Mr. Jonathan, even if we assume you're correct (and I disagree with your implied position that it's proven the activities of mankind are materially altering the climate), there's one climate. Focusing on the UK, which is rapidly reducing its carbon dioxide emissions, is dumb.
But convenient if you want to twat about in the centre of London and annoy law-abiding people just trying to make a living and go about their business.
It’s about personal responsibility. You cannot ask others to do the right thing if you’re not prepared to do it yourself. Lead by example.
I know it’s quaint, but I remember when the right used to care about personal responsibility.
No reason will be coherent to you. That's called a subjective view. We all have them.
I'm coherent, you're confused, he's barmy.
That's politics.
You rather make my point. The only reason given that makes sense-giving the Queen more power doesn't-is keeping foreigners out but it's the one reason no one one is prepared to admit to. So what we're left with is an Alice in Wonderland pastiche like the one you've just posted.
Mr. Jonathan, the UK is reducing carbon dioxide emissions. There's no hypocrisy, except from those flying thousands of miles to protest and try to stop other people flying.
Edited extra bit: also, who are you accusing of hypocrisy? If the Government/UK state, then my point above addresses it.
Mr. Jonathan, the UK is reducing carbon dioxide emissions. There's no hypocrisy, except from those flying thousands of miles to protest and try to stop other people flying.
There is no hypocrisy? Are you serious? We spent so much time pissing about with Brexit, we’ve lost the initiative on something far more important.
A bit soon to be writing them off, though I quite understand why the established parties would want to be doing that. Let's see where we are at the next GE, when the vacuum that could potentially be filled by a more pragmatic group will be abundantly evident.
Forget the established parties, how many people are betting on them?
A collection of Blairites & Cameroon’s whose motivation was to prevent two of the biggest rebellions in British political history, Brexit and Corbyn, branding themselves as ‘Change’ was bordering on being insulting.
Trying to pass yourself off as Che Guevara while transparently punching down was always going to be tricky.
wo more totally disconnected political issues if I tried, but I've really confused several of them by my support for both propositions and made another err.. quite cross.
Fox hunting. Leavers fucking love that atrocity without fail.
Mr. Jonathan, a quick look at Wikipedia suggests a 29% decline in carbon dioxide emissions from 2004 to 2016 (more up to date figures not there yet), in the energy sector.
Fail to see where you're finding hypocrisy. The UK Government has a policy of reducing carbon emissions (and has done under multiple colours of administration, and has achieved said reductions under said administrations).
If you're concerned about carbon emissions, blaming the UK, which contributes a tiny amount of the global emissions *and* is successfully reducing that by a significant degree, is irrational.
FPT - the obsession of so many Tory members and Leavers with cancelling HS2, seemingly as a test of soundness and on a par with withdrawing from the EU, is really bizzare.
I couldn't think of two more totally disconnected political issues if I tried, but I've really confused several of them by my support for both propositions and made another err.. quite cross.
They could both be seen as very expensive fantasy projects. Both can be criticised from a standpoint of applying "common sense" argumentation devoid of actual fact or analysis. And having a proper high speed rail network is a European idea, after all.
Ok, you want facts and analysis. Let’s start with this, what specifically is the economic benefit of HS2? And who sees that benefit?
And of course high speed rail matters more to continental Europe because they have a very different heavy rail network to ours; theirs being built around infrequent long distance services where the U.K. being smaller and having little in the way of external connections is more like a national metro. There’s a reason we aren’t like Europe.
The argument as I understand it is that the main north-south railway lines are already running close to full capacity and more 'bandwidth' is needed. If we are going to have to build a new railway, it might as well be a fit for purpose modern high speed one.
That is only the case on the southern end of the WCML. And no, building to high speed specification imposes considerable construction constraints on a project, particularly maximum curve radius meaning an inevitably expensive build.
The reason for the system they are planning goes beyond simple capacity constraint. Have you read the documentation on the economic justification for the project? Do you understand why it details at length the time savings to the minute and seconds of the various route options? Do you understand who will be using the link, such as London City workers dorming in less expensive regional cities? What do you think will happen to the legacy long distance services when the pax who provide the most profit move over to the shiny new system?
FPT - the obsession of so many Tory members and Leavers with cancelling HS2, seemingly as a test of soundness and on a par with withdrawing from the EU, is really bizzare.
I couldn't think of two more totally disconnected political issues if I tried, but I've really confused several of them by my support for both propositions and made another err.. quite cross.
They could both be seen as very expensive fantasy projects. Both can be criticised from a standpoint of applying "common sense" argumentation devoid of actual fact or analysis. And having a proper high speed rail network is a European idea, after all.
Ok, you want facts and analysis. Let’s start with this, what specifically is the economic benefit of HS2? And who sees that benefit?
And of course high speed rail matters more to continental Europe because they have a very different heavy rail network to ours; theirs being built around infrequent long distance services where the U.K. being smaller and having little in the way of external connections is more like a national metro. There’s a reason we aren’t like Europe.
The argument as I understand it is that the main north-south railway lines are already running close to full capacity and more 'bandwidth' is needed. If we are going to have to build a new railway, it might as well be a fit for purpose modern high speed one.
Precisely the same is true of the East West route from Liverpool through to Hull, which is would be much cheaper and more cost effective to do something about.
Yep. TIG looks like turning into a retirement home for disillusioned Cameroon’s. The vacancy in England for a non-racist, internationalist, redistributive party of the centre left remains.
I think they probably expected more Labour defections which would have kept the momentum and interest going. Tom Watson probably expected such defections too and the steps he took to set up an internal grouping (what are they up to, I wonder?) has, for now, spiked TIG’s guns.
I hope though, for all their failings, that they don’t disappear without trace. The two main parties are rancid and becoming worse by the day.
A collection of Blairites & Cameroon’s whose motivation was to prevent two of the biggest rebellions in British political history, Brexit and Corbyn, branding themselves as ‘Change’ was bordering on being insulting.
Trying to pass yourself off as Che Guevara while transparently punching down was always going to be tricky.
Brexit is a spasm from a coalition of the old establishment, nationalists and nostalgists. It is not a rebellion it is a reaction against globalisation, modernity and the old guard losing relevance.
FPT - the obsession of so many Tory members and Leavers with cancelling HS2, seemingly as a test of soundness and on a par with withdrawing from the EU, is really bizzare.
I couldn't think of two more totally disconnected political issues if I tried, but I've really confused several of them by my support for both propositions and made another err.. quite cross.
They could both be seen as very expensive fantasy projects. Both can be criticised from a standpoint of applying "common sense" argumentation devoid of actual fact or analysis. And having a proper high speed rail network is a European idea, after all.
Ok, you want facts and analysis. Let’s start with this, what specifically is the economic benefit of HS2? And who sees that benefit?
And of course high speed rail matters more to continental Europe because they have a very different heavy rail network to ours; theirs being built around infrequent long distance services where the U.K. being smaller and having little in the way of external connections is more like a national metro. There’s a reason we aren’t like Europe.
The argument as I understand it is that the main north-south railway lines are already running close to full capacity and more 'bandwidth' is needed. If we are going to have to build a new railway, it might as well be a fit for purpose modern high speed one.
That is only the case on the southern end of the WCML. And no, building to high speed specification imposes considerable construction constraints on a project, particularly maximum curve radius meaning an inevitably expensive build.
The reason for the system they are planning goes beyond simple capacity constraint. Have you read the documentation on the economic justification for the project? Do you understand why it details at length the time savings to the minute and seconds of the various route options? Do you understand who will be using the link, such as London City workers dorming in less expensive regional cities? What do you think will happen to the legacy long distance services when the pax who provide the most profit move over to the shiny new system?
And more to the point if capacity was the main issue there’s considerably cheaper ways to release it between London and Birmingham.
A collection of Blairites & Cameroon’s whose motivation was to prevent two of the biggest rebellions in British political history, Brexit and Corbyn, branding themselves as ‘Change’ was bordering on being insulting.
Trying to pass yourself off as Che Guevara while transparently punching down was always going to be tricky.
Brexit is a spasm from a coalition of the old establishment, nationalists and nostalgists. It is not a rebellion it is a reaction against globalisation, modernity and the old guard losing relevance.
Oh, I thought the reason it was so difficult to implement was down to it meaning different things to different people. Glad someone’s nailed it 👍🏻
FPT - the obsession of so many Tory members and Leavers with cancelling HS2, seemingly as a test of soundness and on a par with withdrawing from the EU, is really bizzare.
I couldn't think of two more totally disconnected political issues if I tried, but I've really confused several of them by my support for both propositions and made another err.. quite cross.
They could both be seen as very expensive fantasy projects. Both can be criticised from a standpoint of applying "common sense" argumentation devoid of actual fact or analysis. And having a proper high speed rail network is a European idea, after all.
Ok, you want facts and analysis. Let’s start with this, what specifically is the economic benefit of HS2? And who sees that benefit?
