This is likely to be rubbish. I expect a repeat of the Irish Sea nonsense: we sign up to a LPF but the Government insists we can diverge.
Otherwise no deal beckons...
I cannot see any benefit unless we diverge to enable us to be flexible in our ex EU trade deals. Sajid is saying it as it is and of course there is a chorus of complaints from those who cannot see anything but BINO
I would not be surprised if HMG does refuse any attempt to hold us to a LPF and no doubt Boris will be on a plane to the US in February to start trade talks much to the anger of many remainers who cannot accept the UK is moving away from the EU
I do not think there will be a no deal but a very bare bones deal by the end of the year is more likely than a FTA
You speak sense but how can you reconcile everything?
A trade deal with the US looks very unlikely. A trade deal with the EU without some sort of LPF provision looks very unlikely.
So what do we do? Something has to break.
What the fuck is a LPF? Google (sorry DuckDuck Go) not helping me here!
This is likely to be rubbish. I expect a repeat of the Irish Sea nonsense: we sign up to a LPF but the Government insists we can diverge.
Otherwise no deal beckons...
I cannot see any benefit unless we diverge to enable us to be flexible in our ex EU trade deals. Sajid is saying it as it is and of course there is a chorus of complaints from those who cannot see anything but BINO
I would not be surprised if HMG does refuse any attempt to hold us to a LPF and no doubt Boris will be on a plane to the US in February to start trade talks much to the anger of many remainers who cannot accept the UK is moving away from the EU
I do not think there will be a no deal but a very bare bones deal by the end of the year is more likely than a FTA
You speak sense but how can you reconcile everything?
A trade deal with the US looks very unlikely. A trade deal with the EU without some sort of LPF provision looks very unlikely.
So what do we do? Something has to break.
What the fuck is a LPF? Google (sorry DuckDuck Go) not helping me here!
This is likely to be rubbish. I expect a repeat of the Irish Sea nonsense: we sign up to a LPF but the Government insists we can diverge.
Otherwise no deal beckons...
I cannot see any benefit unless we diverge to enable us to be flexible in our ex EU trade deals. Sajid is saying it as it is and of course there is a chorus of complaints from those who cannot see anything but BINO
I would not be surprised if HMG does refuse any attempt to hold us to a LPF and no doubt Boris will be on a plane to the US in February to start trade talks much to the anger of many remainers who cannot accept the UK is moving away from the EU
I do not think there will be a no deal but a very bare bones deal by the end of the year is more likely than a FTA
You speak sense but how can you reconcile everything?
A trade deal with the US looks very unlikely. A trade deal with the EU without some sort of LPF provision looks very unlikely.
So what do we do? Something has to break.
What the fuck is a LPF? Google (sorry DuckDuck Go) not helping me here!
Level playing field - the idea that if British goods (and services) are allowed to enter free circulation in the EU, they should be required to meet the same standards, so that British manufacturers (and service providers) do not start with an advantage.
This is likely to be rubbish. I expect a repeat of the Irish Sea nonsense: we sign up to a LPF but the Government insists we can diverge.
Otherwise no deal beckons...
I cannot see any benefit unless we diverge to enable us to be flexible in our ex EU trade deals. Sajid is saying it as it is and of course there is a chorus of complaints from those who cannot see anything but BINO
I would not be surprised if HMG does refuse any attempt to hold us to a LPF and no doubt Boris will be on a plane to the US in February to start trade talks much to the anger of many remainers who cannot accept the UK is moving away from the EU
I do not think there will be a no deal but a very bare bones deal by the end of the year is more likely than a FTA
You speak sense but how can you reconcile everything?
A trade deal with the US looks very unlikely. A trade deal with the EU without some sort of LPF provision looks very unlikely.
So what do we do? Something has to break.
What the fuck is a LPF? Google (sorry DuckDuck Go) not helping me here!
This is likely to be rubbish. I expect a repeat of the Irish Sea nonsense: we sign up to a LPF but the Government insists we can diverge.
Otherwise no deal beckons...
I cannot see any benefit unless we diverge to enable us to be flexible in our ex EU trade deals. Sajid is saying it as it is and of course there is a chorus of complaints from those who cannot see anything but BINO
I would not be surprised if HMG does refuse any attempt to hold us to a LPF and no doubt Boris will be on a plane to the US in February to start trade talks much to the anger of many remainers who cannot accept the UK is moving away from the EU
I do not think there will be a no deal but a very bare bones deal by the end of the year is more likely than a FTA
You speak sense but how can you reconcile everything?
A trade deal with the US looks very unlikely. A trade deal with the EU without some sort of LPF provision looks very unlikely.
So what do we do? Something has to break.
What the fuck is a LPF? Google (sorry DuckDuck Go) not helping me here!
Level Playing Field. A doomed attempt to pretend the tories aren't going to perform ritual excarnation on environmental, social and employment protections.
This is likely to be rubbish. I expect a repeat of the Irish Sea nonsense: we sign up to a LPF but the Government insists we can diverge.
Otherwise no deal beckons...
I cannot see any benefit unless we diverge to enable us to be flexible in our ex EU trade deals. Sajid is saying it as it is and of course there is a chorus of complaints from those who cannot see anything but BINO
I would not be surprised if HMG does refuse any attempt to hold us to a LPF and no doubt Boris will be on a plane to the US in February to start trade talks much to the anger of many remainers who cannot accept the UK is moving away from the EU
I do not think there will be a no deal but a very bare bones deal by the end of the year is more likely than a FTA
You speak sense but how can you reconcile everything?
A trade deal with the US looks very unlikely. A trade deal with the EU without some sort of LPF provision looks very unlikely.
So what do we do? Something has to break.
What the fuck is a LPF? Google (sorry DuckDuck Go) not helping me here!
Level playing field - the idea that if British goods (and services) are allowed to enter free circulation in the EU, they should be required to meet the same standards, so that British manufacturers (and service providers) do not start with an advantage.
You do not need an LPF for free circulation. You make a product to the EU product rules in an economy that does not implement EU working directives, REACH, H&S, etc and as long as you meet the EU rules for placing that product in the single market i.e you can legally prove your goods meet EU product rules, then it has free circulation in the single market.
Struggling to see many advantages of a trade deal with the US, to be honest. Have any of its advocates visited a US supermarket recently, and witnessed the garbage that passes for food over there?
Only imbeciles could think a deal with US will be anywhere near a deal with EU. It beggars belief.
This is likely to be rubbish. I expect a repeat of the Irish Sea nonsense: we sign up to a LPF but the Government insists we can diverge.
Otherwise no deal beckons...
