Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » TMay should make Nicky Morgan HomeSec which could make the pas

2456

Comments

  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,896

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Stupid decisions of our time.

    Sainsbury and Asda confirm merger plans. Now all they need is the CMA's approval which given how supine they have become will surely be forthcoming.

    It will bugger competition in the grocery trade even further, but that's life (or a large dividend, I suppose).

    I can't see it ending well though. I think they'll have trouble integrating two such behemoths and end up losing market share hand over fist - probably, ironically, to Tesco, which will make matters still worse.

    I find it astonishing that the CMA would even contemplate agreeing to this. The concentration of the grocery industry and consequential squeezing of suppliers, particularly farmers, was already an issue, despite incomers such as Aldi and Lidl. But would they have announced this without already having a hint that it might be ok?

    I also think there is a complete lack of commercial logic in this merger. Sainsbury shoppers wouldn't be seen dead in Asda. They are aimed at different segments of the market and I really don't see how you satisfy both. Tescos and M&S are both likely to gain.

    Normally you get these kind of really stupid, financially driven mergers as the market reaches the frothing point before a slump. Its a slightly worrying sign that the long period of growth since 2008 might be coming to an end.
    Yes, it’s very difficult to see the CMA nodding this through, there’s going to be extensive lobbying by suppliers and the NFU against further consolidation in the grocery market.

    The two companies employ 360k people between them so there’s the potential for a lot of job losses at head offices, and through consolidation of stores and warehouses.
    Newspapers speculating that as CMA allowed Tesco-Booker tie-up, then their view of market has changed.
    Tesco and Booker aren’t really direct competitors, in the same way as Asda and Sainsbury’s clearly are.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    edited April 2018
    Ironically Rudd was one of the government's more competent performers. You'd have to be mad and desperate to want this job heading into Brexit implementation . Every border queue or cock-up will be your fault . No upside...

    ... unless you can use this job as a platform and get May out before the shit hits the fan.

    Conclusion ... May cannot give this job to anyone who wants it.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,216
    Sainsbury's claim no store closures:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/04/30/sainsburys-asda-promise-price-cuts-no-store-closures-mega-merger/

    The worry for me would be the news that Walmart will get 41% of the new entity.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,280

    Sainsbury's claim no store closures:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/04/30/sainsburys-asda-promise-price-cuts-no-store-closures-mega-merger/

    The worry for me would be the news that Walmart will get 41% of the new entity.

    South Park fan?
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754

    Sainsbury's claim no store closures:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/04/30/sainsburys-asda-promise-price-cuts-no-store-closures-mega-merger/

    The worry for me would be the news that Walmart will get 41% of the new entity.

    the claims being made are ludicrous

    no store closures
    no job losses
    but £500million of savings
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Stupid decisions of our time.

    Sainsbury and Asda confirm merger plans. Now all they need is the CMA's approval which given how supine they have become will surely be forthcoming.

    It will bugger competition in the grocery trade even further, but that's life (or a large dividend, I suppose).

    I can't see it ending well though. I think they'll have trouble integrating two such behemoths and end up losing market share hand over fist - probably, ironically, to Tesco, which will make matters still worse.

    I find it astonishing that the CMA would even contemplate agreeing to this. The concentration of the grocery industry and consequential squeezing of suppliers, particularly farmers, was already an issue, despite incomers such as Aldi and Lidl. But would they have announced this without already having a hint that it might be ok?

    I also think there is a complete lack of commercial logic in this merger. Sainsbury shoppers wouldn't be seen dead in Asda. They are aimed at different segments of the market and I really don't see how you satisfy both. Tescos and M&S are both likely to gain.

    Normally you get these kind of really stupid, financially driven mergers as the market reaches the frothing point before a slump. Its a slightly worrying sign that the long period of growth since 2008 might be coming to an end.
    The CMA is totally bonkers in the supermarket space. When Tesco planned it's purchase of t&s stores (that got converted into Tesco Express's) absolutely noone thought it would be approved - not of its competitors made plans as they all thought it would be knocked back, instead it was nodded through.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,896

    Sainsbury's claim no store closures:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/04/30/sainsburys-asda-promise-price-cuts-no-store-closures-mega-merger/

    The worry for me would be the news that Walmart will get 41% of the new entity.

    the claims being made are ludicrous

    no store closures
    no job losses
    but £500million of savings
    That’s how much they think they can screw their suppliers.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    DavidL said:

    Javid told a very funny joke about condoms. At Business he was a Vince Cable level of disappointment and I have not seen much evidence that he has taken productive steps to improve House building, despite that being a government priority backed with some money. I agree he has shown emotional intelligence which is a commodity that has been in very short supply at the Home Office for too long. Oh for the days of a Roy Jenkins.

    Someone said on a recent thread that Javid was midway through something important on housing. More important for this week's headlines, Javid is also in charge of the forthcoming Windrush anniversary celebrations. That should be enough to get him the job. The government urgently needs to put this fire out and it can't have one department of state celebrating the Windrush settlers at the same time as another department is slinging them out.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,216
    DavidL said:

    Sainsbury's claim no store closures:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/04/30/sainsburys-asda-promise-price-cuts-no-store-closures-mega-merger/

    The worry for me would be the news that Walmart will get 41% of the new entity.

    South Park fan?
    Sorry, you've lost me.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,280

    Sainsbury's claim no store closures:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/04/30/sainsburys-asda-promise-price-cuts-no-store-closures-mega-merger/

    The worry for me would be the news that Walmart will get 41% of the new entity.

    the claims being made are ludicrous

    no store closures
    no job losses
    but £500million of savings
    That's Asda Price!
  • Options

    ydoethur said:

    FWIW, I don't think Amber Rudd is going to join the awkward squad.

    She isn't Anna Soubry, and I think, for her, showing her loyalty and integrity outside Government is as important as doing she inside.

    She’s been shafted by No 10.

    It was clear to me yesterday those leaks were coming from No 10.
    That seems improbable, especially given how exposed this leaves May. What's the basis for your claim?
    My instincts.

    A lot of those leaks were letters written to No 10.
    Ah. There we go. No evidence.

    You just want it to be true so she rebels against May and brings her down.

    Everything must be seen through that prism.
    Sherlock is on the case.
    Sherlock yesterday.

    5:20pm - Says Rudd is toast because someone is leaking against Rudd.

    9:55pm - Rudd resigns.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Has the vanilla message limit been reduced again? I've just had to chop out the internal quotes from what seemed quite a short exchange.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,280

    DavidL said:

    Sainsbury's claim no store closures:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/04/30/sainsburys-asda-promise-price-cuts-no-store-closures-mega-merger/

    The worry for me would be the news that Walmart will get 41% of the new entity.

    South Park fan?
    Sorry, you've lost me.
    South Park is an American cartoon about kids who have bizarre obsessions. More than 1 episode was about Walmart taking over the world.
  • Options
    OchEyeOchEye Posts: 1,469
    Hm! 46 out of 48 letters wanting a leadership election reputedly in the Tory Chief Whip's drawer, council elections taking place on May 3rd, which of course, as many on here like to remind us, is an indicator of the continued popularity of the Tory government's competence and leadership, and now that May, herself, is in the direct line of fire... What could possibly go wrong? 30 days? I think I was possibly being too generous.....
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,586

    Where should I put my 'Next Cabinet minister to go' money?

    What odds are offered on May ?
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,983
    OchEye said:

    Hm! 46 out of 48 letters wanting a leadership election reputedly in the Tory Chief Whip's drawer, council elections taking place on May 3rd, which of course, as many on here like to remind us, is an indicator of the continued popularity of the Tory government's competence and leadership, and now that May, herself, is in the direct line of fire... What could possibly go wrong? 30 days? I think I was possibly being too generous.....

    Can one, does anyone, withdraw their letters?
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Alistair said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Stupid decisions of our time.

