quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin60:
Labour CANNOT win a general election ever again now, not until the working class and their dependents wake up.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Boris has worked diligently for the top job, so he should be given a chance... for a couple of years.

---

quote:

---

And then there should be an early election, and we could vote in someone with caring, socialist credentials.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Who would be the strongest Remain candidate on a short list? Not sure. I don't know enough about Tory internal politics. But most of the potential Remain candidates have a lot more "gravitas" than Boris the stunt-man.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink.:
I had the impression Alan Duncan might be thinking of running, but I don't know how that would play out with his fellow mps.

---

quote:

---

My guess is that it will be between Gove and May in the final ballot and Gove will win because the Tory selectorate will want a Leaver. That said, I had no idea that Gove would knife Johnson at this juncture so Shipmates putting their faith in my eerie powers of prescience may be disappointed.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:

But that's just my logic at work. Plus I really, really, REALLY, don't like Gove.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Posted by Callan in the closed thread.

quote:

---

My guess is that it will be between Gove and May in the final ballot and Gove will win because the Tory selectorate will want a Leaver. That said, I had no idea that Gove would knife Johnson at this juncture so Shipmates putting their faith in my eerie powers of prescience may be disappointed.

---

I hope you are right about your eerie powers on this occasion. I would have thought Liam Fox was more likely to get the Brexit vote. Gove was a self-declared non-candidate until his last minute change of heart/knifing. He's also self-declared as "not prime minister material". Liam Fox is less tainted by association with some of the uglier aspects of Brexit campaigning.

But that's just my logic at work. Plus I really, really, REALLY, don't like Gove. As you said, politics in the UK is a bit of a "bloody Hell!" business at present. The last 24 hours have been dramatic by any standards.

---

quote:

---

Liam Fox is less tainted by association with some of the uglier aspects of Brexit campaigning.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fausto:
Given all the morning-after "Bremorse" being expressed, how likely is a scenario in which a pro-EU politician seeks and wins the Tory leadership, then as the new Tory PM calls a new parliamentary election, then leads the party and wins the election on a Remain platform, thus reversing the (non-binding, advisory) Brexit referendum? (Or, for that matter, that Labour wins the next parliamentary election on a Remain platform?)

---

Not very. Because, as expressed ad nauseam elsewhere, it is now too late - already, let alone by the time all that happens - for it simply to be reversed or ignored. Europe is no longer the same place it was last Thursday. We're not in Kansas anymore.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:

quote:

---

Liam Fox is less tainted by association with some of the uglier aspects of Brexit campaigning.

---

That's "disgraced former Defence Secretary Liam Fox" to give him his full title. I really can't see the PCP putting him on the ballot. Mind you, if they do, I wouldn't bet against him if he's up against a Remainer in the final round. Good God. What a world. What a country!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:

Chinese Proverb; "May you live in interesting times". Personally, right now, I'd like a bit more boredom.

---

It is an English expression falsely purports to be a Chinese curse. So even more apropos than if it had been real.
 

---

Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
That's something I've learned today lilBuddha. Thanks.
 

---

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
There is a macabre pleasure in such multiple assassinations. Gove and Boris assassinate Cameron, but Gove assassinates Boris. Benn assassinates Corbyn.

What a pity that Shakespeare is not alive to describe such foul envenom'd plots.

"The treacherous instrument is in thy hand,
Unbated and envenomed; the foul practice
Hath turned itself on me." Hamlet.
 

---

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :
 
Like Callan, I'm struck by how much (politically, obviously, not literally!) the top echelons of both main parties are beginning to resemble the French Revolutionaries in their last six months of power. Not sure whether Cameron is Hébert and Boris Danton or the other way round, but I really hope Gove will end up like Robespierre
 

---

Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:
That's "disgraced former Defence Secretary Liam Fox" to give him his full title. I really can't see the PCP putting him on the ballot. Mind you, if they do, I wouldn't bet against him if he's up against a Remainer in the final round.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin60:
And with no general election for 4 years that makes a difference how?

All the other parties would back PR to stop a UKIP government.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rolyn:
If they don't pick a Brexiter to lead the Party then I think a large chunk of politically activated Leave voters will look to UKIP.
You can't stir folks up, give them a sense that they have succeeded in making something happen, then elect a pro-Remain leader to unhappen it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
Gove now under pressure to drop out, apparently, according to the BBC

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
... Angela Leadsom has, I gather, impressed some party members, and has more personality, and is a much better speaker, than Gove. She's rather thin on experience, though, but I'd probably rate her as more likely than Fox to get the support from MPs, but still an outside chance at best.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
... Angela Leadsom has, I gather, impressed some party members, and has more personality, and is a much better speaker, than Gove. She's rather thin on experience, though, but I'd probably rate her as more likely than Fox to get the support from MPs, but still an outside chance at best.

---

Having heard her several times on World at One over the last few months, she would be a dreadful destiny for the rest of us to fall into - complacent, not very intelligent, and either not sharp enough to see the flaws in her own rhetoric or intellectually dishonest.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I listened to Gove's speech and his responses to questions. A fluent and confident performance, yet I was left with the impression that he has lost the plot.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ariel:

Out of all of them Theresa May is the only one who seems plausible. Almost nobody's ever heard of Crabb or Leadsome and neither seems to have much charisma. Liam Fox doesn't stand out in any way and Gove doesn't have leadership qualities. May is the only one I can see mixing with heads of state on equal terms. I believe she could do the job.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
That depends on whether UKIP would be savvy and disciplined enough to take advantage of the situation. If they were they would indeed have a golden opportunity to make some hay and steal a stack of Conservative votes on the right. It is eminently possible that they will start in-fighting just like everybody else and let that opportunity slip (I hope so).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
Politicians are not paid an exorbitant amount of money. Politicians are reasonably recompensed for the utterly thankless task they are entrusted with. The widespread (and mostly undeserved) contempt for politicians is a major part of our current problem.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ricardus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
That depends on whether UKIP would be savvy and disciplined enough to take advantage of the situation. If they were they would indeed have a golden opportunity to make some hay and steal a stack of Conservative votes on the right. It is eminently possible that they will start in-fighting just like everybody else and let that opportunity slip (I hope so).

---

Well, they have already threatened to expel their sole MP ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Some stinking facts:

MP's salary in May 2015 - £74,000
Average UK salary - £27,600 to April 2015

An MP is is paid nearly three times the average salary in the UK before expenses in 2016 and that is before we look at the distribution of wages in the UK. Article from 2009 from the BBC comparing MPs' wages with average salaries. In the intervening years MPs' salaries have increased substantially, unlike most salaries in the UK which increased on average by 0.1% last year following a number of years of recession when wages have not increased.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Casineb:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Some stinking facts:

MP's salary in May 2015 - £74,000
Average UK salary - £27,600 to April 2015

An MP is is paid nearly three times the average salary in the UK before expenses in 2016 and that is before we look at the distribution of wages in the UK. Article from 2009 from the BBC comparing MPs' wages with average salaries. In the intervening years MPs' salaries have increased substantially, unlike most salaries in the UK which increased on average by 0.1% last year following a number of years of recession when wages have not increased.

