RugbyRebels

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: That’s the point, though. If we’d built a bloody runway a decade ago, you and millions of other could go through Heathrow/Gatwick/Stanstead.
Yes it is more money for the south-east but that’s not the problem. The problem is the lack of investment in the North. It looks like this is being recognised and hopefully projects such as HS3 will start to rectify the imbalance.

I've no issue with adding an extra hub airport in East Anglia, I'm just against a third runway at Heathrow, it's too polluting in a number of ways. If the extra hub airport in East Anglia isn't wanted or can't be delivered on then as noted above Amsterdam is a fine choice of hub airport

I’m not particularly bothered where it is built either. I just wish it had been built. You and Stones may not care where your hub is, but the Treasury and the local economy of wherever it could’ve/would’ve been built probably do care. Those flying in on long haul for business will also care, as why catch a connection to the UK when you can just stay in Paris or Amsterdam.

If people are flying in for business of a financial nature their final destination is quite likely to be Paris or Amsterdam. Or Frankfurt or Dublin.....

canta_brian wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:
I've no issue with adding an extra hub airport in East Anglia, I'm just against a third runway at Heathrow, it's too polluting in a number of ways. If the extra hub airport in East Anglia isn't wanted or can't be delivered on then as noted above Amsterdam is a fine choice of hub airport

I’m not particularly bothered where it is built either. I just wish it had been built. You and Stones may not care where your hub is, but the Treasury and the local economy of wherever it could’ve/would’ve been built probably do care. Those flying in on long haul for business will also care, as why catch a connection to the UK when you can just stay in Paris or Amsterdam.

If people are flying in for business of a financial nature their final destination is quite likely to be Paris or Amsterdam. Or Frankfurt or Dublin.....

Or Zürich
Or, believe it or not, Leeds or Edinburgh

You know, I've never noticed this before, but David Davis occasionally looks like a Mirror Universe version of Julian Assange in some photos. Or, like, his really strict dad that disapproves of his choices, and makes it known through passive aggressive remarks at Christmas.

Bernard Jenkin (Tory MP) castigates the cabinet for being vague and divided on Brexit, and then sets out a divisive vision whereby we leave the customs union and single market. He is at least not being vague, though why he only thinks it divisive to want a softer Brexit (or indeed no Brexit) fails even the vaguest logic test

Liam Fox once so keen on the idea we'd be able to do free trade deals once free of the EU has spent much of the last few days begging the USA not to announce a huge imposition o tariffs on steel and aluminium. But no dice, and Trump makes clear what he means by a beautiful trade deal.

It may yet prove the USA doesn't care to impose tariffs on the UK as we're just not big enough to care about and/or they want a deal on something else

Digby wrote:Liam Fox once so keen on the idea we'd be able to do free trade deals once free of the EU has spent much of the last few days begging the USA not to announce a huge imposition o tariffs on steel and aluminium. But no dice, and Trump makes clear what he means by a beautiful trade deal.

It may yet prove the USA doesn't care to impose tariffs on the UK as we're just not big enough to care about and/or they want a deal on something else

There are many things you can blame Dr Fox for, but Trump being a fuck head isn't one of them. They are about a £360m export market for us.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:Liam Fox once so keen on the idea we'd be able to do free trade deals once free of the EU has spent much of the last few days begging the USA not to announce a huge imposition o tariffs on steel and aluminium. But no dice, and Trump makes clear what he means by a beautiful trade deal.

It may yet prove the USA doesn't care to impose tariffs on the UK as we're just not big enough to care about and/or they want a deal on something else

There are many things you can blame Dr Fox for, but Trump being a fuck head isn't one of them. They are about a £360m export market for us.

I'd have more sympathy for Fox had he not been so sold there was a swift and lucrative deal to be done with the USA, and here we are months and even years down the line with not even with an outline of what that deal might be, and despite Fox's begging not to make the announcement Trump going ahead with his highly ill-advised and poorly considered announcement of tariffs in the name of protectionism an security. And seeing as Trump is seemingly obsessed with deficits one would have to assume given current UK-US trade that Donald sees any future deal as moving away from our and toward US advantage, though expecting logic and consistency from Trump is something of a waste of time.