And of course high speed rail matters more to continental Europe because they have a very different heavy rail network to ours; theirs being built around infrequent long distance services where the U.K. being smaller and having little in the way of external connections is more like a national metro. There’s a reason we aren’t like Europe.
The argument as I understand it is that the main north-south railway lines are already running close to full capacity and more 'bandwidth' is needed. If we are going to have to build a new railway, it might as well be a fit for purpose modern high speed one.
That is only the case on the southern end of the WCML. And no, building to high speed specification imposes considerable construction constraints on a project, particularly maximum curve radius meaning an inevitably expensive build.
The reason for the system they are planning goes beyond simple capacity constraint. Have you read the documentation on the economic justification for the project? Do you understand why it details at length the time savings to the minute and seconds of the various route options? Do you understand who will be using the link, such as London City workers dorming in less expensive regional cities? What do you think will happen to the legacy long distance services when the pax who provide the most profit move over to the shiny new system?
I’d agree with that critique. Extra capacity is needed, but HS2 probably wasn’t the way to do it.
On the other hand, there are foolhardier projects, as Boris Johnson has demonstrated.
A collection of Blairites & Cameroon’s whose motivation was to prevent two of the biggest rebellions in British political history, Brexit and Corbyn, branding themselves as ‘Change’ was bordering on being insulting.
Trying to pass yourself off as Che Guevara while transparently punching down was always going to be tricky.
Brexit is a spasm from a coalition of the old establishment, nationalists and nostalgists. It is not a rebellion it is a reaction against globalisation, modernity and the old guard losing relevance.
Oh, I thought the reason it was so difficult to implement was down to it meaning different things to different people. Glad someone’s nailed it 👍🏻
As an incoherent protest, it’s small wonder that it is not a practical project.
Anyone want to give me odds that Jeremy Corbyn will NEVER move in to 10 Downing St?
That runs the risk that at some point his mummified body is moved there, so that the Great Mass of the Faithful can troop through to pay their respects to the great man who brought about renationalisation of the trains and an economy based on barter and seashells.....
I mean even Virgil Hunter was telling him not to ie he realised it was great on the cards.
He'd have taken the full 5 minutes if he wanted to carry on or had the Doctor examine his balls back in the changing room if he thought there'd been a rupture or some such.
This is where SeanT calls this as an Islamist act and tim starts a fight about it. In their absence it looks Islamist to me. The suggestion that thus is what IS fighters do when they get back home is worrying.
Mr. Jonathan, a quick look at Wikipedia suggests a 29% decline in carbon dioxide emissions from 2004 to 2016 (more up to date figures not there yet), in the energy sector.
Fail to see where you're finding hypocrisy. The UK Government has a policy of reducing carbon emissions (and has done under multiple colours of administration, and has achieved said reductions under said administrations).
If you're concerned about carbon emissions, blaming the UK, which contributes a tiny amount of the global emissions *and* is successfully reducing that by a significant degree, is irrational.
It is not enough. The spirit of I’m alright Jack is harmful.
The opinion polling suggests around 55% are very keen to stay in the EU so it's odd that a party focussed on this objective fails to gain the same sort of traction as the Brexit party. Either the issue itself lacks deep support compared to others or there's been a massive failure of leadership.
Too difficult a choice. Labour offers a small chance of remaining but a big chance of getting it through. The lib Dems offer a 100% chance of Remaining but with no chance of getting it through. The Tigs are somewhere in the middle. The Brexiteers have no such dilemma. They have the Tories to push it through and the Brexit Party to kick them up the backside.
If you are on the centre left there is no point voting LD. They’re too weak to achieve anything and there is always that suspicion if they were to do well they would prop up the Tories.
Best avoided until they reform and regroup. Hence TIG was a lost opportunity.
I really, really don't think the LibDems will prop up the Tories again for at least 20 years.
Of course they would given the right leader, circumstances and offer. It would be done in the ‘national interest’ again. They won’t resist being ‘important’ again.
No way is it going to happen when the LDs and Con are polar opposites on the key political issue of Brexit. One or other party would have to do a 180 to make it possible. I suspect the Tories will revert to their long standing postwar enthusiasm for joining Europe, but probably not before spending a decade or two down a nativist rabbit hole.
Why can’t the LD leadership say that then and - given the mess we’re in - say ‘you know what we did our best in coalition , but we made a mistake when we let the Tory genie out of the bottle ‘.
While mistakes were made in coalition, notably tuition fees, broadly I support what we did. We see increasingly that it was a golden period of good government, and I think history will be very kind to it. We see from 2015 how without the tempering and moderating influence of the LDs how incompetent a looney and ideological Tory government is.
However the circumstances of 2010 are unlikely to be repeated, as is that election result. You forget too how impossible any other government was after the 2010 result.
Yep. TIG looks like turning into a retirement home for disillusioned Cameroon’s. The vacancy in England for a non-racist, internationalist, redistributive party of the centre left remains.
I think they probably expected more Labour defections which would have kept the momentum and interest going. Tom Watson probably expected such defections too and the steps he took to set up an internal grouping (what are they up to, I wonder?) has, for now, spiked TIG’s guns.
I hope though, for all their failings, that they don’t disappear without trace. The two main parties are rancid and becoming worse by the day.
wo more totally disconnected political issues if I tried, but I've really confused several of them by my support for both propositions and made another err.. quite cross.
Fox hunting. Leavers fucking love that atrocity without fail.
Actually remainerdom is the more rational position for the hunting fraternity. Ease of access to Ireland is critical for those wanting to enjoy the real thing.
I'd be amazed if that community were predominantly Remain. In any case, for people at least, access to Ireland isn't a Brexit issue.
I am part of "that community." I don't think it has a distinctive position on brexit one way or the other.
I'd put it at 60:40 Leave.
I think opposition to HS2 would be around that % split.
How can May stay leader when she has caused 62% of her party members to vote for a party she isn't leading? Given that loyalty is the blood that courses through Tory veins, that really is some monumental achievement.....
The opinion polling suggests around 55% are very keen to stay in the EU so it's odd that a party focussed on this objective fails to gain the same sort of traction as the Brexit party. Either the issue itself lacks deep support compared to others or there's been a massive failure of leadership.
Too difficult a choice. Labour offers a small chance of remaining but a big chance of getting it through. The lib Dems offer a 100% chance of Remaining but with no chance of getting it through. The Tigs are somewhere in the middle. The Brexiteers have no such dilemma. They have the Tories to push it through and the Brexit Party to kick them up the backside.
If you are on the centre left there is no point voting LD. They’re too weak to achieve anything and there is always that suspicion if they were to do well they would prop up the Tories.
Best avoided until they reform and regroup. Hence TIG was a lost opportunity.
I really, really don't think the LibDems will prop up the Tories again for at least 20 years.
Of course they would given the right leader, circumstances and offer. It would be done in the ‘national interest’ again. They won’t resist being ‘important’ again.
No way is it going to happen when the LDs and Con are polar opposites on the key political issue of Brexit. One or other party would have to do a 180 to make it possible. I suspect the Tories will revert to their long standing postwar enthusiasm for joining Europe, but probably not before spending a decade or two down a nativist rabbit hole.
Why can’t the LD leadership say that then and - given the mess we’re in - say ‘you know what we did our best in coalition , but we made a mistake when we let the Tory genie out of the bottle ‘.
While mistakes were made in coalition, notably tuition fees, broadly I support what we did. We see increasingly that it was a golden period of good government, and I think history will be very kind to it. We see from 2015 how without the tempering and moderating influence of the LDs how incompetent a looney and ideological Tory government is.
However the circumstances of 2010 are unlikely to be repeated, as is that election result. You forget too how impossible any other government was after the 2010 result.
I’m broadly in agreement with that. One only has to consider the contrasting nature of a government which went into some kind of loose coalition with the DUP....
How can May stay leader when she has caused 62% of her party members to vote for a party she isn't leading? Given that loyalty is the blood that courses through Tory veins, that really is some monumental achievement.....
CON home is a extreme brexit site and its poll finding reflect its audience.
The opinion polling suggests around 55% are very keen to stay in the EU so it's odd that a party focussed on this objective fails to gain the same sort of traction as the Brexit party. Either the issue itself lacks deep support compared to others or there's been a massive failure of leadership.
Too difficult a choice. Labour offers a small chance of remaining but a big chance of getting it through. The lib Dems offer a 100% chance of Remaining but with no chance of getting it through. The Tigs are somewhere in the middle. The Brexiteers have no such dilemma. They have the Tories to push it through and the Brexit Party to kick them up the backside.
If you are on the centre left there is no point voting LD. They’re too weak to achieve anything and there is always that suspicion if they were to do well they would prop up the Tories.
Best avoided until they reform and regroup. Hence TIG was a lost opportunity.
I really, really don't think the LibDems will prop up the Tories again for at least 20 years.