---

Unskilled jobs earn minimum wages. But being an MP takes a lot of work, and corporate directors and executives get paid 6 figure sums for less work. We lose a lot of talent because MPs are paid so (relatively) little.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Casineb:
Unskilled jobs earn minimum wages. But being an MP takes a lot of work, and corporate directors and executives get paid 6 figure sums for less work. We lose a lot of talent because MPs are paid so (relatively) little.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Casineb:
But being an MP takes a lot of work, and corporate directors and executives get paid 6 figure sums for less work. We lose a lot of talent because MPs are paid so (relatively) little.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rolyn:
In the event of a Leave victory we thought it was the Tories who were going to implode, yet now this is exactly what's happening to Labour. If it wasn't for the fact that politicians are paid an exorbitant amount of money to do the job they do then the current situation would be extremely hilarious.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
Politicians are not paid an exorbitant amount of money. Politicians are reasonably recompensed for the utterly thankless task they are entrusted with. The widespread (and mostly undeserved) contempt for politicians is a major part of our current problem.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:
Liam Fox was essentially sacked for being unfit for government.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Truman White:
Read somewhere in passing that Mrs Leadsome has a deeply held Christian faith. Anyone know what light or shade of Christendom that might be?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rolyn:

quote:

---

Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
Politicians are not paid an exorbitant amount of money. Politicians are reasonably recompensed for the utterly thankless task they are entrusted with. The widespread (and mostly undeserved) contempt for politicians is a major part of our current problem.

---

They are paid good money for not doing what they say they are going to do. This is where much of the contempt has come from.

In many ways the fallout from the referendum has taken the spotlight off of politicians themselves and left people feeling contempt for each other. Hopefully this will be temporary and the heat will return to those who purport to lead us. Regardless of salaries, I would say to a politician--- if you don't want the job then sling your hook.

That's where Corbyn comes in to my mind. He's the only one showing metal in the middle of this. If a split Tory Party thinks this fiasco isn't going to haunt them right up to the next Election, (even if it's 2020), they are dead wrong.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:

We vote for Corbyn because he will end austerity by, um,

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:

We vote for Corbyn because he will end austerity by, um,

---

Partly old fashioned Keynesian stimulus using the low cost of borrowing, coupled with the McDonnell's economic plan for the longer term (drawn up in conjunction with a number of economists including David Blanchflower and Thomas Piketty).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:

In any event, to use old fashioned Keynesian stimulus etc. one does have to win a General Election. Do get back to me when that shows any signs of working out between now and the Parousia.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:

In any event, to use old fashioned Keynesian stimulus etc. one does have to win a General Election. Do get back to me when that shows any signs of working out between now and the Parousia.

---

Okay, but your initial criticism was that there was no economic plan to end austerity.

At the moment the PLP are managing to be more incompetent than Corbyn - they want him to step down, but have no idea what comes next - or indeed have a serious candidate for leadership.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
... i.e. of less interest to journalists than Angela's faith. Maybe Theresa is CofE and Angela is something more exotic?

---

Or maybe it's just that she has - in the past - been fairly vocal about her faith.
 

---

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :
 
Well, you obviously know more about that than I do. That doesn't mean I deserve an eye roll!

What exciting things has Angela said about her faith in the past?
 

---

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
According to a reasonably well-placed source of mine, all five of the Tory candidates in the running are some brand of Christian; one Catholic, one middle-of-the-road CoE, and three evangelicals.

My source did not say who was who, but I guess that can be worked out.
 

---

Posted by Drewthealexander (# 16660) on :
 
There's a perceptive piece in the online edition of The Scotsman which itemises some of Theresa May's less memorable moments. One wonders if she would have remained in post under a leader less reluctant to shuffle ministers than Cameron.
 

---

Posted by Callan (# 525) on :
 
First round today: most likely scenario is disgraced former Defence Secretary Dr. Liam Fox gets eliminated in a "life imitating art" reconstruction of the scene in House of Cards where an eccentric backbencher puts himself up for the Party Leadership and gets one vote.

Worst case scenario: Stephen Crabb eliminated. Notwithstanding his somewhat bonkers views on homosexuality in the past, now largely repudiated (more joy in heaven and all that) he voted Remain and has come out (sorry Stephen, no pun intended) for saying outright that EU nationals in the UK should be granted indefinite leave to remain. So it he goes down in flames on the first ballot, it indicates that the Parliamentary Tory Party are probably about to engage in an epic fit of bastardry which will make us all nostalgic for Mrs Thatcher in full on hubris mode.

Best case scenario: Since The Event there are no best case scenarios. Stay Indoors.
 

---

Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on :
 
I think the final two will be May and Leadsom, and the party members will choose Leadsom much to the MPs' dismay.
 

---

Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eutychus:
According to a reasonably well-placed source of mine, all five of the Tory candidates in the running are some brand of Christian; one Catholic, one middle-of-the-road CoE, and three evangelicals.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
I think the final two will be May and Leadsom, and the party members will choose Leadsom much to the MPs' dismay.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eutychus:
According to a reasonably well-placed source of mine, all five of the Tory candidates in the running are some brand of Christian; one Catholic, one middle-of-the-road CoE, and three evangelicals.

---

There are politicians who are Christians and others who are not, there are politicians who are competent and others who are not. There is little correlation between the two.

---

I wholly agree. Recent correspondence suggests many evangelical voters are more concerned with candidates' policy views on gay marriage than their views on immigration, still less the economy
 

---

Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :
 
Liam Fox is now out, with May and Leadsom in the lead. No surprises there.

[ 05. July 2016, 17:32: Message edited by: Ariel ]
 

---

Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :
 
Crabb's out too.

The question is now whether there will be a tactical Gove vote to screw Leadsom over. There are in principle 50 MPs to re-allocate, and Leadsom currently leads Gove by 18.
 

---

Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on :
 
Why would they do that? I think more MPs are out for vengeance on Gove than on Leadsom.
 

---

Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
They might think that May is bound to beat Gove in the party member vote, but might well lose to Leadsom. And they might be right. Leadsom did not impress the PCP in the candidates' preliminary meeting. But in this strange year she might get the members' vote. It wouldn't be quite a repeat of the Corbyn situation but may be a bit too close for comfort.
 

---

Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
Why would they do that? I think more MPs are out for vengeance on Gove than on Leadsom.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:

quote:

---

Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
Why would they do that? I think more MPs are out for vengeance on Gove than on Leadsom.

---

Because there's not the slightest chance that the party will vote for Gove over May. If Gove and May are the candidates, then Mrs. May is our second female Prime Minister.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
Mrs Leadsom is one of the evangelical candidates: she has supported the work of Christian Concern in the past, so obviously isn't put off by Mrs Minchiello-Williams.

Mrs May has been a regular churchgoer all her life: she was one of the first people who welcomed us to the parish when we lived in the Thames valley and it was only much later that I realise she was also our MP. A genuinely lovely lady.

---

quote:

---

The head of the liberal group in the parliament, former Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt, lambasted the European Council, the forum where EU governments decide policy.
He said the Council's reaction to Brexit was "we shouldn't change anything, just implement existing European policies". "I find this shocking and irresponsible," he said angrily.
There had been warning signs for the EU from previous referendums in Denmark and the Netherlands, he said.
"What are you waiting for? When will the Council recognise that this type of EU - you cannot defend it any more. Europe needs to be reformed... European citizens are not against Europe, they're against this Europe."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eutychus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eutychus:
According to a reasonably well-placed source of mine, all five of the Tory candidates in the running are some brand of Christian; one Catholic, one middle-of-the-road CoE, and three evangelicals.

---

There are politicians who are Christians and others who are not, there are politicians who are competent and others who are not. There is little correlation between the two.

