FlyTheNest

Morning all.

Still wet here

Indie headline : "Elon Musk says he is probably going to go and live on Mars "

Perhaps he could take Mark Zuckerberg with him ?

Hammond on Toady, paraphrased : " Yes, we're going to be worse off ."

Drip, drip, drip of goodnews for the brexiteers .

https://amp.theguardian.com/society/201 ... ssion=true" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Spending cuts breach UK's human rights obligations, says report

RIP Harry Leslie Smith aka @HarrysLastStand

Hip dolphin mam flustered making announcement of economic impact assessment (6,7)

Chancellor admits UK will be worse off under all Brexit scenarios

Guardian

Not good enough. Parliament won the right to see the full legal advice and that is precisely what we expect to see. Labour will not let ministers off the hook.

Keir Starmer

HindleA wrote:https://amp.theguardian.com/society/201 ... ssion=true
Spending cuts breach UK's human rights obligations, says report

" The poorest 20% of people in England lost an average of 11% of their incomes as a result of austerity, compared with zero losses for the top fifth of households.

Measured in cash terms, total spending on public services will have fallen by £1,500 per household in England by 2021-22, compared with just under £500 in Wales and £200 in Scotland, according to the study commissioned by the Equality and Human Rights Commission."

Reading down and wondering why, spending is more 'generous' in Scotland because of income tax rises.

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:

Not good enough. Parliament won the right to see the full legal advice and that is precisely what we expect to see. Labour will not let ministers off the hook.

Keir Starmer

Labour is still on another hook , because if they had responsibility for brexit their option would (saving magic!) still leave the country poorer , assuming Norway being the closest option --
Livethread 9.03 " The analysis suggests that under Mrs May’s deal GDP will be between 1 and 2% lower over the next 15 years. Under the Norway option GDP would be 1.4% lower, under the free trade scenario 4.9% and under no-deal 7.6%."

I assume their defence would be that tho GDP is smaller they would redistribute incomes .

But in normal times redistribution downwards is vastly easier in a growing economy ...

Morning.

Behind paywall but headline raises a few questions:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... d-theresa/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Brexit deal latest news: Norway-style deal will be considered if Theresa May’s plan is blocked by Parliament, Chancellor suggests - live updates

Considered by who? Theresa May? Would she have enough support to get it through among moderate Tories, presuming the SNP are on board (as they appear to have been signalling)? Or would she need Labour support? Would Labour support this? Either officially from the front bench or in sufficient numbers from the backbenches? Or is this just another ploy, a threat to the hard Brexiters that if they don't support May's deal they'll end up with an even softer Brexit?

Good-morning, everyone

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:

Chancellor admits UK will be worse off under all Brexit scenarios

Guardian

He said something along lines of economically being worse off, but there being other political benefits including 'being able to negotiate new trade deals',
I'm pretty sure that was meant to be an economic benefit!

"Philip Hammond has suggested a Norway-style deal will be considered if Theresa May’s plan is blocked by Parliament.

Asked if the Government has a Plan B if Mrs May’s deal is voted down next month, the Chancellor said “we will be in unchartered political territory.

“We will then have to sit down as a government and decide where to go on the basis of the vote, who has voted which way.”

Asked if a Norway-style deal would then be favoured he said: “We know what the different options are, we know what the different proposals that people have talked about are, but we will have to look at the decision Parliament has made and consider what is the best way to proceed.

Last week the Telegraph disclosed that several ministers are engineering an alternative Norway-style relationship with Brussels, which would see the UK remain a member of the European Economic Area (EEA), without full EU membership.

Mr Hammond said: “All of the other options have disadvantages. We have to look not only at the economy but the need to heal a fractured nation."

Hammond speaking quite openly there. Praise where it's due.

tinybgoat wrote:

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:

Chancellor admits UK will be worse off under all Brexit scenarios

Guardian

He said something along lines of economically being worse off, but there being other political benefits including 'being able to negotiate new trade deals',
I'm pretty sure that was meant to be an economic benefit!

Only if the government is able to negotiate a Canadian style FTA and come up with a solution to the Irish border in order to avoid the backstop kicking in. At the moment the only solution available that would allow us to pursue new trade deals is a border in the Irish sea. Which is not going to be acceptable to the DUP, for obvious reasons. So this is just more going round in circles, with everyone knowing what the options and trade offs are but no one willing to articulate them because they don't want to admit that leaving the EU is stupid and pointless.

