Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The other billionaire WH2020 hopeful spends some money and get

13»

Comments

  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 17,481

    I can confirm that SeanT did pay WilliamGlenn £1,000.

    What's happened to William? Is he currently working out how he can keep Chez Glenn in the EU?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 52,698
    Byronic said:

    I can confirm that SeanT did pay WilliamGlenn £1,000.

    There. I knew it!!

    WHAT A MAN HE IS

    A GIANT once walked amongst us. And we pygmies barely knew it.
    Whatever one might think of Mr SeanT, we definitely noticed him while there ;)
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 8,013
    Byronic said:

    I can confirm that SeanT did pay WilliamGlenn £1,000.

    There. I knew it!!

    WHAT A MAN HE IS

    A GIANT once walked amongst us. And we pygmies barely knew it.
    If only such a Superman had a Clark Kent to sing his praises.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 10,340

    Clive Lewis calls for Royal Family referendum

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51062770

    That will get all those patriotic red-wallers back on side.

    Exile, abolition or execution?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 12,992
    This is potentially huge for the entertainment industry:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-50599080

    Presenter Samira Ahmed has won the employment tribunal she brought against the BBC in a dispute over equal pay.

    Ahmed claimed she was underpaid for hosting audience feedback show Newswatch when compared with Jeremy Vine's salary for Points of View.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 17,481
    edited January 10
    Anyone know whether @JackW is OK? Can't remember seeing him around for a long while?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 17,836
    HYUFD said:

    Clive Lewis calls for Royal Family referendum

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51062770

    That will get all those patriotic red-wallers back on side.

    We spend x million a week on the Royal family let us spend that on the NHS instead.
    We would have to spend it on maintaining the President and their family instead without the tourism revenue, the NHS would get zilch
    A lot of people visit Versailles. Just saying.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 9,387
    I have just rejoined the Jewish Labour Movement, and as a result will have a vote in the Leadership election. As of now , I will be voting Nandy followed by Starmer. Ian Murray will receive my vote for Deputy Leader.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 17,836
    GIN1138 said:

    Anyone know whether JackW is OK? Can't remember seeing him around for a long while?

    Oddly I was thinking much the same the other day. Arose from somebody saying somewhere about Charles regnal name, and how people would dispute whether he was Charles III or IV.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 69,562

    HYUFD said:

    Clive Lewis calls for Royal Family referendum

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51062770

    That will get all those patriotic red-wallers back on side.

    We spend x million a week on the Royal family let us spend that on the NHS instead.
    We would have to spend it on maintaining the President and their family instead without the tourism revenue, the NHS would get zilch
    A lot of people visit Versailles. Just saying.
    They don't go to royal wedding, Jubilee celebrations etc though or buy many Macron mugs and towels
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 17,836

    Cyclefree said:

    It is of course tiny in terms of its economic contribution. But it seems to be totemic to many Brexiteers and many in the fishing industry are good at making their views known, plus some of the new Tory constituencies have fishing as one of their industries.

    Whether Boris agrees to the EU’s demands on sequencing will be an early test of whether he will stand by this Brexit constituency or sell them out, much as he did with NI.

    It's impossible to see how the fishing industry doesn't get completely shafted. They voted for their own shafting (which would happen whether or not there is any deal with the EU), apparently on the ludicrous basis that they want the EU to keep taking their fish whilst locking out EU fishermen from the British waters for which they've already paid for permits.
    On that basis British wine growers should be able to pay for permits to dig up vast tracts of France.

    The French wine growers seem to be operating on the ludicrous basis that they want Britain to keep taking their burgundy and champagne whilst locking British wine growers out of French wine regions.
    A silly point made even sillier by the fact that many French vineyards are British-owned.
    As British raIlways are Dutch, German etc owned.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 17,836
    edited January 10
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Clive Lewis calls for Royal Family referendum

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51062770

    That will get all those patriotic red-wallers back on side.

    We spend x million a week on the Royal family let us spend that on the NHS instead.
    We would have to spend it on maintaining the President and their family instead without the tourism revenue, the NHS would get zilch
    A lot of people visit Versailles. Just saying.
    They don't go to royal wedding, Jubilee celebrations etc though or buy many Macron mugs and towels
    Lots of other reasons to visit both countries, of course. And, to be fair, I’d guess that French people don’t buy many Macron mugs. More sense.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 5,975

    GIN1138 said:

    Anyone know whether JackW is OK? Can't remember seeing him around for a long while?

    Oddly I was thinking much the same the other day. Arose from somebody saying somewhere about Charles regnal name, and how people would dispute whether he was Charles III or IV.
    According to his Wikipedia page he is still alive.
  • Clive Lewis calls for Royal Family referendum

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51062770

    That will get all those patriotic red-wallers back on side.

    We spend x million a week on the Royal family let us spend that on the NHS instead.
    Seriously though, the fact this total moron with zero political antenna is even in the running for the Labour party shows what a state they are in. I think he would manage to even under-perform Jezza given he thinks this is a great idea to talk about now.
    Firstly, his electorate is Labour Party members, and not (or not yet) the wider public. Secondly, in context, it looks like he did a Jo Swinson and started rambling on before he'd thought it through. That's the trouble with our politicians: none of them are any good at politics.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 2,832
    Having watched the Steyer ad above I'm immensely disappointed it doesn't go as follows:

    [Woman]: "I don't trust any of 'em, no politician is going to help me get a job."
    [Man]: "No politician will tell the truth these days."
    [Steyer]: "I'm Tom Steyer, and I'm No Politician. I worked in business for [etc etc]"

    What a missed opportunity.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 12,992

    GIN1138 said:

    Anyone know whether JackW is OK? Can't remember seeing him around for a long while?