    Sainsbury and Asda confirm merger plans. Now all they need is the CMA's approval which given how supine they have become will surely be forthcoming.

    It will bugger competition in the grocery trade even further, but that's life (or a large dividend, I suppose).

    I can't see it ending well though. I think they'll have trouble integrating two such behemoths and end up losing market share hand over fist - probably, ironically, to Tesco, which will make matters still worse.

    I find it astonishing that the CMA would even contemplate agreeing to this. The concentration of the grocery industry and consequential squeezing of suppliers, particularly farmers, was already an issue, despite incomers such as Aldi and Lidl. But would they have announced this without already having a hint that it might be ok?

    I also think there is a complete lack of commercial logic in this merger. Sainsbury shoppers wouldn't be seen dead in Asda. They are aimed at different segments of the market and I really don't see how you satisfy both. Tescos and M&S are both likely to gain.

    Normally you get these kind of really stupid, financially driven mergers as the market reaches the frothing point before a slump. Its a slightly worrying sign that the long period of growth since 2008 might be coming to an end.
    The CMA is totally bonkers in the supermarket space. When Tesco planned it's purchase of t&s stores (that got converted into Tesco Express's) absolutely noone thought it would be approved - not of its competitors made plans as they all thought it would be knocked back, instead it was nodded through.
    The CMA has also made a complete hash of the betting industry. And the rubber stamp industry.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,896
    edited April 2018
    Nigelb said:

    Where should I put my 'Next Cabinet minister to go' money?

    What odds are offered on May ?
    I can’t see how bets on May to go first don’t end up affected by dead heat rules, purely because of the process of changing the PM leads immediately to a major reshuffle.

    For example David Cameron, George Osborne and Michael Gove all left the cabinet on the same day.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,983
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Where should I put my 'Next Cabinet minister to go' money?

    What odds are offered on May ?
    I can’t see how bets on May to go first don’t end up affected by dead heat rules, purely because of the process of changing the PM leads immediately to a major reshuffle.

    For example David Cameron, George Osborne and Michael Gove all left the cabinet on the same day.
    Timing is all, surely.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,896

    OchEye said:

    Hm! 46 out of 48 letters wanting a leadership election reputedly in the Tory Chief Whip's drawer, council elections taking place on May 3rd, which of course, as many on here like to remind us, is an indicator of the continued popularity of the Tory government's competence and leadership, and now that May, herself, is in the direct line of fire... What could possibly go wrong? 30 days? I think I was possibly being too generous.....

    Can one, does anyone, withdraw their letters?
    Yes and yes. A member can ask for their letter back any time
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,662
    Anazina said:

    Spare a thought this morning for Carlotta and HYUFD.

    The Central Office auto rebuttal bots have a difficult day ahead.

    My every sympathy.

    Your usual level of contribution I see. Such insecurity!
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,291
    edited April 2018
    This Asda Sainsbury merger is not making any sense. Apparently Wallmart will retain 42% shareholding and the business will be run by the Sainsbury management team. They forecast a 10% drop in their prices

    However, the CEO of Sainsbury's has just said both head offices will remain, as will all the stores under their own brand names and hinted there would be few redundancies.

    Is he kidding everyone. It does not make sense but Sainsbury shares have risen 20% this morning
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,983
    Mr. Eye, I'd be surprised. (As an aside, back from when things looked ropier for May I backed her to leave any month from January to June this year. Since hedged so I'm likely just flat, but if she did go I'd make a tiny profit).
  • Options
    AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    edited April 2018
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Stupid decisions of our time.

    Sainsbury and Asda confirm merger plans. Now all they need is the CMA's approval which given how supine they have become will surely be forthcoming.

    It will bugger competition in the grocery trade even further, but that's life (or a large dividend, I suppose).

    I can't see it ending well though. I think they'll have trouble integrating two such behemoths and end up losing market share hand over fist - probably, ironically, to Tesco, which will make matters still worse.

    I find it astonishing that the CMA would even contemplate agreeing to this. The concentration of the grocery industry and consequential squeezing of suppliers, particularly farmers, was already an issue, despite incomers such as Aldi and Lidl. But would they have announced this without already having a hint that it might be ok?

    I also think there is a complete lack of commercial logic in this merger. Sainsbury shoppers wouldn't be seen dead in Asda. They are aimed at different segments of the market and I really don't see how you satisfy both. Tescos and M&S are both likely to gain.

    Normally you get these kind of really stupid, financially driven mergers as the market reaches the frothing point before a slump. Its a slightly worrying sign that the long period of growth since 2008 might be coming to an end.
    All the supermarkets are suffering from failing to adapt their model quickly enough to changes in consumer shopping habits. The weekly shop is dying in metropolitan areas hence why small in-town stores consistently over trade while the big sheds under trade.


    Yet small Express style stores are somewhat crap - filled with garbage no-one wants yet short on fresh produce, meat and good cooking ingredients. It’s still way too hard to buy a good range of chilled beer and wine in most of them.

    The exception is Marks Simply Food, which hits most criteria most of the time. But that’s aimed at an upper income customer. The middle market expresses are still way below par.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,662
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,426
    edited April 2018
    On topic Nicky Morgan will make a great Home Secretary.

    We need someone at the Home Office who looks at evidence based policies not headline pleasing policies.

    Her tenure at Education shows this.

    Like the truly great Tories such as Gove, Cameron, and Thatcher, Morgan saw that grammar schools screw poor children which is why she continued Gove’s excellent academy process.

    Regretfully she didn’t go full Thatcher and close a lot of grammar schools.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,334

    OchEye said:

    Hm! 46 out of 48 letters wanting a leadership election reputedly in the Tory Chief Whip's drawer, council elections taking place on May 3rd, which of course, as many on here like to remind us, is an indicator of the continued popularity of the Tory government's competence and leadership, and now that May, herself, is in the direct line of fire... What could possibly go wrong? 30 days? I think I was possibly being too generous.....

    Can one, does anyone, withdraw their letters?
    Source foir 46 report?

    I believe there are only 1-2 cases of withdrawals, but it's obviously not known for sure. My sense is that MPs are waiting to get the council elections out of the way and will then strike.
  • Options
    surbysurby Posts: 1,227

    Where should I put my 'Next Cabinet minister to go' money?

    Everyone ?
  • Options
    andypetukandypetuk Posts: 69
    Has James Brokenshire recovered sufficiently? He has home office and cabinet experience
  • Options
    On the Rudd resignation Yvette Cooper was the one who caught her out at the select committee and she is the one labour should be congratulating. It does remind us that a labour party lead by a serious competent politician would be looking at a landslide, but then people's minds turn to the Corbyn - McDonnell - Abbott triumvirate and just shudder
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,076

    On topic Nicky Morgan will make a great Home Secretary.

    We need someone at the Home Office who looks at evidence based policies not headline pleasing policies.

    Her tenure at Education shows this.

    Like the truly great Tories such as Gove, Cameron, and Thatcher, Morgan saw that grammar schools screw poor children which is why she continued Gove’s excellent academy process.

    Regretfully she didn’t go full Thatcher and close a lot of grammar schools.

    Did Thatcher close a single grammar school ?

    I always thought that it was local councils which did so.
  • Options
    AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487

    Sainsbury's claim no store closures:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/04/30/sainsburys-asda-promise-price-cuts-no-store-closures-mega-merger/

    The worry for me would be the news that Walmart will get 41% of the new entity.

    the claims being made are ludicrous

    no store closures
    no job losses
    but £500million of savings
    Indeed so Alan. That is myth making of the lowest order.

    Sainsburys would be better overhauling its stocking policy and rethinking its lines to appeal to its middle class customer base - still too much garbage in there.
  • Options
    andypetuk said:

    Has James Brokenshire recovered sufficiently? He has home office and cabinet experience

    I would have thought his health needs to take priority for him

    And welcome to PB
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,995
    OchEye said:

    Hm! 46 out of 48 letters wanting a leadership election reputedly in the Tory Chief Whip's drawer, council elections taking place on May 3rd, which of course, as many on here like to remind us, is an indicator of the continued popularity of the Tory government's competence and leadership, and now that May, herself, is in the direct line of fire... What could possibly go wrong? 30 days? I think I was possibly being too generous.....

