Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Review : June 14th 2018

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited June 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Review : June 14th 2018

Town on Doncaster (Lab defence) Result: Labour 1,084 (47% +8% on last time), Yorkshire 570 (25% -1% on last time), Green 294 (13% -1% on last time), Conservative 260 (11% -11% on last time), Liberal Democrat 66 (3%, no candidate last time), Independent 43 (2%, no candidate last time) Labour HOLD with a majority of 514 (22%) on a swing of 4.5% from Yorkshire to Labour

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    edited June 2018
    Looking up the skirt of this thread - no offence meant.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44496427
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Cheers for this, Mr. Hayfield.

    Mr. W, is upkilting also illegal?
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    Cheers for this, Mr. Hayfield.

    Mr. W, is upkilting also illegal?

    I'll shall consult Mrs JackW who has the measure of the issue .... :smile:
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,001
    Scott_P said:
    Shocked by Chope's stupidity - just crass
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    Great, now we're the pervert party. Wtf is this shit.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,038
    https://twitter.com/David_K_Clark/status/1007622923388104704

    Did Jefferson and co really build a democracy that can withstand a demagogue? We may have to find out in next few years...
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,704
    Chistopher Chope is a See You Next Tuesday....
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Pulpstar said:

    Leslie Grantham has died, starred in the only fictional TV event to pass 30 million viewers on British TV.

    I must have missed Dirty Den in the LEAVE and REMAIN referendum broadcasts ....
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,704
    MaxPB said:

    Great, now we're the pervert party. Wtf is this shit.

    I just want to know the reason why anyone would object to this, other than being a complete dick.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    edited June 2018
    TOPPING said:
    There seems to be a minor edit war on Wikipedia. What's funny about being born in Putney?
    Christopher Chope (knob head) was born in Putney

    ETA: earlier was, Sir Christopher Robert Chope OBE MP (born 19 May 1947) is a useless British barrister and Conservative politician.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:
    There seems to be a minor edit war on Wikipedia. What's funny about being born in Putney?
    Christopher Chope (knob head) was born in Putney
    The world has moved on...

    "Sir Christopher Robert Chope OBE MP (born 19 May 1947) is an utter twat and absolute muppet with no conscience whatsoever. He is unfortunately the Member of Parliament for Christchurch. A Brexit advocate, he has been supportive of Leave Means Leave, a Eurosceptic pressure group.[2]"
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039

    MaxPB said:

    Great, now we're the pervert party. Wtf is this shit.

    I just want to know the reason why anyone would object to this, other than being a complete dick.
    I think the general case that the awkward squad (Davies, Chope et al.) make is that lots of Private Members' Bills are well-meaning but haven't been subjected to much scrutiny and may not work as intended. I have some sympathy with that in general - I don't think we should be doing that much piecemeal legislation via PMBs - but in this case I don't think that applies.

    In any case I'm not sure how sustainable their approach is in the social media age.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    edited June 2018
    Is there not already a criminal offence that would cover up-skirting?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    RoyalBlue said:

    Is there not already a criminal offence that would cover up-skirting?

    Apparently not if the victim is wearing underwear.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    MaxPB said:

    Great, now we're the pervert party. Wtf is this shit.

    Indeed that is utterly bizarre and inexplicable.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    MaxPB said:

    Great, now we're the pervert party. Wtf is this shit.

    Indeed that is utterly bizarre and inexplicable.
    Welcome to the mindset of your typical Tory MP Brexiter.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,669

    Scott_P said:
    Shocked by Chope's stupidity - just crass
    Not that surprising from him, though.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    Great, now we're the pervert party. Wtf is this shit.

    Indeed that is utterly bizarre and inexplicable.
    Welcome to the mindset of your typical Tory MP Brexiter.
    Not typical, one knobhead. This is where party politics because very frustrating because it only takes one utter bellend to object to something entirely reasonable and the media broadcasts "blocked by Conservative MP" not "Christopher Chope".
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    And now this is the most read story on BBC News.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Scott_P said:
    Shocked by Chope's stupidity - just crass
    Not that surprising from him, though.
    I can't even begin to comprehend what he was trying to achieve. What great principle he was defending.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    Great, now we're the pervert party. Wtf is this shit.

    Indeed that is utterly bizarre and inexplicable.
    Welcome to the mindset of your typical Tory MP Brexiter.
    Not typical, one knobhead. This is where party politics because very frustrating because it only takes one utter bellend to object to something entirely reasonable and the media broadcasts "blocked by Conservative MP" not "Christopher Chope".
    It is typical of a worldview that contains Brexit as a central belief (together with anti-gay marriage, wanting a return to the death penalty, etc). I'm sorry but this is a pretty standard type of Cons MP Brexiter.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    Great, now we're the pervert party. Wtf is this shit.

    Indeed that is utterly bizarre and inexplicable.
    Welcome to the mindset of your typical Tory MP Brexiter.
    Not typical, one knobhead. This is where party politics because very frustrating because it only takes one utter bellend to object to something entirely reasonable and the media broadcasts "blocked by Conservative MP" not "Christopher Chope".
    It is typical of a worldview that contains Brexit as a central belief (together with anti-gay marriage, wanting a return to the death penalty, etc). I'm sorry but this is a pretty standard type of Cons MP Brexiter.
    You're being ridiculous. There wasn't a chorus of people shouting object there was one. Please give any evidence that this is more than just an oddball.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    Cheers for this, Mr. Hayfield.

    Mr. W, is upkilting also illegal?

    Can be useful if you have a poor memory for surnames. A quick peek and, if there's a quarter pounder under there, you know you're talking to a Macdonald.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    edited June 2018

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    Great, now we're the pervert party. Wtf is this shit.