---

I wholly agree. Recent correspondence suggests many evangelical voters are more concerned with candidates' policy views on gay marriage than their views on immigration, still less the economy

---

quote:

---

Nasty though it is Callan, I think they just want to make the reciprocal arrangements (based on past entries) part of the Brexit settlement. It's something that they can see being agreed formally without any difficulty. But I guess they are concerned about hardball being played by the EU on free movement of Labour, so reckon it might be better to slowplay the issue until they find out more.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I hope I'm right, too! And there have been no overt threats to the "already legitimately here", at least as far as I have read.

I do hear that Angela Merkel is pretty fed up with Juncker. Can't say I blame her. In terms of setting the tone for Brexit discussions, he is doing a truly awful job.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:
So, unless the EU goes completely bonkers we are more or less out of the woods.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I do hear that Angela Merkel is pretty fed up with Juncker. Can't say I blame her. In terms of setting the tone for Brexit discussions, he is doing a truly awful job.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:

In a rational world, that ought to mean the end for Leadsom who both flip-flopped on the negative economic effects of Brexit and dissed any forecasts prayed in aid by Remain that a Brexit would be bad economic news.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
lilBuddha

Callan is more than capable of speaking for himself but I'm pretty sure he meant 'out of the woods' on the limited question of repatriation of any EU citizens who came here, quite legally, to work.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
lilBuddha

Callan is more than capable of speaking for himself but I'm pretty sure he meant 'out of the woods' on the limited question of repatriation of any EU citizens who came here, quite legally, to work.

---

Oh, indeed. I still think that things are going to be very bad indeed. But in that respect they look like being less bad. At times like this one is grateful for small mercies.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
On tactical anti-Leadsom voting, I think someone from the Gove camp sent emails around and has now had to say sorry. That may have boomeranged. Pushed a few Govers into the Leadsom camp. The legend of Gove the knifer grows by the day.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by lilBuddha:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
lilBuddha

Callan is more than capable of speaking for himself but I'm pretty sure he meant 'out of the woods' on the limited question of repatriation of any EU citizens who came here, quite legally, to work.

---

Oh, indeed. I still think that things are going to be very bad indeed. But in that respect they look like being less bad. At times like this one is grateful for small mercies.

---

My apologies.

---

No problem.
 

---

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
On tactical anti-Leadsom voting, I think someone from the Gove camp sent emails around and has now had to say sorry. That may have boomeranged. Pushed a few Govers into the Leadsom camp. The legend of Gove the knifer grows by the day.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
On tactical anti-Leadsom voting, I think someone from the Gove camp sent emails around and has now had to say sorry. That may have boomeranged. Pushed a few Govers into the Leadsom camp. The legend of Gove the knifer grows by the day.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:
...whose CV contains the financial equivalent of claiming to have served with the SAS on the basis of two years National Service in the Army Catering Corps.

---

 

---

Posted by Callan (# 525) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sioni Sais:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
On tactical anti-Leadsom voting, I think someone from the Gove camp sent emails around and has now had to say sorry. That may have boomeranged. Pushed a few Govers into the Leadsom camp. The legend of Gove the knifer grows by the day.

---

Once a Chief Whip, always a Chief Whip.

Is it worth looking at the British House of Cards trilogy, in which the Chief Whip engineered his rise to the top?

---

quote:

---

In a rational world...

---

 

---

Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink.:
I note even in the midst of a leadership crisis the Labour party have managed to get a vote through the commons in support of EU nationals currently in the UK being given right to remain.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:

just voting for May and adding "Won MPs vote by a country mile" to her CV before sending her to the members.

---

they may as well, on current form Mrs Leadsom will undoubtedly have added it to hers...
 

---

Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
That one's gone to the Quotes file!
 

---

Posted by Callan (# 525) on :
 
Oh, Indeed.

The year is 2018. The Article 50 timescale has been outlasted and no Treaty between the UK and the EU is forthcoming. President Trump flies to the UK for emergency talks with Prime Minister Andrea Leadsom. He's also scheduled to meet the Leader of the Opposition Jeremy Corbyn. "Andrea's a great woman with a great CV. We're going to arrange the best trade deals between our countries".
 

---

Posted by Rocinante (# 18541) on :
 
So it's May-Leadsom. Personally I'm very pleased that Gove is out. YouGov have anticipated this and polled May-Leadsom among Tory party members: May ahead 63%-31% in the headline figure and leading in all demographics apparently.
 

---

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
I find what I read about Leadsom worrying, and it isn't because of her Christianity. Or rather, it is, because it seems to be a totally different sort of Christianity.

“I envisage there being absolutely no regulation whatsoever—no minimum wage, no maternity or paternity rights, no unfair dismissal rights, no pension rights—for the smallest companies that are trying to get off the ground, in order to give them a chance.”

Now how does that tie in with the remuneration of the workers in the vineyard?

And I'm somewhat suspicious of the concern for early years care for the young, which sounds great, until knitted in with that maternity/paternity leave, unfair dismissal rights stuff, (unfair dismissals often related to pregnancy), and, a bit dead horsey, defining early years as starting from conception.

I'm not sure of the Christian view of hunting.

She's listened to the experts on climate change, which is good.

But if she were to win, she would be imposed on the rest of us by a minority of the country, willy nilly, with no come back, whatever our beliefs are. That cannot be democracy.
 

---

Posted by Callan (# 525) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rocinante:
So it's May-Leadsom. Personally I'm very pleased that Gove is out. YouGov have anticipated this and polled May-Leadsom among Tory party members: May ahead 63%-31% in the headline figure and leading in all demographics apparently.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Chicken entrails? Something on Radio 4 this morning. An interview with Michael Fallon (Defence Minister) re sending forces to Poland and a meeting he was going to. Did he think some of our European allies might be looking askance at the prospect of the UK being led by "an almost complete novice" (Leadsom of course).

If the message gets out that our European allies would prefer May, then Leadsom may become a shoe-in. It's that kind of year.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rocinante:
So it's May-Leadsom. Personally I'm very pleased that Gove is out. YouGov have anticipated this and polled May-Leadsom among Tory party members: May ahead 63%-31% in the headline figure and leading in all demographics apparently.

---

Given the track record of the polls, recently, that's not quite the reassurance it once was. Anyone seen any useful pointers whilst investigating chicken entrails?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rocinante:
The local conservative parties have a long tradition of protecting their independence from central office, and that includes not being very conscientious about submitting up-to-date membership lists.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rocinante:


Or is it the case that Leadsom isn't quite as out of step politically with Tory MPs as Corbyn is with the PLP (or as socially awkward as Corbyn) and they will put up with her?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rocinante:

The PLP have tried to throw Corbyn under a bus, and the bus came to a shuddering halt and is now being towed away to be repaired. Are the rules in the Tory Party less friendly to a leader who has lost the confidence of the lead?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rocinante:
I am wondering just how constitutionally valid this process is. I realise that we, the people, do not elect the Prime Minister, we elect members of parliament. However, I thought that the constitutional process was that the MP's then choose one of their number to be the Prime Minister. This idea of people who happen to be members of the "right" political party getting to choose the prime minister seems to me at best, contrary to convention and at worst, illegal.

---

• Winston Churchilll (1940)
• James Callaghan (1976)
• Gordon Brown (2007)

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
It has the same "constitutional validity" as it has had on many occasions in the past, for instance:

• Winston Churchilll (1940)
• James Callaghan (1976)
• Gordon Brown (2007)

In the absence of a written constitution we rely on what has gone before, and it has long been established that if the ruling party changes leader then that person automatically becomes PM without there being a general election.