I cannot see any benefit unless we diverge to enable us to be flexible in our ex EU trade deals. Sajid is saying it as it is and of course there is a chorus of complaints from those who cannot see anything but BINO
I would not be surprised if HMG does refuse any attempt to hold us to a LPF and no doubt Boris will be on a plane to the US in February to start trade talks much to the anger of many remainers who cannot accept the UK is moving away from the EU
I do not think there will be a no deal but a very bare bones deal by the end of the year is more likely than a FTA
You speak sense but how can you reconcile everything?
A trade deal with the US looks very unlikely. A trade deal with the EU without some sort of LPF provision looks very unlikely.
So what do we do? Something has to break.
I agree that things will be choppy and I do not see a US trade deal with Trump, but no doubt sector by sector deals will happen, both with the EU and US
I cannot see a glorious new beginning but neither do I see a disaster
The one thing that is certain is that it will be fascinating to watch over the coming months and years
Won’t sector by sector deals be politically difficult?
MPs wont be happy if the primary employers in their constituencies don’t get deals and others do.
A lot of this is difficult and basically it would be great if we could wish it away but we cannot and so the Country needs to move forward and hope that Boris with his majority can see it through. There is no alternative for the next 5 years
O/T: my (not particularly active or prominent) CLP has increased its membership by 25% since the election. Make of it what you will, but it's likely to be typical. We have no polling data on these members (since both polls conducted so far have focused on people who were already members). Nor do I have much clue what they think, though I'd guess that most super-Corbynites were members already.
Most likely people who had given up on Labour under the shameful Corbyn regime coming back in the hope that there is still something to save. Probably good for SKS , almost certainly not for RLB.
I rejoined on the day Corbyn announced he was standing down. I know many others who have done the same. It's just over £4 a month DD, so why not?
I rejoined the Monday after the GE. £2.21 per month DD, unwaged. I'll either cancel it in April if RLB is elected, or otherwise supplement it with a regular donation.
I thought you were a Tory?
Didn't you see my response the last time you said that?
Well you were and are wrong. I voted Leave but that doesn't make me a Tory. I am a socialist, just a more moderate one than the revolutionary socialist extremist currently leading the party I have rejoined. I have been a Labour member for 37 of my 41 adult years.
1. Defeat the SNP. 2. Detoxify Labour. 3. Deploy the LDs.
Meanwhile the Tories have the task of:
Defeating the SNP secure in the knowledge that if they don't succeed England and Wales become much easier for Tories to win, and more difficult for the left
Retoxifying Labour. So far the Tories have had to do nothing and let Labour toxify itself.
Ensuring that the LDs are popular enough to take some votes off Labour where necessary, and vice versa.
This is likely to be rubbish. I expect a repeat of the Irish Sea nonsense: we sign up to a LPF but the Government insists we can diverge.
Otherwise no deal beckons...
I cannot see any benefit unless we diverge to enable us to be flexible in our ex EU trade deals. Sajid is saying it as it is and of course there is a chorus of complaints from those who cannot see anything but BINO
I would not be surprised if HMG does refuse any attempt to hold us to a LPF and no doubt Boris will be on a plane to the US in February to start trade talks much to the anger of many remainers who cannot accept the UK is moving away from the EU
I do not think there will be a no deal but a very bare bones deal by the end of the year is more likely than a FTA
You speak sense but how can you reconcile everything?
A trade deal with the US looks very unlikely. A trade deal with the EU without some sort of LPF provision looks very unlikely.
So what do we do? Something has to break.
What the fuck is a LPF? Google (sorry DuckDuck Go) not helping me here!
Level playing field - the idea that if British goods (and services) are allowed to enter free circulation in the EU, they should be required to meet the same standards, so that British manufacturers (and service providers) do not start with an advantage.
That goes both ways and extends to social provisions on employers. So, for example, to avoid EU firms being able to undercut UK ones, is the EU offering to change its rules so that EU employers are required to offer 52 weeks maternity leave, as in the UK?
This is likely to be rubbish. I expect a repeat of the Irish Sea nonsense: we sign up to a LPF but the Government insists we can diverge.
Otherwise no deal beckons...
No Deal does beckon I don't know why so many people don't see this.
No Deal is a relative term. We do actually have a deal to prevent a complete no deal. The Irish border issue has been resolved, as have the UK's payments to the EU, so there should be less acrimoney - which is a good thing.
What we are facing is the failure to agree an FTA. Of course, at a minimum that will mean significant extra burdens for UK exporters to the single market in both goods and services, as well as higher priced EU imports. But the government has a mandate for that to happen if necessary, so there should be few if any grumbles!!
The mandate will soon be shaky when the plebs do not see sunny uplands but rather wastelands. When the penny drops and they are paying through the nose, out of a job, etc, it will be interesting to see how the mandate goes.
This is likely to be rubbish. I expect a repeat of the Irish Sea nonsense: we sign up to a LPF but the Government insists we can diverge.
Otherwise no deal beckons...
I cannot see any benefit unless we diverge to enable us to be flexible in our ex EU trade deals. Sajid is saying it as it is and of course there is a chorus of complaints from those who cannot see anything but BINO
I would not be surprised if HMG does refuse any attempt to hold us to a LPF and no doubt Boris will be on a plane to the US in February to start trade talks much to the anger of many remainers who cannot accept the UK is moving away from the EU
I do not think there will be a no deal but a very bare bones deal by the end of the year is more likely than a FTA
You speak sense but how can you reconcile everything?
A trade deal with the US looks very unlikely. A trade deal with the EU without some sort of LPF provision looks very unlikely.
So what do we do? Something has to break.
What the fuck is a LPF? Google (sorry DuckDuck Go) not helping me here!
Level playing field - the idea that if British goods (and services) are allowed to enter free circulation in the EU, they should be required to meet the same standards, so that British manufacturers (and service providers) do not start with an advantage.
That goes both ways and extends to social provisions on employers. So, for example, to avoid EU firms being able to undercut UK ones, is the EU offering to change its rules so that EU employers are required to offer 52 weeks maternity leave, as in the UK?
O/T: my (not particularly active or prominent) CLP has increased its membership by 25% since the election. Make of it what you will, but it's likely to be typical. We have no polling data on these members (since both polls conducted so far have focused on people who were already members). Nor do I have much clue what they think, though I'd guess that most super-Corbynites were members already.
Most likely people who had given up on Labour under the shameful Corbyn regime coming back in the hope that there is still something to save. Probably good for SKS , almost certainly not for RLB.
I rejoined on the day Corbyn announced he was standing down. I know many others who have done the same. It's just over £4 a month DD, so why not?
I rejoined the Monday after the GE. £2.21 per month DD, unwaged. I'll either cancel it in April if RLB is elected, or otherwise supplement it with a regular donation.
I thought you were a Tory?
Didn't you see my response the last time you said that?
Well you were and are wrong. I voted Leave but that doesn't make me a Tory. I am a socialist, just a more moderate one than the revolutionary socialist extremist currently leading the party I have rejoined. I have been a Labour member for 37 of my 41 adult years.