Of course they would given the right leader, circumstances and offer. It would be done in the ‘national interest’ again. They won’t resist being ‘important’ again.
No way is it going to happen when the LDs and Con are polar opposites on the key political issue of Brexit. One or other party would have to do a 180 to make it possible. I suspect the Tories will revert to their long standing postwar enthusiasm for joining Europe, but probably not before spending a decade or two down a nativist rabbit hole.
Why can’t the LD leadership say that then and - given the mess we’re in - say ‘you know what we did our best in coalition , but we made a mistake when we let the Tory genie out of the bottle ‘.
While mistakes were made in coalition, notably tuition fees, broadly I support what we did. We see increasingly that it was a golden period of good government, and I think history will be very kind to it. We see from 2015 how without the tempering and moderating influence of the LDs how incompetent a looney and ideological Tory government is.
However the circumstances of 2010 are unlikely to be repeated, as is that election result. You forget too how impossible any other government was after the 2010 result.
History will say Clegg was a fool for not allowing Cameron to lance the EU boil in 2010-11. The pair of them supporting it would have had a handy majority for staying in.
How can May stay leader when she has caused 62% of her party members to vote for a party she isn't leading? Given that loyalty is the blood that courses through Tory veins, that really is some monumental achievement.....
CON home is a extreme brexit site and its poll finding reflect its audience.
Quite! 62% of really angry duffers are really angry!
I get that all these Conservative Buffon Tuftons are very unhappy. What actually do they want the government to do now, bearing in mind the maths of the House of Commons?
On topic, the basic problem with the Tiggers is that they don’t really know what they want as opposed to what they don’t want. It’s a mirror image of the basic problem of the Leavers.
Was quite surprised to see this comment about Mayor Pete on facebook today from a black lesbian American singer (she was one of the backing singers on the California raisin ads in the 80s!) friend, who I thought might have been a fan. The article she shares is long but maybe worth a read..
"this, if you take the time to read it, even though the author is clearly infatuated with Bernie, really lays out what a freaking Trojan horse this guy is. He's not a progressive. He's not even a liberal. He's a conservative Blue Dog Democrat who comes from and will uphold the status quo. Don't be fooled.
OT the tiggers are struggling, they need someone to take over the party building process. However I think they will secure a few % in the euros, enough to get an MEP or two and that should keep them at least in the game. Once the rotting corpse of the LDs rises after the locals people will remember they want a proper centrist party to vote for.
FPT - the obsession of so many Tory members and Leavers with cancelling HS2, seemingly as a test of soundness and on a par with withdrawing from the EU, is really bizzare.
I couldn't think of two more totally disconnected political issues if I tried, but I've really confused several of them by my support for both propositions and made another err.. quite cross.
Both appeal explicitly to Little Englanders, who seem to make up the majority of Tory members
The opinion polling suggests around 55% are very keen to stay in the EU so it's odd that a party focussed on this objective fails to gain the same sort of traction as the Brexit party. Either the issue itself lacks deep support compared to others or there's been a massive failure of leadership.
Too difficult a choice. Labour offers a small chance of remaining but a big chance of getting it through. The lib Dems offer a 100% chance of Remaining but with no chance of getting it through. The Tigs are somewhere in the middle. The Brexiteers have no such dilemma. They have the Tories to push it through and the Brexit Party to kick them up the backside.
If you are on the centre left there is no point voting LD. They’re too weak to achieve anything and there is always that suspicion if they were to do well they would prop up the Tories.
Best avoided until they reform and regroup. Hence TIG was a lost opportunity.
I really, really don't think the LibDems will prop up the Tories again for at least 20 years.
They could not prop anything up in any case. They have a handful of invisible pygmies.
The opinion polling suggests around 55% are very keen to stay in the EU so it's odd that a party focussed on this objective fails to gain the same sort of traction as the Brexit party. Either the issue itself lacks deep support compared to others or there's been a massive failure of leadership.
Too difficult a choice. Labour offers a small chance of remaining but a big chance of getting it through. The lib Dems offer a 100% chance of Remaining but with no chance of getting it through. The Tigs are somewhere in the middle. The Brexiteers have no such dilemma. They have the Tories to push it through and the Brexit Party to kick them up the backside.
Best avoided until they reform and regroup. Hence TIG was a lost opportunity.
I really, really don't think the LibDems will prop up the Tories again for at least 20 years.
Of course they would given the right leader, circumstances and offer. It would be done in the ‘national interest’ again. They won’t resist being ‘important’ again.
No way is it going to happen when the LDs and Con are polar opposites on the key political issue of Brexit. One or other party would have to do a 180 to make it possible. I suspect the Tories will revert to their long standing postwar enthusiasm for joining Europe, but probably not before spending a decade or two down a nativist rabbit hole.
Why can’t the LD leadership say that then and - given the mess we’re in - say ‘you know what we did our best in coalition , but we made a mistake when we let the Tory genie out of the bottle ‘.
While mistakes were made in coalition, notably tuition fees, broadly I support what we did. We see increasingly that it was a golden period of good government, and I think history will be very kind to it. We see from 2015 how without the tempering and moderating influence of the LDs how incompetent a looney and ideological Tory government is.
However the circumstances of 2010 are unlikely to be repeated, as is that election result. You forget too how impossible any other government was after the 2010 result.
I’m broadly in agreement with that. One only has to consider the contrasting nature of a government which went into some kind of loose coalition with the DUP....
It wasn't just tuition fees. Pulling the NHS apart and sticking it (sort of) back together differently was unnecessary and wasteful and the castrating of legal aid was illiberal, too.
Too difficult a choice. Labour offers a small chance of remaining but a big chance of getting it through. The lib Dems offer a 100% chance of Remaining but with no chance of getting it through. The Tigs are somewhere in the middle. The Brexiteers have no such dilemma. They have the Tories to push it through and the Brexit Party to kick them up the backside.
If you are on the centre left there is no point voting LD. They’re too weak to achieve anything and there is always that suspicion if they were to do well they would prop up the Tories.
Best avoided until they reform and regroup. Hence TIG was a lost opportunity.
I really, really don't think the LibDems will prop up the Tories again for at least 20 years.
Of course they would given the right leader, circumstances and offer. It would be done in the ‘national interest’ again. They won’t resist being ‘important’ again.
No way is it going to happen when the LDs and Con are polar opposites on the key political issue of Brexit. One or other party would have to do a 180 to make it possible. I suspect the Tories will revert to their long standing postwar enthusiasm for joining Europe, but probably not before spending a decade or two down a nativist rabbit hole.
Why can’t the LD leadership say that then and - given the mess we’re in - say ‘you know what we did our best in coalition , but we made a mistake when we let the Tory genie out of the bottle ‘.
While mistakes were made in coalition, notably tuition fees, broadly I support what we did. We see increasingly that it was a golden period of good government, and I think history will be very kind to it. We see from 2015 how without the tempering and moderating influence of the LDs how incompetent a looney and ideological Tory government is.
However the circumstances of 2010 are unlikely to be repeated, as is that election result. You forget too how impossible any other government was after the 2010 result.
I'm curious as to what the LibDems 'moderated' while in government.
As I remember that before the 2010 GE the two big LibDem issues were opposition to tuition fees increases and opposition to Middle Eastern warmongering.
And then in government the LibDem tripled tuition fees and supported Middle Eastern warmongering.
Not to mention the LibDems 'constitutional reform' agenda was a total wash-out.
I get that all these Conservative Buffon Tuftons are very unhappy. What actually do they want the government to do now, bearing in mind the maths of the House of Commons?
May should have no-dealed when she had the chance. We'd be at the last 30 minutes of On the Beach phase by now but the tories rank and ranker would be happy.
While mistakes were made in coalition, notably tuition fees, broadly I support what we did. We see increasingly that it was a golden period of good government, and I think history will be very kind to it. We see from 2015 how without the tempering and moderating influence of the LDs how incompetent a looney and ideological Tory government is.
However the circumstances of 2010 are unlikely to be repeated, as is that election result. You forget too how impossible any other government was after the 2010 result.
Well the coalition years certainly saw much better government than we have had since. Which is not a high bar. However the decision to implement austerity principally through cuts in expenditure was one of the factors which led people to vote for Brexit. And the Lib Dems became almost indistinguishable from the Tories which meant they were unable to capitalise on Labours move to the left and led to a hollowing out of the political centre which, despite TIG, shows little sign of revival.
Dr. Foxy, dominating a news cycle does not mean people like the story, though. Notre Dame being on fire got a lot of coverage, but I doubt that means most viewers were thinking "Hmm. Cathedral inferno. Cool."
FPT - the obsession of so many Tory members and Leavers with cancelling HS2, seemingly as a test of soundness and on a par with withdrawing from the EU, is really bizzare.
I couldn't think of two more totally disconnected political issues if I tried, but I've really confused several of them by my support for both propositions and made another err.. quite cross.