    Oddly I was thinking much the same the other day. Arose from somebody saying somewhere about Charles regnal name, and how people would dispute whether he was Charles III or IV.
    According to his Wikipedia page he is still alive.
    Such a tease!
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 2,832

    I can confirm that SeanT did pay WilliamGlenn £1,000.

    I imagine regulations/trust would make it unfeasible, but I do sometimes wonder if adding an escrow/payment system onto PB to allow formal verification of bets placed here would be a good thing.
  • Quincel said:

    Having watched the Steyer ad above I'm immensely disappointed it doesn't go as follows:

    [Woman]: "I don't trust any of 'em, no politician is going to help me get a job."
    [Man]: "No politician will tell the truth these days."
    [Steyer]: "I'm Tom Steyer, and I'm No Politician. I worked in business for [etc etc]"

    What a missed opportunity.

    They elected a non-politician last time round. Chap off The Apprentice. Whatever happened to him?
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 1,819

    HYUFD said:

    Clive Lewis calls for Royal Family referendum

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51062770

    That will get all those patriotic red-wallers back on side.

    We spend x million a week on the Royal family let us spend that on the NHS instead.
    We would have to spend it on maintaining the President and their family instead without the tourism revenue, the NHS would get zilch
    A lot of people visit Versailles. Just saying.
    Maybe a Danish or Dutch-style monarchy would be best. The Dutch one seems to allows parliament to appoint the new monarch in extreme circumstances, e.g. a monarch about to die without leaving an heir.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_the_Netherlands

    Glad to hear William G was paid; he can now drown his sorrows on 31/1, so can I with profIts from GE2019.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 17,836
    edited January 10

    GIN1138 said:

    Anyone know whether JackW is OK? Can't remember seeing him around for a long while?

    Oddly I was thinking much the same the other day. Arose from somebody saying somewhere about Charles regnal name, and how people would dispute whether he was Charles III or IV.
    According to his Wikipedia page he is still alive.
    Depends of course on it being kept up to date. But I hope he’s OK.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 42,476
    edited January 10

    Clive Lewis calls for Royal Family referendum

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51062770

    That will get all those patriotic red-wallers back on side.

    We spend x million a week on the Royal family let us spend that on the NHS instead.
    Seriously though, the fact this total moron with zero political antenna is even in the running for the Labour party shows what a state they are in. I think he would manage to even under-perform Jezza given he thinks this is a great idea to talk about now.
    Firstly, his electorate is Labour Party members, and not (or not yet) the wider public. Secondly, in context, it looks like he did a Jo Swinson and started rambling on before he'd thought it through. That's the trouble with our politicians: none of them are any good at politics.
    Its not even being good at politics, it is just having a brain....right, so we took a pounding at the GE, it seems a lot of Northern voters didn't like all the stuff about Jezza not singing the national athemn etc.....and we have had this Brexit referendum that was massively divisive....hold my drink, I have had this great idea pop into my head, sound anti-monarchy and do so via proposing a very divisive referendum....genius.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 69,562
    edited January 10

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Clive Lewis calls for Royal Family referendum

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51062770

    That will get all those patriotic red-wallers back on side.

    We spend x million a week on the Royal family let us spend that on the NHS instead.
    We would have to spend it on maintaining the President and their family instead without the tourism revenue, the NHS would get zilch
    A lot of people visit Versailles. Just saying.
    They don't go to royal wedding, Jubilee celebrations etc though or buy many Macron mugs and towels
    Lots of other reasons to visit both countries, of course. And, to be fair, I’d guess that French people don’t buy many Macron mugs. More sense.
    France has better weather than we do and sunnier beaches in the south, the royal family is part of the attraction of London
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 499

    Cyclefree said:

    It is of course tiny in terms of its economic contribution. But it seems to be totemic to many Brexiteers and many in the fishing industry are good at making their views known, plus some of the new Tory constituencies have fishing as one of their industries.

    Whether Boris agrees to the EU’s demands on sequencing will be an early test of whether he will stand by this Brexit constituency or sell them out, much as he did with NI.

    It's impossible to see how the fishing industry doesn't get completely shafted. They voted for their own shafting (which would happen whether or not there is any deal with the EU), apparently on the ludicrous basis that they want the EU to keep taking their fish whilst locking out EU fishermen from the British waters for which they've already paid for permits.
    On that basis British wine growers should be able to pay for permits to dig up vast tracts of France.

    The French wine growers seem to be operating on the ludicrous basis that they want Britain to keep taking their burgundy and champagne whilst locking British wine growers out of French wine regions.
    A silly point made even sillier by the fact that many French vineyards are British-owned.
    As British raIlways are Dutch, German etc owned.
    Except the exploiters of this local resource owe and pay nothing to the local economy at all. No local employees, no local taxes, no investment beneficial to the country owning the resource, no development, nothing. Its just straight forward taking.


    And that is I suspect why this is so emotive.
  • isamisam Posts: 30,713
    edited January 10
    Quincel said:

    I can confirm that SeanT did pay WilliamGlenn £1,000.

    I imagine regulations/trust would make it unfeasible, but I do sometimes wonder if adding an escrow/payment system onto PB to allow formal verification of bets placed here would be a good thing.
    I’d be £50 better off #knocker @Neil
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Some fine art for a fine Friday afternoon.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 25,211
    For the definition of a generation, how’s about when someone born on the day of the last referendum is eligible to vote in the next one?
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 5,528

    Yvette Cooper and Hilary Benn have kept very quiet in the leadership contest so far. Are they on holiday?

    Would they be leading figures in a Starmer Shadow Cabinet?