I would like to apologise to the board for discussing Fox and not using the label disgraced former defence secretary, Liam Fox

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:Liam Fox once so keen on the idea we'd be able to do free trade deals once free of the EU has spent much of the last few days begging the USA not to announce a huge imposition o tariffs on steel and aluminium. But no dice, and Trump makes clear what he means by a beautiful trade deal.

It may yet prove the USA doesn't care to impose tariffs on the UK as we're just not big enough to care about and/or they want a deal on something else

There are many things you can blame Dr Fox for, but Trump being a fuck head isn't one of them. They are about a £360m export market for us.

I'd have more sympathy for Fox had he not been so sold there was a swift and lucrative deal to be done with the USA, and here we are months and even years down the line with not even with an outline of what that deal might be, and despite Fox's begging not to make the announcement Trump going ahead with his highly ill-advised and poorly considered announcement of tariffs in the name of protectionism an security. And seeing as Trump is seemingly obsessed with deficits one would have to assume given current UK-US trade that Donald sees any future deal as moving away from our and toward US advantage, though expecting logic and consistency from Trump is something of a waste of time.

so you actually believe he was sincere in that? To me that's just expected sophistry, without the cleverness.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: There are many things you can blame Dr Fox for, but Trump being a fuck head isn't one of them. They are about a £360m export market for us.

I'd have more sympathy for Fox had he not been so sold there was a swift and lucrative deal to be done with the USA, and here we are months and even years down the line with not even with an outline of what that deal might be, and despite Fox's begging not to make the announcement Trump going ahead with his highly ill-advised and poorly considered announcement of tariffs in the name of protectionism an security. And seeing as Trump is seemingly obsessed with deficits one would have to assume given current UK-US trade that Donald sees any future deal as moving away from our and toward US advantage, though expecting logic and consistency from Trump is something of a waste of time.

so you actually believe he was sincere in that? To me that's just expected sophistry, without the cleverness.

The idea free trade deals with the EU and others would be easily arranged was put forward as part of the campaign, though I'm not surprised the disgraced former defence secretary is being caught out in instances such as this. And people should be called out for sophistry, Fox and his cohorts in this instance, just as Osborne and Cameron can be called out for some of the worst of what's daftly labeled Project Fear

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
I'd have more sympathy for Fox had he not been so sold there was a swift and lucrative deal to be done with the USA, and here we are months and even years down the line with not even with an outline of what that deal might be, and despite Fox's begging not to make the announcement Trump going ahead with his highly ill-advised and poorly considered announcement of tariffs in the name of protectionism an security. And seeing as Trump is seemingly obsessed with deficits one would have to assume given current UK-US trade that Donald sees any future deal as moving away from our and toward US advantage, though expecting logic and consistency from Trump is something of a waste of time.

so you actually believe he was sincere in that? To me that's just expected sophistry, without the cleverness.

The idea free trade deals with the EU and others would be easily arranged was put forward as part of the campaign, though I'm not surprised the disgraced former defence secretary is being caught out in instances such as this. And people should be called out for sophistry, Fox and his cohorts in this instance, just as Osborne and Cameron can be called out for some of the worst of what's daftly labeled Project Fear

Oh I agree, I was just surprised at what sounded like naivety from your goodself

Banquo wrote: Oh I agree, I was just surprised at what sounded like naivety from your goodself

I could manage misplaced credulity, though not for such as disgraced former defence secretary Liam Fox who maybe doesn't rank as low as Farage or Galloway but is nonetheless approximate to scum.

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: Oh I agree, I was just surprised at what sounded like naivety from your goodself

I could manage misplaced credulity, though not for such as disgraced former defence secretary Liam Fox who maybe doesn't rank as low as Farage or Galloway but is nonetheless approximate to scum.

agreed, the Tower for the lot of em

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: Oh I agree, I was just surprised at what sounded like naivety from your goodself

I could manage misplaced credulity, though not for such as disgraced former defence secretary Liam Fox who maybe doesn't rank as low as Farage or Galloway but is nonetheless approximate to scum.

agreed, the Tower for the lot of em

God knows what to do. Listening to May on Marr earlier and the scale of ineptitude and lack of planning continue to vie for dominance with her putting the Tory government before the country (though given the alternative might be Corbyn I'm not entirely without sympathy)

Still at least Trump isn't saying he wants more tariffs now

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
I could manage misplaced credulity, though not for such as disgraced former defence secretary Liam Fox who maybe doesn't rank as low as Farage or Galloway but is nonetheless approximate to scum.