    Indeed that is utterly bizarre and inexplicable.
    Welcome to the mindset of your typical Tory MP Brexiter.
    Not typical, one knobhead. This is where party politics because very frustrating because it only takes one utter bellend to object to something entirely reasonable and the media broadcasts "blocked by Conservative MP" not "Christopher Chope".
    It is typical of a worldview that contains Brexit as a central belief (together with anti-gay marriage, wanting a return to the death penalty, etc). I'm sorry but this is a pretty standard type of Cons MP Brexiter.
    You're being ridiculous. There wasn't a chorus of people shouting object there was one. Please give any evidence that this is more than just an oddball.
    He is part of a gang (so a smidge of google tells me) that won't put up with that sort of thing. As I said, a particular mindset including gay marriage and the death penalty. The Union set of people with such views, including Brexit, is large. Cash, Bone, Chope, Davies, Nuttall, and many more.

    I don't think it's particularly contentious to say that Brexit fits into a conservative small c, right wing, traditionalist outlook.

    Look, I'm a Conservative too and, having just googled those who opposed gay marriage, I'm very disappointed at some of the names in there, to say nothing of Br*x*t. But that's the party for you.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    The BBC article wasn't clear. How can one MP shout 'object' and the bill fails?

    In any case, it has support of the Government, so they'll probably be able to put it in somewhere.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    This could be turned into a nice easy win for Theresa, I suspect shell contrive to bollocks it up though.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,232
    I suppose Chope could defend his decision on strictly libertarian grounds: we didn't battle to free ourselves from the shackles of the EU only to prevent a Briton doing what he likes with his own camera in his own land.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Max, indeed.

    It does seem bloody weird.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,392
    To distract from Brexit, the Tories have thrown a dead cat on the table. And looked up its skirt.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    I suppose Chope could defend his decision on strictly libertarian grounds: we didn't battle to free ourselves from the shackles of the EU only to prevent a Briton doing what he likes with his own camera in his own land.

    I'd be interested to hear what he has to say on the matter, which appears missing from the BBC article. He might (bear with me here) have a legitimate complaint about the wording of the bill. For example, proving guilt by subsection (3) might be difficult:

    https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2017-2019/0174/18174.pdf

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,569
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    Great, now we're the pervert party. Wtf is this shit.

    Indeed that is utterly bizarre and inexplicable.
    Welcome to the mindset of your typical Tory MP Brexiter.
    Not typical, one knobhead. This is where party politics because very frustrating because it only takes one utter bellend to object to something entirely reasonable and the media broadcasts "blocked by Conservative MP" not "Christopher Chope".
    It is typical of a worldview that contains Brexit as a central belief (together with anti-gay marriage, wanting a return to the death penalty, etc). I'm sorry but this is a pretty standard type of Cons MP Brexiter.
    You're being ridiculous. There wasn't a chorus of people shouting object there was one. Please give any evidence that this is more than just an oddball.
    He is part of a gang (so a smidge of google tells me) that won't put up with that sort of thing. As I said, a particular mindset including gay marriage and the death penalty. The Union set of people with such views, including Brexit, is large. Cash, Bone, Chope, Davies, Nuttall, and many more.

    I don't think it's particularly contentious to say that Brexit fits into a conservative small c, right wing, traditionalist outlook.

    Look, I'm a Conservative too and, having just googled those who opposed gay marriage, I'm very disappointed at some of the names in there, to say nothing of Br*x*t. But that's the party for you.
    He's a pillock with form:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Chope#Blocking_and_filibustering_of_bills
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,704

    Scott_P said:
    Shocked by Chope's stupidity - just crass
    Not that surprising from him, though.
    I can't even begin to comprehend what he was trying to achieve. What great principle he was defending.
    The principle to be an utter c***.

    This, and people like him make me despair to be a 'right-winger' and to be anyway associated with him. There should be no place for people like him in the Tories.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    Scott_P said:
    Shocked by Chope's stupidity - just crass
    Not that surprising from him, though.
    I can't even begin to comprehend what he was trying to achieve. What great principle he was defending.
    The principle to be an utter c***.

    This, and people like him make me despair to be a 'right-winger' and to be anyway associated with him. There should be no place for people like him in the Tories.
    Sadly, as mentioned above, he is part of what the Conservative Party is today. No use wishing him away and in any case, his sort are in the ascendancy so we will need to suck it up. Or withhold our vote.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    There's a certain class of Tory MP that has taken great and public delight in talking out Private Memebers' Bills.

    This is the culmination of such self satisfied wankery.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited June 2018
    I see Chope, along with utter cretin Philip Davies, talked out a mental health bill moments before as well.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    I have quite a lot of sympathy with the principle that legislation needs proper scrutiny before being passed. However, this looks like a poor application of that general principle. A pressing social problem requires MPs to prioritise giving that scrutiny.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765

    RoyalBlue said:

    Is there not already a criminal offence that would cover up-skirting?

    Apparently not if the victim is wearing underwear.
    I imagine that would be the offence of voyeurism.

    I'm surprised that people who do this can't be charged with assault.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,704
    TOPPING said:

    Scott_P said:
    Shocked by Chope's stupidity - just crass
    Not that surprising from him, though.
    I can't even begin to comprehend what he was trying to achieve. What great principle he was defending.
    The principle to be an utter c***.

    This, and people like him make me despair to be a 'right-winger' and to be anyway associated with him. There should be no place for people like him in the Tories.
    Sadly, as mentioned above, he is part of what the Conservative Party is today. No use wishing him away and in any case, his sort are in the ascendancy so we will need to suck it up. Or withhold our vote.
    Sadly true. Where's that Centralist party again? come on Chukka/David etc....
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    Scott_P said:
    Shocked by Chope's stupidity - just crass
    Not that surprising from him, though.
    I can't even begin to comprehend what he was trying to achieve. What great principle he was defending.
    The principle to be an utter c***.

    This, and people like him make me despair to be a 'right-winger' and to be anyway associated with him. There should be no place for people like him in the Tories.
    Sadly, as mentioned above, he is part of what the Conservative Party is today. No use wishing him away and in any case, his sort are in the ascendancy so we will need to suck it up. Or withhold our vote.
    Sadly true. Where's that Centralist party again? come on Chukka/David etc....
    :smile:

    Bring it!
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,037
    edited June 2018
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    Great, now we're the pervert party. Wtf is this shit.