    I guess tricky situation in sense that if it became known that they would be, it could cost Starmer votes in the leadership election.
  • nunu2nunu2 Posts: 1,418
    Reduced majorities help to concentrate the mind.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 17,481

    GIN1138 said:

    Anyone know whether JackW is OK? Can't remember seeing him around for a long while?

    Oddly I was thinking much the same the other day. Arose from somebody saying somewhere about Charles regnal name, and how people would dispute whether he was Charles III or IV.
    According to his Wikipedia page he is still alive.
    Good to know. :)
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 10,344
    MikeL said:

    Yvette Cooper and Hilary Benn have kept very quiet in the leadership contest so far. Are they on holiday?

    Would they be leading figures in a Starmer Shadow Cabinet?

    I guess tricky situation in sense that if it became known that they would be, it could cost Starmer votes in the leadership election.
    Difficult to see Benn in there, Cooper perhaps.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 2,411

    eek said:

    Animal_pb said:

    Foxy said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    @Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?

    WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.
    There might be some sweet new buildings to officially open during the Brexit boom!
    Are the official receivers expanding? Or is it Customs booths that you have in mind? o:)
    Well, there's a big ol' bridge from Scotland to NI in the pipeline, right?
    Scotland is no longer thought a secure route.

    The bridge (except it is a tunnel now) will go from NW England (Workington?) to Belfast via the Isle of Man. So says the Sunday Times.

    Great work, Nicola.
    An English link makes more sense - otherwise you are just adding hours of additional driving with little actually benefit for the economies those lorries drive through

    The drive to Stranraer is pretty but does take a long time.
    Narrator: neither a bridge or a tunnel came to pass.
    Oh, it probaby will, just so Boris can say to the Scots "let's see what you could have won....." - as Ireland gets a massive influx of tourists driving in from Europe whilst Scotland gets to see lichen grow on its roads.

    A majority of 80 means he can get away with spending tens of billions just to troll Nicola Sturgeon.
    What you describe is trolling Scots, not trolling an individual.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 2,411
    Byronic said:

    I can confirm that SeanT did pay WilliamGlenn £1,000.

    There. I knew it!!

    WHAT A MAN HE IS

    A GIANT once walked amongst us. And we pygmies barely knew it.
    Yes, and I’m a giant too.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 18,155

    Byronic said:

    I can confirm that SeanT did pay WilliamGlenn £1,000.

    There. I knew it!!

    WHAT A MAN HE IS

    A GIANT once walked amongst us. And we pygmies barely knew it.
    If only such a Superman had a Clark Kent to sing his praises.
    At least the pulp mags guys realised that they needed a contrasting alter ego to their superhero. It's vaguely insulting that some folk think that they can get away with replacing a boozy braggart with a taste for baroque invective and a tendency to over write with an..er..boozy braggart with a taste for baroque invective and a tendency to over write.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 2,528

    GIN1138 said:

    Anyone know whether JackW is OK? Can't remember seeing him around for a long while?

    Oddly I was thinking much the same the other day. Arose from somebody saying somewhere about Charles regnal name, and how people would dispute whether he was Charles III or IV.
    I thought the smart money was on him taking “George VII”
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 5,505
    Here's a tricky one. The man who confronted the terrorist with a narwhal tusk has lambasted Donald Trump and made some other woke pronouncements.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/10/man-who-tackled-london-bridge-attacker-with-narwhal-tusk-says-trump-is-feeding-terror

    What's to be done with him now?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 19,429

    Here's a tricky one. The man who confronted the terrorist with a narwhal tusk has lambasted Donald Trump and made some other woke pronouncements.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/10/man-who-tackled-london-bridge-attacker-with-narwhal-tusk-says-trump-is-feeding-terror

    What's to be done with him now?

    Not so much the horn of a dilemma, as the tooth.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 19,429
    edited January 10
    Jim Webb expresses well what's troubling about offing leaders we don't like.

    When did it become acceptable to kill a top leader of a country we aren’t even at war with?
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-iran-crisis-isnt-a-failure-of-the-executive-branch-alone/2020/01/09/cc0f3728-3305-11ea-9313-6cba89b1b9fb_story.html
  • ParistondaParistonda Posts: 1,777
    If Clive Lewis makes it through the nominations (it looks like not but there's still plenty of Lab MPs to declare), I think he may have a decent chance. He's one of the few that's actually offering interesting ideas (yes some of them are duds, but not all). He's very much on the left but is not at all a continuity Corbyn candidate like rlb. Plus he's got a media friendly personality (not so much charismatic but someone who knows their way around a TV set).

  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 8,013
    justin124 said:

    I have just rejoined the Jewish Labour Movement, and as a result will have a vote in the Leadership election. As of now , I will be voting Nandy followed by Starmer. Ian Murray will receive my vote for Deputy Leader.

    There's a 'Jewish Labour Movement' ?
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 5,975
    The latest Google info on @Jackw is that he's currently involved in a big climate change debate in Australia. The stories were dated this week. In his real persona he has very strong views on climate change.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited January 10

    justin124 said:

    I have just rejoined the Jewish Labour Movement, and as a result will have a vote in the Leadership election. As of now , I will be voting Nandy followed by Starmer. Ian Murray will receive my vote for Deputy Leader.

    There's a 'Jewish Labour Movement' ?
    Yes! Has been for a veeery long time. They were rather frozen out by the current leadership team. For some reason.

    You can join as a non-Jew as an 'ally', too.

    [your comment may have been sarky, I've just realised. Ho hum.]
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 5,975

    justin124 said:

    I have just rejoined the Jewish Labour Movement, and as a result will have a vote in the Leadership election. As of now , I will be voting Nandy followed by Starmer. Ian Murray will receive my vote for Deputy Leader.