    In 2014, the last time the wards on Thursday were up, Ed Miliband won by 2%. So unless Corbyn wins by 2% or more on Thursday the Tories could even make net gains outside London.

    Remember too UKIP got 17% then and where their vote goes will be crucial
  • Options
    hamiltonacehamiltonace Posts: 642
    Sandpit said:

    Sainsbury's claim no store closures:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/04/30/sainsburys-asda-promise-price-cuts-no-store-closures-mega-merger/

    The worry for me would be the news that Walmart will get 41% of the new entity.

    the claims being made are ludicrous

    no store closures
    no job losses
    but £500million of savings
    That’s how much they think they can screw their suppliers.
    The Government is in no position to challenge business at the moment. This is one of the unintended consequences of the Brexit mess. The departure of Wal Mart and this is a departure will lead to the repatriation of a £7bn investment in the UK from the USA.

    The general theme in business at the moment is that the UK Government and UK consumers are facing a major squeeze over the next decade and they will have less money to spend. Austerity is not going to disappear anytime fast.
  • Options

    On the Rudd resignation Yvette Cooper was the one who caught her out at the select committee and she is the one labour should be congratulating. It does remind us that a labour party lead by a serious competent politician would be looking at a landslide, but then people's minds turn to the Corbyn - McDonnell - Abbott triumvirate and just shudder

    When Yvette Cooper held a senior shadow cabinet role Labour polled around 31% at a general election.

    With Abbott in the same role they polled 40%
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,995
    Javid looks tough enough to be Home Secretary to me, Morgan could return to Cabinet eventually but Home Secretary is too big a first new job
  • Options
    AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    HYUFD said:

    OchEye said:

    Hm! 46 out of 48 letters wanting a leadership election reputedly in the Tory Chief Whip's drawer, council elections taking place on May 3rd, which of course, as many on here like to remind us, is an indicator of the continued popularity of the Tory government's competence and leadership, and now that May, herself, is in the direct line of fire... What could possibly go wrong? 30 days? I think I was possibly being too generous.....

    In 2014, the last time the wards on Thursday were up, Ed Miliband won by 2%. So unless Corbyn wins by 2% or more on Thursday the Tories could even make net gains outside London.

    Remember too UKIP got 17% then and where their vote goes will be crucial
    Is that a prediction like your Rudd forecast? Still a loyalist Mayite?
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    edited April 2018

    Anazina said:

    Spare a thought this morning for Carlotta and HYUFD.

    The Central Office auto rebuttal bots have a difficult day ahead.

    My every sympathy.

    Your usual level of contribution I see. ...
    Truth hurts. :D
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    The only reason to want it, is a quick tilt at the top job.
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095

    On the Rudd resignation Yvette Cooper was the one who caught her out at the select committee and she is the one labour should be congratulating. It does remind us that a labour party lead by a serious competent politician would be looking at a landslide, but then people's minds turn to the Corbyn - McDonnell - Abbott triumvirate and just shudder

    When Yvette Cooper held a senior shadow cabinet role Labour polled around 31% at a general election.

    With Abbott in the same role they polled 40%
    Mr Smithson used to channel Yvette Cooper as Labour leader. Bring it on, she's useless. Shrill voice , and NO gravitas
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,896

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Where should I put my 'Next Cabinet minister to go' money?

    What odds are offered on May ?
    I can’t see how bets on May to go first don’t end up affected by dead heat rules, purely because of the process of changing the PM leads immediately to a major reshuffle.

    For example David Cameron, George Osborne and Michael Gove all left the cabinet on the same day.
    Timing is all, surely.
    The Ts and Cs usually state that if more than one person leaves the Cabinet on the same day, then dead heat rules apply.
  • Options
    AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    Everyone knows that chalices suffer from poisoning, rather than toxicity.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,995
    Anazina said:

    Spare a thought this morning for Carlotta and HYUFD.

    The Central Office auto rebuttal bots have a difficult day ahead.

    My every sympathy.

    I doubt Rudd's resignation changes anything, as the last polling showed most Tory voters blame the last Labour government for the Windrush affair, it is Labour voters who blame May
  • Options

    On the Rudd resignation Yvette Cooper was the one who caught her out at the select committee and she is the one labour should be congratulating. It does remind us that a labour party lead by a serious competent politician would be looking at a landslide, but then people's minds turn to the Corbyn - McDonnell - Abbott triumvirate and just shudder

    When Yvette Cooper held a senior shadow cabinet role Labour polled around 31% at a general election.

    With Abbott in the same role they polled 40%
    I said a serious competent politician so several labour mps could come into that category.

    The shudder part still applies
  • Options

    On topic Nicky Morgan will make a great Home Secretary.

    We need someone at the Home Office who looks at evidence based policies not headline pleasing policies.

    Her tenure at Education shows this.

    Like the truly great Tories such as Gove, Cameron, and Thatcher, Morgan saw that grammar schools screw poor children which is why she continued Gove’s excellent academy process.

    Regretfully she didn’t go full Thatcher and close a lot of grammar schools.

    Did Thatcher close a single grammar school ?

    I always thought that it was local councils which did so.
    She did.

    Going further back, how many grammar schools were turned into comprehensives under Edward Heath's government, when a certain Margaret Thatcher was education secretary? Answer: lots.

    Indeed, Mrs Thatcher (as she then was) is understood to have signed away more grammar schools between 1970 and 1974 than any other education secretary before or since.


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6712177.stm

    Margaret Thatcher and Tories let grammar schools go into ruin: only Ukip will restore them.

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/uk/443211/Margaret-Thatcher-and-Tories-let-grammar-schools-go-into-ruin-only-Ukip-will-restore-them/amp
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,076
    Anazina said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Stupid decisions of our time.

    Sainsbury and Asda confirm merger plans. Now all they need is the CMA's approval which given how supine they have become will surely be forthcoming.

    It will bugger competition in the grocery trade even further, but that's life (or a large dividend, I suppose).

    I can't see it ending well though. I think they'll have trouble integrating two such behemoths and end up losing market share hand over fist - probably, ironically, to Tesco, which will make matters still worse.

    I find it astonishing that the CMA would even contemplate agreeing to this. The concentration of the grocery industry and consequential squeezing of suppliers, particularly farmers, was already an issue, despite incomers such as Aldi and Lidl. But would they have announced this without already having a hint that it might be ok?

    I also think there is a complete lack of commercial logic in this merger. Sainsbury shoppers wouldn't be seen dead in Asda. They are aimed at different segments of the market and I really don't see how you satisfy both. Tescos and M&S are both likely to gain.

    Normally you get these kind of really stupid, financially driven mergers as the market reaches the frothing point before a slump. Its a slightly worrying sign that the long period of growth since 2008 might be coming to an end.
    All the supermarkets are suffering from failing to adapt their model quickly enough to changes in consumer shopping habits. The weekly shop is dying in metropolitan areas hence why small in-town stores consistently over trade while the big sheds under trade.


    Yet small Express style stores are somewhat crap - filled with garbage no-one wants yet short on fresh produce, meat and good cooking ingredients. It’s still way too hard to buy a good range of chilled beer and wine in most of them.

    The exception is Marks Simply Food, which hits most criteria most of the time. But that’s aimed at an upper income customer. The middle market expresses are still way below par.
    Does anyone do a 'weekly shop' any more ?

    I thought that had died when supermarkets were built along main roads and stayed open all hours.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Anazina said:

    Everyone knows that chalices suffer from poisoning, rather than toxicity.
    I expect the Russians are working on that.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    Javid looks tough enough to be Home Secretary to me, Morgan could return to Cabinet eventually but Home Secretary is too big a first new job

    Morgan was Education Secretary so why is Home Secretary too big a first job for her
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754

    On topic Nicky Morgan will make a great Home Secretary.