No I didn’t, otherwise I wouldn’t have asked it! Who did you vote for?
This is likely to be rubbish. I expect a repeat of the Irish Sea nonsense: we sign up to a LPF but the Government insists we can diverge.
Otherwise no deal beckons...
I cannot see any benefit unless we diverge to enable us to be flexible in our ex EU trade deals. Sajid is saying it as it is and of course there is a chorus of complaints from those who cannot see anything but BINO
I would not be surprised if HMG does refuse any attempt to hold us to a LPF and no doubt Boris will be on a plane to the US in February to start trade talks much to the anger of many remainers who cannot accept the UK is moving away from the EU
I do not think there will be a no deal but a very bare bones deal by the end of the year is more likely than a FTA
You speak sense but how can you reconcile everything?
A trade deal with the US looks very unlikely. A trade deal with the EU without some sort of LPF provision looks very unlikely.
So what do we do? Something has to break.
I agree that things will be choppy and I do not see a US trade deal with Trump, but no doubt sector by sector deals will happen, both with the EU and US
I cannot see a glorious new beginning but neither do I see a disaster
The one thing that is certain is that it will be fascinating to watch over the coming months and years
Won’t sector by sector deals be politically difficult?
MPs wont be happy if the primary employers in their constituencies don’t get deals and others do.
A lot of this is difficult and basically it would be great if we could wish it away but we cannot and so the Country needs to move forward and hope that Boris with his majority can see it through. There is no alternative for the next 5 years
Don’t you see the contradiction though? Noone was told this would be difficult. We were told this would be easy.
I’m not disagreeing with your assertion that we don’t have a choice but if real negative consequences are felt things could get rather nasty for the government, majority or not.
Struggling to see many advantages of a trade deal with the US, to be honest. Have any of its advocates visited a US supermarket recently, and witnessed the garbage that passes for food over there?
Likewise you can go to ASDA and see what garbage passes for food in much of Europe.
We're very fortunate in the range, quality and price of food we have in this country.
Indeed, so why do we need to import the shite they eat over there? Food standards in the States are lower than here.
Lots of standards are lower in other countries than they are here.
For example there wouldn't be much Made in China tat or Made in Bangladesh clothing if we insisted on the same environmental and employment standards as the UK has.
And on the wider food issue the availability of chlorinated chicken would be rather less of a threat to the nation's health than the over abundance of grotty takeaways in deprived areas is:
@another_richard you’re right but its really rather irrelevant. The EU are insisting on a LPF because of the geographic proximity of the UK. They want to avoid a competitor racing to the bottom on their border.
You can argue whether or not you think this is fair or justifiable until you are blue in the face but unfortunately that is the reality of the situation.
Struggling to see many advantages of a trade deal with the US, to be honest. Have any of its advocates visited a US supermarket recently, and witnessed the garbage that passes for food over there?
Likewise you can go to ASDA and see what garbage passes for food in much of Europe.
We're very fortunate in the range, quality and price of food we have in this country.
Indeed, so why do we need to import the shite they eat over there? Food standards in the States are lower than here.
Lots of standards are lower in other countries than they are here.
For example there wouldn't be much Made in China tat or Made in Bangladesh clothing if we insisted on the same environmental and employment standards as the UK has.
And on the wider food issue the availability of chlorinated chicken would be rather less of a threat to the nation's health than the over abundance of grotty takeaways in deprived areas is:
Yes, you are not really making much of a case though are you? The fact that we already allow too much shite into our food economy is categorically not an argument for allowing even more.
We should tighten up the regulations, not open the doors to yet more crap.
I cannot see any benefit unless we diverge to enable us to be flexible in our ex EU trade deals. Sajid is saying it as it is and of course there is a chorus of complaints from those who cannot see anything but BINO
I would not be surprised if HMG does refuse any attempt to hold us to a LPF and no doubt Boris will be on a plane to the US in February to start trade talks much to the anger of many remainers who cannot accept the UK is moving away from the EU
I do not think there will be a no deal but a very bare bones deal by the end of the year is more likely than a FTA
You speak sense but how can you reconcile everything?
A trade deal with the US looks very unlikely. A trade deal with the EU without some sort of LPF provision looks very unlikely.
So what do we do? Something has to break.
I agree that things will be choppy and I do not see a US trade deal with Trump, but no doubt sector by sector deals will happen, both with the EU and US
I cannot see a glorious new beginning but neither do I see a disaster
The one thing that is certain is that it will be fascinating to watch over the coming months and years
Won’t sector by sector deals be politically difficult?
MPs wont be happy if the primary employers in their constituencies don’t get deals and others do.
A lot of this is difficult and basically it would be great if we could wish it away but we cannot and so the Country needs to move forward and hope that Boris with his majority can see it through. There is no alternative for the next 5 years
Don’t you see the contradiction though? Noone was told this would be difficult. We were told this would be easy.
I’m not disagreeing with your assertion that we don’t have a choice but if real negative consequences are felt things could get rather nasty for the government, majority or not.
Governments can fall even with a majority.
I know some leavers gave the impression it would be easy but equally remainers predicted economic armageddon. Constantly visiting the campaign only results in stale arguments when the agenda has moved on and in two weeks we exit subject to transistion
Should things become negative it may well have issues for HMG but for that to be relevant the Country needs a relevant opposition and that seems quite some way away
@another_richard you’re right but its really rather irrelevant. The EU are insisting on a LPF because of the geographic proximity of the UK. They want to avoid a competitor racing to the bottom on their border.
You can argue whether or not you think this is fair or justifiable until you are blue in the face but unfortunately that is the reality of the situation.
The justification is geography, the reason is the LPF gives the EU a degree of control over the UK economy.
@another_richard you’re right but its really rather irrelevant. The EU are insisting on a LPF because of the geographic proximity of the UK. They want to avoid a competitor racing to the bottom on their border.
You can argue whether or not you think this is fair or justifiable until you are blue in the face but unfortunately that is the reality of the situation.
I'm really not too bothered one way or another at present and rather expect a moderate technocratic agreement.
The chances of a 'race to the bottom' are pretty much zero as regulations tend to become more stringent rather than less.
I know some leavers gave the impression it would be easy but equally remainers predicted economic armageddon. Constantly visiting the campaign only results in stale arguments when the agenda has moved on and in two weeks we exit subject to transistion
Should things become negative it may well have issues for HMG but for that to be relevant the Country needs a relevant opposition and that seems quite some way away
But if there is negative economic consequences severe enough to cause the government problems then the Remainers would be proved right. That’s the problem for the Government.
They now have to make real decisions. Brexit now becomes real rather than all things to all people.
@another_richard you’re right but its really rather irrelevant. The EU are insisting on a LPF because of the geographic proximity of the UK. They want to avoid a competitor racing to the bottom on their border.