    There's a 'Jewish Labour Movement' ?
    The Jewish Labour movement is one of the party's affiliated organisations which have a part in the selection process. My guess is that its nomination will not be Corbyn's favourite.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 17,836

    Cyclefree said:

    It is of course tiny in terms of its economic contribution. But it seems to be totemic to many Brexiteers and many in the fishing industry are good at making their views known, plus some of the new Tory constituencies have fishing as one of their industries.

    Whether Boris agrees to the EU’s demands on sequencing will be an early test of whether he will stand by this Brexit constituency or sell them out, much as he did with NI.

    It's impossible to see how the fishing industry doesn't get completely shafted. They voted for their own shafting (which would happen whether or not there is any deal with the EU), apparently on the ludicrous basis that they want the EU to keep taking their fish whilst locking out EU fishermen from the British waters for which they've already paid for permits.
    On that basis British wine growers should be able to pay for permits to dig up vast tracts of France.

    The French wine growers seem to be operating on the ludicrous basis that they want Britain to keep taking their burgundy and champagne whilst locking British wine growers out of French wine regions.
    A silly point made even sillier by the fact that many French vineyards are British-owned.
    As British raIlways are Dutch, German etc owned.
    Except the exploiters of this local resource owe and pay nothing to the local economy at all. No local employees, no local taxes, no investment beneficial to the country owning the resource, no development, nothing. Its just straight forward taking.


    And that is I suspect why this is so emotive.
    AIUI, and I gather it's extremely complicated, at the moment the British fishing industry catches fish which are primarily sold to consumers elsewhere in the EU, since British consumers don't want to eat that sort of fish. Meanwhile fisherfolk from elsewhere in the EU (and Norway) catch fish we we DO want to eat.So we buy it.
    Back in the dim and distant, too, there were quotas for fish assigned to each EU maritime nation, but the people at top of the British industry sold the quotas they had been assigned to other similar people elsewhere in the EU, thereby shafting the honest fisherfolk of Lowestoft, Grimsby and Peterhead.

    I stand to be corrected by anyone better informed.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 22,223

    justin124 said:

    I have just rejoined the Jewish Labour Movement, and as a result will have a vote in the Leadership election. As of now , I will be voting Nandy followed by Starmer. Ian Murray will receive my vote for Deputy Leader.

    There's a 'Jewish Labour Movement' ?
    Until the next leader is elected it has been dedicated to moving Jews out of the Labour Party.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 19,429

    The latest Google info on @Jackw is that he's currently involved in a big climate change debate in Australia. The stories were dated this week. In his real persona he has very strong views on climate change.

    So ARSE really meant anthropogenic rear sphincter emissions ?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 42,476

    Here's a tricky one. The man who confronted the terrorist with a narwhal tusk has lambasted Donald Trump and made some other woke pronouncements.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/10/man-who-tackled-london-bridge-attacker-with-narwhal-tusk-says-trump-is-feeding-terror

    What's to be done with him now?

    He is entitled to his own opinions, but as a civil servant should he be proclaiming them in a national newspaper?
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201

    Cyclefree said:

    It is of course tiny in terms of its economic contribution. But it seems to be totemic to many Brexiteers and many in the fishing industry are good at making their views known, plus some of the new Tory constituencies have fishing as one of their industries.

    Whether Boris agrees to the EU’s demands on sequencing will be an early test of whether he will stand by this Brexit constituency or sell them out, much as he did with NI.


    ritain to keep taking their burgundy and champagne whilst locking British wine growers out of French wine regions.
    A silly point made even sillier by the fact that many French vineyards are British-owned.
    As British raIlways are Dutch, German etc owned.
    Except the exploiters of this local resource owe and pay nothing to the local economy at all. No local employees, no local taxes, no investment beneficial to the country owning the resource, no development, nothing. Its just straight forward taking.


    And that is I suspect why this is so emotive.
    AIUI, and I gather it's extremely complicated, at the moment the British fishing industry catches fish which are primarily sold to consumers elsewhere in the EU, since British consumers don't want to eat that sort of fish. Meanwhile fisherfolk from elsewhere in the EU (and Norway) catch fish we we DO want to eat.So we buy it.
    Back in the dim and distant, too, there were quotas for fish assigned to each EU maritime nation, but the people at top of the British industry sold the quotas they had been assigned to other similar people elsewhere in the EU, thereby shafting the honest fisherfolk of Lowestoft, Grimsby and Peterhead.

    I stand to be corrected by anyone better informed.
    And where are the quotas set each year? Well that would be Brussels and if Brussels decides to give no quota to the UK fleet of the fish we eat but give it to RoEU fleets and vice versa, then the fisherpeople have no option, they have to chuck perfectly good fish over the side. If the truth were known it would not surprise me if this was a deliberate policy by the EU when it was first setup because it can only result in increased inter-EU trade which was one of the goals of the single market.

    We get our main fish that we like, Cod from The Faroes, Iceland and China. Also our fish exports are heavily skewed by Salmon, which is farmed and Shell fish. Our Mackeral exports to the EU, 83% go to one factory in Holland which cans it and exports it to Africa, why Africans like to munch on Mackeral i have no idea.
  • SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 1,672
    edited January 10

    Here's a tricky one. The man who confronted the terrorist with a narwhal tusk has lambasted Donald Trump and made some other woke pronouncements.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/10/man-who-tackled-london-bridge-attacker-with-narwhal-tusk-says-trump-is-feeding-terror

    What's to be done with him now?