    We need someone at the Home Office who looks at evidence based policies not headline pleasing policies.

    Her tenure at Education shows this.

    Like the truly great Tories such as Gove, Cameron, and Thatcher, Morgan saw that grammar schools screw poor children which is why she continued Gove’s excellent academy process.

    Regretfully she didn’t go full Thatcher and close a lot of grammar schools.

    If only we had a Department of Self-Importance and Vacuous Pomposity

    Nicky Morgan would be a shoo in
  • Options
    RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 2,977

    On topic Nicky Morgan will make a great Home Secretary.

    We need someone at the Home Office who looks at evidence based policies not headline pleasing policies.

    Her tenure at Education shows this.

    Like the truly great Tories such as Gove, Cameron, and Thatcher, Morgan saw that grammar schools screw poor children which is why she continued Gove’s excellent academy process.

    Regretfully she didn’t go full Thatcher and close a lot of grammar schools.

    I'd argue her academies agenda wasn't exactly "evidence based", but there we go
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,995

    Where should I put my 'Next Cabinet minister to go' money?

    Davis? To avoid accusations of apostasy as it becomes increasingly apparent that the Leavers are going to get done up the Customs Union without the courtesy of a reach around.
  • Options
    AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487

    Anazina said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Stupid decisions of our time.

    Sainsbury and Asda confirm merger plans. Now all they need is the CMA's approval which given how supine they have become will surely be forthcoming.

    It will bugger competition in the grocery trade even further, but that's life (or a large dividend, I suppose).

    I can't see it ending well though. I think they'll have trouble integrating two such behemoths and end up losing market share hand over fist - probably, ironically, to Tesco, which will make matters still worse.

    I find it astonishing that the CMA would even contemplate agreeing to this. The concentration of the grocery industry and consequential squeezing of suppliers, particularly farmers, was already an issue, despite incomers such as Aldi and Lidl. But would they have announced this without already having a hint that it might be ok?

    I also think there is a complete lack of commercial logic in this merger. Sainsbury shoppers wouldn't be seen dead in Asda. They are aimed at different segments of the market and I really don't see how you satisfy both. Tescos and M&S are both likely to gain.

    Normally you get these kind of really stupid, financially driven mergers as the market reaches the frothing point before a slump. Its a slightly worrying sign that the long period of growth since 2008 might be coming to an end.
    All the supermarkets are suffering from failing to adapt their model quickly enough to changes in consumer shopping habits. The weekly shop is dying in metropolitan areas hence why small in-town stores consistently over trade while the big sheds under trade.


    Yet small Express style stores are somewhat crap - filled with garbage no-one wants yet short on fresh produce, meat and good cooking ingredients. It’s still way too hard to buy a good range of chilled beer and wine in most of them.

    The exception is Marks Simply Food, which hits most criteria most of the time. But that’s aimed at an upper income customer. The middle market expresses are still way below par.
    Does anyone do a 'weekly shop' any more ?

    I thought that had died when supermarkets were built along main roads and stayed open all hours.
    Indeed so. The problem is most of the supermarkets’ assets are build around that model. Very large footages given over to stocking huge amounts of crap. But changing consumer habits have completely wrongfooted them.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,995

    On topic Nicky Morgan will make a great Home Secretary.

    We need someone at the Home Office who looks at evidence based policies not headline pleasing policies.

    Her tenure at Education shows this.

    Like the truly great Tories such as Gove, Cameron, and Thatcher, Morgan saw that grammar schools screw poor children which is why she continued Gove’s excellent academy process.

    Regretfully she didn’t go full Thatcher and close a lot of grammar schools.

    Did Thatcher close a single grammar school ?

    I always thought that it was local councils which did so.
    She did.

    Going further back, how many grammar schools were turned into comprehensives under Edward Heath's government, when a certain Margaret Thatcher was education secretary? Answer: lots.

    Indeed, Mrs Thatcher (as she then was) is understood to have signed away more grammar schools between 1970 and 1974 than any other education secretary before or since.


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6712177.stm
    ,
    Margaret Thatcher and Tories let grammar schools go into ruin: only Ukip will restore them.

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/uk/443211/Margaret-Thatcher-and-Tories-let-grammar-schools-go-into-ruin-only-Ukip-will-restore-them/amp
    When Thatcher was PM there were more pupils in grammar schools by 1990 when she left office than in 1979 when she arrived, she was also a prominent supporter of Brady's pro Grammar School Association.

    Even Cameron refused to close grammar schools despite not committing to open any more, indeed he once attended a grammar school prize giving. A majority of Tory voters want new grammars and a plurality if voters as a whole. Only Labour voters want to have an entirely comprehensive system and end selection completely (though of course they would attack private schools too by ending their charitable status etc)
  • Options
    AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    HYUFD said:

    Anazina said:

    Spare a thought this morning for Carlotta and HYUFD.

    The Central Office auto rebuttal bots have a difficult day ahead.

    My every sympathy.

    I doubt Rudd's resignation changes anything, as the last polling showed most Tory voters blame the last Labour government for the Windrush affair, it is Labour voters who blame May
    Good to see the algorithm is operating as normal.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,995

    HYUFD said:

    Javid looks tough enough to be Home Secretary to me, Morgan could return to Cabinet eventually but Home Secretary is too big a first new job

    Morgan was Education Secretary so why is Home Secretary too big a first job for her
    Given she was sacked from that May is not going to appoint her immediately to one of the 3 Great Offices of State
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Damian Green. Too soon?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,995

    Anazina said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Stupid decisions of our time.

    Sainsbury and Asda confirm merger plans. Now all they need is the CMA's approval which given how supine they have become will surely be forthcoming.

    It will bugger competition in the grocery trade even further, but that's life (or a large dividend, I suppose).

    I can't see it ending well though. I think they'll have trouble integrating two such behemoths and end up losing market share hand over fist - probably, ironically, to Tesco, which will make matters still worse.

    I find it astonishing that the CMA would even contemplate agreeing to this. The concentration of the grocery industry and consequential squeezing of suppliers, particularly farmers, was already an issue, despite incomers such as Aldi and Lidl. But would they have announced this without already having a hint that it might be ok?

    I also think there is a complete lack of commercial logic in this merger. Sainsbury shoppers wouldn't be seen dead in Asda. They are aimed at different segments of the market and I really don't see how you satisfy both. Tescos and M&S are both likely to gain.

    Normally you get these kind of really stupid, financially driven mergers as the market reaches the frothing point before a slump. Its a slightly worrying sign that the long period of growth since 2008 might be coming to an end.
    All the supermarkets are suffering from failing to adapt their model quickly enough to changes in consumer shopping habits. The weekly shop is dying in metropolitan areas hence why small in-town stores consistently over trade while the big sheds under trade.


    Yet small Express style stores are somewhat crap - filled with garbage no-one wants yet short on fresh produce, meat and good cooking ingredients. It’s still way too hard to buy a good range of chilled beer and wine in most of them.

    The exception is Marks Simply Food, which hits most criteria most of the time. But that’s aimed at an upper income customer. The middle market expresses are still way below par.
    Does anyone do a 'weekly shop' any more ?

    I thought that had died when supermarkets were built along main roads and stayed open all hours.
    I do, every Saturday. I still pick up odds and ends in between
  • Options
    AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487

    Anazina said:

    Spare a thought this morning for Carlotta and HYUFD.

    The Central Office auto rebuttal bots have a difficult day ahead.

    My every sympathy.

    Your usual level of contribution I see. ...
    Truth hurts. :D
    :)
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    On topic Nicky Morgan will make a great Home Secretary.

    We need someone at the Home Office who looks at evidence based policies not headline pleasing policies.

    Her tenure at Education shows this.