    Indeed that is utterly bizarre and inexplicable.
    Welcome to the mindset of your typical Tory MP Brexiter.
    Not typical, one knobhead. This is where party politics because very frustrating because it only takes one utter bellend to object to something entirely reasonable and the media broadcasts "blocked by Conservative MP" not "Christopher Chope".
    It is typical of a worldview that contains Brexit as a central belief (together with anti-gay marriage, wanting a return to the death penalty, etc). I'm sorry but this is a pretty standard type of Cons MP Brexiter.
    Pretty much hit the nail on the head! These folk are just weird!
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765

    FPT, I don't see anything wrong about referendums. They are a conventional means of determining public opinion.

    I think that few people (on either side of the debate) would consider it fair that a government which got elected with c.40% of the vote could simply exercise Article 50, without bothering to consult the public.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    People who’ve never done anything meaningful outside politics don’t always seem to appreciate that good outcomes are driven by many things other than good rules. It is a dangerous fallacy that legislation can turn people into angels, and a fallacy that lends itself to an authoritarian mindset.

    I’m not saying that this applies to this particular case at all. All I’m saying is that law-making should never be done lightly, and in general, we have a surfeit of law and regulation rather than a deficit.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,349
    Excuse my ignorance, but how do you get away with 'upskirting'?

    Surely shoving a camera up a woman's skirt is bound to attract attention. You may as carry a sign around your neck saying "I'm a sad and lonely pervert."

    A case for psychiatric intervention?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    RoyalBlue said:

    People who’ve never done anything meaningful outside politics don’t always seem to appreciate that good outcomes are driven by many things other than good rules. It is a dangerous fallacy that legislation can turn people into angels, and a fallacy that lends itself to an authoritarian mindset.

    I’m not saying that this applies to this particular case at all. All I’m saying is that law-making should never be done lightly, and in general, we have a surfeit of law and regulation rather than a deficit.

    Yes, surely we already have laws that can deal with this type of thing.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,835
    Alistair said:

    I see Chope, along with utter cretin Philip Davies, talked out a mental health bill moments before as well.

    Which, with all the caveats outlined on here, was a serious Bill, of the kind Govts don't get round to, to improve and streamline policies and training around Use of Force.
    As more and more people with mental problems are being dealt with by the Police and criminal justice services one would have thought this, too, was a Bill to at least consider.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,835
    CD13 said:

    Excuse my ignorance, but how do you get away with 'upskirting'?

    Surely shoving a camera up a woman's skirt is bound to attract attention. You may as carry a sign around your neck saying "I'm a sad and lonely pervert."

    A case for psychiatric intervention?

    It is far from obvious. Cameras are so small, they can be worn on shoes...so I hear.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,349
    Mr Dean,

    "Cameras are so small, they can be worn on shoes...so I hear."

    Thanks. But that begs the question why would someone make so much effort to look at a picture of women's underwear. OK, I'm probably showing my age now. Forget I asked.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,704
    CD13 said:

    Mr Dean,

    "Cameras are so small, they can be worn on shoes...so I hear."

    Thanks. But that begs the question why would someone make so much effort to look at a picture of women's underwear. OK, I'm probably showing my age now. Forget I asked.

    Perverts get turned on by all sorts of things. More it's the thrill of degrading unsupecting women which don't notice it I would think.

  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    Great, now we're the pervert party. Wtf is this shit.

    Indeed that is utterly bizarre and inexplicable.
    Welcome to the mindset of your typical Tory MP Brexiter.
    Not typical, one knobhead. This is where party politics because very frustrating because it only takes one utter bellend to object to something entirely reasonable and the media broadcasts "blocked by Conservative MP" not "Christopher Chope".
    It is typical of a worldview that contains Brexit as a central belief (together with anti-gay marriage, wanting a return to the death penalty, etc). I'm sorry but this is a pretty standard type of Cons MP Brexiter.
    You're being ridiculous. There wasn't a chorus of people shouting object there was one. Please give any evidence that this is more than just an oddball.
    He is part of a gang (so a smidge of google tells me) that won't put up with that sort of thing. As I said, a particular mindset including gay marriage and the death penalty. The Union set of people with such views, including Brexit, is large. Cash, Bone, Chope, Davies, Nuttall, and many more.

    I don't think it's particularly contentious to say that Brexit fits into a conservative small c, right wing, traditionalist outlook.

    Look, I'm a Conservative too and, having just googled those who opposed gay marriage, I'm very disappointed at some of the names in there, to say nothing of Br*x*t. But that's the party for you.
    I don't see what gay marriage has to do with putting cameras up people's skirts. Maybe there's a link in your head but I'm not seeing it.
  • DeClareDeClare Posts: 483
    Sean_F said:


    FPT, I don't see anything wrong about referendums. They are a conventional means of determining public opinion.

    I think that few people (on either side of the debate) would consider it fair that a government which got elected with c.40% of the vote could simply exercise Article 50, without bothering to consult the public.

    The first ever national referendum was called by the Labour party in 1975 to vote on whether to leave the ECC as it was then, or to stay in, this was before there was an article 50.

    Later it became official Labour policy to leave, it was in their 1983 election manifesto, presumably without a referendum. Later it became their policy to stay in and not have a referendum.

    Now we have had another referendum and it said leave, large numbers of them think we should ignore it and stay in.

    Most people agree that the Tories are in a mess over Brexit, the only party that's not in a mess over Brexit is UKIP.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    Great, now we're the pervert party. Wtf is this shit.