You can argue whether or not you think this is fair or justifiable until you are blue in the face but unfortunately that is the reality of the situation.
The justification is geography, the reason is the LPF gives the EU a degree of control over the UK economy.
Again, that doesn’t matter. Justifiable or not that is the reality of the situation.
I know some leavers gave the impression it would be easy but equally remainers predicted economic armageddon. Constantly visiting the campaign only results in stale arguments when the agenda has moved on and in two weeks we exit subject to transistion
Should things become negative it may well have issues for HMG but for that to be relevant the Country needs a relevant opposition and that seems quite some way away
But if there is negative economic consequences severe enough to cause the government problems then the Remainers would be proved right. That’s the problem for the Government.
They now have to make real decisions. Brexit now becomes real rather than all things to all people.
I am not sure either side will be proven to be right. Once the leave vote was confirmed the politicians should have come together to resolve the issues but they polarised each other sadly
I am sure there are many labour mps and ex labour mps who now bitterly regret not having passed TM deal
1. Defeat the SNP. 2. Detoxify Labour. 3. Deploy the LDs.
Meanwhile the Tories have the task of:
Defeating the SNP secure in the knowledge that if they don't succeed England and Wales become much easier for Tories to win, and more difficult for the left
Retoxifying Labour. So far the Tories have had to do nothing and let Labour toxify itself.
Ensuring that the LDs are popular enough to take some votes off Labour where necessary, and vice versa.
I wonder which group has the easier job?
If Starmer won a it is possible to see Scottish Labour making some gains from the SNP and moderate Tory voting Remainers or soft Leavers being prepared to consider voting Labour or risk voting LD in a way they were not under Corbyn.
Tories should not be complacent if Starmer beats Long Bailey, the Corbynista candidate as looks likely
Struggling to see many advantages of a trade deal with the US, to be honest. Have any of its advocates visited a US supermarket recently, and witnessed the garbage that passes for food over there?
Likewise you can go to ASDA and see what garbage passes for food in much of Europe.
We're very fortunate in the range, quality and price of food we have in this country.
Indeed, so why do we need to import the shite they eat over there? Food standards in the States are lower than here.
Lots of standards are lower in other countries than they are here.
For example there wouldn't be much Made in China tat or Made in Bangladesh clothing if we insisted on the same environmental and employment standards as the UK has.
And on the wider food issue the availability of chlorinated chicken would be rather less of a threat to the nation's health than the over abundance of grotty takeaways in deprived areas is:
Yes, you are not really making much of a case though are you? The fact that we already allow too much shite into our food economy is categorically not an argument for allowing even more.
We should tighten up the regulations, not open the doors to yet more crap.
Well you don't let in more crap for nothing do you - you only do so if you get something in return.
What that would be is for other people to negotiate about.
Struggling to see many advantages of a trade deal with the US, to be honest. Have any of its advocates visited a US supermarket recently, and witnessed the garbage that passes for food over there?
Likewise you can go to ASDA and see what garbage passes for food in much of Europe.
We're very fortunate in the range, quality and price of food we have in this country.
Indeed, so why do we need to import the shite they eat over there? Food standards in the States are lower than here.
Lots of standards are lower in other countries than they are here.
For example there wouldn't be much Made in China tat or Made in Bangladesh clothing if we insisted on the same environmental and employment standards as the UK has.
And on the wider food issue the availability of chlorinated chicken would be rather less of a threat to the nation's health than the over abundance of grotty takeaways in deprived areas is:
Yes, you are not really making much of a case though are you? The fact that we already allow too much shite into our food economy is categorically not an argument for allowing even more.
We should tighten up the regulations, not open the doors to yet more crap.
Well you don't let in more crap for nothing do you - you only do so if you get something in return.
What that would be is for other people to negotiate about.
Why would you want to let more crap food into our economy?
I know some leavers gave the impression it would be easy but equally remainers predicted economic armageddon. Constantly visiting the campaign only results in stale arguments when the agenda has moved on and in two weeks we exit subject to transistion
Should things become negative it may well have issues for HMG but for that to be relevant the Country needs a relevant opposition and that seems quite some way away
But if there is negative economic consequences severe enough to cause the government problems then the Remainers would be proved right. That’s the problem for the Government.
They now have to make real decisions. Brexit now becomes real rather than all things to all people.
I suspect that Brexit overall will have a negative impact, but not a cataclysmic one. In a similar way to the way the economy reacted to the initial vote, it wasn’t great but the bottom didn’t fall out. I may be proved horribly wrong and it might destroy the economy, but it seems to me more likely that it will impede it but not be enough to sink the ship.
Generally when we get prophecies of doom there is some truth in them, but often on this topic it tends to be a bit overstated. I don’t want Brexit and in an economic sense I will certainly say there will be some negative impact, but the question is to what degree and on that I do think that people’s strong opinions on the whole topic can produce a fair amount of hyperbole.
Level Playing Field. So according to the EU documentation, it’s to prevent the UK “outcompeting” the EU by way of lowering environmental, state aid, tax, and labour rights below the current (or future) aligned standards.
I know some leavers gave the impression it would be easy but equally remainers predicted economic armageddon. Constantly visiting the campaign only results in stale arguments when the agenda has moved on and in two weeks we exit subject to transistion
Should things become negative it may well have issues for HMG but for that to be relevant the Country needs a relevant opposition and that seems quite some way away
But if there is negative economic consequences severe enough to cause the government problems then the Remainers would be proved right. That’s the problem for the Government.
They now have to make real decisions. Brexit now becomes real rather than all things to all people.
I suspect that Brexit overall will have a negative impact, but not a cataclysmic one. In a similar way to the way the economy reacted to the initial vote, it wasn’t great but the bottom didn’t fall out. I may be proved horribly wrong and it might destroy the economy, but it seems to me more likely that it will impede it but not be enough to sink the ship.
Generally when we get prophecies of doom there is some truth in them, but often on this topic it tends to be a bit overstated. I don’t want Brexit and in an economic sense I will certainly say there will be some negative impact, but the question is to what degree and on that I do think that people’s strong opinions on the whole topic can produce a fair amount of hyperbole.
I know some leavers gave the impression it would be easy but equally remainers predicted economic armageddon. Constantly visiting the campaign only results in stale arguments when the agenda has moved on and in two weeks we exit subject to transistion
Should things become negative it may well have issues for HMG but for that to be relevant the Country needs a relevant opposition and that seems quite some way away
But if there is negative economic consequences severe enough to cause the government problems then the Remainers would be proved right. That’s the problem for the Government.
They now have to make real decisions. Brexit now becomes real rather than all things to all people.