    Like the truly great Tories such as Gove, Cameron, and Thatcher, Morgan saw that grammar schools screw poor children which is why she continued Gove’s excellent academy process.

    Regretfully she didn’t go full Thatcher and close a lot of grammar schools.

    Did Thatcher close a single grammar school ?

    I always thought that it was local councils which did so.
    She did.

    Going further back, how many grammar schools were turned into comprehensives under Edward Heath's government, when a certain Margaret Thatcher was education secretary? Answer: lots.

    Indeed, Mrs Thatcher (as she then was) is understood to have signed away more grammar schools between 1970 and 1974 than any other education secretary before or since.


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6712177.stm
    ,
    Margaret Thatcher and Tories let grammar schools go into ruin: only Ukip will restore them.

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/uk/443211/Margaret-Thatcher-and-Tories-let-grammar-schools-go-into-ruin-only-Ukip-will-restore-them/amp
    When Thatcher was PM there were more pupils in grammar schools by 1990 when she left office than in 1979 when she arrived, she was also a prominent supporter of Brady's pro Grammar School Association.

    Even Cameron refused to close grammar schools despite not committing to open any more, indeed he once attended a grammar school prize giving. A majority of Tory voters want new grammars and a plurality if voters as a whole. Only Labour voters want to have an entirely comprehensive system and end selection completely (though of course they would attack private schools too by ending their charitable status etc)
    This says there were fewer pupils in grammar schools in 1990 than in 1979

    https://fullfact.org/education/grammar-schools-and-social-mobility-whats-evidence/
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,995
    Anazina said:

    HYUFD said:

    OchEye said:

    Hm! 46 out of 48 letters wanting a leadership election reputedly in the Tory Chief Whip's drawer, council elections taking place on May 3rd, which of course, as many on here like to remind us, is an indicator of the continued popularity of the Tory government's competence and leadership, and now that May, herself, is in the direct line of fire... What could possibly go wrong? 30 days? I think I was possibly being too generous.....

    In 2014, the last time the wards on Thursday were up, Ed Miliband won by 2%. So unless Corbyn wins by 2% or more on Thursday the Tories could even make net gains outside London.

    Remember too UKIP got 17% then and where their vote goes will be crucial
    Is that a prediction like your Rudd forecast? Still a loyalist Mayite?
    It is a statement of fact that if the Tories and Labour tie in voteshare on Thursday as they currently are in polling that will be a net gain for the Tories compared to 2014 when Labour were 2% ahead at that year's Local Elections.

    Yes I am still a loyalist Mayite and polling showed few voters blamed Rudd for Windrush and Tory voters do not blame May
  • Options
    Jonathan said:

    Damian Green. Too soon?

    There’s some internet porn restriction legislation scheduled between now and 2019 which I’m not sure Green is the best man to navigate through the Commons.
  • Options
    Heidi Allen may be a good choice as Home Sec.

    She'd be very hard working---there is a lot of 'grunt' work for a home Sec---and loyal. A staunch remainer, she'd accept cabinet joint responsibility on Brexit issues.

    Sure, it would be an over-promotion, but not as much as Gavin Williamson...

  • Options
    AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487

    HYUFD said:

    On topic Nicky Morgan will make a great Home Secretary.

    We need someone at the Home Office who looks at evidence based policies not headline pleasing policies.

    Her tenure at Education shows this.

    Like the truly great Tories such as Gove, Cameron, and Thatcher, Morgan saw that grammar schools screw poor children which is why she continued Gove’s excellent academy process.

    Regretfully she didn’t go full Thatcher and close a lot of grammar schools.

    Did Thatcher close a single grammar school ?

    I always thought that it was local councils which did so.
    She did.

    Going further back, how many grammar schools were turned into comprehensives under Edward Heath's government, when a certain Margaret Thatcher was education secretary? Answer: lots.

    Indeed, Mrs Thatcher (as she then was) is understood to have signed away more grammar schools between 1970 and 1974 than any other education secretary before or since.


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6712177.stm
    ,
    Margaret Thatcher and Tories let grammar schools go into ruin: only Ukip will restore them.

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/uk/443211/Margaret-Thatcher-and-Tories-let-grammar-schools-go-into-ruin-only-Ukip-will-restore-them/amp
    When Thatcher was PM there were more pupils in grammar schools by 1990 when she left office than in 1979 when she arrived, she was also a prominent supporter of Brady's pro Grammar School Association.

    Even Cameron refused to close grammar schools despite not committing to open any more, indeed he once attended a grammar school prize giving. A majority of Tory voters want new grammars and a plurality if voters as a whole. Only Labour voters want to have an entirely comprehensive system and end selection completely (though of course they would attack private schools too by ending their charitable status etc)
    This says there were fewer pupils in grammar schools in 1990 than in 1979

    https://fullfact.org/education/grammar-schools-and-social-mobility-whats-evidence/
    Believe me, clouding the issue with facts in the face of HYUFD spin is the definition of a wasted life. Recall his contention that “west London is mainly Tory” which was simply and immediately disproven by looking at a widely available parliamentary map. He will never admit he is wrong.
  • Options
    Anazina said:

    HYUFD said:

    Anazina said:

    Spare a thought this morning for Carlotta and HYUFD.

    The Central Office auto rebuttal bots have a difficult day ahead.

    My every sympathy.

    I doubt Rudd's resignation changes anything, as the last polling showed most Tory voters blame the last Labour government for the Windrush affair, it is Labour voters who blame May
    Good to see the algorithm is operating as normal.
    You expect this to have a negative effect on the council elections for the conservatives.

    However, it has to be recognised that a hostile environment to illegal immigration and targets is popular and how it plays out outside the metropolitan areas will be interesting but I would expect the lib dems to do well
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,426
    edited April 2018
    Craig Mackinlay’s trial starts in a fortnight and the verdict is expected when Mike is on holiday.
  • Options

    Anazina said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Stupid decisions of our time.

    Sainsbury and Asda confirm merger plans. Now all they need is the CMA's approval which given how supine they have become will surely be forthcoming.

    It will bugger competition in the grocery trade even further, but that's life (or a large dividend, I suppose).

    I can't see it ending well though. I think they'll have trouble integrating two such behemoths and end up losing market share hand over fist - probably, ironically, to Tesco, which will make matters still worse.

    I find it astonishing that the CMA would even contemplate agreeing to this. The concentration of the grocery industry and consequential squeezing of suppliers, particularly farmers, was already an issue, despite incomers such as Aldi and Lidl. But would they have announced this without already having a hint that it might be ok?

    I also think there is a complete lack of commercial logic in this merger. Sainsbury shoppers wouldn't be seen dead in Asda. They are aimed at different segments of the market and I really don't see how you satisfy both. Tescos and M&S are both likely to gain.

    Normally you get these kind of really stupid, financially driven mergers as the market reaches the frothing point before a slump. Its a slightly worrying sign that the long period of growth since 2008 might be coming to an end.
    All the supermarkets are suffering from failing to adapt their model quickly enough to changes in consumer shopping habits. The weekly shop is dying in metropolitan areas hence why small in-town stores consistently over trade while the big sheds under trade.


    Yet small Express style stores are somewhat crap - filled with garbage no-one wants yet short on fresh produce, meat and good cooking ingredients. It’s still way too hard to buy a good range of chilled beer and wine in most of them.

    The exception is Marks Simply Food, which hits most criteria most of the time. But that’s aimed at an upper income customer. The middle market expresses are still way below par.
    Does anyone do a 'weekly shop' any more ?

    I thought that had died when supermarkets were built along main roads and stayed open all hours.
    Asda delivers to our home once a week
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,076

    On topic Nicky Morgan will make a great Home Secretary.

    We need someone at the Home Office who looks at evidence based policies not headline pleasing policies.

    Her tenure at Education shows this.

    Like the truly great Tories such as Gove, Cameron, and Thatcher, Morgan saw that grammar schools screw poor children which is why she continued Gove’s excellent academy process.