---

These PM's were all chosen by parliament. They were not chosen by a self-selecting subset of the wider electorate.
 

---

Posted by Anglican't (# 15292) on :
 
How was Gordon Brown chosen by Parliament in a way that Theresa May (for example) won't be?

[ 08. July 2016, 23:28: Message edited by: Anglican't ]
 

---

Posted by Rocinante (# 18541) on :
 
Gordon Brown was the choice of the largest party in parliament (then Labour). I am not disputing that the largest party, or controlling group, in the Commons should choose the PM - that is essentially how PM's have been chosen since Walpole's day. (Strictly speaking the Monarch chooses the PM, but usually follows the advice of parliament, sometimes in the person of the outgoing PM)

When the opposition wins a general election they have a leader in place and that leader will be their choice of PM. (Although I'm told that in 1945 Herbert Morrison - bizarrely - tried to challenge Attlee after the result of the general election was declared, but Attlee got wind of it and went to the Palace to kiss hands before Morrison could make his move).

Sometimes the monarch will exercise his/her constitutional prerogative to choose a Prime Minister, as did George V in 1931 when he asked Ramsay MacDonald to lead a National Government. MacDonald accepted the King's commission, although he knew it would destroy his career and reputation.

The whole point of this constitutional process is to nominate a PM who will command the confidence of the House - without which government cannot function. If Teresa May wins the ballot of party members, she will have also demonstrated that she has the confidence of the House, or at least the governing party. If Andrea Leadsom wins, not so much.

If Jeremy Corbyn wins the next general election (a flock of pigs just flew past my window). we will have a PM who demonstrably does not have the confidence of the house. - Cue Corbynistas telling us that sitting MP's who do not support the Dear Leader will be deselected. If Labour in government were to select a leader under its current rules, the PM could potentially be chosen by a £3 entryist rent-a-mob - a very worrying scenario IMO. So I am more concerned about Labour, but I believe that both party's leader election procedures have the potential to subvert the constitution and parliamentary sovereignty.
 

---

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
Nasty argument surfacing this morning about whether Leadsom did or did not say that a mother would have a better interest in the future than a non-mother. Her supporters say that that was not what she said and she did not imply any better staus for her than for May. I heard the interview, and she did backpedal after the first comment, with an air of 'get me out of this', and then repeated the idea.
It wasn't impressive, and accusing the Times of gutter politics because it supports May wasn't helpful, I feel. PM's shouldn't make mistakes like that. As bad as Brown's bigot remark? Probably not, but a glimpse into her world view.
I have been blessed with neither a partner nor children. I do have nephews and nieces. I feel my years of teaching to be diminished.
But on the other hand, the attack on Leadsom doesn't feel good, either.

[ 09. July 2016, 08:16: Message edited by: Penny S ]
 

---

Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :
 
I can't see Andrea Leadsom standing up to Trump or smacking Corbyn back where he belongs. Theresa May comes across as having the strength and intelligence to do both quite easily.

Whoever gets in, there will inevitably be comparisons with Thatcher and either candidate is going to be hated in a pretty short space of time. Things are going to be difficult whatever with Brexit anyway: Theresa May seems like the more robust candidate and better able to cope.
 

---

Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :
 
I quite like leadson, but having been a pit prop in brexit she will not pacify the 48% of seethers. T. May seems the obvious choice to try and reunite the country and move it forward to wherever it is headed.
 

---

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
Rachel Sylvester, the Times journalist who did the piece on Andrea Leadsom has been on the news channels.

Unfortunately for Mrs Leadsom, Ms Sylvester is an old-school journalist who not only takes notes but also carries a tape-recorder. Her tapes back-up the story about Leadsom's remarks re Teresa May and children 100%.

Really bad news for Mrs Leadsom is that Rachel Sylvester is able to prove that the subject of Teresa May was brought up by Leadsom, not raised by the journalist, and it was Leadsom who introduced the subject of children.

Quite apart from anything else, I wonder how this will go down with two of Mrs Leadsom's prominent backers, Penny Mordaunt (unmarried, lives with partner, childless) and William Wragg (another out-and-proud Tory MP).

Not only is this woman not fit to be PM, I seriously question whether she ought to be an MP. So far it has been proved she lied about her City experience on her CV, she's lied about her links to Christian Concern (prop Andrea Minchiello-Williams), she's accepted the backing of Britain First (current home of Nick Griffin, formerly head of the BNP), and now she's attacking Teresa May for being childless.

If elected she could become our own version of Trump
 

---

Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :
 
Leadsom will cost the party the next election, I think. She may be in tune with some of the grassroots but I doubt she speaks for the wider country as a whole.
 

---

Posted by ThunderBunk (# 15579) on :
 
I am a bad, bad person. As a nearly Corbynite Labour supporter, it is very hard not to enjoy the Tories going through their own process of horror and conflicting emotions at the range of leaders available to them.

Sadly, this can be traced directly back to Blair's fanatical separation of politics and government, and his insistence on pursuing the former to the complete exclusion of the latter. Cameron, of course, was a total convert to this cause, and therefore bears the blame for the last six years, during which this process has proceeded apace, with only the Liberal Democrats there to insist that reality was able to impinge on decision making occasionally.

Now that there is no accountability to reality at all, but only to the echo chamber of the Tory shires, God help us all. This could go nearly as well as the appointment of Gordon Brown as prime minister.
 

---

Posted by Callan (# 525) on :
 
The thing that worries me is that the Conservative Party won't think: "we can't elect Andrea Leadsom, because she'll lose to Jeremy Corbyn". In 1990 the Tories ditched Mrs Thatcher, and the Poll Tax, because they thought she would lose the next election to Neil Kinnock. This is why you need a decent opposition. It may not win elections but at least it encourages the governing party to be on it's best behaviour.

In a parallel universe the communication between Tony Blair and Bush went like this:

I am with you. But if, and only, if there is a fucking plan on the table, capisch. If we go to war without a plan and it all goes tits up, that fat twat Clarke will have my arse on a plate. I am not having biggest swing to the Tories since 1931 on my fucking gravestone. No plan, no fucking deal.

But, unfortunately, we had that nice Mr Duncah Smith leading the Tories and so, instead of Tony Soprano, we got "Yo Blair". The rest, as they say is history.
 

---

Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by ThunderBunk:
I am a bad, bad person. As a nearly Corbynite Labour supporter, it is very hard not to enjoy the Tories going through their own process of horror and conflicting emotions at the range of leaders available to them.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'Organist

quote:

---

It has the same "constitutional validity" as it has had on many occasions in the past, for instance:

• Winston Churchilll (1940)
• James Callaghan (1976)
• Gordon Brown (2007)

In the absence of a written constitution we rely on what has gone before, and it has long been established that if the ruling party changes leader then that person automatically becomes PM without there being a general election.

---

These PM's were all chosen by parliament. They were not chosen by a self-selecting subset of the wider electorate.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rolyn:

The fascinating thing about history is that it's constantly being made.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
Not only is this woman not fit to be PM, I seriously question whether she ought to be an MP. So far it has been proved she lied about her City experience on her CV, she's lied about her links to Christian Concern (prop Andrea Minchiello-Williams), she's accepted the backing of Britain First (current home of Nick Griffin, formerly head of the BNP), and now she's attacking Teresa May for being childless.