    Indeed that is utterly bizarre and inexplicable.
    Welcome to the mindset of your typical Tory MP Brexiter.
    Not typical, one knobhead. This is where party politics because very frustrating because it only takes one utter bellend to object to something entirely reasonable and the media broadcasts "blocked by Conservative MP" not "Christopher Chope".
    It is typical of a worldview that contains Brexit as a central belief (together with anti-gay marriage, wanting a return to the death penalty, etc). I'm sorry but this is a pretty standard type of Cons MP Brexiter.
    You're being ridiculous. There wasn't a chorus of people shouting object there was one. Please give any evidence that this is more than just an oddball.
    He is part of a gang (so a smidge of google tells me) that won't put up with that sort of thing. As I said, a particular mindset including gay marriage and the death penalty. The Union set of people with such views, including Brexit, is large. Cash, Bone, Chope, Davies, Nuttall, and many more.

    I don't think it's particularly contentious to say that Brexit fits into a conservative small c, right wing, traditionalist outlook.

    Look, I'm a Conservative too and, having just googled those who opposed gay marriage, I'm very disappointed at some of the names in there, to say nothing of Br*x*t. But that's the party for you.
    I don't see what gay marriage has to do with putting cameras up people's skirts. Maybe there's a link in your head but I'm not seeing it.
    Nope you are not seeing it; I don't think my explaining it further will help.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,835
    DeClare said:

    Sean_F said:


    FPT, I don't see anything wrong about referendums. They are a conventional means of determining public opinion.

    I think that few people (on either side of the debate) would consider it fair that a government which got elected with c.40% of the vote could simply exercise Article 50, without bothering to consult the public.

    The first ever national referendum was called by the Labour party in 1975 to vote on whether to leave the ECC as it was then, or to stay in, this was before there was an article 50.

    Later it became official Labour policy to leave, it was in their 1983 election manifesto, presumably without a referendum. Later it became their policy to stay in and not have a referendum.

    Now we have had another referendum and it said leave, large numbers of them think we should ignore it and stay in.

    Most people agree that the Tories are in a mess over Brexit, the only party that's not in a mess over Brexit is UKIP.
    No. But they are in a mess about absolutely everything else.
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,545

    TOPPING said:

    Scott_P said:
    Shocked by Chope's stupidity - just crass
    Not that surprising from him, though.
    I can't even begin to comprehend what he was trying to achieve. What great principle he was defending.
    The principle to be an utter c***.

    This, and people like him make me despair to be a 'right-winger' and to be anyway associated with him. There should be no place for people like him in the Tories.
    Sadly, as mentioned above, he is part of what the Conservative Party is today. No use wishing him away and in any case, his sort are in the ascendancy so we will need to suck it up. Or withhold our vote.
    Sadly true. Where's that Centralist party again? come on Chukka/David etc....
    We are nowhere near a breakaway I think. Was discussing this with some Labour colleagues last week and we couldnt think of more than 2 or 3 activists in our very large London CLP who would be likely to support a new party. This is not to say we all all Corbynistas - far from it - just that it Is not clear what a breakaway party would offer apart from stopping Brexit and there is very little evidence on the ground that voters are interested. Older Labour members who remember the 1980s generally take the view that we must fight for change from within and there have been some developments recently that support that stance, such as the selection of Janet Daby in Lewisham and the departure of Ken from the party. Selections of candidates in marginal seats have also been going against Momentum in most contests.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    Great, now we're the pervert party. Wtf is this shit.

    Indeed that is utterly bizarre and inexplicable.
    Welcome to the mindset of your typical Tory MP Brexiter.
    Not typical, one knobhead. This is where party politics because very frustrating because it only takes one utter bellend to object to something entirely reasonable and the media broadcasts "blocked by Conservative MP" not "Christopher Chope".
    It is typical of a worldview that contains Brexit as a central belief (together with anti-gay marriage, wanting a return to the death penalty, etc). I'm sorry but this is a pretty standard type of Cons MP Brexiter.
    You're being ridiculous. There wasn't a chorus of people shouting object there was one. Please give any evidence that this is more than just an oddball.
    He is part of a gang (so a smidge of google tells me) that won't put up with that sort of thing. As I said, a particular mindset including gay marriage and the death penalty. The Union set of people with such views, including Brexit, is large. Cash, Bone, Chope, Davies, Nuttall, and many more.

    I don't think it's particularly contentious to say that Brexit fits into a conservative small c, right wing, traditionalist outlook.

    Look, I'm a Conservative too and, having just googled those who opposed gay marriage, I'm very disappointed at some of the names in there, to say nothing of Br*x*t. But that's the party for you.
    I don't see what gay marriage has to do with putting cameras up people's skirts. Maybe there's a link in your head but I'm not seeing it.
    Nope you are not seeing it; I don't think my explaining it further will help.
    No so we are back to having one person who represents this and a group of others you already dislike for other, unrelated reasons.
  • Didn't the government allocate funds towards the cost of the next European Elections a few weeks ago? Glad to see they are contingency planning to extend their employment. Wish they had done the same for WTO-terms no deal Brexit.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    Great, now we're the pervert party. Wtf is this shit.

    Indeed that is utterly bizarre and inexplicable.
    Welcome to the mindset of your typical Tory MP Brexiter.
    Not typical, one knobhead. This is where party politics because very frustrating because it only takes one utter bellend to object to something entirely reasonable and the media broadcasts "blocked by Conservative MP" not "Christopher Chope".
    It is typical of a worldview that contains Brexit as a central belief (together with anti-gay marriage, wanting a return to the death penalty, etc). I'm sorry but this is a pretty standard type of Cons MP Brexiter.
    You're being ridiculous. There wasn't a chorus of people shouting object there was one. Please give any evidence that this is more than just an oddball.
    He is part of a gang (so a smidge of google tells me) that won't put up with that sort of thing. As I said, a particular mindset including gay marriage and the death penalty. The Union set of people with such views, including Brexit, is large. Cash, Bone, Chope, Davies, Nuttall, and many more.

    I don't think it's particularly contentious to say that Brexit fits into a conservative small c, right wing, traditionalist outlook.