    Regretfully she didn’t go full Thatcher and close a lot of grammar schools.

    Did Thatcher close a single grammar school ?

    I always thought that it was local councils which did so.
    She did.

    Going further back, how many grammar schools were turned into comprehensives under Edward Heath's government, when a certain Margaret Thatcher was education secretary? Answer: lots.

    Indeed, Mrs Thatcher (as she then was) is understood to have signed away more grammar schools between 1970 and 1974 than any other education secretary before or since.


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6712177.stm

    Margaret Thatcher and Tories let grammar schools go into ruin: only Ukip will restore them.

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/uk/443211/Margaret-Thatcher-and-Tories-let-grammar-schools-go-into-ruin-only-Ukip-will-restore-them/amp
    But it was the local councils who were closing them, Thatcher was merely not interfering.

    I would be interested to know what the Conservative manifestos in 1970 and 1974 said about grammar schools and what Ted Heath's views about them were.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,995
    edited April 2018

    HYUFD said:

    On topic Nicky Morgan will make a great Home Secretary.

    We need someone at the Home Office who looks at evidence based policies not headline pleasing policies.

    Her tenure at Education shows this.

    Like the truly great Tories such as Gove, Cameron, and Thatcher, Morgan saw that grammar schools screw poor children which is why she continued Gove’s excellent academy process.

    Regretfully she didn’t go full Thatcher and close a lot of grammar schools.

    Did Thatcher close a single grammar school ?

    I always thought that it was local councils which did so.
    She did.

    Going further back, how many grammar schools were turned into comprehensives under Edward Heath's government, when a certain Margaret Thatcher was education secretary? Answer: lots.

    Indeed, Mrs Thatcher (as she then was) is understood to have signed away more grammar schools between 1970 and 1974 than any other education secretary before or since.


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6712177.stm
    ,
    Margaret Thatcher and Tories let grammar schools go into ruin: only Ukip will restore them.

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/uk/443211/Margaret-Thatcher-and-Tories-let-grammar-schools-go-into-ruin-only-Ukip-will-restore-them/amp
    When Thatcher was PM there were more pupils in grammar schools by 1990 when she left office than in 1979 when she arrived, she was also a prominent supporter of Brady's pro Grammar School Association.

    Even Cameron refused to close grammar schools despite not committing to open any more, indeed he once attended a grammar school prize giving. A majority of Tory voters want new grammars and a plurality if voters as a whole. Only Labour voters want to have an entirely comprehensive system and end selection completely (though of course they would attack private schools too by ending their charitable status etc)
    This says there were fewer pupils in grammar schools in 1990 than in 1979

    https://fullfact.org/education/grammar-schools-and-social-mobility-whats-evidence/
    Though there were admittedly slightly fewer grammar schools the rate of decline slowed rapidly under Thatcher. Major and Cameron saw the biggest rise in grammar school pupils now up to 5.2% from 4.5% in 1979.

    Though on this as on much else again you have more in common with LD than Tory voters
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908
    Jonathan said:

    Damian Green. Too soon?

    I put 2 quid on him as next leader at 439/1 just in case...
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Jonathan said:

    Damian Green. Too soon?

    There’s some internet porn restriction legislation scheduled between now and 2019 which I’m not sure Green is the best man to navigate through the Commons.
    May needs someone she can trust who doesn't want the job.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,995
    Anazina said:

    HYUFD said:

    On topic Nicky Morgan will make a great Home Secretary.

    We need someone at the Home Office who looks at evidence based policies not headline pleasing policies.

    Her tenure at Education shows this.

    Like the truly great Tories such as Gove, Cameron, and Thatcher, Morgan saw that grammar schools screw poor children which is why she continued Gove’s excellent academy process.

    Regretfully she didn’t go full Thatcher and close a lot of grammar schools.

    Did Thatcher close a single grammar school ?

    I always thought that it was local councils which did so.
    She did.

    Going further back, how many grammar schools were turned into comprehensives under Edward Heath's government, when a certain Margaret Thatcher was education secretary? Answer: lots.

    Indeed, Mrs Thatcher (as she then was) is understood to have signed away more grammar schools between 1970 and 1974 than any other education secretary before or since.


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6712177.stm
    ,
    Margaret Thatcher and Tories let grammar schools go into ruin: only Ukip will restore them.

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/uk/443211/Margaret-Thatcher-and-Tories-let-grammar-schools-go-into-ruin-only-Ukip-will-restore-them/amp
    When Thatcher was PM there were more pupils in grammar schools by 1990 when she left office than in 1979 when she arrived, she was also a prominent supporter of Brady's pro Grammar School Association.

    Even Cameron refused to close grammar schools despite not committing to open any more, indeed he once attended a grammar school prize giving. A majority of Tory voters want new grammars and a plurality if voters as a whole. Only Labour voters want to have an entirely comprehensive system and end selection completely (though of course they would attack private schools too by ending their charitable status etc)
    This says there were fewer pupils in grammar schools in 1990 than in 1979

    https://fullfact.org/education/grammar-schools-and-social-mobility-whats-evidence/
    Believe me, clouding the issue with facts in the face of HYUFD spin is the definition of a wasted life. Recall his contention that “west London is mainly Tory” which was simply and immediately disproven by looking at a widely available parliamentary map. He will never admit he is wrong.
    No it wasn't as I showed you repeatedly and yes my point stands
  • Options

    Craig Mackinlay’s trial starts in a fortnight and the verdict is expected when Mike is on holiday.

    Nothing much happens on here when Mike is away
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,983
    Mr. Eagles, the Government should drop that. And its sugar tax nonsense. This sort of mindless, foolish meddling is what Labour's for. The Conservatives shouldn't be ramping up the nanny state. May's an interfering authoritarian, a useful idiot for puritans.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    The only reason to want this job is to position yourself for an early leadership election .
  • Options

    Craig Mackinlay’s trial starts in a fortnight and the verdict is expected when Mike is on holiday.

    Nothing much happens on here when Mike is away
    Indeed. I often struggle to come up with threads.

    I should be publishing two AV related threads during my next stint as guest editor.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,854
    Morning all :)

    Not the best start to the week for the Government - a resignation of one of the most senior members of Cabinet. Oddly enough, given the longevity of her predecessor, Rudd's departure might be a return to the "revolving door" that is the Home Office.

    Rudd's fall wasn't related to Windrush per se and not even to the fact of "enforced returns" which most people would accept is something that happens. It's the much more old-fashioned notion of misleading (intentionally or otherwise) Parliament on the question of whether a regime of targets existed.

    Being charitable, it looked as though the Home Office functioned outside the control of the Minister (or, less charitably, that it carried on functioning as it did under the old Minister even when there was a new Minister in post).

    The Prime Minister is probably safe (though some were saying that about Rudd only yesterday evening) though the perception of a Government in crisis three days before a set of local elections would be about as welcome as a (add your own negative scenario).

    The more serious problem for May is IF the Independent is right and she is looking for a deal with the EU which would more or less retain Freedom of Movement. I imagine that would be unacceptable to many LEAVE voters even if it had a majority in the Commons.

    In truth, post-EU immigration policy has hardly been mentioned in comparison with the utopia of wondrous trade deals that are apparently waiting to be negotiated and signed the moment we depart the evil clutches of the EU. All the talk now is of a pseudo-Customs Union and Freedom of Movement. I find it hard to believe the Prime Minister would be so politically inept as to seek an outcome along those lines which would guarantee re-opening all the old fault lines within the Conservative party which have proved so corrosive for so long.
  • Options
    AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487

    Mr. Eagles, the Government should drop that. And its sugar tax nonsense. This sort of mindless, foolish meddling is what Labour's for. The Conservatives shouldn't be ramping up the nanny state. May's an interfering authoritarian, a useful idiot for puritans.