They could both be seen as very expensive fantasy projects. Both can be criticised from a standpoint of applying "common sense" argumentation devoid of actual fact or analysis. And having a proper high speed rail network is a European idea, after all.
Ok, you want facts and analysis. Let’s start with this, what specifically is the economic benefit of HS2? And who sees that benefit?
And of course high speed rail matters more to continental Europe because they have a very different heavy rail network to ours; theirs being built around infrequent long distance services where the U.K. being smaller and having little in the way of external connections is more like a national metro. There’s a reason we aren’t like Europe.
The argument as I understand it is that the main north-south railway lines are already running close to full capacity and more 'bandwidth' is needed. If we are going to have to build a new railway, it might as well be a fit for purpose modern high speed one.
why does it take 20 years and 200 Billion in UK, whilst other countries manage it quickly at bargain basement costs.
Live and let live, I say. As long as the middle-class know-it-alls bugger up London amd stay there, they can do what they want.
I've asked you before what it is about leaving that excites you so much. A lot of the 'know alls' complaint is that apart from chanting 'referendum result' no Leaver seems able to give a coherent reason for wanting to leave.
I would on balance prefer to Remain. So I am probably the wrong person to answer this question.
But a sensible case for Leaving is this: the EU is now de facto the eurozone, even if there are a few countries outside it. The creation of the euro and the difficulties it has had necessitate, if it is to function well, increasing political centralisation and control. That - coupled with QMV - means that it is becomes increasingly uncomfortable for a major country to remain comfortably outside the euro while being very strongly affected by those increasingly close economic and political structures. That applies far more to Britain than Sweden because of the former’s large financial sector.
Add to that the fact that there is in Continental Europe an emotional attachment to the idea of breaking down borders which, while more evident in recent months in Britain, has not been a large part of British political culture (as evidenced by the FoM argument) and a shared political culture strongly influenced by Roman rather than civil law (don’t underestimate the very strong effect that a country’s legal system - and what that says about the balance of power between state and people - has on political culture) in Europe with significant differences to that in Britain, and it is not hard to see why long-term Britain could find itself in a very uncomfortable and unstable position within an increasingly federal and centralising EU.
Cameron’s deal sought in part to address this. But the failure of the British and EU political classes to work out an effective modus vivendi when you have an inner and an outer core is the reason why Leave became increasingly attractive. If we were to remain now, the same issues would need addressing - and I see no signs of anyone on the Remain side thinking about this. Or indeed of addressing the concerns of those parts of the country which voted Leave because they felt left behind, including the concerns raised by FoM.
What the Leave side has utterly failed to do is think about both the process of leaving - how one disentangles a 40+ year relationship without destroying yourself - or about what should come after. That is one reason why it is so toxic. And the other is because the case which has been put by so many Leavers has been put in such personalised and offensive terms (“we hate foreigners”).
While mistakes were made in coalition, notably tuition fees, broadly I support what we did. We see increasingly that it was a golden period of good government, and I think history will be very kind to it. We see from 2015 how without the tempering and moderating influence of the LDs how incompetent a looney and ideological Tory government is.
However the circumstances of 2010 are unlikely to be repeated, as is that election result. You forget too how impossible any other government was after the 2010 result.
Well the coalition years certainly saw much better government than we have had since. Which is not a high bar. However the decision to implement austerity principally through cuts in expenditure was one of the factors which led people to vote for Brexit. And the Lib Dems became almost indistinguishable from the Tories which meant they were unable to capitalise on Labours move to the left and led to a hollowing out of the political centre which, despite TIG, shows little sign of revival.
On topic, the basic problem with the Tiggers is that they don’t really know what they want as opposed to what they don’t want. It’s a mirror image of the basic problem of the Leavers.
Don’t they want a return to the 1997-2015 political consensus?
The opinion polling suggests around 55% are very keen to stay in the EU so it's odd that a party focussed on this objective fails to gain the same sort of traction as the Brexit party. Either the issue itself lacks deep support compared to others or there's been a massive failure of leadership.
Too difficult a choice. Labour offers a small chance of remaining but a big chance of getting it through. The lib Dems offer a 100% chance of Remaining but with no chance of getting it through. The Tigs are somewhere in the middle. The Brexiteers have no such dilemma. They have the Tories to push it through and the Brexit Party to kick them up the backside.
If you are on the centre left there is no point voting LD. They’re too weak to achieve anything and there is always that suspicion if they were to do well they would prop up the Tories.
Best avoided until they reform and regroup. Hence TIG was a lost opportunity.
I really, really don't think the LibDems will prop up the Tories again for at least 20 years.
Of course they would given the right leader, circumstances and offer. It would be done in the ‘national interest’ again. They won’t resist being ‘important’ again.
No way is it going to happen when the LDs and Con are polar opposites on the key political issue of Brexit. One or other party would have to do a 180 to make it possible. I suspect the Tories will revert to their long standing postwar enthusiasm for joining Europe, but probably not before spending a decade or two down a nativist rabbit hole.
Why can’t the LD leadership say that then and - given the mess we’re in - say ‘you know what we did our best in coalition , but we made a mistake when we let the Tory genie out of the bottle ‘.
While mistakes were made in coalition, notably tuition fees, broadly I support what we did. We see increasingly that it was a golden period of good government, and I think history will be very kind to it. We see from 2015 how without the tempering and moderating influence of the LDs how incompetent a looney and ideological Tory government is.
However the circumstances of 2010 are unlikely to be repeated, as is that election result. You forget too how impossible any other government was after the 2010 result.
The main legacy of the Coalition LDs is making it possible for Cameron to win in 2015. History will not be kind.
On topic, the basic problem with the Tiggers is that they don’t really know what they want as opposed to what they don’t want. It’s a mirror image of the basic problem of the Leavers.
Don’t they want a return to the 1997-2015 political consensus?
By definition a consensus requires others to agree.
They don’t want Brexit and they don’t want Corbynism. That aside they don’t seem to have much glue.
On topic, the basic problem with the Tiggers is that they don’t really know what they want as opposed to what they don’t want. It’s a mirror image of the basic problem of the Leavers.
Don’t they want a return to the 1997-2015 political consensus?
By definition a consensus requires others to agree.
They don’t want Brexit and they don’t want Corbynism. That aside they don’t seem to have much glue.
I'm in a slightly awkward position as I think of a couple of the TIGers as friends, but the party seems likely merely to drain a modest amount of support from other parties in roughly equal numbers, which is pointless, and to weaken the Remainerish side overall, which is actively damaging to what they claim to want - there is a real danger in areas like the East Mids with a smaller number of MEPs that they inadvertently help Farage by diverting enough votes from Labour, without getting enough votes to win seats themselves.
PB has a disproportionate number of people like me who are active in other parties, and there is a TIGger launch on Tuesday, so we may be underestimating them, but even if they get say 8% in the Euros, what next? A probable early test is whether they stand in Peterborough if the recall succeeds.
Regardless of who is responsible these are atrocities quite as evil as the Christchurch massacre. To slaughter Christians worshipping in church on the most important day in their religious year is deliberately evil violence.
And it is not that infrequent. Christians have been murdered while worshipping in churches in Pakistan and Egypt and have been targeted in Iraq too.
Will we see the same reaction as to Christchurch? My guess is no - it’s all too far away, the people involved are brown and Christian so not a fashionable victim group and there is no recognisably nice boy who wouldn’t harm a fly when young growing up into evil killer story for the newspapers to ventilate over.
And yet we should not turn away. These murdered people matter. The reasons why this evil happens matter. We should spare a thought for those mourning today.
Pretty selfish of him. The security he will need as PM if he continues to live at home may be impossible to give him and will very seriously inconvenience his neighbours.
On topic, the basic problem with the Tiggers is that they don’t really know what they want as opposed to what they don’t want. It’s a mirror image of the basic problem of the Leavers.
Don’t they want a return to the 1997-2015 political consensus?
By definition a consensus requires others to agree.
They don’t want Brexit and they don’t want Corbynism. That aside they don’t seem to have much glue.
Yes, many people would say that period was one of consensus between the parties on the major issues; pro mass immigration, pro EU, pro Iraq War, etc... things it seems there wasn’t a consensus for from the public. That’s what led to Brexit and Corbyn, which is why the TIGs were formed
Was quite surprised to see this comment about Mayor Pete on facebook today from a black lesbian American singer (she was one of the backing singers on the California raisin ads in the 80s!) friend, who I thought might have been a fan. The article she shares is long but maybe worth a read..
"this, if you take the time to read it, even though the author is clearly infatuated with Bernie, really lays out what a freaking Trojan horse this guy is. He's not a progressive. He's not even a liberal. He's a conservative Blue Dog Democrat who comes from and will uphold the status quo. Don't be fooled.
Which as far as I can see, is pretty well untrue; Buttigieg is not a conservative.
