Westministenders: Its WAR. Huh!? What is that good for? Negotiations apparently

[RedToothBrush]

Theresa May has declared war on the EU. She is going to be a ‘bloody difficult woman’ after she got caught out by a highly predictable leak.

Apparently, the EU are trying to rig an election she seems almost dead cert to win. They deliberately timed the leak to interfere with an election May decided the timing of. May was not supposed to be at the dinner, but after she announced the election she decided that she had to get in on the act for some reason. Wildly speculating here, but could this be because she wanted the political mileage herself?

No it wasn't a preplanned strategy. Don't be stupid. That would suggest they had the foggiest clue and a plan. Nope, the war declaration was an opportunist damage limitation exercise, used to maximise political capital.

She has now even further alienated the EU. It seems difficult to conceive how any deal will be done. Instead it looks like the election is trying to set us up to crash out. Whether the ‘No deal is better than a bad deal’ happens to make the 3 page Tory Manifesto remains to be seen.

This would leave EU nationals and British national aboard in legal and social limbo.

There is also a feud building over the Brexit leaving bill, which is steadily climbing. We can not progress to the second stage of Brexit without resolving this. Again, this seems unlikely.

Thirdly, a settlement with Ireland is a top priority for the EU, and plans are being drawn up to make allowances for any potential United Ireland. This is a subject that is still to be talked about on any level really. May has been much more interested in the fate of Scotland and battling with Nicola Sturgeon.

That’s the thing. May is like the playground bully who goes around going “Do you wanna scrap ?, Do ya? DO YA?” and generally throws their weight around and most of the time gets their own way as a result. The trouble with the strategy is when the bigger kid comes along and thumps the bully, for being a cocky little shit and doesn’t like their kid brother getting picked on.

The trouble is that May is setting it up, to try and make it look like the poor little Britain has been picked on to her parents, so they go around accusing the big kid of all sorts rather than admitting their little darling is a nasty little shit.

It’s not going to end well is it? You can’t help but feel that at some point they’ll all end up in the Headmasters office and the WTO/UN/International Courts will rule against us for being a bunch of dickheads. No doubt May, will stick to character, hold a grudge and demand to leave them or say they have no authority over the UK.

That or we really will end up declaring war on Spain over Gibraltar. By accident of course. Probably to keep the ConKip party together and avoid a split.

Rule Britannia. Britannia rules. Erm, not a lot these days.

Thanks Hashi will order one!
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08p5lbr
Women's hour at 30 minutes 'Welcome Mama" good item on German women running pregnancy and maternity help for refugee women.

It's slightly annoying because I always felt that Ed M could have been a little bolder.

Yes, I agree. On a related note, a friend was going on about how Labour is all tax and spend. I decided to challenge him. I asked whether he didn't think a civilised society should be willing to pay taxes for the health and education of all its citizens. He looked sheepish and said yes.

It always drove me nuts all that c**p about Ed M not being "strong enough to stand up to Putin". Have we seen any sign over the last two years that Putin gives a monkey about whether a British PM is "standing up" to him? And given that we're now about to face economic chaos, possible UK breakup and we're busy kowtowing to such desirable world leaders as Trump and Erdogan, I think we can safely say that a "weak" Ed M would have been somewhat better for our country than what we got.

But everyone lets remember Ed can't eat sandwiches properly so therefore is incapable of doing anything else ever. This is the level we're dealing with still in many ways infuriatingly.

It's slightly annoying because I always felt that Ed M could have been a little bolder.

I absolutely agree with this. I was so frustrated with Ed M that he seemed so wishy washy and to not feel able to go for something a bit more distinct from the Tories. I felt he got pushed down by the new labour types who wanted to stay very centerists and in parallel to the Tories. It was particularly annoying as in the last couple of weeks before the election he seemed to finally find himself and was much more inspiring and interesting, but by then it was just to late.

I do like Ed (he gives great Twitter) and wish he was leader of the labour party with this manifesto. I think they could have done really well. I sort of feel that if Ed had found his feet and back bone a little sooner we probably wouldn't be in the position we are in now.

The Labour manifesto pledge on Royal Mail is our playing to the crowd though. It shows no regard for the business environment Royal Mail is operating in which is increasingly dominated by a few big players that arose out of the merging of the German Post Office and DHL and the Dutch Post Office and TNT. That has enabled them to become global players. The Royal Mail was denied that chance by successive governments of all shades who used its monopoly as a means of indirect taxation, without making the necessary investment to enable it to compete in its markets. It was a strategy of managed decline that was and is bound to yield the obvious result in time, at least access to private investment stalls that a little.