I am not sure either side will be proven to be right. Once the leave vote was confirmed the politicians should have come together to resolve the issues but they polarised each other sadly
I am sure there are many labour mps and ex labour mps who now bitterly regret not having passed TM deal
There is a good argument that they should have done from the pure standpoint of parliamentary arithmetic. Yes they could have lost some London seats to the Lib Dem’s in that circumstance but the far higher number of northern and midlands leave seats might have been protected.
Struggling to see many advantages of a trade deal with the US, to be honest. Have any of its advocates visited a US supermarket recently, and witnessed the garbage that passes for food over there?
Likewise you can go to ASDA and see what garbage passes for food in much of Europe.
We're very fortunate in the range, quality and price of food we have in this country.
Indeed, so why do we need to import the shite they eat over there? Food standards in the States are lower than here.
Lots of standards are lower in other countries than they are here.
For example there wouldn't be much Made in China tat or Made in Bangladesh clothing if we insisted on the same environmental and employment standards as the UK has.
And on the wider food issue the availability of chlorinated chicken would be rather less of a threat to the nation's health than the over abundance of grotty takeaways in deprived areas is:
Yes, you are not really making much of a case though are you? The fact that we already allow too much shite into our food economy is categorically not an argument for allowing even more.
We should tighten up the regulations, not open the doors to yet more crap.
Well you don't let in more crap for nothing do you - you only do so if you get something in return.
What that would be is for other people to negotiate about.
Why would you want to let more crap food into our economy?
As I said to get something else in return.
Given that we have managed to survive American raisins and cranberries having access to our stomachs I'll not lie awake at the possibility of other such imports.
There are much more important issues relating to both nutritional health and import standards IMO.
Struggling to see many advantages of a trade deal with the US, to be honest. Have any of its advocates visited a US supermarket recently, and witnessed the garbage that passes for food over there?
Likewise you can go to ASDA and see what garbage passes for food in much of Europe.
We're very fortunate in the range, quality and price of food we have in this country.
Indeed, so why do we need to import the shite they eat over there? Food standards in the States are lower than here.
Lots of standards are lower in other countries than they are here.
For example there wouldn't be much Made in China tat or Made in Bangladesh clothing if we insisted on the same environmental and employment standards as the UK has.
And on the wider food issue the availability of chlorinated chicken would be rather less of a threat to the nation's health than the over abundance of grotty takeaways in deprived areas is:
Yes, you are not really making much of a case though are you? The fact that we already allow too much shite into our food economy is categorically not an argument for allowing even more.
We should tighten up the regulations, not open the doors to yet more crap.
Well you don't let in more crap for nothing do you - you only do so if you get something in return.
What that would be is for other people to negotiate about.
Why would you want to let more crap food into our economy?
As I said to get something else in return.
Given that we have managed to survive American raisins and cranberries having access to our stomachs I'll not lie awake at the possibility of other such imports.
There are much more important issues relating to both nutritional health and import standards IMO.
Importation of US food is not the problem. The problem is the potential requirement for banning country of origin on packaging and other things of that nature.
Struggling to see many advantages of a trade deal with the US, to be honest. Have any of its advocates visited a US supermarket recently, and witnessed the garbage that passes for food over there?
Likewise you can go to ASDA and see what garbage passes for food in much of Europe.
We're very fortunate in the range, quality and price of food we have in this country.
Indeed, so why do we need to import the shite they eat over there? Food standards in the States are lower than here.
Lots of standards are lower in other countries than they are here.
For example there wouldn't be much Made in China tat or Made in Bangladesh clothing if we insisted on the same environmental and employment standards as the UK has.
And on the wider food issue the availability of chlorinated chicken would be rather less of a threat to the nation's health than the over abundance of grotty takeaways in deprived areas is:
Yes, you are not really making much of a case though are you? The fact that we already allow too much shite into our food economy is categorically not an argument for allowing even more.
We should tighten up the regulations, not open the doors to yet more crap.
Well you don't let in more crap for nothing do you - you only do so if you get something in return.
What that would be is for other people to negotiate about.
Why would you want to let more crap food into our economy?
As I said to get something else in return.
Given that we have managed to survive American raisins and cranberries having access to our stomachs I'll not lie awake at the possibility of other such imports.
There are much more important issues relating to both nutritional health and import standards IMO.
Importation of US food is not the problem. The problem is the potential requirement for banning country of origin on packaging and other things of that nature.
I agree, that shouldn't be stopped.
Customers should always have the appropriate information when making a purchase.
And any respectable business should not wish to hide the origin of its products.
Struggling to see many advantages of a trade deal with the US, to be honest. Have any of its advocates visited a US supermarket recently, and witnessed the garbage that passes for food over there?
Likewise you can go to ASDA and see what garbage passes for food in much of Europe.
We're very fortunate in the range, quality and price of food we have in this country.
Indeed, so why do we need to import the shite they eat over there? Food standards in the States are lower than here.
Lots of standards are lower in other countries than they are here.
For example there wouldn't be much Made in China tat or Made in Bangladesh clothing if we insisted on the same environmental and employment standards as the UK has.
And on the wider food issue the availability of chlorinated chicken would be rather less of a threat to the nation's health than the over abundance of grotty takeaways in deprived areas is:
Yes, you are not really making much of a case though are you? The fact that we already allow too much shite into our food economy is categorically not an argument for allowing even more.
We should tighten up the regulations, not open the doors to yet more crap.
Well you don't let in more crap for nothing do you - you only do so if you get something in return.
What that would be is for other people to negotiate about.
Why would you want to let more crap food into our economy?
Importation of US food is not the problem. The problem is the potential requirement for banning country of origin on packaging and other things of that nature.
I agree, that shouldn't be stopped.
Customers should always have the appropriate information when making a purchase.
And any respectable business should not wish to hide the origin of its products.
Level Playing Field. So according to the EU documentation, it’s to prevent the UK “outcompeting” the EU by way of lowering environmental, state aid, tax, and labour rights below the current (or future) aligned standards.
God, The Times is extremely depressing today. If anyone says there aren't any victims from PC culture then they are wrong.
Don’t make this about “PC culture”. You’re dangerously close to blaming “woke liberals” for atrocities such as this.
This is about incompetence and poor policies and nothing else.
No this is about the Police being too scared to get involved for fear of having the race card played against them. I thought we were all meant to be equal before the law.. Obviously not
Tim would have accused you of drooling over child abuse
Who cares what he would have thought.
I am angry - as anyone should be, really - at the utter incompetence of various authorities charged with vitally important duties, as my thread header yesterday should have made clear.
If the police ignore this because of “community sensitivities” what are the chances of them doing anything about the abuse of Asian women in those same communities (another scandal waiting to be exposed)?
If the police ignore the plight of white under-age girls on the grounds that they were “offering sexual favours”, what are the chances of them doing anything about girls (and boys) abused by other sorts of abusers?
