Tories take the lead with Ipsos-MORI. BXP drops 4 to 12%. LDs up 7 to 22. At last month's Euros Ipsos-MORI was the most accurate pollster

CON 26 (+1)
LAB 24 (-3)
LD 22 (+7)
BXP 12 (-4)
GRN 8 (-1)

ronmcd wrote:polls returning to some sort of normality post EU elections?

Tories take the lead with Ipsos-MORI. BXP drops 4 to 12%. LDs up 7 to 22. At last month's Euros Ipsos-MORI was the most accurate pollster

CON 26 (+1)
LAB 24 (-3)
LD 22 (+7)
BXP 12 (-4)
GRN 8 (-1)

https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/ ... 1412036609

ronmcd wrote:polls returning to some sort of normality post EU elections?

Tories take the lead with Ipsos-MORI. BXP drops 4 to 12%. LDs up 7 to 22. At last month's Euros Ipsos-MORI was the most accurate pollster

CON 26 (+1)
LAB 24 (-3)
LD 22 (+7)
BXP 12 (-4)
GRN 8 (-1)

https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/ ... 1412036609

While the favourite to be Britain’s next prime minister feeds his public disinformation, the EU is homing in on a huge trade deal

Three years after the United Kingdom’s Brexit referendum, the UK is no closer to figuring out how to leave the European Union – and what comes next – than it was when the result was announced. And now a Conservative party leadership election to replace the outgoing prime minister, Theresa May, is in full swing. To those of us watching from the outside, the debate between the candidates confirms that they have learned nothing whatsoever from the past two years of negotiations with the EU.

Sadly, this comes as no surprise, given that the lead candidate is Boris Johnson, the leave campaign’s most prominent architect and a man who continues to dissemble, exaggerate and disinform the public about Brexit. In 2016, Johnson and his fellow Brexiteers duped a narrow majority of UK voters into thinking that leaving the EU would somehow furnish the NHS with an additional £350m per week. He also drummed up fears that Britain’s EU membership would somehow lead to mass immigration from Turkey (which happens to be the homeland of his paternal great-grandfather, Ali Kemal).

Though Johnson will most likely soon find himself in a position where he must make good on his promises, he continues to spread untruths. Chief among them is the myth that Britain can tear up the withdrawal agreement that May negotiated with the EU, withhold its financial commitments to the bloc, and simultaneously start negotiating free-trade deals. To Johnson’s followers, however, he is more prophet than politician: only he can deliver a mythical “true Brexit” that will bring the prosperity promised during the referendum campaign.

Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt claim the backstop problems can be fixed by 31 October. They are in for a rude awakening

As commentators line up to debate the character and personality traits of the two men running for the Tory leadership – and by default our prime minister – there is only one question on my mind: how credible are the details of how and when they can deliver or resolve Brexit?

This does not appear to be a question 84% of Conservative party members are remotely bothered with, as they would prefer the fantasy of an immediate “clean Brexit”. They welcome their witching hour of 11pm on 31 October becoming Independence Day, as if it’s some sort of Hollywood blockbuster, with no deal.

If only will was reality. There is a raft of legislation required even in a no-deal scenario – for example bills on agriculture, fisheries, financial services, trade and immigration. So, too, the vexed question of the Irish border. Boris Johnson, like an overexcited puppy when interviewed by the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg this week, grabbed this bone and enthused about “abundant, abundant technical fixes that can be introduced to make sure that you don’t have to have checks at the border”. Johnson is not one to worry about details, given the fact that in January Sabine Weyand, the EU’s deputy negotiator, said: “We’ve looked at every border on this Earth, every border the EU has with a third country – there’s simply no way you can do away with checks and controls.”

Then there is the clause in the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. Section 10, on the subject of the Irish border, states that nothing in this act “authorises regulations which … diminish any form of North-South cooperation provided for by the Belfast agreement”. This is likely to mean that the Northern Ireland backstop will stay in place until MPs reach an agreement that honours the UK’s obligations under the Good Friday agreement.

I can see a scenario where the SNP go to Jeremy Corbyn and say we will will vote for every one of your budgets in the lifetime of your parliament in return for indyref2.

I think it's a serious prospect, and I don't say that in any attempt to cause a political drama - although I'm sure some people will perceive it that way.

It's hard to see, from my understanding, why he would walk away from power at that moment. I don't know that to be true, but it's just my feeling.

zerne wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48790803

Labour MPs, Peers, members sign letters objecting to decision the allow Chris Williamson back in. The Labour Party Infight begins anew. Perhaps electing a leader is solution. Seems to be a popular tactic for some.

They criticise the process by which Mr Williamson was allowed back into the party, adding: "It is clear to us that the Labour Party's disciplinary process remains mired by the appearance of political interference. This must stop. We need a truly independent process."

They called on Mr Corbyn to "show leadership" by asking for this "damaging decision to be overturned and reviewed".

zerne wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48790803

Labour MPs, Peers, members sign letters objecting to decision the allow Chris Williamson back in. The Labour Party Infight begins anew. Perhaps electing a leader is solution.

minininja wrote:

zerne wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48790803

Labour MPs, Peers, members sign letters objecting to decision the allow Chris Williamson back in. The Labour Party Infight begins anew. Perhaps electing a leader is solution. Seems to be a popular tactic for some.

They criticise the process by which Mr Williamson was allowed back into the party, adding: "It is clear to us that the Labour Party's disciplinary process remains mired by the appearance of political interference. This must stop. We need a truly independent process."

They called on Mr Corbyn to "show leadership" by asking for this "damaging decision to be overturned and reviewed".

They need to make their bloody minds up whether they want the disciplinary process to be independent or if they want to blame Corbyn for every decision.

ronmcd wrote:I wouldn't trust Mags Hodge as far as I could throw her.