If elected she could become our own version of Trump

---

quote:

---

So how would this work where the Prime Minister is the leader of the largest party, but the party only governs through coalition because it doesn't have a majority? If that party wanted to change its leader, what happens then? Does the leader have to be elected by both the governing party and the party with which it governs in coalition?

---

quote:

---

And does the prime minister have to be an MP? You can be a Secretary of State and a Lord?

---

quote:

---

It's worth pointing out that the party leader doesn't also have to be Prime Minister. John Major resigned as Conservative party leader to get rebel MPs to "put up or shut up." He didn't resign as Prime Minister.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:
... The change in the law to allow this sleight of hand was, of course, brought about Anthony, 2nd Viscount Stansgate, who spent his latter years posing as some kind of Tribune of the Proletariat. His son, of course, rejoices in the title of the 3rd Viscount Stansgate. ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boogie:
Yep - she's pulled out.

So May is PM now?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by lowlands_boy:
Whereas actually even Gove has come out and said that May should be allowed to get on with it.

The Queen is currently in Scotland I believe. Perhaps she'll be tempted to stay there given the state of other parts of the kingdom. However, I don't know if she'll traipse back to London to swap Prime Ministers, or whether they'll just have to wait for her summer holidays to finish....

---

Aparently the Queen is back tomorrow so maybe May will pop round for tea then

Tubbs
 

---

Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on :
 
and if we'd all just stopped at post three of the thread all the jostling of past 2 weeks could have been avoided.

Just call me Mystic Betjemaniac
 

---

Posted by lowlands_boy (# 12497) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by betjemaniac:
and if we'd all just stopped at post three of the thread all the jostling of past 2 weeks could have been avoided.

Just call me Mystic Betjemaniac

---

So how much did you put on then? I'm a Methodist, so my interest is completely academic of course.
 

---

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
Take back control!
No, you take back control.
I am, I just knifed somebody in the back, that is taking back control.
I see that somebody just knifed you in the back, so they've taken back control.
No, they haven't, they've just resigned.
Well, I'm off for a spot of lunch, that is taking back control.
 

---

Posted by Tulfes (# 18000) on :
 
The BBC is reporting that Cameron will do PMQ on Wednesday lunchtime and then go to the Palace and resign and invite HMQ to invite TM to form a Government. Then TM will go to the Palace and have tea with HMQ and be invited to form a Government. So civilised. So British. So much control taken back.
 

---

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
Correction: when I said take back control, that was in the heat of the referendum campaign, when obviously one's emotions are over-heated, and one isn't as rational as one would like. What I really meant, was that a right-wing Tory government should take control. I'm sure that all right-thinking people will agree with this, after all, there's only so much blood-letting that is allowed on TV at 6pm.
 

---

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
And there is something else to think about:

It only requires two-thirds of MPs to ask for a general election for one to be called, and the minimum requirement is just 3 weeks notice. So, this is how it could look:

Mrs May takes over as PM.

Labour/SNP say this is undemocratic and move to have a general election - move is supported by the necessary two-thirds.

Teresa May goes back to Buckingham Palace to ask HMQ to prorogue Parliament so that election can be called.

Date chosen is 3-4 weeks on.

Conservatives partly campaign on unnecessary expense/uncertainty of election, paint SNP, etc as spendthrift and irresponsible.

Labour party is forced to go into election with J Corbyn at the helm and is annihilated at the polls after the main feature of their campaign is infighting and Momentum heckling long-serving Labour MPs.

SNP lose more Scottish seats to reinvigorated Scottish tories.

End result: Teresa May back in Downing Street with conservatives having increased majority and in power to autumn of 2021.

I might put a tenner on that ...

(edited to correct spellings)

[ 11. July 2016, 15:58: Message edited by: L'organist ]
 

---

Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
May: God help us all
 

---

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
Well, if Labour demand an election right now, that definitely shows their suicidal drift. Still, I wouldn't put it past them.
 

---

Posted by Rocinante (# 18541) on :
 
Where would the 2/3 parliamentary majority come from to force a general election? can't see many Tory MPs supporting a no-confidence motion if the whips lean on them. Gove maybe, in one of his "who can I shaft today?" moods.

This process isn't undemocratic by British standards. It's happened many times before, see posts above. We elect the MP's every 5 years - that's the democratic part.
 

---

Posted by Callan (# 525) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Well, if Labour demand an election right now, that definitely shows their suicidal drift. Still, I wouldn't put it past them.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Well, if Labour demand an election right now, that definitely shows their suicidal drift. Still, I wouldn't put it past them.

---

Oh, they already have done. Six minutes later they announced their leadership contest. There were Kamikaze pilots in the Second World War with a better honed sense of self-preservation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:
AIUI, under the FTPA it requires a no confidence vote to bring down the government.

However, The FTPA can be repealed by a simple majority. So they could go down that route.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink.:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Well, if Labour demand an election right now, that definitely shows their suicidal drift. Still, I wouldn't put it past them.

---

Oh, they already have done. Six minutes later they announced their leadership contest. There were Kamikaze pilots in the Second World War with a better honed sense of self-preservation.

---

I imagine the logic is that either a) it won't happen or b) the leadership contest would be suspended and the constituency parties might chose deselect candidates who don't support the current leadership - cunningly producing a plp that does have confidence in Corbyn ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firenze:
I think she was anything but heir apparent. That was Osborne or Johnson - depending on which Bullingdon faction you belonged to.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firenze:
I think she was anything but heir apparent. That was Osborne or Johnson - depending on which Bullingdon faction you belonged to.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gee D:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firenze:
I think she was anything but heir apparent. That was Osborne or Johnson - depending on which Bullingdon faction you belonged to.

---

I can't speak of Osborne, save that he does not seem ever to have been very popular with any section of the Tories.

To put it at is most kindly, Boris is different. In Peter Principle terms, he was at the very limit of his abilities as Mayor of London. He's a lightweight, one who survives on being outrageous, and gives no indication that he's capable of thinking any idea through. He never had any chance of being elected, knew that and withdrew, I'd say.

I had a drink or 2 with Dlet and some of his mates this evening. The opinion was that Cameron would go quietly to the backbench after a bit of a holiday, work away loyally, and in a couple of years be re-elected leader to win the 2020 General Election.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin60:
How can she fail?

---

Appoint Boris as Foreign Secretary?
 

---

Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :
 
We won't see much of Boris. He'll be out of the country a lot. Eating for Britain.

George Osborne is out
 

---

Posted by Beenster (# 242) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ariel:
We won't see much of Boris. He'll be out of the country a lot. Eating for Britain.

George Osborne is out

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ariel:
We won't see much of Boris. He'll be out of the country a lot. Eating for Britain.

George Osborne is out

---

Yup - just had my first Mcenroe moment of the May era. Bojo as Foreign Secretary


 

---

Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :
 
I think this is going to be quite interesting.

I'm hanging on to the BBC's live broadcast in the hope of hearing that Jeremy Hunt has been replaced and has resigned from the government.
 

---

Posted by Firenze (# 619) on :
 
Obviously I think Johnson should have been given the Embassy in Ulan Bator at best. But the fact that he will have to report in to the Headmistress ('Johnson, I'm sorry to see you've been slipping in your Conversational German. Frau Merkel is very sad. We will have to work a little harder this term, won't we?') may help.
 

---

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beenster:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin60:
How can she fail?

---

Appoint Boris as Foreign Secretary?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ariel:
...And we have to wait until tomorrow to find out what happens to Gove. That's going to be an interesting one.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ariel:
...And we have to wait until tomorrow to find out what happens to Gove. That's going to be an interesting one.