agreed, the Tower for the lot of em

God knows what to do. Listening to May on Marr earlier and the scale of ineptitude and lack of planning continue to vie for dominance with her putting the Tory government before the country (though given the alternative might be Corbyn I'm not entirely without sympathy)

Still at least Trump isn't saying he wants more tariffs now

she's up sh*t creek, and the paddle was taken away when she called the election and ran the worst campaign since....well the worst campaign.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: agreed, the Tower for the lot of em

God knows what to do. Listening to May on Marr earlier and the scale of ineptitude and lack of planning continue to vie for dominance with her putting the Tory government before the country (though given the alternative might be Corbyn I'm not entirely without sympathy)

Still at least Trump isn't saying he wants more tariffs now

she's up sh*t creek, and the paddle was taken away when she called the election and ran the worst campaign since....well the worst campaign.

That's the problem with her view, it's about her being in trouble, when really it's about the county being in trouble, her individual success/failure is in the bigger picture meaningless and it's not like there aren't many others who couldn't prove similarly impotent

I don't as it happens think the election has changed that much for her on Brexit. It's not as if the Tory parliamentary party before the election was united in what should happen, the election was an aim to increase a majority to make it easier to ignore both extremes, that she returned no majority doesn't in many ways change the divisions when it comes to Brexit, it makes other areas harder where the Tory MPs would be easier to corral, but the remain and leave camps seem much as they were

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
God knows what to do. Listening to May on Marr earlier and the scale of ineptitude and lack of planning continue to vie for dominance with her putting the Tory government before the country (though given the alternative might be Corbyn I'm not entirely without sympathy)

Still at least Trump isn't saying he wants more tariffs now

she's up sh*t creek, and the paddle was taken away when she called the election and ran the worst campaign since....well the worst campaign.

That's the problem with her view, it's about her being in trouble, when really it's about the county being in trouble, her individual success/failure is in the bigger picture meaningless and it's not like there aren't many others who couldn't prove similarly impotent

I don't as it happens think the election has changed that much for her on Brexit. It's not as if the Tory parliamentary party before the election was united in what should happen, the election was an aim to increase a majority to make it easier to ignore both extremes, that she returned no majority doesn't in many ways change the divisions when it comes to Brexit, it makes other areas harder where the Tory MPs would be easier to corral, but the remain and leave camps seem much as they were

I think she is miles weaker post election, the DUP being just one example.

Mind, pretending this would be easy to do in any circumstances is exactly that, a pretence. And i was using she as a substitute for we; WE are up shyte creek. This govt will fall at some point during this mess, and likely Corbyn will walk into power.

Banquo wrote: I think she is miles weaker post election, the DUP being just one example.

Mind, pretending this would be easy to do in any circumstances is exactly that, a pretence. And i was using she as a substitute for we; WE are up shyte creek. This govt will fall at some point during this mess, and likely Corbyn will walk into power.

She's weaker generally for sure, and that perhaps does make Brexit worse for her. But give her back the MPs she lost during the election and I don't see how they're not having the same fight over Europe.

I don't know either if Corbyn would walk in, I think we'd probably need another coalition. And any Corbyn government could easily see some Labour MPs ignore their party whip so even a slim majority mayn't mean much. Still, if people are stupid enough to vote Brexit and Trump I should likely give up any predictions on how people will vote, christ even Berlusconi is back as a truly bizarre voice of reason

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: I think she is miles weaker post election, the DUP being just one example.

Mind, pretending this would be easy to do in any circumstances is exactly that, a pretence. And i was using she as a substitute for we; WE are up shyte creek. This govt will fall at some point during this mess, and likely Corbyn will walk into power.

She's weaker generally for sure, and that perhaps does make Brexit worse for her. But give her back the MPs she lost during the election and I don't see how they're not having the same fight over Europe.

I don't know either if Corbyn would walk in, I think we'd probably need another coalition. And any Corbyn government could easily see some Labour MPs ignore their party whip so even a slim majority mayn't mean much. Still, if people are stupid enough to vote Brexit and Trump I should likely give up any predictions on how people will vote, christ even Berlusconi is back as a truly bizarre voice of reason

I don't think you should discount the emboldening effect, or that others are after her job, and how debilitating that is.