Rather than using this abysmal issue as a way to make points about “wokeness” or PC culture or whatever, we ought to be furious about the incompetence shown and demanding better, much much better. Action - not point-scoring - is needed.
God, The Times is extremely depressing today. If anyone says there aren't any victims from PC culture then they are wrong.
Don’t make this about “PC culture”. You’re dangerously close to blaming “woke liberals” for atrocities such as this.
This is about incompetence and poor policies and nothing else.
No this is about the Police being too scared to get involved for fear of having the race card played against them. I thought we were all meant to be equal before the law.. Obviously not
In fairness several hundred are now serving long sentences. There has been some progress. These are difficult cases with very damaged and unreliable witnesses who sadly have been so abused by so many that they make very poor witnesses. The passage of time doesn’t help either.
In Scotland 90% of cases in the High Court are now sex cases, mainly historical. The conviction rate is low but nonetheless the prisons are increasingly becoming like old folks homes, trying to deal with a huge range of health problems they did not have with the traditional young offender. What this shows is that this is by no means just a SE Asia problem. The backlog is massive and depressing.
God, The Times is extremely depressing today. If anyone says there aren't any victims from PC culture then they are wrong.
Don’t make this about “PC culture”. You’re dangerously close to blaming “woke liberals” for atrocities such as this.
This is about incompetence and poor policies and nothing else.
No this is about the Police being too scared to get involved for fear of having the race card played against them. I thought we were all meant to be equal before the law.. Obviously not
I’m not defending the police whatsoever.
I’m merely wary of framing this in a way that has the potential indirectly blame this on those who seek a fairer society.
The Police being too scared to get involved for fear of having the race card played screams cowardice of leadership. No one who promotes “political correctness” would support the actions of the Police here.
Anyone who put cowardice ahead of the welfare of these children should be held to account.
The circulation of the Sun is circa 1.2m so that’s around 360k people. 3.5% roughly of the Labour vote share.
So I wouldn’t say “loads” is accurate but clearly Labour need to be reaching out to these people.
It is not just about readership. The Tories were pretty much finally broken when the Sun came out for Tony B half way through 97 campaign. The impact goes way beyond the readers of the actual paper. Perhaps you can argue that this impact will be a lot less in the social media age, but even so.
Finally, candidates start to present the loony Corbynites with the truth: trashing Blair/Brown's government just undermines your case for a Lab government:
Finally, candidates start to present the loony Corbynites with the truth: trashing Blair/Brown's government just undermines your case for a Lab government:
Can we make it compulsory for all these candidates to read 'The Unfinished Revolution'?
Diane Abbott leading the national debate.... I now understand Corbyn - it was a national suicide pact. Everything falls in to place, McDonnell as chancellor would be the obvious thing.
It's going to get so much better though. Burgon as chancellor, because Starmer doesn't like him and doesn't like numbers either.
Finally, candidates start to present the loony Corbynites with the truth: trashing Blair/Brown's government just undermines your case for a Lab government:
The circulation of the Sun is circa 1.2m so that’s around 360k people. 3.5% roughly of the Labour vote share.
So I wouldn’t say “loads” is accurate but clearly Labour need to be reaching out to these people.
It is not just about readership. The Tories were pretty much finally broken when the Sun came out for Tony B half way through 97 campaign. The impact goes way beyond the readers of the actual paper. Perhaps you can argue that this impact will be a lot less in the social media age, but even so.
Print media and their associated web sites are going to be almost completely irrelevant by the next election. Dank memes, shitposts and deep fakes will be what matters.
Finally, candidates start to present the loony Corbynites with the truth: trashing Blair/Brown's government just undermines your case for a Lab government:
I know some leavers gave the impression it would be easy but equally remainers predicted economic armageddon. Constantly visiting the campaign only results in stale arguments when the agenda has moved on and in two weeks we exit subject to transistion
Should things become negative it may well have issues for HMG but for that to be relevant the Country needs a relevant opposition and that seems quite some way away
But if there is negative economic consequences severe enough to cause the government problems then the Remainers would be proved right. That’s the problem for the Government.
They now have to make real decisions. Brexit now becomes real rather than all things to all people.
I suspect that Brexit overall will have a negative impact, but not a cataclysmic one. In a similar way to the way the economy reacted to the initial vote, it wasn’t great but the bottom didn’t fall out. I may be proved horribly wrong and it might destroy the economy, but it seems to me more likely that it will impede it but not be enough to sink the ship.
Generally when we get prophecies of doom there is some truth in them, but often on this topic it tends to be a bit overstated. I don’t want Brexit and in an economic sense I will certainly say there will be some negative impact, but the question is to what degree and on that I do think that people’s strong opinions on the whole topic can produce a fair amount of hyperbole.
You have to distinguish between short term (i.e. 1-2 year) and long term (5+ year) effects. Changing the patterns of the UK's trade will inevitably cause some dislocation in the short term, but the longer term outlook could be potentially very different for the UK. There is also the short term damage caused by uncertainty - thanks to politics the whole process has dragged out longer than it need have.
The police turning a blind eye because they are worried about race relations offends because it is a disgrace. But so is the abuse of children in care, young drug addicts selling their bodies, people trafficked into this country for sex, the abuse of power in so many places of work, domestic abuse and the level of abuse of step children, I could go on all day.
The bottom line is that the police and the courts have a long list of bad excuses for ignoring sexual abuse and race is only one. The underlying feature is victims that we just don’t care enough about as a society. It’s not just the police’s shame, it shames us all.
The circulation of the Sun is circa 1.2m so that’s around 360k people. 3.5% roughly of the Labour vote share.
So I wouldn’t say “loads” is accurate but clearly Labour need to be reaching out to these people.
It is not just about readership. The Tories were pretty much finally broken when the Sun came out for Tony B half way through 97 campaign. The impact goes way beyond the readers of the actual paper. Perhaps you can argue that this impact will be a lot less in the social media age, but even so.
Print media and their associated web sites are going to be almost completely irrelevant by the next election. Dank memes, shitposts and deep fakes will be what matters.
Did you get this package of ideas on approval? I'd send it back if you did.
I find it quite funny that the Labour Party seem about to elect another man and it seems like a complete walkover. And it's not like the female candidates are particularly lacking either. That's not even me saying he isn't the best candidate, but it's still funny.
33 is the number to get on the ballot via CLP nominations
The Starmer/Rayner combo was the outcome in 10 CLPs (other than the 5 mentioned above, also Richmond Park, Bosworth, Bolton North East, Leigh) Long-Bailey/Burgon was the choice in Warley. Long-Bailey/Rayner was the outcome in Preston. Chatham & Aylesford went for Long-Bailey/Butler Glasgow Shettleston went for Starmer/Murray
The police turning a blind eye because they are worried about race relations offends because it is a disgrace. But so is the abuse of children in care, young drug addicts selling their bodies, people trafficked into this country for sex, the abuse of power in so many places of work, domestic abuse and the level of abuse of step children, I could go on all day.