---

quote:

---

It's been a privilege to be Chancellor these last 6 yrs. Others will judge - I hope I've left the economy in a better state than I found it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joesaphat:
Johnson, Davis and Fox at the helm of every position dealing with foreign countries; I cannot tell whether Theresa May has a great sense of humour and will sack them in a few months or whether this is an actual calamity.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Golden Key:
Rocinante--

You said they were probably "sent home with 3 red boxes". Meaning? That they were fired?

Thx.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ariel:
...And we have to wait until tomorrow to find out what happens to Gove. That's going to be an interesting one.

---

He's out. Made my day.....He has the unfortunate capabililty of reminding me of Lionel Culver gone wrong.......I don't know why

 

---

Posted by Callan (# 525) on :
 
NHS employees across the country whooping with joy as they hear that Jeremy Hunt is out.

May smiles, briefly, turns to her chief of staff and says: "Better send Andrea Leadsom up, I suppose".
 

---

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
Whateer else, we now have someone at the FO who speaks languages. Boris Johnson is fluent in French, German, Russian and Greek, plus what he terms as 'get-by' in a few more.

Underneath the image (and his own and others' pronouncements) there is a very good brain and an addiction to finding out everything around a subject - if ever ennobled he should choose two mongooses rampant as part of his arms.

Don't make the mistake of writing of BJ as a buffoon ...
 

---

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
Whateer else, we now have someone at the FO who speaks languages. Boris Johnson is fluent in French, German, Russian and Greek, plus what he terms as 'get-by' in a few more.

Underneath the image (and his own and others' pronouncements) there is a very good brain and an addiction to finding out everything around a subject - if ever ennobled he should choose two mongooses rampant as part of his arms.

Don't make the mistake of writing of BJ as a buffoon ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Golden Key:
Rocinante--

You said they were probably "sent home with 3 red boxes". Meaning? That they were fired?

Thx.

---

No, buried in paperwork and briefing material by the civil service. Basically code for the civil service having utter contempt for their capacity to do the job.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
Back to Boris: you can bet that TM will have told him in no uncertain terms that the nonsense has to stop.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SusanDoris:
On the subject of George Osborne, I know little about the country's finances, but it does seem to me that over the last six years he has tried and managed to reduce somewhat the huge debts the country has accumulated over the years, so that there might be a remote chance of not being in debt ... .. maybe after several hundred years I suppose. *sad face*

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
Back to Boris: you can bet that TM will have told him in no uncertain terms that the nonsense has to stop.

Justine Greening gets Justice - so Home Office and Justice an all-female team.

Philip Hammond at the Treasury could be interesting - he's not as grey as you'd think either: anyone else remember him on The Daily Politics with a Peppa Pig standing in for the non-appearing representative from the Labour Party? And he put a bomb (pun intended) under the lacklustre civil servants at the MoD.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alienfromzog:


Put simply, reducing the deficit should never have been the first priority. Even if it was, Osborne has completely failed in his own terms and made it more difficult to reduce the national debt. And more importantly, the fundementals of a strong economy in the medium to long term have been significantly undermined (Wolf has written extensively on this point).

So, No, Mr Osborne, history will not be kind.

AFZ

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Firenze:
ISTM that Johnson likes to be liked. He now has a job dealing with people who have every reason to cordially despise him.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
Jeremy Hunt is staying at the Department of Health.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin60:
SusanDoris.

Governments can hold up a piece of paper and say 'This is worth a billion quid, well it will be when you've all lent us someone else's money and we'll tax everyone but you to pay you a higher interest rate than you charge them to finance stuff they can't afford to buy outright while working in the schools and hospitals we build from the billion or working in other borrowers businesses.'.

Win, win, win, win. No?

---

Er...er...um...I have to confess I'm not quite sure about all that - and I slowed the speed of the voice down too!
 

---

Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:
Still, on the plus side, good to see a remainer getting the gig.

---

 

---

Posted by SusanDoris (# 12618) on :
 
alienfromzog

Thank you for your post and for the link to an expert view. I suppose it's that I personally have always hated to owe money, but international finances don't work thatway, do they.
 

---

Posted by beatmenace (# 16955) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joesaphat:
Johnson, Davis and Fox at the helm of every position dealing with foreign countries; I cannot tell whether Theresa May has a great sense of humour and will sack them in a few months or whether this is an actual calamity.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
Jeremy Hunt is staying at the Department of Health.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beatmenace:

I think its quite smart. They now have to follow through on the rhetoric they have been spouting for the last few months.

Davis maintained that the EU would come to the UK begging for a deal if we held out firmly over migration, so he is being given the chance to test what I suspect was a piece of wishful thinking on his part.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by beatmenace:

I think its quite smart. They now have to follow through on the rhetoric they have been spouting for the last few months.

Davis maintained that the EU would come to the UK begging for a deal if we held out firmly over migration, so he is being given the chance to test what I suspect was a piece of wishful thinking on his part.

---

His conservativehome post is an exercise in wishful thinking and general posturing.

I have to interject on the idea that this is a clever plan though. What if it isn't? So far most of the front bench have proved to be fairly mediocre - what if May's Machiavellian reputation purely stems from the fact that she's generally kept her mouth shut?

I mean her record at the home office isn't exactly glowing.

Either way I'll be taking bets on which of Davis, Johnson, or Fox resign first.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by lilBuddha:

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
Jeremy Hunt is staying at the Department of Health.

---

This was nearly a foregone conclusion. It merely emphasises the lie that they ever intended to slow down the destruction of the NHS.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:

quote:

---

Originally posted by lilBuddha:

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
Jeremy Hunt is staying at the Department of Health.

---

This was nearly a foregone conclusion. It merely emphasises the lie that they ever intended to slow down the destruction of the NHS.

---

70 years on and the NHS still hasn't been destroyed...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:

quote:

---

Originally posted by lilBuddha:

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
Jeremy Hunt is staying at the Department of Health.

---

This was nearly a foregone conclusion. It merely emphasises the lie that they ever intended to slow down the destruction of the NHS.

---

70 years on and the NHS still hasn't been destroyed...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Yes, I wait two weeks now to see a GP. Forward to a modern Conservative Britain! (Unless you're ill or poor).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SusanDoris:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Yes, I wait two weeks now to see a GP. Forward to a modern Conservative Britain! (Unless you're ill or poor).

---

In my local surgery, there is always a doctor assigned to seeurgent cases, so, as happened several months ago, I phoned early and was given an appointment that afternoon. (As it turned out to be a TIA I spent the next 24 hours in hospital!)
Do you have that sort of system where you are?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:

Though to be honest, I'm not sure there is much else Theresa May could have done bar putting the Brexiteers up front on their pet issue. If (when) failure comes, they do have to be in the front line.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:


I recognise that the combination of an increasing population, a much larger population of very elderly, a massive increase in chronic conditions caused by obesity and, not least, the huge increase in treatments and drugs available (at a cost) for most conditions, we are bound to - may already have - reach a situation where the demands cannot be paid for.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:

Though to be honest, I'm not sure there is much else Theresa May could have done bar putting the Brexiteers up front on their pet issue. If (when) failure comes, they do have to be in the front line.

---

So she's grouped up a prima-donna and two serial liars, one of whom has no ministerial experience to sort out an issue of national important so that when they screw up she has plausible deniability. That is the most charitable explanation.