    Look, I'm a Conservative too and, having just googled those who opposed gay marriage, I'm very disappointed at some of the names in there, to say nothing of Br*x*t. But that's the party for you.
    I don't see what gay marriage has to do with putting cameras up people's skirts. Maybe there's a link in your head but I'm not seeing it.
    Nope you are not seeing it; I don't think my explaining it further will help.
    No so we are back to having one person who represents this and a group of others you already dislike for other, unrelated reasons.
    There's none so blind...
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,123

    Scott_P said:
    Shocked by Chope's stupidity - just crass
    Not that surprising from him, though.
    I can't even begin to comprehend what he was trying to achieve. What great principle he was defending.
    The principle to be an utter c***.

    This, and people like him make me despair to be a 'right-winger' and to be anyway associated with him. There should be no place for people like him in the Tories.
    Not to defend Chope but can't you see the irony in calling him a C***?
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    CD13 said:

    Mr Dean,

    "Cameras are so small, they can be worn on shoes...so I hear."

    Thanks. But that begs the question why would someone make so much effort to look at a picture of women's underwear. OK, I'm probably showing my age now. Forget I asked.

    It's will be power disparity in getting the picture rather than the picture itself.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    Didn't the government allocate funds towards the cost of the next European Elections a few weeks ago? Glad to see they are contingency planning to extend their employment. Wish they had done the same for WTO-terms no deal Brexit.
    Wasn't it the electoral commission that did that?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766
    DeClare said:

    Sean_F said:


    FPT, I don't see anything wrong about referendums. They are a conventional means of determining public opinion.

    I think that few people (on either side of the debate) would consider it fair that a government which got elected with c.40% of the vote could simply exercise Article 50, without bothering to consult the public.

    The first ever national referendum was called by the Labour party in 1975 to vote on whether to leave the ECC as it was then, or to stay in, this was before there was an article 50.

    Later it became official Labour policy to leave, it was in their 1983 election manifesto, presumably without a referendum. Later it became their policy to stay in and not have a referendum.

    Now we have had another referendum and it said leave, large numbers of them think we should ignore it and stay in.

    Most people agree that the Tories are in a mess over Brexit, the only party that's not in a mess over Brexit is UKIP.
    Ah yes, but the Labour Party has one big advantage over the Conservatives.

    For the next decade, they will say: We would have gotten all the advantages of the single market, with absolutely none of the disadvantages.

    They are not required to implement policy and will be able to claim - at every point - that they would have done better. Especially if the Labour leader is not Corbyn, it is likely to be an effective approach.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    Great, now we're the pervert party. Wtf is this shit.

    Indeed that is utterly bizarre and inexplicable.
    Welcome to the mindset of your typical Tory MP Brexiter.
    Not typical, one knobhead. This is where party politics because very frustrating because it only takes one utter bellend to object to something entirely reasonable and the media broadcasts "blocked by Conservative MP" not "Christopher Chope".
    It is typical of a worldview that contains Brexit as a central belief (together with anti-gay marriage, wanting a return to the death penalty, etc). I'm sorry but this is a pretty standard type of Cons MP Brexiter.
    You're being ridiculous. There wasn't a chorus of people shouting object there was one. Please give any evidence that this is more than just an oddball.
    He is part of a gang (so a smidge of google tells me) that won't put up with that sort of thing. As I said, a particular mindset including gay marriage and the death penalty. The Union set of people with such views, including Brexit, is large. Cash, Bone, Chope, Davies, Nuttall, and many more.

    I don't think it's particularly contentious to say that Brexit fits into a conservative small c, right wing, traditionalist outlook.

    Look, I'm a Conservative too and, having just googled those who opposed gay marriage, I'm very disappointed at some of the names in there, to say nothing of Br*x*t. But that's the party for you.
    I don't see what gay marriage has to do with putting cameras up people's skirts. Maybe there's a link in your head but I'm not seeing it.
    Nope you are not seeing it; I don't think my explaining it further will help.
    No so we are back to having one person who represents this and a group of others you already dislike for other, unrelated reasons.
    There's none so blind...
    Indeed you're so blinded by your hate you can't tell the difference between what you call Br*x*t and putting cameras up skirts.

    I pity you.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited June 2018
    "We have just spoken with Sir Christopher Chope. He has objected on a principled basis because the bill has not been debated. He has kindly agreed to meet with Gina and I to discuss the bill next week. "

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44496427

    Not content with blocking the upskirting bill, Chope just blocked another government-backed bill to make it a specific criminal offence to attack police dogs and horses.

    In addition to the upskirting bill, Chope has also blocked:

    Pardoning Alan Turing (which was supported by The Queen);
    Same-sex marriage;
    An investigation into Bercow bullying allegations;
    The use of wild animals in circus performances;
    Pay gap transparency;
    Blocked free hospital car parking for carers;
    Making revenge evictions an offence.

    https://order-order.com/2018/06/15/9-things-chris-chope-blocked/
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    Great, now we're the pervert party. Wtf is this shit.

    Indeed that is utterly bizarre and inexplicable.
    Welcome to the mindset of your typical Tory MP Brexiter.
    Not typical, one knobhead. This is where party politics because very frustrating because it only takes one utter bellend to object to something entirely reasonable and the media broadcasts "blocked by Conservative MP" not "Christopher Chope".
    It is typical of a worldview that contains Brexit as a central belief (together with anti-gay marriage, wanting a return to the death penalty, etc). I'm sorry but this is a pretty standard type of Cons MP Brexiter.
    You're being ridiculous. There wasn't a chorus of people shouting object there was one. Please give any evidence that this is more than just an oddball.
    He is part of a gang (so a smidge of google tells me) that won't put up with that sort of thing. As I said, a particular mindset including gay marriage and the death penalty. The Union set of people with such views, including Brexit, is large. Cash, Bone, Chope, Davies, Nuttall, and many more.

    I don't think it's particularly contentious to say that Brexit fits into a conservative small c, right wing, traditionalist outlook.