The bottom line is that the police and the courts have a long list of bad excuses for ignoring sexual abuse and race is only one. The underlying feature is victims that we just don’t care enough about as a society. It’s not just the police’s shame, it shames us all.
A retired male schoolteacher of my acquaintance told me of the time, during his training, when he was ‘instructed’ in dealing with ‘14 year old tarts’. The exists, I suggest, a suspicion, which may on occasion be justified, that girls are ‘asking for it’. They may well be, and probably are, like Christine Keeler and her friends, asking for because experience has taught them that behaving that way leads to rewards, but there has still been corruption in the first place. And if the police could get into the matter earlier .............
33 is the number to get on the ballot via CLP nominations
The Starmer/Rayner combo was the outcome in 10 CLPs (other than the 5 mentioned above, also Richmond Park, Bosworth, Bolton North East, Leigh) Long-Bailey/Burgon was the choice in Warley. Long-Bailey/Rayner was the outcome in Preston. Chatham & Aylesford went for Long-Bailey/Butler Glasgow Shettleston went for Starmer/Murray
Looks like the CLP nominations aren't doing much in terms of qualification (i.e. Starmer and RLB will hit 5% but would have qualified under unions anyway) but are doing a great job of letting us know the result early. At this rate Starmer will be 1/10 by the time the members actually vote.
Warley is a weird one as their Labour MP seems to be a massive Blairite.
Spellar is old Labour right. But Sandwell CLPs went leftwards in the last years. They published the % of Warley nominations. Both Long Bailey and Burgon were at around 75%. Starmer at 20% and Rayner at 17%. All others with few votes, some with 0 (2% Nandy, 1% Phillips, 0 votes Thornberry; 5% Murray, 1% Butler, 0 votes Khan)
There's a big difference between 'differing for the sake of it' and 'not being allowed to differ, ever, regardless of what regulations appear in the future'. It is such a simple concept I can only assume those not grasping it are being deliberately obtuse. As per.
The Saj's remarks about trade barriers with the EU has rather brought Brexit gloom and uncertainty back to the fore. This is contrary to Boris's sunshine narrative. Boris needs to get back on the front foot and do something that reminds us of his cheeky grin and cheers us all up. How about getting everyone to partake in one giant street conga the moment the Brexit bell tolls? It would cost next to nothing and would rub the Remainers noses in it. The catchphrase can be 'Do do do. Come on a do the Brexit.' Boris could even lead it along Downing Street!
The Saj's remarks about trade barriers with the EU has rather brought Brexit gloom and uncertainty back to the fore. This is contrary to Boris's sunshine narrative. Boris needs to get back on the front foot and do something that reminds us of his cheeky grin and cheers us all up. How about getting everyone to partake in one giant street conga the moment the Brexit bell tolls? It would cost next to nothing and would rub the Remainers noses in it. The catchphrase can be 'Do do do. Come on a do the Brexit.' Boris could even lead it along Downing Street!
Warley is a weird one as their Labour MP seems to be a massive Blairite.
Spellar is old Labour right. But Sandwell CLPs went leftwards in the last years. They published the % of Warley nominations. Both Long Bailey and Burgon were at around 75%. Starmer at 20% and Rayner at 17%. All others with few votes, some with 0 (2% Nandy, 1% Phillips, 0 votes Thornberry; 5% Murray, 1% Butler, 0 votes Khan)
Suggests that when Spellar eventually does step down he'll be replaced by a Corbynite.
Many EU standards are international ones so to simply diverge for the sake of it seems madness .
The areas most likely to be effected by new trade barriers with the EU happen to be places with higher Leave votes so that’s what they voted for .
So they will of course be happy then ! As of course they knew what they were voting for allegedly !
I hope they don’t expect the tax payer to step in and save their jobs if manufacturing in those areas is badly hit . They voted for it and own it .
But at least they’ll have a shiny new blue passport and commemorative Brexit coin to wave around as they head off to the job centre !
As I posted up thread - current standards won’t change much - it’s future standards for new tech where we can diverge to our advantage.
In what ways? All new tech will need to be produced to EU standards anyway to be able to be sold into that market. What do you have in mind?
R&D - particularly in life sciences, AI etc. The EU will be the follower not the leader.
Why? I don't have any expertise in this area so I don't know why it should and would be genuinely interested to know. My second hand knowledge is not encouraging. My wife is a Doctor working in safety in the pharmaceutical industry and my son is doing a Ph.D. in computing at Cambridge and the feedback from both of them on the impact of Brexit is very negative, particularly pharmaceutical.
I wouldn't worry about it, outside of party loyalists its not always easily apparent who supports who, though one being more likely than another is guessable.
Finally, candidates start to present the loony Corbynites with the truth: trashing Blair/Brown's government just undermines your case for a Lab government:
Notice he's careful not to trash Corbynism either, though.
He's difficult to beat as the unity candidate, and difficult for either Momentum or the Blairites to shift.
"Don't trash the last four years" is a careful tip toe around the problem. It is suitably ambiguous, but hardly sounds, taken overall, like a ringing endorsement of the Corbyn triumph.
Parties don't like being seen to argue ideas with each other I suspect. Sure they will have factional disagreements based on ideology to a degree, but it takes a bit of time in a contest before candidates start really disagreeing, and only if the contest gets close, but early on unity is prized.
I remember the early days of the 2015 contest there was a broadcast debate or hustings or whatever, and everyone started by saying what a great job Ed M and the campaign had done, and the mediator broke in to essentially ask them to stop going on about how they all agreed everything had been great, they wanted to know what each actually thought.
Finally, candidates start to present the loony Corbynites with the truth: trashing Blair/Brown's government just undermines your case for a Lab government:
Notice he's careful not to trash Corbynism either, though.
He's difficult to beat as the unity candidate, and difficult for either Momentum or the Blairites to shift.
"Don't trash the last four years" is a careful tip toe around the problem. It is suitably ambiguous, but hardly sounds, taken overall, like a ringing endorsement of the Corbyn triumph.
Smart stuff. He may not be adored by either side of things, but he's trusted by both wings enough so they don't need to go for someone in complete denial about problems, or for someone who will upset everybody's feelings by being too critical.
Comments
Well you were and are wrong. I voted Leave but that doesn't make me a Tory. I am a socialist, just a more moderate one than the revolutionary socialist extremist currently leading the party I have rejoined. I have been a Labour member for 37 of my 41 adult years.
Tim would have accused you of drooling over child abuse
Noone was told this would be difficult. We were told this would be easy.
I’m not disagreeing with your assertion that we don’t have a choice but if real negative consequences are felt things could get rather nasty for the government, majority or not.
Governments can fall even with a majority.