Apart from anything else, there is a high likelihood of some other foreign crisis kicking off that needs someone with real diplomacy skills, not a self-centred buffoon with an elephant sized vocabulary who only opens his mouth to change feet.

---

quote:

---

Apart from anything else, there is a high likelihood of some other foreign crisis kicking off that needs someone with real diplomacy skills, not a self-centred buffoon with an elephant sized vocabulary who only opens his mouth to change feet.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rocinante:

quote:

---

Originally posted by SusanDoris:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Yes, I wait two weeks now to see a GP. Forward to a modern Conservative Britain! (Unless you're ill or poor).

---

In my local surgery, there is always a doctor assigned to seeurgent cases, so, as happened several months ago, I phoned early and was given an appointment that afternoon. (As it turned out to be a TIA I spent the next 24 hours in hospital!)
Do you have that sort of system where you are?

---

Yes, it must be a very badly-run surgery which says "you can't see a doctor for 2 weeks under any circumstances". At my local surgery the medical staff and the much-maligned administrators perform prodigies of service and organisation. On the 2 occasions when I have needed to in recent years, I have been able to see a doctor that day.

I agree that there is a national debate to be had on how much we can reasonably continue to expect from the NHS, but it will be impossible to have that debate while people continue to expect that everything they want or need will be provided instantly for free, and while politicians continue to stoke that belief to get easy votes.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SusanDoris:
alienfromzog

Thank you for your post and for the link to an expert view. I suppose it's that I personally have always hated to owe money, but international finances don't work thatway, do they.

---

Thank you

It's all deeply tragic. With record low interest rates, the government should be borrowing and investing like crazy. Instead we've had to borrow to cover Osborne's inadequacies...

I am not sad to see Cameron and Osborne gone, it will be nice not to have to see their smug faces any more.

The problem is, I have such low expectations of a May government. Hunt is still in post, we have a smart foolish person as Foreign secretary.

It's all so depressing.

AFZ
 

---

Posted by Rocinante (# 18541) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rocinante:

quote:

---

Originally posted by SusanDoris:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Yes, I wait two weeks now to see a GP. Forward to a modern Conservative Britain! (Unless you're ill or poor).

---

In my local surgery, there is always a doctor assigned to seeurgent cases, so, as happened several months ago, I phoned early and was given an appointment that afternoon. (As it turned out to be a TIA I spent the next 24 hours in hospital!)
Do you have that sort of system where you are?

---

Yes, it must be a very badly-run surgery which says "you can't see a doctor for 2 weeks under any circumstances". At my local surgery the medical staff and the much-maligned administrators perform prodigies of service and organisation. On the 2 occasions when I have needed to in recent years, I have been able to see a doctor that day.

I agree that there is a national debate to be had on how much we can reasonably continue to expect from the NHS, but it will be impossible to have that debate while people continue to expect that everything they want or need will be provided instantly for free, and while politicians continue to stoke that belief to get easy votes.

---

Well, lucky you. Surveys seem to show that waiting times have been increasing, and two weeks is expected to become the norm. But the Tories favour private health, and are going to starve such services of money.

http://tinyurl.com/hcsfne6

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:

Some might say it is already too late to instigate rational debate about setting affordable and sensible proposals for what the NHS covers, or how a dedicated mandatory health insurance might be introduced, but it has to be done.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:

I'm guessing that the real power in foreign policy is going to be Mrs May and that the job of the Foreign Secretary will be to manage the FCO and schmooze diplomats at receptions.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
Yes, I know it is received wisdom in some quarters that "the tories" hold as an article of faith the destruction of the NHS but that is ducking the issue.

---

quote:

---

The expectation that the NHS can keep on offering cradle-to-grave care for all, medical services from GPs and health visitors to critical care, all surgical procedures from open-heart surgery to repair of botched cosmetic procedures, plus fertility treatment, free contraception, etc, etc, etc is not only naive, it is fundamentally dishonest since anyone with a modicum of intellegence must realise that what the "hands off 'our' NHS" attitude implies is that all governments must, effectively, give a blank cheque to the NHS, regardless of any other items which the country may need.

---

quote:

---

I too have benefited from the NHS in my time, but I recognise that the combination of an increasing population, a much larger population of very elderly, a massive increase in chronic conditions caused by obesity and, not least, the huge increase in treatments and drugs available (at a cost) for most conditions, we are bound to - may already have - reach a situation where the demands cannot be paid for.

---

quote:

---

Some might say it is already too late to instigate rational debate about setting affordable and sensible proposals for what the NHS covers, or how a dedicated mandatory health insurance might be introduced, but it has to be done. Simply repeating the mantra that "our" NHS must be preserved is not the answer, nor is demonising public servants and politicians who are trying to achieve the impossible by running it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:

The only way a heath insurance scheme becomes more affordable than an NHS is if it performs less healthcare, and by that you mean less healthcare for poor people.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ricardus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:

Some might say it is already too late to instigate rational debate about setting affordable and sensible proposals for what the NHS covers, or how a dedicated mandatory health insurance might be introduced, but it has to be done.

---

If the population as a whole does not have enough money to pay for the NHS via taxes, how is it possible for it to have enough money to pay for the NHS via mandatory health insurance???

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:
It may, for aught I know, be an appropriate time to have an honest conversation about what we can and cannot expect from the National Health Service, but there do appear to be a number of members of the Cabinet who have just won an EU Referendum on a policy of spending an extra £350 million a week on it, if we leave the EU. ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:
It may, for aught I know, be an appropriate time to have an honest conversation about what we can and cannot expect from the National Health Service, but there do appear to be a number of members of the Cabinet who have just won an EU Referendum on a policy of spending an extra £350 million a week on it, if we leave the EU. ...

---

It's very important to keep on reminding them about this, in season and out of it. And all the other promises they made. And everything else they claimed.

Bang on about it and keep on banging.

---

I think you're right. However, I find it hard to do when I knew from the start it was impossible.



AFZ
 

---

Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
L’organist: bit of a tangent, but paying for contraceptives is excellent economic sense. In my neck of the woods, the pill costs the princely sum of €2 a month give or take. The expense to the State of a woman getting pregnant is considerably higher.

Humble servant: France actually does have essentially a private healthcare service paid for by the State. You pay the (self-employed) professional upfront and then claim a refund from the Social Security (70% of standard rates set by the Government) and your top-up insurance. FWIW it looks to me like it works better than the current set-up in the UK. That said, it has problems of its own and I think the situation is going to get untenably expensive at some point. The funding of healthcare is a major headache for all developed economies with aging populations and we need to be honest about that.

[Esprit d'escalier]

[ 15. July 2016, 08:34: Message edited by: la vie en rouge ]
 

---

Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by alienfromzog:

quote:

---

Originally posted by SusanDoris:
alienfromzog

Thank you for your post and for the link to an expert view. I suppose it's that I personally have always hated to owe money, but international finances don't work thatway, do they.

---

Thank you

It's all deeply tragic. With record low interest rates, the government should be borrowing and investing like crazy. Instead we've had to borrow to cover Osborne's inadequacies...

I am not sad to see Cameron and Osborne gone, it will be nice not to have to see their smug faces any more.

The problem is, I have such low expectations of a May government. Hunt is still in post, we have a smart foolish person as Foreign secretary.

It's all so depressing.

AFZ

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:
It may, for aught I know, be an appropriate time to have an honest conversation about what we can and cannot expect from the National Health Service,

but there do appear to be a number of members of the Cabinet who have just won an EU Referendum on a policy of spending an extra £350 million a week on it, if we leave the EU. ...