The author of the hit piece is indeed a Saunders backer, who has written hit pieces on several other contenders who are not Bernie. And the critique of Buttigieg’s academic career is a bit rich coming from a Yale graduate studying for a PhD at Harvard...
It is a demonstration of the worst aspect of Saunders’ campaign style, which certainly comes from his followers if not him personally, which goes scorched earth on his opponents. It arguably tipped the balance against Clinton last time around, and there is a danger of that happening again.
wo more totally disconnected political issues if I tried, but I've really confused several of them by my support for both propositions and made another err.. quite cross.
Fox hunting. Leavers fucking love that atrocity without fail.
I do, but I don't think that's true. A pretty clear majority of the country is now against restoring fox hunting, and that includes a majority of Leavers.
I can't think of a political battle I've more decisively lost over the last 15 years than that. But there it is.
I'm in a slightly awkward position as I think of a couple of the TIGers as friends, but the party seems likely merely to drain a modest amount of support from other parties in roughly equal numbers, which is pointless, and to weaken the Remainerish side overall, which is actively damaging to what they claim to want - there is a real danger in areas like the East Mids with a smaller number of MEPs that they inadvertently help Farage by diverting enough votes from Labour, without getting enough votes to win seats themselves.
PB has a disproportionate number of people like me who are active in other parties, and there is a TIGger launch on Tuesday, so we may be underestimating them, but even if they get say 8% in the Euros, what next? A probable early test is whether they stand in Peterborough if the recall succeeds.
Many of the Labour MPs left your party to join TIG/CUK due to anti-Semtiism. Standing up against anti-Semitism is not pointless, even if their attempt is doomed.
I'd rather them than the sh*ts within Labour who excuse and deny anti-Semitism (sometimes even when their leader admits the issues) ...
Yep. TIG looks like turning into a retirement home for disillusioned Cameroon’s. The vacancy in England for a non-racist, internationalist, redistributive party of the centre left remains.
They think they are that party.
I'd say disillusioned Blarities, personally.
You miss the point of Blair. The whole point was to get Labour into power, so that we might actually achieve something. Mucking about with a dozen MPs is an anathema to whole spirit of the thing.
Yes, but his programme of public sector reform, interventionism, social liberalism and generating growth in high growth industries with high immigration to generate tax revenues to pay for welfare and investment programmes is nowadays a very clear policy prospectus.
FPT - the obsession of so many Tory members and Leavers with cancelling HS2, seemingly as a test of soundness and on a par with withdrawing from the EU, is really bizzare.
I couldn't think of two more totally disconnected political issues if I tried, but I've really confused several of them by my support for both propositions and made another err.. quite cross.
They could both be seen as very expensive fantasy projects. Both can be criticised from a standpoint of applying "common sense" argumentation devoid of actual fact or analysis. And having a proper high speed rail network is a European idea, after all.
Tests of soundness aren't new, of course, and political activists on left and right love identifying totemic issues such as these that allow a shortcut to working out whether someone is "one of us" or not.
I'm in a slightly awkward position as I think of a couple of the TIGers as friends, but the party seems likely merely to drain a modest amount of support from other parties in roughly equal numbers, which is pointless, and to weaken the Remainerish side overall, which is actively damaging to what they claim to want - there is a real danger in areas like the East Mids with a smaller number of MEPs that they inadvertently help Farage by diverting enough votes from Labour, without getting enough votes to win seats themselves.
PB has a disproportionate number of people like me who are active in other parties, and there is a TIGger launch on Tuesday, so we may be underestimating them, but even if they get say 8% in the Euros, what next? A probable early test is whether they stand in Peterborough if the recall succeeds.
Many of the Labour MPs left your party to join TIG/CUK due to anti-Semtiism. Standing up against anti-Semitism is not pointless, even if their attempt is doomed.
I'd rather them than the sh*ts within Labour who excuse and deny anti-Semitism (sometimes even when their leader admits the issues) ...
Tiggers need a win - double figure % in the euros and beating the LDs and greens would do it, then a few more conlab might be attracted over and wagons roll
I’d agree with that critique. Extra capacity is needed, but HS2 probably wasn’t the way to do it.
On the other hand, there are foolhardier projects, as Boris Johnson has demonstrated.
Where I live - North London, Hampstead area - it is the default to be against HS2 because the work is disruptive to the locale. Many well-argued and knowledgeable pieces are written around here, all of them demonstrating compellingly that the project is ill advised and ought to be cancelled, and all of them, I strongly suspect, hopelessly biased and despite the superficial 'expertise' more animated by NIMBY than anything else, NIMBY in the hands of the affluent classes being one of this country's very defining forces.
Me, I'm in favour. It's never the right time for major infrastructure spend. There is always a good reason not to do it. It will always fail a test on some spreadsheet or other. But if you don't do it, one day, not next week, not next year, but one day hence you wake up and realize that you should have and it is now too late. It is analogous to never upgrading your tech. That never makes sense either. You will always be fine with the older model. Until the day dawns when you realize you have been left behind and cannot understand the world you live in.
FPT - the obsession of so many Tory members and Leavers with cancelling HS2, seemingly as a test of soundness and on a par with withdrawing from the EU, is really bizzare.
I couldn't think of two more totally disconnected political issues if I tried, but I've really confused several of them by my support for both propositions and made another err.. quite cross.
Both appeal explicitly to Little Englanders, who seem to make up the majority of Tory members
There's a certain class of Tory member like that, of course, but not all of them are.
The really angry and grumpy ones are the ones I find repellant.
Yep. TIG looks like turning into a retirement home for disillusioned Cameroon’s. The vacancy in England for a non-racist, internationalist, redistributive party of the centre left remains.
They think they are that party.
I'd say disillusioned Blarities, personally.
You miss the point of Blair. The whole point was to get Labour into power, so that we might actually achieve something. Mucking about with a dozen MPs is an anathema to whole spirit of the thing.
Yes, but his programme of public sector reform, interventionism, social liberalism and generating growth in high growth industries with high immigration to generate tax revenues to pay for welfare and investment programmes is nowadays a very clear policy prospectus.
Not much discussion here of his criticism of his own governments failure to integrate the immigrants he needed
The Tiggers faced a very tough challenge to get things off the ground but seemed to lose momentum quickly as Watson in particular headed off further Labour defections. As has been pointed out they also appear to stand for very little.
I'm minded to give them some backing though because even facing deselection their decision to quit their parties was brave and bold, something very few MPs have risked.
That's almost certainly a loss-of-crew event. On the positive side, it was the capsule that was used in the recent flight to the ISS, so it could be a problem due to impact with the water, or saltwater dunking.
But until they know, and fix the problem, the capsules aren't going anywhere. And it's pointless to do an in-flight abort - the next milestone - as that's probably the system that's failed.
At best a three-month delay in my decidedly non-expert opinion. Probably six months or more. :;(
The opinion polling suggests around 55% are very keen to stay in the EU so it's odd that a party focussed on this objective fails to gain the same sort of traction as the Brexit party. Either the issue itself lacks deep support compared to others or there's been a massive failure of leadership.
Too difficult a choice. Labour offers a small chance of remaining but a big chance of getting it through. The lib Dems offer a 100% chance of Remaining but with no chance of getting it through. The Tigs are somewhere in the middle. The Brexiteers have no such dilemma. They have the Tories to push it through and the Brexit Party to kick them up the backside.
If you are on the centre left there is no point voting LD. They’re too weak to achieve anything and there is always that suspicion if they were to do well they would prop up the Tories.
Best avoided until they reform and regroup. Hence TIG was a lost opportunity.
I really, really don't think the LibDems will prop up the Tories again for at least 20 years.
Of course they would given the right leader, circumstances and offer. It would be done in the ‘national interest’ again. They won’t resist being ‘important’ again.
No way is it going to happen when the LDs and Con are polar opposites on the key political issue of Brexit. One or other party would have to do a 180 to make it possible. I suspect the Tories will revert to their long standing postwar enthusiasm for joining Europe, but probably not before spending a decade or two down a nativist rabbit hole.
Why can’t the LD leadership say that then and - given the mess we’re in - say ‘you know what we did our best in coalition , but we made a mistake when we let the Tory genie out of the bottle ‘.
While mistakes were made in coalition, notably tuition fees, broadly I support what we did. We see increasingly that it was a golden period of good government, and I think history will be very kind to it. We see from 2015 how without the tempering and moderating influence of the LDs how incompetent a looney and ideological Tory government is.
However the circumstances of 2010 are unlikely to be repeated, as is that election result. You forget too how impossible any other government was after the 2010 result.
I liked the coalition and it would really put me off if the lds disavowed it as many want them to. Parties working together making compromises is good, even if people will disagree if it was worth it.
wo more totally disconnected political issues if I tried, but I've really confused several of them by my support for both propositions and made another err.. quite cross.
Fox hunting. Leavers fucking love that atrocity without fail.
All leavers?
I assume Dura ace tries to be funny with such comments, if not it's just sad.