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Hammond speaking quite openly there. Praise where it's due.

Hammond speaking quite openly about the government's lies and failures that he continues to be complicit in. Damnation where it's due.

adam wrote:

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Hammond speaking quite openly there. Praise where it's due.

Hammond speaking quite openly about the government's lies and failures that he continues to be complicit in. Damnation where it's due.

They should have been talking about the trade offs long ago. The public have always been capable of understanding the trade offs. Indeed, polls have been indicating for some time that pursuing the end of freedom of movement at the expense of the economy as May is doing has always had less support than vice versa and that's before open and honest debate about what leaving the single market really means and what going it alone on WTO terms would really entail.

adam wrote:

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Hammond speaking quite openly there. Praise where it's due.

Hammond speaking quite openly about the government's lies and failures that he continues to be complicit in. Damnation where it's due.

"People didn't vote to be poorer" Hammond not long ago .
"People did vote to be poorer" Hammond today

https://www.parliament.uk/business/comm ... ent-17-19/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Work and Pensions Committee Chair takes a stand on overpayment of Carer’s Allowance

https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/11/28/wh ... ed-part-2/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"Why Brexit is going wrong and how it could be fixed (part 2)"

This is the second of two posts here looking at Brexit through a democratic, rather than a political lens. In the previous post, I argued that the ‘cliff edge’ exit that is inevitable when leaving the EU is not sustainable for the EU, and that the UK would be doing everyone a favour by challenging it.

Some interesting ideas,some Frog222 might like.
(including truth & conciliation type mechanism)

tinybgoat wrote:https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/11/28/wh ... ed-part-2/
"Why Brexit is going wrong and how it could be fixed (part 2)"

This is the second of two posts here looking at Brexit through a democratic, rather than a political lens. In the previous post, I argued that the ‘cliff edge’ exit that is inevitable when leaving the EU is not sustainable for the EU, and that the UK would be doing everyone a favour by challenging it.

Some interesting ideas,some Frog222 might like.
(including truth & conciliation type mechanism)

Slugger : " Here’s what I believe Mrs May needs to do now;

Admit attempting to leave the EU by referendum was crazy in the first place. It was inexcusable to decide to scrap the entirety of the UK’s trading / foreign / diplomatic / economic policies without any idea what the Plan B was, and to do so using a single 50%+1 binary vote will be something we will look back on with disbelief. The social divisions it has caused were very easy to predict — referendums of these kind make “the greatest unhappiness for the greatest number” an actual policy goal. This now needs to be acknowledged and articulated widely, and Teresa May could reasonably claim to have learned this lesson he hard way."

TBG -- exactly what I wrote yesterday

viewtopic.php?p=205119&sid=96f5378b3bb0 ... 5a#p205119" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Begin with the Truth about parliament's failure, which wasn't limited to Cameron/Osborne .

Government refuses honouring a binding motion

"" It would be impossible for government to function if we create a precedent that the legal advice that the government receives has to be made public.

We must have, as every other citizen has, the right to take privileged legal advice which remains private between the lawyer and the client.

So the client has the ability to ask the difficult questions, to receive full and frank legal advice, and then to make a decision based on that full and frank advice. ""

State secret !

frog222 wrote:"" It would be impossible for government to function if we create a precedent that the legal advice that the government receives has to be made public.

We must have, as every other citizen has, the right to take privileged legal advice which remains private between the lawyer and the client.

So the client has the ability to ask the difficult questions, to receive full and frank legal advice, and then to make a decision based on that full and frank advice. ""

State secret !

I completely agree that the commons have passed a binding motion requiring the government to do something which they now have to do, but I have some sympathy with this view. It doesn't mean that the commons have done the wrong thing - there is a clear argument that we are so close to a catastrophic situation that we need to know everything, and there is the possibility that the government are asserting that x is the legal position despite the fact that there own legal advice is that x is not the legal position. But there is a good general idea that advice is confidential, even if there are specific reasons why it might be forced open.

Morning all.

Well, that was fun...wife felt ill yesterday afternoon - cold, shivering, severe back pain, short of breath - 111 took an age to get a clinician to phone back. They sent an ambulance which eventually turned up and took her off to A&E. I followed up but came home when we heard there was a 4 hour wait in Majors to get seen by a doctor. Got home at midnight and went to bed. Phone call at 7:20...she can be collected. Went straight off there and got back in time to get dressed - properly this time. Meeting in school at 8:30. Home for a second part of breakfast. Back to school for Y5 swimming. Then home.

