but as a policy only about a third of the children have both parents Thai. As a result there are a lot of expat children, and a lot of children of mixed marriages. My wife, a retired infants teacher is very impressed both with the standard of the children’s work and wityh the facilities available. My grandchildren have a very wide range of friends, although very often friendships are broken when parents tours, either commercial or diplomatic, come to an end.
Similarly we could, for arguments sake, set high tariffs on wine, then sign up MFN deals with Australia, New Zealand, Chile & South Africa, and leave the EU to stew in its own wine lake?
It is important to realise that the local party is unlikely to want anyone other than Zac, and certainly unlikely to want anyone who isn't as strongly anti-R3 as he is. That doesn't seem to leave any good options for CCHQ. Of the available options, fudging things so that he stands again as the Conservative candidate would be the least bad.
Sticking points likely to be the return to legality and land reform to give the native Americans their farmland back.
'Yes. The unelected PM.'
Strange how we never heard that from you after Brown's coronation.
This is all seriously 'goes around, comes around'.
Despite being in the 'south', I'm closer in travel time to Manchester than Gatwick (train from Reading takes 75 mins., aargh) or Heathrow (bus needed from Reading), so please expand Manchester.
http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.id/2016/10/salmond-spins-again_16.html?m=1
Alex Salmond once proudly boasted of his ability to put “a gloss on statistics or any economic figure” to build a political case. It's an assertion predicated on his belief that ordinary voters just aren't smart enough to spot when they're being misled by him, on the toweringly arrogant assumption that he's simply too smart for us.
I can't think of any bilateral trade negotiation that has concluded in less than about four years. It always amuses me that the Maldives-China negotiations are onto their third or fourth round, and have dragged on for almost five years. How can the volume of trade between those countries possibly justify that commitment of time?
And here's the issue. The US government, for example, cannot make exemptions in deals with the UK that it has not made in deals with South Korea and Australia. So, we'd be starting with tens of thousands of words of treaty, many of which would be extremely unpalatble for the UK.
There are four countries where I reckon we could make very rapid progress towards a Free Trade deal: Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Korea. (In the case of the last, there is already a comprehensive EU-ROK deal in place, so it would not be incremental. It is also possible that Canada-EU gets agreed this week.)
Some peshmerga soldiers giving victory salutes at the moment.
It would stop the libdems tilting too far left and enable them to replace Labour as official opposition and perhaps one day even gain power.
The problem that the collapse of the old liberals has caused is that ambitious metropolitan liberals have for years joined the Tory party rather than the Libs/Libdems as there was no chance of getting into power in the Libs.
Now that Labour are imploding into irrelevance (the main reason being the discrediting of their philosophy, socialism, and the end of mass unskilled labour which gave rise to it), the only alternative to a one party Tory state is for the Libdems to be electable.
If Theresa May succeeds in eating into once solid Labour urban working class seats, it leaves the way forward to the Lib Dems to claim the wealthy urban seats as well as their traditional rural feifdoms.
From the point of view of an angry voter might they not want to punish the party that is building the new runway? Might they not think that re-electing a Conservative MP wouldn't be punishing that party at all?