I remember reading a Guardian piece after Girls Aloud's 'Sound of the Underground' went into the charts. 'This is the last we will see of Girls Aloud' the article announced. 'They will be confined to a footnote in the history of reality shows.'
I think it's a little too soon to write-off TIG, when they have only released their first single. Let's at least wait until next week when they launch for the euros and see how things progress through May.
However, I do agree with much of the thrust of Mike's piece. Here, crystallised, are some of the points and problems I see.
1. Labour's response
To my surprise, Corbyn has reacted by a noticeable embrace of centrist agendas. He made moves on anti-semitism, accepted talks with May's Gov't over Brexit (thus allowing himself to appear legitimate in the process), and came out with some eye-catching statements such as abolishing SATS tests for primary children (something which will win the hearts and minds of everyone except the alt-right). If Corbyn appears even half-palatable it removes much of TIGs sting.
2. They are Metropolitan Elitist.
TIGs biggest problem at the moment is that they appear far removed from the kind of people they need to be winning over. Farage's brilliant, insidious, strength is 'appearing' to speak with the feelings of working class people. Chuka and Anna seem far removed from that at the moment. Which is sad, because Chuka's background ought to be strongly in their favour.
3. They are in attack-dog mode
This is really disappointing. They are attacking Labour and Conservatives willy-nilly. It's understandable but it really doesn't fit their Change meme. There was a particularly silly tweet from Heidi Allen attacking Corbyn for failing to raise Brexit at PMQs, shortly before he and the PM were due to meet for the talks. Corbyn was obviously wise not to raise the stakes before sitting down with May, so this just came across as pointless petty student politics.
4. Failure to engage with the other centrists
I agree with Mike. And the failure to have a Remain list is woeful when the majority of the country are probably, just, remain leaning now.
5. Amateurish
This is so stark. From the party name to the logo, from the launch to the lack of policy announcement it's really, really, amateurish at the moment.
Politics moves fast. If they don't get their act together they will, unlike Girls Aloud, be confined to the footnote of Parliamentary history.
wo more totally disconnected political issues if I tried, but I've really confused several of them by my support for both propositions and made another err.. quite cross.
Fox hunting. Leavers fucking love that atrocity without fail.
All leavers?
I assume Dura ace tries to be funny with such comments, if not it's just sad.
He's part troll, part amateur black comedian and part experimenting with testing the boundaries of his own "socialism".
I’d agree with that critique. Extra capacity is needed, but HS2 probably wasn’t the way to do it.
On the other hand, there are foolhardier projects, as Boris Johnson has demonstrated
From memory, two reports were done into the alternatives, and there are massive devils within them as well (I think one was by Atkins). All of the 'easy' projects to be done to increase capacity on the southern sections of the WCML have been done years ago, and most of the difficult ones. We are left with the hideously difficult and the excruciatingly hideous ones.
As example, the last upgrade to the WCML twenty years ago cost about £8-10 billion (instead of the planed £1 billion), was years (a decade?) late, and did not deliver what was planed (125 MPH instead of 140 MPH, no new signalling system). Witness also the current calamitous Great Western electrification.
Upgrades of an operating railway are hideously difficult and expensive - you get few bangs for your buck.
Regardless of who is responsible these are atrocities quite as evil as the Christchurch massacre. To slaughter Christians worshipping in church on the most important day in their religious year is deliberately evil violence.
And it is not that infrequent. Christians have been murdered while worshipping in churches in Pakistan and Egypt and have been targeted in Iraq too.
Will we see the same reaction as to Christchurch? My guess is no - it’s all too far away, the people involved are brown and Christian so not a fashionable victim group and there is no recognisably nice boy who wouldn’t harm a fly when young growing up into evil killer story for the newspapers to ventilate over.
And yet we should not turn away. These murdered people matter. The reasons why this evil happens matter. We should spare a thought for those mourning today.
Regardless of who is responsible these are atrocities quite as evil as the Christchurch massacre. To slaughter Christians worshipping in church on the most important day in their religious year is deliberately evil violence.
And it is not that infrequent. Christians have been murdered while worshipping in churches in Pakistan and Egypt and have been targeted in Iraq too.
Will we see the same reaction as to Christchurch? My guess is no - it’s all too far away, the people involved are brown and Christian so not a fashionable victim group and there is no recognisably nice boy who wouldn’t harm a fly when young growing up into evil killer story for the newspapers to ventilate over.
And yet we should not turn away. These murdered people matter. The reasons why this evil happens matter. We should spare a thought for those mourning today.
You can't use murdered Christians abroad as a pretext to attack your political opponents at home.
I’d agree with that critique. Extra capacity is needed, but HS2 probably wasn’t the way to do it.
On the other hand, there are foolhardier projects, as Boris Johnson has demonstrated.
Where I live - North London, Hampstead area - it is the default to be against HS2 because the work is disruptive to the locale. Many well-argued and knowledgeable pieces are written around here, all of them demonstrating compellingly that the project is ill advised and ought to be cancelled, and all of them, I strongly suspect, hopelessly biased and despite the superficial 'expertise' more animated by NIMBY than anything else, NIMBY in the hands of the affluent classes being one of this country's very defining forces.
Me, I'm in favour. It's never the right time for major infrastructure spend. There is always a good reason not to do it. It will always fail a test on some spreadsheet or other. But if you don't do it, one day, not next week, not next year, but one day hence you wake up and realize that you should have and it is now too late. It is analogous to never upgrading your tech. That never makes sense either. You will always be fine with the older model. Until the day dawns when you realize you have been left behind and cannot understand the world you live in.
I don’t have a real problem with the disruption, or the idea of major infrastructure projects. I simply think this is the wrong one, and its cost will jeopardise better ones. The tendency to gold plate anything connected with London, and cheese pare everywhere else is undeniable.
wo more totally disconnected political issues if I tried, but I've really confused several of them by my support for both propositions and made another err.. quite cross.
Fox hunting. Leavers fucking love that atrocity without fail.
All leavers?
I assume Dura ace tries to be funny with such comments, if not it's just sad.
He's part troll, part amateur black comedian and part experimenting with testing the boundaries of his own "socialism".
He comes here cuz he's bored as he can't drive his fast cars/bikes until he gets his licence back.....
wo more totally disconnected political issues if I tried, but I've really confused several of them by my support for both propositions and made another err.. quite cross.
Fox hunting. Leavers fucking love that atrocity without fail.
All leavers?
I assume Dura ace tries to be funny with such comments, if not it's just sad.
He's part troll, part amateur black comedian and part experimenting with testing the boundaries of his own "socialism".
He does post some good comments however, a welcome addition to viewpoints for me.
I’d agree with that critique. Extra capacity is needed, but HS2 probably wasn’t the way to do it.
On the other hand, there are foolhardier projects, as Boris Johnson has demonstrated.
Where I live - North London, Hampstead area - it is the default to be against HS2 because the work is disruptive to the locale. Many well-argued and knowledgeable pieces are written around here, all of them demonstrating compellingly that the project is ill advised and ought to be cancelled, and all of them, I strongly suspect, hopelessly biased and despite the superficial 'expertise' more animated by NIMBY than anything else, NIMBY in the hands of the affluent classes being one of this country's very defining forces.
Me, I'm in favour. It's never the right time for major infrastructure spend. There is always a good reason not to do it. It will always fail a test on some spreadsheet or other. But if you don't do it, one day, not next week, not next year, but one day hence you wake up and realize that you should have and it is now too late. It is analogous to never upgrading your tech. That never makes sense either. You will always be fine with the older model. Until the day dawns when you realize you have been left behind and cannot understand the world you live in.
I don’t have a real problem with the disruption, or the idea of major infrastructure projects. I simply think this is the wrong one, and its cost will jeopardise better ones. The tendency to gold plate anything connected with London, and cheese pare everywhere else is undeniable.
Billions are being invested in the rail network outside HS2 and London. Network Rail is planning to spend £35 billion on the network in 2019-2024. As an example, £200 million has recently been spent on Derby, for instance: and that was a 'small' project. The same sort of thing is being done all over the network - although it's only noticed by the public because of the disruption caused by the works, or if it goes wrong.
And remember that the recent timetabling problems (e.g. in Northern Rail) were due to changes caused by large enhancements to the network (which were sadly delivered late).
I don’t have a real problem with the disruption, or the idea of major infrastructure projects. I simply think this is the wrong one, and its cost will jeopardise better ones. The tendency to gold plate anything connected with London, and cheese pare everywhere else is undeniable.
HS2 aside, it looks like a national upgrade to me, I agree strongly with your general point about the country being far too Londoncentric. Labour are making the right noises on the need to invest more heavily in the regions. Will be interested to see the policies come GE time.
That's almost certainly a loss-of-crew event. On the positive side, it was the capsule that was used in the recent flight to the ISS, so it could be a problem due to impact with the water, or saltwater dunking.