    Look, I'm a Conservative too and, having just googled those who opposed gay marriage, I'm very disappointed at some of the names in there, to say nothing of Br*x*t. But that's the party for you.
    I don't see what gay marriage has to do with putting cameras up people's skirts. Maybe there's a link in your head but I'm not seeing it.
    Nope you are not seeing it; I don't think my explaining it further will help.
    No so we are back to having one person who represents this and a group of others you already dislike for other, unrelated reasons.
    There's none so blind...
    Indeed you're so blinded by your hate you can't tell the difference between what you call Br*x*t and putting cameras up skirts.

    I pity you.
    LOL. That escalated quickly; no need to get angry just because you can't understand the point I made. Several times.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    edited June 2018

    "We have just spoken with Sir Christopher Chope. He has objected on a principled basis because the bill has not been debated. He has kindly agreed to meet with Gina and I to discuss the bill next week. "

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44496427

    Dreadful!

    Gina and ME!!!
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,123

    "We have just spoken with Sir Christopher Chope. He has objected on a principled basis because the bill has not been debated. He has kindly agreed to meet with Gina and I to discuss the bill next week. "

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44496427

    Something of a storm in a teacup.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    "We have just spoken with Sir Christopher Chope. He has objected on a principled basis because the bill has not been debated. He has kindly agreed to meet with Gina and I to discuss the bill next week. "

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44496427

    Apparently, there was no debate at first reading. Is this common for private members bills?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766
    So, asking for a friend, if he were to attach a tiny camera to his shoe, and take pictures of ladies underwear under their skirts, he wouldn't be breaking any law?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    edited June 2018
    rcs1000 said:

    So, asking for a friend, if he were to attach a tiny camera to his shoe, and take pictures of ladies underwear under their skirts, he wouldn't be breaking any law?

    Yebbut how would you he know about the presence or otherwise of the underwear which is, I understand, what the criminality turns on?
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,846
    DeClare said:

    Sean_F said:


    FPT, I don't see anything wrong about referendums. They are a conventional means of determining public opinion.

    I think that few people (on either side of the debate) would consider it fair that a government which got elected with c.40% of the vote could simply exercise Article 50, without bothering to consult the public.

    The first ever national referendum was called by the Labour party in 1975 to vote on whether to leave the ECC as it was then, or to stay in, this was before there was an article 50.

    Later it became official Labour policy to leave, it was in their 1983 election manifesto, presumably without a referendum. Later it became their policy to stay in and not have a referendum.

    Now we have had another referendum and it said leave, large numbers of them think we should ignore it and stay in.

    Most people agree that the Tories are in a mess over Brexit, the only party that's not in a mess over Brexit is UKIP.
    I think that is a little unfair on the Lib Dems. I may not agree with them but they seem to be pretty united in their EU position. And UKIP hardly even counts as a party anymore.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    TOPPING said:

    rcs1000 said:

    So, asking for a friend, if he were to attach a tiny camera to his shoe, and take pictures of ladies underwear under their skirts, he wouldn't be breaking any law?

    Yebbut how would you he know about the presence or otherwise of the underwear which is, I understand, what the criminality turns on?
    Sort of like MAD. You don't know what'll happen until you try it.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited June 2018
    Party sources said the festival’s drinks supplier – the Workers Beer Company – was refusing to supply beer kegs as it didn’t think there would be enough people to justify them. Organisers were said to have “gone to war” with the company, though it remains to be seen whether revellers will be served draft beer or bottles and cans.

    An ice cream van, which will carry the slogan “Ice cream lovers of the world – unite” and play a jingle version of The Red Flag.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/15/labour-live-festival-jeremy-corbyn-clean-bandit

    Will the ice cream be massive subsidized like in Cuba?
  • DeClareDeClare Posts: 483
    dixiedean said:

    DeClare said:

    Sean_F said:


    FPT, I don't see anything wrong about referendums. They are a conventional means of determining public opinion.

    I think that few people (on either side of the debate) would consider it fair that a government which got elected with c.40% of the vote could simply exercise Article 50, without bothering to consult the public.

    The first ever national referendum was called by the Labour party in 1975 to vote on whether to leave the ECC as it was then, or to stay in, this was before there was an article 50.

    Later it became official Labour policy to leave, it was in their 1983 election manifesto, presumably without a referendum. Later it became their policy to stay in and not have a referendum.

    Now we have had another referendum and it said leave, large numbers of them think we should ignore it and stay in.

    Most people agree that the Tories are in a mess over Brexit, the only party that's not in a mess over Brexit is UKIP.
    No. But they are in a mess about absolutely everything else.
    If there are European elections in the UK next year as a report in the Sun is suggesting, there will be UKIP tanks on everybody's lawns, make no mistake.

    But it's the Sun talking, so I don't take it seriously.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    edited June 2018
    RobD said:

    "We have just spoken with Sir Christopher Chope. He has objected on a principled basis because the bill has not been debated. He has kindly agreed to meet with Gina and I to discuss the bill next week. "

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44496427

    Apparently, there was no debate at first reading. Is this common for private members bills?
    I don't think there's normally any debate for any Bill at first reading.

    Apparently Philip Davies spoke unbroken for two hours so that Chope could object there was no debate. Cynical behaviour from the pair of them. A disgrace.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766

    "We have just spoken with Sir Christopher Chope. He has objected on a principled basis because the bill has not been debated. He has kindly agreed to meet with Gina and I to discuss the bill next week. "

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44496427

    Not content with blocking the upskirting bill, Chope just blocked another government-backed bill to make it a specific criminal offence to attack police dogs and horses.

    In addition to the upskirting bill, Chope has also blocked:

    Pardoning Alan Turing (which was supported by The Queen);
    Same-sex marriage;
    An investigation into Bercow bullying allegations;
    The use of wild animals in circus performances;
    Pay gap transparency;
    Blocked free hospital car parking for carers;
    Making revenge evictions an offence.

    https://order-order.com/2018/06/15/9-things-chris-chope-blocked/

    So, he prevented debate by working with Davies, and then complaining the bill wasn't properly debated.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,704

    RobD said:

    "We have just spoken with Sir Christopher Chope. He has objected on a principled basis because the bill has not been debated. He has kindly agreed to meet with Gina and I to discuss the bill next week. "

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44496427

    Apparently, there was no debate at first reading. Is this common for private members bills?
    I don't think there's normally any debate for any Bill at first reading.