    I have never grasped the fury about the sugar tax. If we accept taxes on alcohol and tobacco then why not on sugary drinks? The only question is why the tax shouldn’t be extended to other sweets. Sugar literally kills people.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,076

    On the Rudd resignation Yvette Cooper was the one who caught her out at the select committee and she is the one labour should be congratulating. It does remind us that a labour party lead by a serious competent politician would be looking at a landslide, but then people's minds turn to the Corbyn - McDonnell - Abbott triumvirate and just shudder

    You mean how Labour won a landslide in 2010 and 2015 when it was led by 'serious politicians' ?

    Tell me which 'serious politicians' would have offered to end student tuition fees ?
  • Options
    Anazina said:

    Mr. Eagles, the Government should drop that. And its sugar tax nonsense. This sort of mindless, foolish meddling is what Labour's for. The Conservatives shouldn't be ramping up the nanny state. May's an interfering authoritarian, a useful idiot for puritans.

    I have never grasped the fury about the sugar tax. If we accept taxes on alcohol and tobacco then why not on sugary drinks? The only question is why the tax shouldn’t be extended to other sweets. Sugar literally kills people.
    I'm sure it soon will creep into other products, all for our own good of course.
  • Options
    AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    HYUFD said:

    Anazina said:

    HYUFD said:

    On topic Nicky Morgan will make a great Home Secretary.

    We need someone at the Home Office who looks at evidence based policies not headline pleasing policies.

    Her tenure at Education shows this.

    Like the truly great Tories such as Gove, Cameron, and Thatcher, Morgan saw that grammar schools screw poor children which is why she continued Gove’s excellent academy process.

    Regretfully she didn’t go full Thatcher and close a lot of grammar schools.

    Did Thatcher close a single grammar school ?

    I always thought that it was local councils which did so.
    She did.

    Going further back, how many grammar schools were turned into comprehensives under Edward Heath's government, when a certain Margaret Thatcher was education secretary? Answer: lots.

    Indeed, Mrs Thatcher (as she then was) is understood to have signed away more grammar schools between 1970 and 1974 than any other education secretary before or since.


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6712177.stm
    ,
    Margaret Thatcher and Tories let grammar schools go into ruin: only Ukip will restore them.

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/uk/443211/Margaret-Thatcher-and-Tories-let-grammar-schools-go-into-ruin-only-Ukip-will-restore-them/amp
    When Thatcher was PM there were more pupils in grammar schools by 1990 when she left office than in 1979 when she arrived, she was also a prominent supporter of Brady's pro Grammar School Association.

    Even Cameron refused to close grammar schools despite not committing to open any more, indeed he once attended a grammar school prize giving. A majority of Tory voters want new grammars and a plurality if voters as a whole. Only Labour voters want to have an entirely comprehensive system and end selection completely (though of course they would attack private schools too by ending their charitable status etc)
    This says there were fewer pupils in grammar schools in 1990 than in 1979

    https://fullfact.org/education/grammar-schools-and-social-mobility-whats-evidence/
    Believe me, clouding the issue with facts in the face of HYUFD spin is the definition of a wasted life. Recall his contention that “west London is mainly Tory” which was simply and immediately disproven by looking at a widely available parliamentary map. He will never admit he is wrong.
    No it wasn't as I showed you repeatedly and yes my point stands
    Seeing that geography is clearly not your strong point, west London is the bit on the middle left of this map.

    https://goo.gl/images/cAycnG
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Anazina said:

    HYUFD said:

    Anazina said:

    Spare a thought this morning for Carlotta and HYUFD.

    The Central Office auto rebuttal bots have a difficult day ahead.

    My every sympathy.

    I doubt Rudd's resignation changes anything, as the last polling showed most Tory voters blame the last Labour government for the Windrush affair, it is Labour voters who blame May
    Good to see the algorithm is operating as normal.
    You expect this to have a negative effect on the council elections for the conservatives.

    However, it has to be recognised that a hostile environment to illegal immigration and targets is popular and how it plays out outside the metropolitan areas will be interesting but I would expect the lib dems to do well
    A hostile environment for legal immigrants who've been here for decades doesn't play well.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908
    Anazina said:

    Mr. Eagles, the Government should drop that. And its sugar tax nonsense. This sort of mindless, foolish meddling is what Labour's for. The Conservatives shouldn't be ramping up the nanny state. May's an interfering authoritarian, a useful idiot for puritans.

    I have never grasped the fury about the sugar tax. If we accept taxes on alcohol and tobacco then why not on sugary drinks? The only question is why the tax shouldn’t be extended to other sweets. Sugar literally kills people.
    Is there really fury? Most people probably don't know or particularly care.

    What there is, I suspect, is a very powerful drinks industry that doesn't like the tax... and is happy to fund surrogate organizations/lobbyists to argue that it won't work/won't reduce sugary drinks consumption/won't solve obesity on its own etc. etc.
  • Options

    Craig Mackinlay’s trial starts in a fortnight and the verdict is expected when Mike is on holiday.

    Nothing much happens on here when Mike is away
    Indeed. I often struggle to come up with threads.

    I should be publishing two AV related threads during my next stint as guest editor.
    AV threads are the PB equivalent of Brigadoon appearing out of the mist.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,983
    Ms. Anazina, sugar literally saves people.

    Go a month without sugar if you like. But I'd get your will written first.

    Cigarettes contain carcinogens. They're addictive and give you cancer, as well as causing emphysema and other conditions. Alcohol is also addictive, and its effects (reducing inhibitions and motor control) can cause problems for both the individual and for others (drink driving victims being the prime example). It can also cause liver problems.

    Without sugar, you die. It's the fuel we use to live. Poor people spend a higher proportion of their income on food. Increase food prices and your disproportionately harm the poor. Of course, you get to complain about food bank use rising too.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,983
    Mr. Pubgoer, can't trust the peasants to decide what food to buy for themselves without the oversight of a bureaucrat from London to tax the 'wrong' choices.
  • Options

    Craig Mackinlay’s trial starts in a fortnight and the verdict is expected when Mike is on holiday.

    Nothing much happens on here when Mike is away
    Indeed. I often struggle to come up with threads.

    I should be publishing two AV related threads during my next stint as guest editor.
    AV threads are the PB equivalent of Brigadoon appearing out of the mist.
    Another thread might combine AV with another PB favourite, Scottish Independence.

    Is an Indyref conducted under AV the only way to keep Scotland in the Union?
  • Options
    AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487

    Mr. Pubgoer, can't trust the peasants to decide what food to buy for themselves without the oversight of a bureaucrat from London to tax the 'wrong' choices.

    Ms. Anazina, sugar literally saves people.

    Go a month without sugar if you like. But I'd get your will written first.

    Cigarettes contain carcinogens. They're addictive and give you cancer, as well as causing emphysema and other conditions. Alcohol is also addictive, and its effects (reducing inhibitions and motor control) can cause problems for both the individual and for others (drink driving victims being the prime example). It can also cause liver problems.

    Without sugar, you die. It's the fuel we use to live. Poor people spend a higher proportion of their income on food. Increase food prices and your disproportionately harm the poor. Of course, you get to complain about food bank use rising too.

    We don’t need to add sugar to our diet in the way you suggest. As sugar is in everything we can get all we need from eating fresh produce. I drink sugary drinks from time to time, but there is nothing wrong with taxing them. It makes perfect sense. Obesity is a massive killer.

  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,662
    Matt Singh:

    Amber Rudd’s resignation as Home Secretary has already – and it’s barely 7am as I write this – prompted a couple of questions on what this might mean for the polls and the local elections this week. In each case, the answer is the same – there have been so few national voting intention polls lately that it will be very, very hard to unpick the effect of Rudd’s resignation from everything else (though I’m sure that won’t stop people trying).