And breathe...they think it was possibly a chest infection but we can't be too careful given what she's been through before.

Willow904 wrote:Morning.

Behind paywall but headline raises a few questions:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... d-theresa/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Brexit deal latest news: Norway-style deal will be considered if Theresa May’s plan is blocked by Parliament, Chancellor suggests - live updates

Considered by who? Theresa May? Would she have enough support to get it through among moderate Tories, presuming the SNP are on board (as they appear to have been signalling)? Or would she need Labour support? Would Labour support this? Either officially from the front bench or in sufficient numbers from the backbenches? Or is this just another ploy, a threat to the hard Brexiters that if they don't support May's deal they'll end up with an even softer Brexit?

It is probably what Hammond actually wants tbh, less so May given how obsessed she is with freedom of movement. But she may yet be forced into it, or possibly her successor if she is forced from office (though given the past few years, I will believe that when I see it)

Labour support for such an option is far from universal, but I still suspect they would overall find it easier to adapt to than the Tories.

RogerOThornhill wrote:Morning all.

Well, that was fun...wife felt ill yesterday afternoon - cold, shivering, severe back pain, short of breath - 111 took an age to get a clinician to phone back. They sent an ambulance which eventually turned up and took her off to A&E. I followed up but came home when we heard there was a 4 hour wait in Majors to get seen by a doctor. Got home at midnight and went to bed. Phone call at 7:20...she can be collected. Went straight off there and got back in time to get dressed - properly this time. Meeting in school at 8:30. Home for a second part of breakfast. Back to school for Y5 swimming. Then home.

And breathe...they think it was possibly a chest infection but we can't be too careful given what she's been through before.

Glad your wife was seen eventually and is getting some treatment.

It does worry me that changes to how we access out of hours services has been changed for political rather than medical reasons. In the past I suspect your wife would have called and been seen by an out of hours GP on call. I'm not sure if that would have been better for her than the unpleasantness of a long A&E wait when poorly, not being a doctor myself, but knowing 111 is the result of Tory privatisation of commissioning and the resulting break up of PCTs which had previously run NHS Direct rather than a service based on the preferences of medical professionals leaves you always wondering if it really is the best way to get people the best treatment....

Edited to add that GPs having more direct access to the specialist services available in hospitals seems the way forward. Too many people seem to be only able to access specialist tests, x-rays etc via A&E which is an emergency triage environment. It just doesn't seem like the right environment for ill people who need urgent tests.

RogerOThornhill wrote:Morning all.

Well, that was fun...wife felt ill yesterday afternoon - cold, shivering, severe back pain, short of breath - 111 took an age to get a clinician to phone back. They sent an ambulance which eventually turned up and took her off to A&E. I followed up but came home when we heard there was a 4 hour wait in Majors to get seen by a doctor. Got home at midnight and went to bed. Phone call at 7:20...she can be collected. Went straight off there and got back in time to get dressed - properly this time. Meeting in school at 8:30. Home for a second part of breakfast. Back to school for Y5 swimming. Then home.

And breathe...they think it was possibly a chest infection but we can't be too careful given what she's been through before.

Hopefully it was nothing too serious, best wishes

Nige Tassell
‏

@nigetassell
34m34 minutes ago
More
Quentin Letts' departure from the Mail does mean, of course, that he's now more likely to crop up on our TV screens as Pompous Arse For Hire. Admittedly, it is a much more crowded marketplace these days...

One of the many reasons that I never bother with This Week was the fact that Letts was a regular.

I'm sure John Bercow will pay tribute to his departure in the usual fashion i.e.

@RogerOThornhill
I'm so sorry. Please give my love.

A couple of bits from the AS blog.

John Redwood, a Conservative Brexiter, asks Stride if the government will publish figures showing the UK growth rate in the 25 years before it joined the EEC, and since it joined the single market in 1992. That will show how bad the EU has been for the UK.

But that's not a valid comparison - it should be against other EU/non EU countries for the same periods.

David Davis, the former Brexit secretary, asks Stride if he knows of any economic forecast that has got the figures right. Stride accepts such a forecast does not exist.

For someone who was in business like Davis, he seems to not have a clue as to what forecasts are for - they're not for simply waiting and measuring against the actual outcome but about taking action - "If x is showing us y, then we should do z to improve y."

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... ible-homes" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Builders criticised for lobbying against accessible homes

JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI (The Borowitz Report)—Celebrating her election victory on Tuesday night, U.S. Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith said that, despite predictions that her state was ready to turn the page on its shameful past, “I never lost faith in Mississippi’s racists.”