    He is entitled to his own opinions, but as a civil servant should he be proclaiming them in a national newspaper?
    Not all civil servants are politically restricted. Indeed those in some grades are defined as "politically free" and CANNOT be restricted by managers from political activities. Those in higher grades may be restricted, but the nature of the restriction does vary by role.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 8,013

    Cyclefree said:

    It is of course tiny in terms of its economic contribution. But it seems to be totemic to many Brexiteers and many in the fishing industry are good at making their views known, plus some of the new Tory constituencies have fishing as one of their industries.

    Whether Boris agrees to the EU’s demands on sequencing will be an early test of whether he will stand by this Brexit constituency or sell them out, much as he did with NI.


    ritain to keep taking their burgundy and champagne whilst locking British wine growers out of French wine regions.
    A silly point made even sillier by the fact that many French vineyards are British-owned.
    As British raIlways are Dutch, German etc owned.

    And that is I suspect why this is so emotive.
    AIUI, and I gather it's extremely complicated, at the moment the British fishing industry catches fish which are primarily sold to consumers elsewhere in the EU, since British consumers don't want to eat that sort of fish. Meanwhile fisherfolk from elsewhere in the EU (and Norway) catch fish we we DO want to eat.So we buy it.
    Back in the dim and distant, too, there were quotas for fish assigned to each EU maritime nation, but the people at top of the British industry sold the quotas they had been assigned to other similar people elsewhere in the EU, thereby shafting the honest fisherfolk of Lowestoft, Grimsby and Peterhead.

    I stand to be corrected by anyone better informed.
    And where are the quotas set each year? Well that would be Brussels and if Brussels decides to give no quota to the UK fleet of the fish we eat but give it to RoEU fleets and vice versa, then the fisherpeople have no option, they have to chuck perfectly good fish over the side. If the truth were known it would not surprise me if this was a deliberate policy by the EU when it was first setup because it can only result in increased inter-EU trade which was one of the goals of the single market.

    We get our main fish that we like, Cod from The Faroes, Iceland and China. Also our fish exports are heavily skewed by Salmon, which is farmed and Shell fish. Our Mackeral exports to the EU, 83% go to one factory in Holland which cans it and exports it to Africa, why Africans like to munch on Mackeral i have no idea.
    Mackeral is a very tasty fish, great curried too.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 17,836

    Cyclefree said:

    It is of course tiny in terms of its economic contribution. But it seems to be totemic to many Brexiteers and many in the fishing industry are good at making their views known, plus some of the new Tory constituencies have fishing as one of their industries.

    AIUI, and I gather it's extremely complicated, at the moment the British fishing industry catches fish which are primarily sold to consumers elsewhere in the EU, since British consumers don't want to eat that sort of fish. Meanwhile fisherfolk from elsewhere in the EU (and Norway) catch fish we we DO want to eat.So we buy it.
    Back in the dim and distant, too, there were quotas for fish assigned to each EU maritime nation, but the people at top of the British industry sold the quotas they had been assigned to other similar people elsewhere in the EU, thereby shafting the honest fisherfolk of Lowestoft, Grimsby and Peterhead.

    I stand to be corrected by anyone better informed.
    And where are the quotas set each year? Well that would be Brussels and if Brussels decides to give no quota to the UK fleet of the fish we eat but give it to RoEU fleets and vice versa, then the fisherpeople have no option, they have to chuck perfectly good fish over the side. If the truth were known it would not surprise me if this was a deliberate policy by the EU when it was first setup because it can only result in increased inter-EU trade which was one of the goals of the single market.

    We get our main fish that we like, Cod from The Faroes, Iceland and China. Also our fish exports are heavily skewed by Salmon, which is farmed and Shell fish. Our Mackeral exports to the EU, 83% go to one factory in Holland which cans it and exports it to Africa, why Africans like to munch on Mackeral i have no idea.
    Thanks for responding. Again AIUI any annual quotas are set by agreement between the maritime nations of the EU, presumably on the One Nation One Vote basis. I would be somewhat surprised if Luxembourg or Hungary had a vote, although I would not at all be surprised there is some weighting system depending on fleet size. Or something like that.
    Trouble is, as I think Ms Cyclefree pointed out recently, fish, other than shellfish of farmed salmon, swim around a bit, ignoring the lines on the sea which are human borders.
    One issue which has troubled all nations fisherfolk, AIUI is conservation. Catching small, immature fish is, in the medium, let alone the long term, counter-productive since the poor little devels don't have time to reproduce.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 17,836
    edited January 10
    I'm trying to reply to Mr Malph, but vanilla has stuck again.
    So.
    Thanks for responding. Again AIUI any annual quotas are set by agreement between the maritime nations of the EU, presumably on the One Nation One Vote basis. I would be somewhat surprised if Luxembourg or Hungary had a vote, although I would not at all be surprised there is some weighting system depending on fleet size. Or something like that.
    Trouble is, as I think Ms Cyclefree pointed out recently, fish, other than shellfish of farmed salmon, swim around a bit, ignoring the lines on the sea which are human borders.
    One issue which has troubled all nations fisherfolk, AIUI is conservation. Catching small, immature fish is, in the medium, let alone the long term, counter-productive since the poor little devils don't have time to reproduce.
  • Alphabet_SoupAlphabet_Soup Posts: 371
    edited January 10
    A reminder from Wiki of how we got the CFP in the first place:

    "The first rules were created in 1970. The original six Common Market members realised that four countries applying to join the Common Market at that time (Britain, Ireland, Denmark including Greenland, and Norway) would control the richest fishing grounds in the world. The original six therefore drew up Council Regulation 2141/70 giving all Members equal access to all fishing waters, even though the Treaty of Rome did not explicitly include fisheries in its agriculture chapter. This was adopted on the morning of 30 June 1970, a few hours before the applications to join were officially received. This ensured that the regulations became part of the acquis communautaire before the new members joined, obliging them to accept the regulation. In its accession negotiations, the UK at first refused to accept the rules but by the end of 1971 the UK gave way and signed the Accession Treaty on 22 January 1972, thereby bringing into the CFP joint management an estimated four fifths of all the fish off Western Europe. Norway decided not to join..."
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 18,155

    Here's a tricky one. The man who confronted the terrorist with a narwhal tusk has lambasted Donald Trump and made some other woke pronouncements.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/10/man-who-tackled-london-bridge-attacker-with-narwhal-tusk-says-trump-is-feeding-terror

    What's to be done with him now?

