EU funding question

[350millionpoundsaweek]

Does anyone have a breakdown of what was funded by the EU? Could the govt undertake to continue this once we leave the EU i.e. recipients would not lose out , and in addition the govt would promise to invest our rebate in the NHS? So the £350m/wk was actually still invested in the UK instead of going out to EU then coming back? Would that keep all sides happy? Would we be able to afford it?

You might want to rethink that Citroen.

Oh I know MotherOfBleach. She's awful in so many ways. But re the ECHR (not an EU institution) my understanding is that while she clearly wants out, she's backed off (for now) because there is 'no appetite' for withdrawal. That doesn't suggest she is prepared to bypass democratic processes for that, but who knows once she has the latch key to no 10.

Such a mess. The referendum question should have been do you want to get rid of, or keep, the U.K. political parties!

This is a 'least worst' scenario. She's had the toughest UK brief and not whined and has been prepared to make very difficult judgements (much more courage than Cameron who she thinks is hopeless. I think we'd all agree with that one). She works very hard (civil servants despise Gove). She is a remainer (however reluctant - I'll take it). She may have always wanted to be PM (so she may be a rampant narcissist like Cameron, Johnson et al), but somehow I don't see it. She might just think she's better than all of them and not difficult to see why. That Liam Fox, boy he's a trier.

The referendum should have been do you WANT a referendum! We'd have had more space and negotiating power.

Why would anyone want to withdraw from the ECHR? It's not even binding. The UK has always been free to ignore the Courts rulings if it wanted to. This is another case of the government scapegoating another organisation for governmental failings.

Oh God,

I've been looking at the voting records for all of them. They're all fucking abysmal.

I'm moving to Canada. The Canadians seem like sensible folk. Anyone joining me?

Mother out of curiosity, which of them would you say is "least worst"?

Not Fox - terrible judgement, if not actually a crook.
Not Gove, for obvious reasons
Not Leadsom, who is a fraud - limited government experience (and those who worked with her thought she was useless), and there was a piece circulating today written by a colleague at Perpetual suggesting that her much vaunted business/ financial experience isn't what she has claimed.

I note that Kenneth Clark voted for Stephen Crabb, who might be the "least worst" for centrists, but has unpalatable social opinions and no track record.

I had been thinking Crabb was the least worst. However, having looked at his voting record I'm not so sure.

Who the fuck votes for benefits cuts and tax breaks for the rich?

Oh yeah, every Tory known to man.

I'm not sure there is a least worst

Ok I need to get with the programme and not step away from my screen, since I just saw that Crabb has gone. That has to make May if not the "least worst" then at least the only qualified candidate.

Re ECHR, May's argument was "The ECHR can bind the hands of parliament, adds nothing to our prosperity, makes us less secure by preventing the deportation of dangerous foreign nationals [e.g. Abu Hamza?] – and does nothing to change the attitudes of governments like Russia’s when it comes to human rights."
Am not a lawyer, no idea. MissBossyBoots?

May has backed off from her ECHR stance though hasn't she? She knows that view does not command a majority in the House of Commons.

So she's spouting rubbish. I'm not a lawyer but I did do a law degree many moons ago. The decisions of the ECHR are advisory. I forget the legal term, something like 'persuasive authority' I think. So the courts and the government have to give their opinion a bit more consideration than Bob down the pub. But they are free to ignore it if they choose. It cannot prevent the deportation of dangerous criminal because it has no powers.

So Gove should be out by Thursday. Then will the pressure be on for Leadsom (presume she will be behind May) to drop out? Or will she stay in to take it to members, hoping that she will win on that? Are the Tory and Labour parties both so set apart ideologically from their respective members?

I don't know whether the ECHR is good or bad. Whether it's powers are 'advisory' or not, if the end result seems to be people who we really might not want being here being protected by legislation that was created for something else entirely is not a good thing. Which sounds incredibly Daily Maily I know.