    Apparently Philip Davies spoke unbroken for two hours so that Chope could object there was no debate. Cynical behaviour from the pair of them. A disgrace.
    Exactly, both of them just being dicks, and hiding behind 'prodcedure'.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766
    TOPPING said:

    rcs1000 said:

    So, asking for a friend, if he were to attach a tiny camera to his shoe, and take pictures of ladies underwear under their skirts, he wouldn't be breaking any law?

    Yebbut how would you he know about the presence or otherwise of the underwear which is, I understand, what the criminality turns on?
    So, if someone wasn't wearing underwear, then I he would be breaking the law? And it's impossible to know if someone's wearing underwear in advance...
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766
    DeClare said:

    dixiedean said:

    DeClare said:

    Sean_F said:


    FPT, I don't see anything wrong about referendums. They are a conventional means of determining public opinion.

    I think that few people (on either side of the debate) would consider it fair that a government which got elected with c.40% of the vote could simply exercise Article 50, without bothering to consult the public.

    The first ever national referendum was called by the Labour party in 1975 to vote on whether to leave the ECC as it was then, or to stay in, this was before there was an article 50.

    Later it became official Labour policy to leave, it was in their 1983 election manifesto, presumably without a referendum. Later it became their policy to stay in and not have a referendum.

    Now we have had another referendum and it said leave, large numbers of them think we should ignore it and stay in.

    Most people agree that the Tories are in a mess over Brexit, the only party that's not in a mess over Brexit is UKIP.
    No. But they are in a mess about absolutely everything else.
    If there are European elections in the UK next year as a report in the Sun is suggesting, there will be UKIP tanks on everybody's lawns, make no mistake.

    But it's the Sun talking, so I don't take it seriously.
    Imagine if there was a four month extension to Article 50. Would we have EU elections? Or could it be fudged in some way?
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,704
    May should suspend both of them from the party frankly. Make an example out of them.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    RobD said:

    "We have just spoken with Sir Christopher Chope. He has objected on a principled basis because the bill has not been debated. He has kindly agreed to meet with Gina and I to discuss the bill next week. "

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44496427

    Apparently, there was no debate at first reading. Is this common for private members bills?
    I don't think there's normally any debate for any Bill at first reading.

    Apparently Philip Davies spoke unbroken for two hours so that Chope could object there was no debate. Cynical behaviour from the pair of them. A disgrace.
    How does the time limit enable someone to object to kill the bill? I understand talking one out, but can't see the link here.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263

    RobD said:

    "We have just spoken with Sir Christopher Chope. He has objected on a principled basis because the bill has not been debated. He has kindly agreed to meet with Gina and I to discuss the bill next week. "

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44496427

    Apparently, there was no debate at first reading. Is this common for private members bills?
    I don't think there's normally any debate for any Bill at first reading.

    Apparently Philip Davies spoke unbroken for two hours so that Chope.could object there was no debate. Cynical behaviour from the pair of them. A disgrace.
    Yes, this is an old story - lots of harmless private Bills were blocked by Chope and another notorious MP with childish glee - they said they believed there was too much legislation and anything important should be done in Government time. The same other MP (who lots here will know, but his name escapes me) used to boast that he would throw away letters from constituents if they related to local problems ("What do I care if their drains don't work?"). He was often cited as a great parliamentarian, which he was in a very specialised and peculiarly unhelpful way.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    I am going to guess Morocco vs Iran isn't exactly a great game?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766
    Scott_P said:
    That suggests that the evidence of witness tampering is strong. I suspect it dramatically increases the chance that Manafort will flip.

    That being said, what Manafort "wants" (I suspect) is no jail time, followed by a guilty plea followed by an immediate presidential pardon. Can he be pardoned pre-trial?
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    rcs1000 said:

    DeClare said:

    dixiedean said:

    DeClare said:

    Sean_F said:


    FPT, I don't see anything wrong about referendums. They are a conventional means of determining public opinion.

    I think that few people (on either side of the debate) would consider it fair that a government which got elected with c.40% of the vote could simply exercise Article 50, without bothering to consult the public.

    The first ever national referendum was called by the Labour party in 1975 to vote on whether to leave the ECC as it was then, or to stay in, this was before there was an article 50.

    Later it became official Labour policy to leave, it was in their 1983 election manifesto, presumably without a referendum. Later it became their policy to stay in and not have a referendum.

    Now we have had another referendum and it said leave, large numbers of them think we should ignore it and stay in.

    Most people agree that the Tories are in a mess over Brexit, the only party that's not in a mess over Brexit is UKIP.
    No. But they are in a mess about absolutely everything else.
    If there are European elections in the UK next year as a report in the Sun is suggesting, there will be UKIP tanks on everybody's lawns, make no mistake.

    But it's the Sun talking, so I don't take it seriously.
    Imagine if there was a four month extension to Article 50. Would we have EU elections? Or could it be fudged in some way?
    If you have a four month extension of Article 50 then it's presumably still possible for there to be another extension, or a wholesale cancellation. So the UK has to retain its MEPs. I'm not sure whether you could fudge it to either extend the mandate of our existing MEPs to avoid a largely unnecessary election.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    May should suspend both of them from the party frankly. Make an example out of them.

    She'd have to start whipping private members bills first.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,835
    rcs1000 said:

    TOPPING said:

    rcs1000 said:

    So, asking for a friend, if he were to attach a tiny camera to his shoe, and take pictures of ladies underwear under their skirts, he wouldn't be breaking any law?

    Yebbut how would you he know about the presence or otherwise of the underwear which is, I understand, what the criminality turns on?
    So, if someone wasn't wearing underwear, then I he would be breaking the law? And it's impossible to know if someone's wearing underwear in advance...
    Pretty much it seems. Nonsensical.
    And so it will remain thanks to the sagacious and principled stand of Messrs. Chope and Davies
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    "We have just spoken with Sir Christopher Chope. He has objected on a principled basis because the bill has not been debated. He has kindly agreed to meet with Gina and I to discuss the bill next week. "

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44496427

    Apparently, there was no debate at first reading. Is this common for private members bills?
    I don't think there's normally any debate for any Bill at first reading.