For example there wouldn't be much Made in China tat or Made in Bangladesh clothing if we insisted on the same environmental and employment standards as the UK has.
And on the wider food issue the availability of chlorinated chicken would be rather less of a threat to the nation's health than the over abundance of grotty takeaways in deprived areas is:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/apr/02/fast-food-takeaway-shops-grow-more-rapidly-in-deprived-areas-of-uk
https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2017/jul/25/large-rise-takeaway-shops-highlights-dominance-fast-food-deprived-areas-england
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jun/29/poorer-areas-of-england-have-more-fast-food-shops-figures-show
You can argue whether or not you think this is fair or justifiable until you are blue in the face but unfortunately that is the reality of the situation.
We should tighten up the regulations, not open the doors to yet more crap.
Should things become negative it may well have issues for HMG but for that to be relevant the Country needs a relevant opposition and that seems quite some way away
The chances of a 'race to the bottom' are pretty much zero as regulations tend to become more stringent rather than less.
They now have to make real decisions. Brexit now becomes real rather than all things to all people.
I am sure there are many labour mps and ex labour mps who now bitterly regret not having passed TM deal
Tories should not be complacent if Starmer beats Long Bailey, the Corbynista candidate as looks likely
What that would be is for other people to negotiate about.
Generally when we get prophecies of doom there is some truth in them, but often on this topic it tends to be a bit overstated. I don’t want Brexit and in an economic sense I will certainly say there will be some negative impact, but the question is to what degree and on that I do think that people’s strong opinions on the whole topic can produce a fair amount of hyperbole.
This is about incompetence and poor policies and nothing else.
Given that we have managed to survive American raisins and cranberries having access to our stomachs I'll not lie awake at the possibility of other such imports.
There are much more important issues relating to both nutritional health and import standards IMO.
How many Prime Ministers, Home Secretaries, Police Ministers and Children's Ministers have we had since then ?
Customers should always have the appropriate information when making a purchase.
And any respectable business should not wish to hide the origin of its products.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/17/opinion/bill-weld-new-hampshire-primary.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage
I thought we were all meant to be equal before the law..
Obviously not
I am angry - as anyone should be, really - at the utter incompetence of various authorities charged with vitally important duties, as my thread header yesterday should have made clear.
If the police ignore this because of “community sensitivities” what are the chances of them doing anything about the abuse of Asian women in those same communities (another scandal waiting to be exposed)?
If the police ignore the plight of white under-age girls on the grounds that they were “offering sexual favours”, what are the chances of them doing anything about girls (and boys) abused by other sorts of abusers?
Rather than using this abysmal issue as a way to make points about “wokeness” or PC culture or whatever, we ought to be furious about the incompetence shown and demanding better, much much better. Action - not point-scoring - is needed.
In Scotland 90% of cases in the High Court are now sex cases, mainly historical. The conviction rate is low but nonetheless the prisons are increasingly becoming like old folks homes, trying to deal with a huge range of health problems they did not have with the traditional young offender. What this shows is that this is by no means just a SE Asia problem. The backlog is massive and depressing.
I’m merely wary of framing this in a way that has the potential indirectly blame this on those who seek a fairer society.
The Police being too scared to get involved for fear of having the race card played screams cowardice of leadership. No one who promotes “political correctness” would support the actions of the Police here.
Anyone who put cowardice ahead of the welfare of these children should be held to account.
Can we make it compulsory for all these candidates to read 'The Unfinished Revolution'?
The circulation of the Sun is circa 1.2m so that’s around 360k people. 3.5% roughly of the Labour vote share.
So I wouldn’t say “loads” is accurate but clearly Labour need to be reaching out to these people.
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1218513320610758656
I now understand Corbyn - it was a national suicide pact. Everything falls in to place, McDonnell as chancellor would be the obvious thing.
It's going to get so much better though. Burgon as chancellor, because Starmer doesn't like him and doesn't like numbers either.
He's difficult to beat as the unity candidate, and difficult for either Momentum or the Blairites to shift.
The bottom line is that the police and the courts have a long list of bad excuses for ignoring sexual abuse and race is only one. The underlying feature is victims that we just don’t care enough about as a society. It’s not just the police’s shame, it shames us all.
Most of the Sun links I see on Facebook and what not are directly to showbiz stories and the like.
Mainly as they don’t have Puritan tax laws around ABV levels like we do in the Uk.
The areas most likely to be effected by new trade barriers with the EU happen to be places with higher Leave votes so that’s what they voted for .
So they will of course be happy then ! As of course they knew what they were voting for allegedly !
I hope they don’t expect the tax payer to step in and save their jobs if manufacturing in those areas is badly hit . They voted for it and own it .
But at least they’ll have a shiny new blue passport and commemorative Brexit coin to wave around as they head off to the job centre !
The areas most likely to be affected are the Remain voting ones.
Burton: Starmer/Rayner
Mid Fife and Glenrothes: Starmer/Rayner
Ipswich: Starmer/Rayner
Hartlepool: Starmer/Rayner
Witham: Starmer/Rayner
Today
Lichfield: Starmer/Rayner
So far
Starmer 11
Long Bailey 3
Nandy 0
Phillips 0
Thornberry 0
Rayner 11
Burgon 1
Murray 1
Butler 1
Khan 0
33 is the number to get on the ballot via CLP nominations
The Starmer/Rayner combo was the outcome in 10 CLPs (other than the 5 mentioned above, also Richmond Park, Bosworth, Bolton North East, Leigh)
Long-Bailey/Burgon was the choice in Warley.
Long-Bailey/Rayner was the outcome in Preston.
Chatham & Aylesford went for Long-Bailey/Butler
Glasgow Shettleston went for Starmer/Murray
The exists, I suggest, a suspicion, which may on occasion be justified, that girls are ‘asking for it’. They may well be, and probably are, like Christine Keeler and her friends, asking for because experience has taught them that behaving that way leads to rewards, but there has still been corruption in the first place.
And if the police could get into the matter earlier .............
What a time to be alive.
But Sandwell CLPs went leftwards in the last years. They published the % of Warley nominations. Both Long Bailey and Burgon were at around 75%. Starmer at 20% and Rayner at 17%. All others with few votes, some with 0 (2% Nandy, 1% Phillips, 0 votes Thornberry; 5% Murray, 1% Butler, 0 votes Khan)
https://twitter.com/HartlepoolCLP/status/1218261563221643264?s=20
Many other examples - regulations are not just lawnmowers and cheese.
https://twitter.com/paulmasonnews/status/1218519775669837826?s=21
I remember the early days of the 2015 contest there was a broadcast debate or hustings or whatever, and everyone started by saying what a great job Ed M and the campaign had done, and the mediator broke in to essentially ask them to stop going on about how they all agreed everything had been great, they wanted to know what each actually thought.
https://twitter.com/JamesKelly/status/1218536558699188225?s=20