    YouGov had a poll out on immigration over the weekend, and once again, an overwhelming majority think it’s too high – 63 per cent answered “Much too high” or “A little too high”, which is down slightly on a year ago.


    https://www.ncpolitics.uk/2018/04/a-rudd-awakening.html/
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,942
    rkrkrk said:

    Anazina said:

    Mr. Eagles, the Government should drop that. And its sugar tax nonsense. This sort of mindless, foolish meddling is what Labour's for. The Conservatives shouldn't be ramping up the nanny state. May's an interfering authoritarian, a useful idiot for puritans.

    I have never grasped the fury about the sugar tax. If we accept taxes on alcohol and tobacco then why not on sugary drinks? The only question is why the tax shouldn’t be extended to other sweets. Sugar literally kills people.
    Is there really fury? Most people probably don't know or particularly care.

    What there is, I suspect, is a very powerful drinks industry that doesn't like the tax... and is happy to fund surrogate organizations/lobbyists to argue that it won't work/won't reduce sugary drinks consumption/won't solve obesity on its own etc. etc.
    I must admit that I have heard and seen absolutely no anger at the sugar tax. I tend to agree it probably won't do.much to reduce consumption since the alternatives are frankly awful. But I certainly don't see anyone taking to the streets or even getting mildly peeved about it
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Ladbrokes' next Home Secretary market is back up. Javid 4/5; Karen Bradley next best at 4/1.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908

    Ms. Anazina, sugar literally saves people.

    Go a month without sugar if you like. But I'd get your will written first.

    Cigarettes contain carcinogens. They're addictive and give you cancer, as well as causing emphysema and other conditions. Alcohol is also addictive, and its effects (reducing inhibitions and motor control) can cause problems for both the individual and for others (drink driving victims being the prime example). It can also cause liver problems.

    Without sugar, you die. It's the fuel we use to live. Poor people spend a higher proportion of their income on food. Increase food prices and your disproportionately harm the poor. Of course, you get to complain about food bank use rising too.

    The tax is designed so that very sugary drinks become more expensive.
    No one is going to die if they stop drinking coca cola. The tax has already pushed several drinks manufacturers to lower the sugar content of their drinks. That in itself is a win.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,662
    Anazina said:

    Mr. Pubgoer, can't trust the peasants to decide what food to buy for themselves without the oversight of a bureaucrat from London to tax the 'wrong' choices.

    Ms. Anazina, sugar literally saves people.

    Go a month without sugar if you like. But I'd get your will written first.

    Cigarettes contain carcinogens. They're addictive and give you cancer, as well as causing emphysema and other conditions. Alcohol is also addictive, and its effects (reducing inhibitions and motor control) can cause problems for both the individual and for others (drink driving victims being the prime example). It can also cause liver problems.

    Without sugar, you die. It's the fuel we use to live. Poor people spend a higher proportion of their income on food. Increase food prices and your disproportionately harm the poor. Of course, you get to complain about food bank use rising too.

    We don’t need to add sugar to our diet in the way you suggest. As sugar is in everything we can get all we need from eating fresh produce. I drink sugary drinks from time to time, but there is nothing wrong with taxing them. It makes perfect sense. Obesity is a massive killer.
    For once we are in agreement - my mother read 'Pure White and Deadly' when I was young and strove mightily to remove added sugar from our diets...

    If only we'd known!

    We did.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/wellbeing/diet/10634081/John-Yudkin-the-man-who-tried-to-warn-us-about-sugar.html
  • Options
    AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    rkrkrk said:

    Anazina said:

    Mr. Eagles, the Government should drop that. And its sugar tax nonsense. This sort of mindless, foolish meddling is what Labour's for. The Conservatives shouldn't be ramping up the nanny state. May's an interfering authoritarian, a useful idiot for puritans.

    I have never grasped the fury about the sugar tax. If we accept taxes on alcohol and tobacco then why not on sugary drinks? The only question is why the tax shouldn’t be extended to other sweets. Sugar literally kills people.
    Is there really fury? Most people probably don't know or particularly care.

    What there is, I suspect, is a very powerful drinks industry that doesn't like the tax... and is happy to fund surrogate organizations/lobbyists to argue that it won't work/won't reduce sugary drinks consumption/won't solve obesity on its own etc. etc.
    Actually, I agree, only the drinks lobby and Morris Dancer seem furious. What I meant was where there is fury, I cannot understand it. It’s no different to taxing booze and fags.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,983
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    On topic Nicky Morgan will make a great Home Secretary.

    We need someone at the Home Office who looks at evidence based policies not headline pleasing policies.

    Her tenure at Education shows this.

    Like the truly great Tories such as Gove, Cameron, and Thatcher, Morgan saw that grammar schools screw poor children which is why she continued Gove’s excellent academy process.

    Regretfully she didn’t go full Thatcher and close a lot of grammar schools.

    Did Thatcher close a single grammar school ?

    I always thought that it was local councils which did so.
    She did.

    Going further back, how many grammar schools were turned into comprehensives under Edward Heath's government, when a certain Margaret Thatcher was education secretary? Answer: lots.

    Indeed, Mrs Thatcher (as she then was) is understood to have signed away more grammar schools between 1970 and 1974 than any other education secretary before or since.


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6712177.stm
    ,
    Margaret Thatcher and Tories let grammar schools go into ruin: only Ukip will restore them.

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/uk/443211/Margaret-Thatcher-and-Tories-let-grammar-schools-go-into-ruin-only-Ukip-will-restore-them/amp
    When Thatcher was PM there were more pupils in grammar schools by 1990 when she left office than in 1979 when she arrived, she was also a prominent supporter of Brady's pro Grammar School Association.

    Even Cameron refused to close grammar schools despite not committing to open any more, indeed he once attended a grammar school prize giving. A majority of Tory voters want new grammars and a plurality if voters as a whole. Only Labour voters want to have an entirely comprehensive system and end selection completely (though of course they would attack private schools too by ending their charitable status etc)
    This says there were fewer pupils in grammar schools in 1990 than in 1979

    https://fullfact.org/education/grammar-schools-and-social-mobility-whats-evidence/
    Though there were admittedly slightly fewer grammar schools the rate of decline slowed rapidly under Thatcher. Major and Cameron saw the biggest rise in grammar school pupils now up to 5.2% from 4.5% in 1979.

    Though on this as on much else again you have more in common with LD than Tory voters
    By the time Thatcher got REALLY into power there wasn’t nearly as much secondary education that needed reorganising.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,076

    Ladbrokes' next Home Secretary market is back up. Javid 4/5; Karen Bradley next best at 4/1.

    May's cabinet picks have had a tendency to be unusual.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    rkrkrk said:

    Anazina said:

    Mr. Eagles, the Government should drop that. And its sugar tax nonsense. This sort of mindless, foolish meddling is what Labour's for. The Conservatives shouldn't be ramping up the nanny state. May's an interfering authoritarian, a useful idiot for puritans.

    I have never grasped the fury about the sugar tax. If we accept taxes on alcohol and tobacco then why not on sugary drinks? The only question is why the tax shouldn’t be extended to other sweets. Sugar literally kills people.
    Is there really fury? Most people probably don't know or particularly care.

    What there is, I suspect, is a very powerful drinks industry that doesn't like the tax... and is happy to fund surrogate organizations/lobbyists to argue that it won't work/won't reduce sugary drinks consumption/won't solve obesity on its own etc. etc.
    It's put the prices up. Of course it has, but it still means things cost more. It also means manufacturers start fiddling with recipes, which means the taste changes, which is fine for most of us who don't consume product X but annoys those who do.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,942
    edited April 2018

    Mr. Pubgoer, can't trust the peasants to decide what food to buy for themselves without the oversight of a bureaucrat from London to tax the 'wrong' choices.

    But taxing it is the Conservative way. The authoritarian Nanny State way would be to ban it. This way people still get to choose to live as they wish but have to accept the financial consequences of their choices and make a contribution to the cost of their care when they end up with type 2 diabetes.

    We should extend this legalise and tax policy to a few more things like drugs and prostitution.
This discussion has been closed.