    He is entitled to his own opinions, but as a civil servant should he be proclaiming them in a national newspaper?
    Surely someone who batters a terrorist with a nawrhal tusk is just the sort of weirdo misfit that Domski is looking for? He should therefore be given licence to trumpet his views to the world.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 42,476

    Here's a tricky one. The man who confronted the terrorist with a narwhal tusk has lambasted Donald Trump and made some other woke pronouncements.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/10/man-who-tackled-london-bridge-attacker-with-narwhal-tusk-says-trump-is-feeding-terror

    What's to be done with him now?

    He is entitled to his own opinions, but as a civil servant should he be proclaiming them in a national newspaper?
    Surely someone who batters a terrorist with a nawrhal tusk is just the sort of weirdo misfit that Domski is looking for? He should therefore be given licence to trumpet his views to the world.
    I think still not weird enough for Big Dom.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 42,476

    Here's a tricky one. The man who confronted the terrorist with a narwhal tusk has lambasted Donald Trump and made some other woke pronouncements.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/10/man-who-tackled-london-bridge-attacker-with-narwhal-tusk-says-trump-is-feeding-terror

    What's to be done with him now?

    He is entitled to his own opinions, but as a civil servant should he be proclaiming them in a national newspaper?
    Not all civil servants are politically restricted. Indeed those in some grades are defined as "politically free" and CANNOT be restricted by managers from political activities. Those in higher grades may be restricted, but the nature of the restriction does vary by role.
    Fair enough then.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 17,836
    edited January 10

    A reminder from Wiki of how we got the CFP in the first place:

    "The first rules were created in 1970. The original six Common Market members realised that four countries applying to join the Common Market at that time (Britain, Ireland, Denmark including Greenland, and Norway) would control the richest fishing grounds in the world. The original six therefore drew up Council Regulation 2141/70 giving all Members equal access to all fishing waters, even though the Treaty of Rome did not explicitly include fisheries in its agriculture chapter. This was adopted on the morning of 30 June 1970, a few hours before the applications to join were officially received. This ensured that the regulations became part of the acquis communautaire before the new members joined, obliging them to accept the regulation. In its accession negotiations, the UK at first refused to accept the rules but by the end of 1971 the UK gave way and signed the Accession Treaty on 22 January 1972, thereby bringing into the CFP joint management an estimated four fifths of all the fish off Western Europe. Norway decided not to join..."

    Bodging rarely produces a good result. Apart from chairs.

    And thanks for the reminder, Mr S.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 18,155
    edited January 10
    More mixed messages on the Scotch question in Labour. Starmer is probably one of the few who hasn't afaik taken a position, which is probably a smart move.

  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 11,910
    When t

    A reminder from Wiki of how we got the CFP in the first place:

    "The first rules were created in 1970. The original six Common Market members realised that four countries applying to join the Common Market at that time (Britain, Ireland, Denmark including Greenland, and Norway) would control the richest fishing grounds in the world. The original six therefore drew up Council Regulation 2141/70 giving all Members equal access to all fishing waters, even though the Treaty of Rome did not explicitly include fisheries in its agriculture chapter. This was adopted on the morning of 30 June 1970, a few hours before the applications to join were officially received. This ensured that the regulations became part of the acquis communautaire before the new members joined, obliging them to accept the regulation. In its accession negotiations, the UK at first refused to accept the rules but by the end of 1971 the UK gave way and signed the Accession Treaty on 22 January 1972, thereby bringing into the CFP joint management an estimated four fifths of all the fish off Western Europe. Norway decided not to join..."

    Bodging rarely produces a good result. Apart from chairs.

    And thanks for the reminder, Mr S.
    When the aircraft industry started using carbon fibre they ran into an enormous problem: suddenly nothing fit. They'd got so used to bodging subassemblies together they couldn't cope with brittle materials that can't be subject to percussive adjustment. This tradition was famously one of the reasons why the AEW Nimrod went over budget: not one of the refurbished wings fitted in the fuselages, since all of the wing roots were of slightly different sizes.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 8,108

    The latest Google info on @Jackw is that he's currently involved in a big climate change debate in Australia. The stories were dated this week. In his real persona he has very strong views on climate change.

    Jack is Greta Thunberg? He's/She's hidden that well....
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 3,678

    The latest Google info on @Jackw is that he's currently involved in a big climate change debate in Australia. The stories were dated this week. In his real persona he has very strong views on climate change.

    That's entirely correct; I believe he accompanied Greta Thornburg in that boat trip to the US but kept a low profile.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 44,318
    edited January 10
    JohnO said:

    The latest Google info on @Jackw is that he's currently involved in a big climate change debate in Australia. The stories were dated this week. In his real persona he has very strong views on climate change.