But until they know, and fix the problem, the capsules aren't going anywhere. And it's pointless to do an in-flight abort - the next milestone - as that's probably the system that's failed.
At best a three-month delay in my decidedly non-expert opinion. Probably six months or more. :;(
On the other hand, SpaceX have shown the ability to diagnose and remedy failure pretty quickly - and given their low costs, an inflight abort test isn’t a huge financial risk. I would guess nearer three than six months’ delay.
I’d agree with that critique. Extra capacity is needed, but HS2 probably wasn’t the way to do it.
On the other hand, there are foolhardier projects, as Boris Johnson has demonstrated
From memory, two reports were done into the alternatives, and there are massive devils within them as well (I think one was by Atkins). All of the 'easy' projects to be done to increase capacity on the southern sections of the WCML have been done years ago, and most of the difficult ones. We are left with the hideously difficult and the excruciatingly hideous ones.
As example, the last upgrade to the WCML twenty years ago cost about £8-10 billion (instead of the planed £1 billion), was years (a decade?) late, and did not deliver what was planed (125 MPH instead of 140 MPH, no new signalling system). Witness also the current calamitous Great Western electrification.
Upgrades of an operating railway are hideously difficult and expensive - you get few bangs for your buck.
Nothing could be as hideous as the cost of HS2 for minimal benefits for Southern England only. We have to pay yet again for fancy infrastructure for teh south whilst many places in the north have little to no infrastructure/public transport.
I’d agree with that critique. Extra capacity is needed, but HS2 probably wasn’t the way to do it.
On the other hand, there are foolhardier projects, as Boris Johnson has demonstrated.
Where I live - North London, Hampstead area - it is the default to be against HS2 because the work is disruptive to the locale. Many well-argued and knowledgeable pieces are written around here, all of them demonstrating compellingly that the project is ill advised and ought to be cancelled, and all of them, I strongly suspect, hopelessly biased and despite the superficial 'expertise' more animated by NIMBY than anything else, NIMBY in the hands of the affluent classes being one of this country's very defining forces.
Me, I'm in favour. It's never the right time for major infrastructure spend. There is always a good reason not to do it. It will always fail a test on some spreadsheet or other. But if you don't do it, one day, not next week, not next year, but one day hence you wake up and realize that you should have and it is now too late. It is analogous to never upgrading your tech. That never makes sense either. You will always be fine with the older model. Until the day dawns when you realize you have been left behind and cannot understand the world you live in.
I don’t have a real problem with the disruption, or the idea of major infrastructure projects. I simply think this is the wrong one, and its cost will jeopardise better ones. The tendency to gold plate anything connected with London, and cheese pare everywhere else is undeniable.
Yes, that's the point, its spending on the right infrastructure projects and goodness knows there are enough candidates. The benefits of HS2 are minimal compared to those that could be delivered across the North and Midlands from the same level of spending. Since the costs are reported now to be about three times the official cost of £56bn, whatever dubious cost-benefit analysis used to justify the project in the first place should be junked.
I’d agree with that critique. Extra capacity is needed, but HS2 probably wasn’t the way to do it.
On the other hand, there are foolhardier projects, as Boris Johnson has demonstrated.
Where I live - North London, Hampstead area - it is the default to be against HS2 because the work is disruptive to the locale. Many well-argued and knowledgeable pieces are written around here, all of them demonstrating compellingly that the project is ill advised and ought to be cancelled, and all of them, I strongly suspect, hopelessly biased and despite the superficial 'expertise' more animated by NIMBY than anything else, NIMBY in the hands of the affluent classes being one of this country's very defining forces.
Me, I'm in favour. It's never the right time for major infrastructure spend. There is always a good reason not to do it. It will always fail a test on some spreadsheet or other. But if you don't do it, one day, not next week, not next year, but one day hence you wake up and realize that you should have and it is now too late. It is analogous to never upgrading your tech. That never makes sense either. You will always be fine with the older model. Until the day dawns when you realize you have been left behind and cannot understand the world you live in.
I don’t have a real problem with the disruption, or the idea of major infrastructure projects. I simply think this is the wrong one, and its cost will jeopardise better ones. The tendency to gold plate anything connected with London, and cheese pare everywhere else is undeniable.
Yes, that's the point, its spending on the right infrastructure projects and goodness knows there are enough candidates. The benefits of HS2 are minimal compared to those that could be delivered across the North and Midlands from the same level of spending. Since the costs are reported now to be about three times the official cost of £56bn, whatever dubious cost-benefit analysis used to justify the project in the first place should be junked.
That makes the rather dramatic assumption that the money spent on HS2 would be spent on other projects on the network - and that's not a given, especially as billions are being spent on the rest of the network anyway.
In addition, you really need to critically read that link you keep on posting, as it's (ahem) rubbish ...
I get that all these Conservative Buffon Tuftons are very unhappy. What actually do they want the government to do now, bearing in mind the maths of the House of Commons?
May should have no-dealed when she had the chance. We'd be at the last 30 minutes of On the Beach phase by now but the tories rank and ranker would be happy.
Loved the film and the book when I was a teenager, truly scary.
Presumably you'd be the Fred Astaire character sitting in his Ferrari in the garage.
They were/are arrogant, they didn't want the Lib Dems dragging them down or holding them back.
I wonder if they believed many in the press about how everyone really wanted a centrist alternative. People who wanted to push this theory were able to ignore the last election on the basis that people didn't have a decent centrist alternative because the Lib Dems reputation discounted them.
If you believe the majority did want centrism and the only reason the Lib Dems didn't make a big breakthrough is because their reputation held them back then CUKs actions make sense. If you read some newspapers and listened to some journalists you would have assumed that all this would have happened quite easily and CUK MPs would be riding a huge wave of popular support just by not being in Corbyn's Labour or the pro Brexit Tories.
It turns out reality is rather more complicated than some imagine.
Edit: I enjoyed Ians comment, we should ask(force) him to write a whole thread on the subject!
Aren’t you so funny calling them ‘CUKs’ all the time. Ha ha ha.
It was a stupid name.
It was a stupid name for people who want to change nothing. Doesn’t excuse the resident jewbaiter from his wanking though.
The opinion polling suggests around 55% are very keen to stay in the EU so it's odd that a party focussed on this objective fails to gain the same sort of traction as the Brexit party. Either the issue itself lacks deep support compared to others or there's been a massive failure of leadership.
Too difficult a choice. Labour offers a small chance of remaining but a big chance of getting it through. The lib Dems offer a 100% chance of Remaining but with no chance of getting it through. The Tigs are somewhere in the middle. The Brexiteers have no such dilemma. They have the Tories to push it through and the Brexit Party to kick them up the backside.
Best avoided until they reform and regroup. Hence TIG was a lost opportunity.
I really, really don't think the LibDems will prop up the Tories again for at least 20 years.
Of course they would given the right leader, circumstances and offer. It would be done in the ‘national interest’ again. They won’t resist being ‘important’ again.
No way is it going to happen when the LDs and Con are polar opposites on the key political issue of Brexit. One or other party would have to do a 180 to make it possible. I suspect the Tories will revert to their long standing postwar enthusiasm for joining Europe, but probably not before spending a decade or two down a nativist rabbit hole.
Why can’t the LD leadership say that then and - given the mess we’re in - say ‘you know what we did our best in coalition , but we made a mistake when we let the Tory genie out of the bottle ‘.
While mistakes were made in coalition, notably tuition fees, broadly I support what we did. We see increasingly that it was a golden period of good government, and I think history will be very kind to it. We see from 2015 how without the tempering and moderating influence of the LDs how incompetent a looney and ideological Tory government is.
However the circumstances of 2010 are unlikely to be repeated, as is that election result. You forget too how impossible any other government was after the 2010 result.
The main legacy of the Coalition LDs is making it possible for Cameron to win in 2015. History will not be kind.
'Making it possible for Cameron to win in 2015' wasn't exactly what they thought they were doing. But Cameron's legacy isn't something the Tories will be happy about, either.
Comments
I know it’s quaint, but I remember when the right used to care about personal responsibility.
Edited extra bit: also, who are you accusing of hypocrisy? If the Government/UK state, then my point above addresses it.
Trying to pass yourself off as Che Guevara while transparently punching down was always going to be tricky.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_the_United_Kingdom
Fail to see where you're finding hypocrisy. The UK Government has a policy of reducing carbon emissions (and has done under multiple colours of administration, and has achieved said reductions under said administrations).
If you're concerned about carbon emissions, blaming the UK, which contributes a tiny amount of the global emissions *and* is successfully reducing that by a significant degree, is irrational.