---

It's very important to keep on reminding them about this, in season and out of it. And all the other promises they made. And everything else they claimed.

Bang on about it and keep on banging.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin60:
Is the argument that because we didn't borrow to catalytically expand the economy we've had to borrow to compensate an under-performing one failing further?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
L’organist: bit of a tangent, but paying for contraceptives is excellent economic sense. In my neck of the woods, the pill costs the princely sum of €2 a month give or take. The expense to the State of a woman getting pregnant is considerably higher.

Humble servant: France actually does have essentially a private healthcare service paid for by the State. You pay the (self-employed) professional upfront and then claim a refund from the Social Security (70% of standard rates set by the Government) and your top-up insurance. FWIW it looks to me like it works better than the current set-up in the UK. That said, it has problems of its own and I think the situation is going to get untenably expensive at some point. The funding of healthcare is a major headache for all developed economies with aging populations and we need to be honest about that.

[Esprit d'escalier]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alienfromzog:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin60:
Is the argument that because we didn't borrow to catalytically expand the economy we've had to borrow to compensate an under-performing one failing further?

---

Yes, in part. There's more to it than that but yes, this is true.

AFZ

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:
It may, for aught I know, be an appropriate time to have an honest conversation about what we can and cannot expect from the National Health Service,

but there do appear to be a number of members of the Cabinet who have just won an EU Referendum on a policy of spending an extra £350 million a week on it, if we leave the EU. ...

---

It's very important to keep on reminding them about this, in season and out of it. And all the other promises they made. And everything else they claimed.

Bang on about it and keep on banging.

---

Why? Is that going to make the Brexit vote (or voters) disappear?

All this bitterness seems like a good way to give yourself a heart attack. Then you really will need the NHS!

In any case, not all Brexiteers voted as they did because they expected the NHS to be flush with money afterwards.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:

quote:

---

Originally posted by lilBuddha:

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
Jeremy Hunt is staying at the Department of Health.

---

This was nearly a foregone conclusion. It merely emphasises the lie that they ever intended to slow down the destruction of the NHS.

---

70 years on and the NHS still hasn't been destroyed...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sioni Sais:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:

quote:

---

Originally posted by lilBuddha:

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
Jeremy Hunt is staying at the Department of Health.

---

This was nearly a foregone conclusion. It merely emphasises the lie that they ever intended to slow down the destruction of the NHS.

---

70 years on and the NHS still hasn't been destroyed...

---

Not for want of trying. Since Sir Keith Joseph gained any kind of foothold in making Conservative policy destroying the NHS has been that party's priority. KJ was a swivel-eyed loon while Thatcher was a moderating influence.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by alienfromzog:
Ultimately though - the NHS is significantly more efficient. If you want to cope with expanding costs, I would suggest that using the most efficient system is the way to go.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:
Guilty conscience much?

It's actually pretty salient that we're expected to have an honest discussion about the NHS when a number of serving Cabinet Ministers have attained their office by, among other reasons, lying about the level of funding available to same. Let's face it, without Brexit, it's unlikely that Fox, Davis and Leadsom would be in the Cabinet and Johnson would have been at some mid-level Cabinet position learning that a talent for the winning phrase is no substitute for being a capable administrator in government. When the recession bites and there is less money available for such frivolous luxuries as schools and hospitals it won't be entirely unreasonable to point out that the consequences of this particular course of action were not entirely in keeping with what its advocates suggested might be the case.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:
If (destroying the NHS) is a priority it's not a priority that they have done very much about.

Granted, since 2010 they haven't spent as much on it as they indicated that they were going to and, granted, they wasted an inordinate amount of time and money in a rather pointless reorganisation that they had promised not to do. They are, nonetheless, spending £116.4 billion on it. Which is, on the face of it, rather an odd thing to do if getting rid of it was a priority.

Inasmuch as the Tories have priorities they are largely a) get re-elected and b) spend less money on things whilst getting the same, or better, outcomes. Which is a perfectly good reason not to support them but the "Woe unto Illium" stuff does rather boil down to "who are you going to believe? Me, or your lying eyes".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:
Guilty conscience much?

It's actually pretty salient that we're expected to have an honest discussion about the NHS when a number of serving Cabinet Ministers have attained their office by, among other reasons, lying about the level of funding available to same. Let's face it, without Brexit, it's unlikely that Fox, Davis and Leadsom would be in the Cabinet and Johnson would have been at some mid-level Cabinet position learning that a talent for the winning phrase is no substitute for being a capable administrator in government. When the recession bites and there is less money available for such frivolous luxuries as schools and hospitals it won't be entirely unreasonable to point out that the consequences of this particular course of action were not entirely in keeping with what its advocates suggested might be the case.

---

These politicians are all in the same political party. That party was always going to have more or less the same policy towards the NHS, regardless of Brexit. IOW, if the NHS is going to suffer outside the EU then it was also going to suffer inside the EU.

The only way for us to influence what happens to the NHS will be to vote for a different political party when the chance comes. It won't be too long.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Do you believe that the recession will be the natural outcome of Brexit, or is Brexit simply a convenient excuse for something that the Tory party wanted to happen anyway?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Do you believe that the recession will be the natural outcome of Brexit, or is Brexit simply a convenient excuse for something that the Tory party wanted to happen anyway?

---

quote:

---

The belief that cutting ourselves loose from Europe, as advocated by Mrs Leadsom, will make everybody rich and prosperous was, and remains, seriously delusional.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by molopata:
...but, but, .. there is a free-trade deal in the offing with Australia, apparently ... perhaps.

---

quote:

---

Of course it's easy to get a free-trade deal if you just say 'yes' to everything.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chris stiles:

quote:

---

Originally posted by molopata:
...but, but, .. there is a free-trade deal in the offing with Australia, apparently ... perhaps.

---

Australian exports about £5bn to the UK, and imports about £7bn from the UK, so in real terms is a fairly small amount from a UK perspective. As Australia is a smaller economy in percentage terms these figures are more important to them.

Of course it's easy to get a free-trade deal if you just say 'yes' to everything.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink.:
They're quite small, 8 times of the power of the Hiroshima bomb, and the deployed sub can only carry 4 - which require a day or more's notice to fire, and are part manufactured and part serviced in the ISA.

But apparently, this is vital to our defence and will stop a country the size of Russia from attacking us ....

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink.:
They're quite small, 8 times of the power of the Hiroshima bomb, and the deployed sub can only carry 4 - which require a day or more's notice to fire, and are part manufactured and part serviced in the ISA.

But apparently, this is vital to our defence and will stop a country the size of Russia from attacking us ....

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by hatless:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink.:
They're quite small, 8 times of the power of the Hiroshima bomb, and the deployed sub can only carry 4 - which require a day or more's notice to fire, and are part manufactured and part serviced in the ISA.

But apparently, this is vital to our defence and will stop a country the size of Russia from attacking us ....

---

I read that our subs will carry 8 missiles, but could carry more, and that each missile will have 3 warheads, but could contain more, and that they are thought to have 7 to 30 times the power of Little Boy.

A launch could, if targeted at Russian cities, and if all the warheads arrived and detonated, kill millions, perhaps a few tens of millions.

---

quote:

---

However, they were built, and until recently did, carry a full war load of 12 missiles, each with 12 warheads - meaning each boat could deal with 144 targets.

---

© Ship of Fools 2016


UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0