    That's entirely correct; I believe he accompanied Greta Thornburg in that boat trip to the US but kept a low profile.
    What @Slackbladder said; have you ever seen Greta and @JackW in the same room? ;)
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 34,563

    A reminder from Wiki of how we got the CFP in the first place:

    "The first rules were created in 1970. The original six Common Market members realised that four countries applying to join the Common Market at that time (Britain, Ireland, Denmark including Greenland, and Norway) would control the richest fishing grounds in the world. The original six therefore drew up Council Regulation 2141/70 giving all Members equal access to all fishing waters, even though the Treaty of Rome did not explicitly include fisheries in its agriculture chapter. This was adopted on the morning of 30 June 1970, a few hours before the applications to join were officially received. This ensured that the regulations became part of the acquis communautaire before the new members joined, obliging them to accept the regulation. In its accession negotiations, the UK at first refused to accept the rules but by the end of 1971 the UK gave way and signed the Accession Treaty on 22 January 1972, thereby bringing into the CFP joint management an estimated four fifths of all the fish off Western Europe. Norway decided not to join..."

    Cameron (yes, he) makes it clear in his autobiography that the EU are happy to bend the rules, but only in one direction.

    Up until the final few chapters, where it's very different, it reads as a eurosceptic book.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 17,836
    viewcode said:

    When t

    A reminder from Wiki of how we got the CFP in the first place:

    "The first rules were created in 1970. The original six Common Market members realised that four countries applying to join the Common Market at that time (Britain, Ireland, Denmark including Greenland, and Norway) would control the richest fishing grounds in the world. The original six therefore drew up Council Regulation 2141/70 giving all Members equal access to all fishing waters, even though the Treaty of Rome did not explicitly include fisheries in its agriculture chapter. This was adopted on the morning of 30 June 1970, a few hours before the applications to join were officially received. This ensured that the regulations became part of the acquis communautaire before the new members joined, obliging them to accept the regulation. In its accession negotiations, the UK at first refused to accept the rules but by the end of 1971 the UK gave way and signed the Accession Treaty on 22 January 1972, thereby bringing into the CFP joint management an estimated four fifths of all the fish off Western Europe. Norway decided not to join..."

    Bodging rarely produces a good result. Apart from chairs.

    And thanks for the reminder, Mr S.
    When the aircraft industry started using carbon fibre they ran into an enormous problem: suddenly nothing fit. They'd got so used to bodging subassemblies together they couldn't cope with brittle materials that can't be subject to percussive adjustment. This tradition was famously one of the reasons why the AEW Nimrod went over budget: not one of the refurbished wings fitted in the fuselages, since all of the wing roots were of slightly different sizes.
    The mind boggles.
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    More mixed messages on the Scotch question in Labour. Starmer is probably one of the few who hasn't afaik taken a position, which is probably a smart move.

    What are they doing?!

    If they back independence it means they lose their last few unionist votes in Scotland. And any chance or more Scots MPs or MSPs

    And if Scotland ever did go INDY it means goodbye Labour majority government in England for most of the time.

    Why don’t they follow your suggestion and go for devomax? It’s piss poor politics. Labour has a death wish.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 10,319
    edited January 10
    Byronic said:

    More mixed messages on the Scotch question in Labour. Starmer is probably one of the few who hasn't afaik taken a position, which is probably a smart move.

    What are they doing?!

    If they back independence it means they lose their last few unionist votes in Scotland. And any chance or more Scots MPs or MSPs

    And if Scotland ever did go INDY it means goodbye Labour majority government in England for most of the time.

    Why don’t they follow your suggestion and go for devomax? It’s piss poor politics. Labour has a death wish.
    'They' are not doing anything. An (English) arch remainer is predicting and doing his best to bring about the break up of the UK. We've seen the same phenomenon here. Now their precious EU is a lost cause, they want to see the UK burn. They don't give a shit about the UK - thank goodness sufficient numbers of people ignored their guff about remaining 'being in the UK's interests'.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 18,155
    edited January 10
    Byronic said:

    More mixed messages on the Scotch question in Labour. Starmer is probably one of the few who hasn't afaik taken a position, which is probably a smart move.

    What are they doing?!

    If they back independence it means they lose their last few unionist votes in Scotland. And any chance or more Scots MPs or MSPs

    And if Scotland ever did go INDY it means goodbye Labour majority government in England for most of the time.

    Why don’t they follow your suggestion and go for devomax? It’s piss poor politics. Labour has a death wish.
    I think Labour, and more specifically SLab, are having a tortuous 'conversation' about this, but as ever it's on the back of electoral failure and ever decreasing influence. If Scotland isn't independent in 10 years time I predict Lab folk will still be blathering on about federalism with an ever more decrepit Gordon Brown wheeled out to give it a veneer of believability.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 52,911
    Mr. Byronic, aye. It's handy for the SNP, but for Labour it's thick as pigshit.

    The only 'reasoning' that makes sense is a desire for the evil English* to be seen to suffer and have caused the destruction of the UK by having the temerity to leave the EU.

    I appreciate that's tenuous, but it's the only thing that I think fits.

    If they're actually pro-union they should endorse the 2014 referendum result. If they want to have Scotland leave they should support that aim.

    Supporting a referendum on something when you like the status quo and disapprove of the alternative would not necessarily be a smart move.

    *Wales, of course, doesn't exist in this mindset. Except when it's being oppressed by England, obviously.
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    Byronic said:

    More mixed messages on the Scotch question in Labour. Starmer is probably one of the few who hasn't afaik taken a position, which is probably a smart move.

    What are they doing?!

    If they back independence it means they lose their last few unionist votes in Scotland. And any chance or more Scots MPs or MSPs

    And if Scotland ever did go INDY it means goodbye Labour majority government in England for most of the time.