There's some new polling methodology, which seems credible, which has Labour at 48%; apparently you have 'shy' Labour these days. Mind, as you say, bizarre is the new normal!

Banquo wrote:I don't think you should discount the emboldening effect, or that others are after her job, and how debilitating that is.

There's some new polling methodology, which seems credible, which has Labour at 48%; apparently you have 'shy' Labour these days. Mind, as you say, bizarre is the new normal!

I do sort of agree, in part, but they've been divided on Europe since I can remember (which would be the early 90s as far as politics goes). So unless she'd won with a majority of 70+ Brexit was always going to be a problem, and even then she'd have needed MPs she could form a power base amongst, had the new MPs all been akin to Anna Soubry or Peter Bone there'd have been issues with a majority of 100 when it came to Brexit

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:I don't think you should discount the emboldening effect, or that others are after her job, and how debilitating that is.

There's some new polling methodology, which seems credible, which has Labour at 48%; apparently you have 'shy' Labour these days. Mind, as you say, bizarre is the new normal!

I do sort of agree, in part, but they've been divided on Europe since I can remember (which would be the early 90s as far as politics goes). So unless she'd won with a majority of 70+ Brexit was always going to be a problem, and even then she'd have needed MPs she could form a power base amongst, had the new MPs all been akin to Anna Soubry or Peter Bone there'd have been issues with a majority of 100 when it came to Brexit

as have Labour. Reflecting the country, as it turns out, so Brexit a pretty intractable vote to deal with, whatever the hue. But having no authority makes it harder, which is the point.

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:I don't think you should discount the emboldening effect, or that others are after her job, and how debilitating that is.

There's some new polling methodology, which seems credible, which has Labour at 48%; apparently you have 'shy' Labour these days. Mind, as you say, bizarre is the new normal!

I do sort of agree, in part, but they've been divided on Europe since I can remember (which would be the early 90s as far as politics goes). So unless she'd won with a majority of 70+ Brexit was always going to be a problem, and even then she'd have needed MPs she could form a power base amongst, had the new MPs all been akin to Anna Soubry or Peter Bone there'd have been issues with a majority of 100 when it came to Brexit

as have Labour. Reflecting the country, as it turns out, so Brexit a pretty intractable vote to deal with, whatever the hue. But having no authority makes it harder, which is the point.

If she wanted authority she should have run her leadership campaign on such basis, instead she ran trying not to offend anyone in her party from either camp. She's not been dealt a bum hand, these are the cards she negotiated for, presumably on the basis she saw her being leader as enough

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
I do sort of agree, in part, but they've been divided on Europe since I can remember (which would be the early 90s as far as politics goes). So unless she'd won with a majority of 70+ Brexit was always going to be a problem, and even then she'd have needed MPs she could form a power base amongst, had the new MPs all been akin to Anna Soubry or Peter Bone there'd have been issues with a majority of 100 when it came to Brexit

as have Labour. Reflecting the country, as it turns out, so Brexit a pretty intractable vote to deal with, whatever the hue. But having no authority makes it harder, which is the point.

If she wanted authority she should have run her leadership campaign on such basis, instead she ran trying not to offend anyone in her party from either camp. She's not been dealt a bum hand, these are the cards she negotiated for, presumably on the basis she saw her being leader as enough

I didn't claim otherwise. Its a bum hand full stop, whoever has it, and she did campaign on the basis of unity its true. All I am saying is that the election result- her fault mostly- made it harder. As we have now gone full circle I'll just stop.

Trumps says tariffs on steel might be forgiven for Canada and Mexico if they sign a NAFTA deal which better suits the USA, asides from that the tariffs are for every country.

May says she's raised the issue on a call with Trump. Typically saying you've raised an issue, rather than say actually doing anything about an issue, is a weak play from a politician. But Trump's comments are fairly mental so maybe by the time any details come out they'll look more than a little different themselves.

Perhaps the most amusing part of May's day was complaining about the BBC asking her about Brexit, apparently they always raise the issue, even when she's trying to talk about other matters. This is the sort of comment on the media you just wouldn't get from someone like May if she were able to take a step back, but she wouldn't be the first PM who is so involved she's struggling to see the wood for the trees

May is lacking vision. That departed when her chiefs of staff left after the election.

Sadly no one else seems to have a vision either, or at least no one sane.