“For weeks, we’ve been hearing national pundits say that Mississippi was ready to enter the twenty-first century,” Hyde-Smith told a crowd of supporters at her victory rally. “Tonight, with your help, we proved them wrong.”

Hyde-Smith said that, despite the media’s unearthing of a cavalcade of embarrassing comments and actions from her past, “I never doubted that, at the end of the day, the people of Mississippi would listen to the racist voices in their heads.”

Choking back tears, Hyde-Smith thanked her supporters for honoring Mississippi’s storied heritage of hatred and cruelty.

“Mississippi voters do not want to tear down the relics of our Confederate past,” she said. “As such a relic, I am eternally grateful.”

Exit polls showed that Hyde-Smith performed extremely well with voters who described themselves as bigots, and dominated among those who could not correctly spell “Mississippi.”

Gone a bit quiet again innit, well I'm sure the news that the world chess champion has retained their title will interest you

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Gone a bit quiet again innit, well I'm sure the news that the world chess champion has retained their title will interest you

I don't play chess any more. I like bocce ball.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Gone a bit quiet again innit, well I'm sure the news that the world chess champion has retained their title will interest you

I sat reading the 'minute by minute' of the last game whilst waiting for my train!

adam wrote:

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Gone a bit quiet again innit, well I'm sure the news that the world chess champion has retained their title will interest you

I sat reading the 'minute by minute' of the last game whilst waiting for my train!

No more waiting for trains after werk for me!
(Since long ago.)
Here's M.Crace : https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -only-plan" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Courtesy of thauma, off to read !

" ” . The revolution will be televised. But will anyone be watching? “ "

Not me . I rely on SGO and other noble ( perhaps a little maso as far as volunteers are concerned ) people to do that

frog222 wrote:JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI (The Borowitz Report)—Celebrating her election victory on Tuesday night, U.S. Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith said that, despite predictions that her state was ready to turn the page on its shameful past, “I never lost faith in Mississippi’s racists.”

“For weeks, we’ve been hearing national pundits say that Mississippi was ready to enter the twenty-first century,” Hyde-Smith told a crowd of supporters at her victory rally. “Tonight, with your help, we proved them wrong.”

Hyde-Smith said that, despite the media’s unearthing of a cavalcade of embarrassing comments and actions from her past, “I never doubted that, at the end of the day, the people of Mississippi would listen to the racist voices in their heads.”

Choking back tears, Hyde-Smith thanked her supporters for honoring Mississippi’s storied heritage of hatred and cruelty.

“Mississippi voters do not want to tear down the relics of our Confederate past,” she said. “As such a relic, I am eternally grateful.”

Exit polls showed that Hyde-Smith performed extremely well with voters who described themselves as bigots, and dominated among those who could not correctly spell “Mississippi.”

Final result of around 54-46, pretty close by recent standards.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
Final result of around 54-46, pretty close by recent standards.

8 points - the next closest contest in recent years was over 16 points. A win is a win and a loss a loss, but this was a decent end to the elections.

good-night, everyone
love,
cJA

adam wrote:

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
Final result of around 54-46, pretty close by recent standards.

8 points - the next closest contest in recent years was over 16 points. A win is a win and a loss a loss, but this was a decent end to the elections.

Could be somewhat better tho !

As with the Tomasky feature in the NYT, I'm looking forward to Senate Reform as in the UK's HoL reform ..........


( It may take some time ! ...................... )

Nancy Pelosi overcame the first hurdle in her quest to become Speaker again as 203 Democrats supported her in an internal election. She still needs 218 votes on the floor in January.

I think this is wrong - she doesn't need 218, she needs half of the votes made for any candidate plus one - in other words, half plus one of the votes ignoring abstentions.

This probably won't be relevant because of the 32 who voted against her in the internal Democrat vote today you would expect some to now take the party line, but it could be close.

If they voted for another candidate from amongst themselves, then she might not quite reach half plus one of the votes and it would have to go to another vote - there's no knocking out or anything, they just do it again.

If they abstained - if enough of them abstained - then they could allow the Republican candidate to win. It's not likely - it would need a few more than voted against her today. I don't think it would do any serious policy damage - I think the democrat majority could quickly vote to remove him/her (let's face it, him), but it would do terrible political damage - Trump would be howling at the moon with laughter - even with a majority they can't elect one of their own.