    Why don’t they follow your suggestion and go for devomax? It’s piss poor politics. Labour has a death wish.
    'They' are not doing anything. An (English) arch remainer is predicting and doing his best to bring about the break up of the UK. We've seen the same phenomenon here. Now their precious EU is a lost cause, they want to see the UK burn. They don't give a shit about the UK - thank goodness sufficient numbers of people ignored their guff about remaining 'being in the UK's interests'.
    Yes quite possibly. Bradshaw was always a c*nt
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 34,563
    Byronic said:

    More mixed messages on the Scotch question in Labour. Starmer is probably one of the few who hasn't afaik taken a position, which is probably a smart move.

    What are they doing?!

    If they back independence it means they lose their last few unionist votes in Scotland. And any chance or more Scots MPs or MSPs

    And if Scotland ever did go INDY it means goodbye Labour majority government in England for most of the time.

    Why don’t they follow your suggestion and go for devomax? It’s piss poor politics. Labour has a death wish.
    The Nits are cheering this on.

    That tells you everything you need to know.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 18,155
    viewcode said:

    When t

    A reminder from Wiki of how we got the CFP in the first place:

    "The first rules were created in 1970. The original six Common Market members realised that four countries applying to join the Common Market at that time (Britain, Ireland, Denmark including Greenland, and Norway) would control the richest fishing grounds in the world. The original six therefore drew up Council Regulation 2141/70 giving all Members equal access to all fishing waters, even though the Treaty of Rome did not explicitly include fisheries in its agriculture chapter. This was adopted on the morning of 30 June 1970, a few hours before the applications to join were officially received. This ensured that the regulations became part of the acquis communautaire before the new members joined, obliging them to accept the regulation. In its accession negotiations, the UK at first refused to accept the rules but by the end of 1971 the UK gave way and signed the Accession Treaty on 22 January 1972, thereby bringing into the CFP joint management an estimated four fifths of all the fish off Western Europe. Norway decided not to join..."

    Bodging rarely produces a good result. Apart from chairs.

    And thanks for the reminder, Mr S.
    When the aircraft industry started using carbon fibre they ran into an enormous problem: suddenly nothing fit. They'd got so used to bodging subassemblies together they couldn't cope with brittle materials that can't be subject to percussive adjustment. This tradition was famously one of the reasons why the AEW Nimrod went over budget: not one of the refurbished wings fitted in the fuselages, since all of the wing roots were of slightly different sizes.
    I remember the wings problem but wasn't aware of the cause. I've bodged a couple of cf bits in my time but I accept that a rear hugger on a bike is of a somewhat different order of magnitude than a wing :)
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 2,586

    I can confirm that SeanT did pay WilliamGlenn £1,000.

    Wasn't Sean's wager with William for £10,000?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 30,280

    I can confirm that SeanT did pay WilliamGlenn £1,000.

    Wasn't Sean's wager with William for £10,000?
    Nope, it was £1,000.

    The only £10,000 wager is @TheGreenMachine with me on the LibDems to win the next General Election.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 2,586
    rcs1000 said:

    I can confirm that SeanT did pay WilliamGlenn £1,000.

    Wasn't Sean's wager with William for £10,000?
    Nope, it was £1,000.

    The only £10,000 wager is @TheGreenMachine with me on the LibDems to win the next General Election.
    ? At what odds?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 18,155
    edited January 10

    I can confirm that SeanT did pay WilliamGlenn £1,000.

    Wasn't Sean's wager with William for £10,000?
    Started off 10k but discretion got the better of late night bevvied valour.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 44,318

    rcs1000 said:

    I can confirm that SeanT did pay WilliamGlenn £1,000.

    Wasn't Sean's wager with William for £10,000?
    Nope, it was £1,000.

    The only £10,000 wager is @TheGreenMachine with me on the LibDems to win the next General Election.
    ? At what odds?
    Wasn't it a "I'll give you a grand if this, and you give me a grand if that"?
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 5,528
    edited January 10
    tlg86 said:

    This is potentially huge for the entertainment industry:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-50599080

    Presenter Samira Ahmed has won the employment tribunal she brought against the BBC in a dispute over equal pay.

    Ahmed claimed she was underpaid for hosting audience feedback show Newswatch when compared with Jeremy Vine's salary for Points of View.

    If taken literally it could surely be extended everywhere.

    Mark Chapman presenting Match of the Day on Sunday is on a fraction of the pay Gary Lineker gets for MOTD on a Saturday. Their jobs are even more similar than Ahmed and Vine. Can Chapman now claim millions?

    What about two footballers in the same team playing the same number of games? They are doing the same job, working the same hours etc. But it would be completely ludicrous to pay every player the same.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 25,211
    tlg86 said:

    This is potentially huge for the entertainment industry:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-50599080

    Presenter Samira Ahmed has won the employment tribunal she brought against the BBC in a dispute over equal pay.

    Ahmed claimed she was underpaid for hosting audience feedback show Newswatch when compared with Jeremy Vine's salary for Points of View.

    The end result will be that the BBC doesn’t make any programmes themselves, doesn’t employ any ‘on-screen talent’ and commissions everything from third party production companies on a show-by-show basis.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 52,911
    Mr. 86/Mr. L, I agree, it's bonkers.
  • RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I can confirm that SeanT did pay WilliamGlenn £1,000.

    Wasn't Sean's wager with William for £10,000?
    Nope, it was £1,000.

    The only £10,000 wager is @TheGreenMachine with me on the LibDems to win the next General Election.
    ? At what odds?
    Wasn't it a "I'll give you a grand if this, and you give me a grand if that"?
    That would make more sense lol.
This discussion has been closed.