    Apparently Philip Davies spoke unbroken for two hours so that Chope could object there was no debate. Cynical behaviour from the pair of them. A disgrace.
    How does the time limit enable someone to object to kill the bill? I understand talking one out, but can't see the link here.
    Because Chope objected the Bill couldn't be passed "on the nod" as I believe one of the Withdrawal Bill amendments was passed. But there wasn't time to have a division, so the Bill fails (at least this time).
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,835

    I am going to guess Morocco vs Iran isn't exactly a great game?

    Actually not bad. At least they are giving it a go. If they don't win this they have no chance of going through with Spai and Portugal to come.
    Better than the dross from Uruguay Egypt.
  • DeClareDeClare Posts: 483

    I am going to guess Morocco vs Iran isn't exactly a great game?

    I am going to guess Morocco vs Iran isn't exactly a great game?

    I drew Iran in my pub sweepstake, they were the first team to qualify, apart from Russia of course.

    Just for fun I also put £1 on them at 1000/1 which I'll lay off if they get to the quarter finals.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,715

    I have quite a lot of sympathy with the principle that legislation needs proper scrutiny before being passed. However, this looks like a poor application of that general principle. A pressing social problem requires MPs to prioritise giving that scrutiny.

    Quite
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,569
    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_P said:
    That suggests that the evidence of witness tampering is strong. I suspect it dramatically increases the chance that Manafort will flip.

    That being said, what Manafort "wants" (I suspect) is no jail time, followed by a guilty plea followed by an immediate presidential pardon. Can he be pardoned pre-trial?
    In theory, possibly.
    Trump has form in stretching convention past its limit, and the pardon powers are ill defined.
  • Torby_FennelTorby_Fennel Posts: 438



    I think that is a little unfair on the Lib Dems. I may not agree with them but they seem to be pretty united in their EU position. And UKIP hardly even counts as a party anymore.

    To be honest we're not entirely united in the Lib Dems. We're pretty much almost all agree that Brexit is a really terrible thing for the country but we have differences of opinion upon what to do about it. Some want to re-run the In/Out referendum, some (most?) want a referendum on the Brexit deal and others want to just try to find ways to minimize the harm as we leave.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,762
    Trump puts 25% tariff on Chinese goods: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44498484

    If that doesn't encourage the onshoring of some US production I am not sure what would.

    The traditional view is that this is reckless and damaging to international growth and trade but the fact is that the current system has not worked well for the US (or the UK) for more than 20 years now. The growth that is generated is not shared around and neither is the increase in living standards.

    A great deal of that is the US's own fault (ours as well) because we don't save enough, we consume too much and we are too prone to electing irresponsible governments who run large deficits. But long term the consequences are seriously adverse. Too much of our future earnings actually belong to people outside this country. Improving the standard of living of those resident in the US or the UK becomes increasingly difficult, as does maintaining public services. Bluntly, the US and the UK really cannot go on like this. Trump is a bull in a china shop but it is difficult to pretend (as I expect the BBC to do) that the current system of trade does not need shaken up.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    DavidL said:

    Trump puts 25% tariff on Chinese goods: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44498484

    If that doesn't encourage the onshoring of some US production I am not sure what would.

    The traditional view is that this is reckless and damaging to international growth and trade but the fact is that the current system has not worked well for the US (or the UK) for more than 20 years now. The growth that is generated is not shared around and neither is the increase in living standards.

    A great deal of that is the US's own fault (ours as well) because we don't save enough, we consume too much and we are too prone to electing irresponsible governments who run large deficits. But long term the consequences are seriously adverse. Too much of our future earnings actually belong to people outside this country. Improving the standard of living of those resident in the US or the UK becomes increasingly difficult, as does maintaining public services. Bluntly, the US and the UK really cannot go on like this. Trump is a bull in a china shop but it is difficult to pretend (as I expect the BBC to do) that the current system of trade does not need shaken up.

    With tariffs on EU, Mexican, Canadian, Chinese and Japanese imports Trump clearly is pushing 'America First' in a drastic attempt to reduce the US trade deficit and boost the rustbelt
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,762
    edited June 2018
    And on another front I expect the rows around this policy to take up a lot more time than Brexit at the June summit: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-44494006

    The Franco-German alliance is becoming strained with the lack of enthusiasm in Germany for Macron's plans and the French are starting to look around for new allies whether the Germans like the proposals or not.

    Interesting times and all that.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,762
    HYUFD said:

    DavidL said:

    Trump puts 25% tariff on Chinese goods: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44498484

    If that doesn't encourage the onshoring of some US production I am not sure what would.

    The traditional view is that this is reckless and damaging to international growth and trade but the fact is that the current system has not worked well for the US (or the UK) for more than 20 years now. The growth that is generated is not shared around and neither is the increase in living standards.

    A great deal of that is the US's own fault (ours as well) because we don't save enough, we consume too much and we are too prone to electing irresponsible governments who run large deficits. But long term the consequences are seriously adverse. Too much of our future earnings actually belong to people outside this country. Improving the standard of living of those resident in the US or the UK becomes increasingly difficult, as does maintaining public services. Bluntly, the US and the UK really cannot go on like this. Trump is a bull in a china shop but it is difficult to pretend (as I expect the BBC to do) that the current system of trade does not need shaken up.

    With tariffs on EU, Mexican, Canadian, Chinese and Japanese imports Trump clearly is pushing 'America First' in a drastic attempt to reduce the US trade deficit and boost the rustbelt
    Yep. Of course having a record federal deficit artificially increasing already high domestic demand is not exactly a policy to reduce the trade deficit. Like us, if the US ran a reasonable surplus in the public accounts most of the deficit would disappear.
This discussion has been closed.