The reason for the system they are planning goes beyond simple capacity constraint. Have you read the documentation on the economic justification for the project? Do you understand why it details at length the time savings to the minute and seconds of the various route options? Do you understand who will be using the link, such as London City workers dorming in less expensive regional cities? What do you think will happen to the legacy long distance services when the pax who provide the most profit move over to the shiny new system?
https://twitter.com/joglasg/status/1118878502219128832?s=21
I think they probably expected more Labour defections which would have kept the momentum and interest going. Tom Watson probably expected such defections too and the steps he took to set up an internal grouping (what are they up to, I wonder?) has, for now, spiked TIG’s guns.
I hope though, for all their failings, that they don’t disappear without trace. The two main parties are rancid and becoming worse by the day.
Happy Easter everyone!
https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2019/04/our-survey-three-out-of-five-party-members-will-vote-for-the-brexit-party-in-european-elections.html
Extra capacity is needed, but HS2 probably wasn’t the way to do it.
On the other hand, there are foolhardier projects, as Boris Johnson has demonstrated.
Anyone want to give me odds that Jeremy Corbyn will NEVER move in to 10 Downing St?
However the circumstances of 2010 are unlikely to be repeated, as is that election result. You forget too how impossible any other government was after the 2010 result.
In answer to your question about Watson, on manoeuvres:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/20/second-eu-referendum-only-way-to-beat-farage-says-watson
And Happy Easter.
"this, if you take the time to read it, even though the author is clearly infatuated with Bernie, really lays out what a freaking Trojan horse this guy is. He's not a progressive. He's not even a liberal. He's a conservative Blue Dog Democrat who comes from and will uphold the status quo. Don't be fooled.
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2019/03/all-about-pete "
As I remember that before the 2010 GE the two big LibDem issues were opposition to tuition fees increases and opposition to Middle Eastern warmongering.
And then in government the LibDem tripled tuition fees and supported Middle Eastern warmongering.
Not to mention the LibDems 'constitutional reform' agenda was a total wash-out.
https://twitter.com/dailymailuk/status/1119867101475430400?s=21
But a sensible case for Leaving is this: the EU is now de facto the eurozone, even if there are a few countries outside it. The creation of the euro and the difficulties it has had necessitate, if it is to function well, increasing political centralisation and control. That - coupled with QMV - means that it is becomes increasingly uncomfortable for a major country to remain comfortably outside the euro while being very strongly affected by those increasingly close economic and political structures. That applies far more to Britain than Sweden because of the former’s large financial sector.
Add to that the fact that there is in Continental Europe an emotional attachment to the idea of breaking down borders which, while more evident in recent months in Britain, has not been a large part of British political culture (as evidenced by the FoM argument) and a shared political culture strongly influenced by Roman rather than civil law (don’t underestimate the very strong effect that a country’s legal system - and what that says about the balance of power between state and people - has on political culture) in Europe with significant differences to that in Britain, and it is not hard to see why long-term Britain could find itself in a very uncomfortable and unstable position within an increasingly federal and centralising EU.
Cameron’s deal sought in part to address this. But the failure of the British and EU political classes to work out an effective modus vivendi when you have an inner and an outer core is the reason why Leave became increasingly attractive. If we were to remain now, the same issues would need addressing - and I see no signs of anyone on the Remain side thinking about this. Or indeed of addressing the concerns of those parts of the country which voted Leave because they felt left behind, including the concerns raised by FoM.
What the Leave side has utterly failed to do is think about both the process of leaving - how one disentangles a 40+ year relationship without destroying yourself - or about what should come after. That is one reason why it is so toxic. And the other is because the case which has been put by so many Leavers has been put in such personalised and offensive terms (“we hate foreigners”).
Even Money.
They don’t want Brexit and they don’t want Corbynism. That aside they don’t seem to have much glue.
PB has a disproportionate number of people like me who are active in other parties, and there is a TIGger launch on Tuesday, so we may be underestimating them, but even if they get say 8% in the Euros, what next? A probable early test is whether they stand in Peterborough if the recall succeeds.
And it is not that infrequent. Christians have been murdered while worshipping in churches in Pakistan and Egypt and have been targeted in Iraq too.
Will we see the same reaction as to Christchurch? My guess is no - it’s all too far away, the people involved are brown and Christian so not a fashionable victim group and there is no recognisably nice boy who wouldn’t harm a fly when young growing up into evil killer story for the newspapers to ventilate over.
And yet we should not turn away. These murdered people matter. The reasons why this evil happens matter. We should spare a thought for those mourning today.
The author of the hit piece is indeed a Saunders backer, who has written hit pieces on several other contenders who are not Bernie.
And the critique of Buttigieg’s academic career is a bit rich coming from a Yale graduate studying for a PhD at Harvard...
It is a demonstration of the worst aspect of Saunders’ campaign style, which certainly comes from his followers if not him personally, which goes scorched earth on his opponents. It arguably tipped the balance against Clinton last time around, and there is a danger of that happening again.
I can't think of a political battle I've more decisively lost over the last 15 years than that. But there it is.
I'd rather them than the sh*ts within Labour who excuse and deny anti-Semitism (sometimes even when their leader admits the issues) ...
Me, I'm in favour. It's never the right time for major infrastructure spend. There is always a good reason not to do it. It will always fail a test on some spreadsheet or other. But if you don't do it, one day, not next week, not next year, but one day hence you wake up and realize that you should have and it is now too late. It is analogous to never upgrading your tech. That never makes sense either. You will always be fine with the older model. Until the day dawns when you realize you have been left behind and cannot understand the world you live in.
The really angry and grumpy ones are the ones I find repellant.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1119683756535820288?s=21
Also the ex Tory tail seems to be wagging the ex Labour dog which didn't seem to be the original intention
I'm minded to give them some backing though because even facing deselection their decision to quit their parties was brave and bold, something very few MPs have risked.
https://twitter.com/Astronut099/status/1119825093742530560
That's almost certainly a loss-of-crew event. On the positive side, it was the capsule that was used in the recent flight to the ISS, so it could be a problem due to impact with the water, or saltwater dunking.
But until they know, and fix the problem, the capsules aren't going anywhere. And it's pointless to do an in-flight abort - the next milestone - as that's probably the system that's failed.
At best a three-month delay in my decidedly non-expert opinion. Probably six months or more. :;(
I think it's a little too soon to write-off TIG, when they have only released their first single. Let's at least wait until next week when they launch for the euros and see how things progress through May.
However, I do agree with much of the thrust of Mike's piece. Here, crystallised, are some of the points and problems I see.
1. Labour's response
To my surprise, Corbyn has reacted by a noticeable embrace of centrist agendas. He made moves on anti-semitism, accepted talks with May's Gov't over Brexit (thus allowing himself to appear legitimate in the process), and came out with some eye-catching statements such as abolishing SATS tests for primary children (something which will win the hearts and minds of everyone except the alt-right).
If Corbyn appears even half-palatable it removes much of TIGs sting.
2. They are Metropolitan Elitist.
TIGs biggest problem at the moment is that they appear far removed from the kind of people they need to be winning over. Farage's brilliant, insidious, strength is 'appearing' to speak with the feelings of working class people. Chuka and Anna seem far removed from that at the moment. Which is sad, because Chuka's background ought to be strongly in their favour.
3. They are in attack-dog mode
This is really disappointing. They are attacking Labour and Conservatives willy-nilly. It's understandable but it really doesn't fit their Change meme. There was a particularly silly tweet from Heidi Allen attacking Corbyn for failing to raise Brexit at PMQs, shortly before he and the PM were due to meet for the talks. Corbyn was obviously wise not to raise the stakes before sitting down with May, so this just came across as pointless petty student politics.
4. Failure to engage with the other centrists
I agree with Mike. And the failure to have a Remain list is woeful when the majority of the country are probably, just, remain leaning now.
5. Amateurish
This is so stark. From the party name to the logo, from the launch to the lack of policy announcement it's really, really, amateurish at the moment.
Politics moves fast. If they don't get their act together they will, unlike Girls Aloud, be confined to the footnote of Parliamentary history.
As example, the last upgrade to the WCML twenty years ago cost about £8-10 billion (instead of the planed £1 billion), was years (a decade?) late, and did not deliver what was planed (125 MPH instead of 140 MPH, no new signalling system). Witness also the current calamitous Great Western electrification.
Upgrades of an operating railway are hideously difficult and expensive - you get few bangs for your buck.
Edit: this is one of the reports:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/253456/hs2-strategic-alternatives.pdf
And remember that the recent timetabling problems (e.g. in Northern Rail) were due to changes caused by large enhancements to the network (which were sadly delivered late).
https://www.expressandstar.com/news/transport/2019/04/19/hs2-could-end-up-costing-more-than-156-billion/
TIG offers motherhood and apple pie, with cream if you are really good.
In addition, you really need to critically read that link you keep on posting, as it's (ahem) rubbish ...
The Brexit Party on the other hand is the Ronseal of politics "it does exactly what it says on the tin".
If you had to explain these two parties to someone who had been asleep for a year, which one do you think they'd understand first?
Presumably you'd be the Fred Astaire character sitting in his Ferrari in the garage.