All very well to exploit the fondness for a brand that encompasses village Post Offices and Postman Pat but it is absolutely a strategy for the 1970s

It always drove me nuts all that c**p about Ed M not being "strong enough to stand up to Putin

We now know that "stand up to Putin" is a MSM code for "ignore the British people". Something Theresa May is doing in spades, but which Corbyn might struggle with, and which - frankly - Miliband could not have pulled off either.

Mark Carnet said earlier that boe have made no plans for a disorderly brexit. Plans are based on a deal and a transition arrangement. As he's slashed the growth forecast.

Has he pissed on TM's chips by showing her rhetoric is entirely that?

Carney. Bloody auto correct

I am impressed your autocorrect speaks French, mine just speaks subversion....

The Royal Mail was denied that chance by successive governments of all shades who used its monopoly as a means of indirect taxation, without making the necessary investment to enable it to compete in its markets. It was a strategy of managed decline that was and is bound to yield the obvious result in time, at least access to private investment stalls that a little.

I confess I do not know masses about postal services, but from what you are saying the decline of royal mail is a deliberate strategy rather than something that is inevitable, which means which some thought and investment it could be turned around. It may be a case of considering what it is we want from a nationalised postal service to start with rather than blindly continuing with what went before.

As much as it seems twee, in rural communities post offices can be very important, particularly for those unable to travel into towns. They aren't just somewhere to post a letter, they also provide banking services when banks are reducing the number of cash machines.

DH has just seen the Green-Lib Dem story.

He said that clearly the Lib Dems learned little from their power share with the Tories as the going rate to buy 30 seats is only £70k.

I think it's too late now to make the Royal Mail financially profitable (all the money making bits have been taken out), but I would love for it to sit in a department like DCLG and for us to explicitly say that post offices have an important role to play in our communities, particularly in rural areas, and that making money is not the foremost aim of providing this service.

"Red Ed" is just such a catchy moniker, though. If only his name hadn't lent itself to communist insinuating rhymes. Something like David might have been better....

Bigly I totally agree that we need a Royal Mail with a universal service obligation that works, to quote a well worn phrase, for everyone but if it is just a public service it is incredbibly expensive to run, and it is also too tempting for government to hike the prices to yield indirect tax which affects both Royal Mail and its business customers ability to compete in other markets. The most sensible business models would have it operating in related markets where it can use its competency and brand to generate income in the way the Germans and Dutch did. Royal Mail itself has been asking for the ability to raise private investment for over thirty years because its opportunities to enter new markets have slowly evaporated without it. It is probably too late now judging by the origins of my Mail from bulk posters, most of which is posted overseas in Holland, and the number of delivery company vans that are now making deliveries to my suburban street. The economics of Royal Mail or any logistics business are all about getting the volumes through the network so for instance filling up planes with Courier traffic like the Germans and Dutch do is a no brainer because it spreads the cost further but Royal Mail were stopped from investing in creating a full service competitive Courier Service. The investment needed now to win back volumes and sustain the USP long term would be huge, and almost certainly, quite rightly, not in front of the priorities for any government. I think nurses and social workers trump Postman Pat in terms of public service. Private investment is the best solution for enabling it to provide a service in the current environment.

By the way rural Post Offices are almost all franchisees. The Royal Mail is only a part of their business and they can and do diversify. The easy fix for the government to make them more sustainable in critical locations would be to put more government business through them, develop their role as a community hub. It is actually a separate issue from the sustainability of Royal Mail itself.

I got to call my local MP as few choice words today. He deserved them too. Typical of him, his need to give a message is far more important than allowing parents to access the school and adding more time onto already stretched teachers day.

Labour's policies are popular on the whole, when you take care not to mention who's proposing them. They are even more popular when advocated by tories. But the tories own the narrative, which means we will be told that these policies are all unaffordable. (In fact that started last night with the Beeb warning that raises in corporation tax are risky, despite the fact they're already at the lower end of the spectrum). The debate about their affordability could be an interesting one if people could just get over their prejudice that tories are better at managing the economy that Labour. Last time I looked the scoresheet was pretty much even on that score, unless you believe - as most people do - that G Brown was personally responsible for lending mortgages to Americans who couldn't afford to pay them back.

If it turns out that these policies are affordable after all, maybe, just maybe, people might start wondering what the fuck we've been doing for the last 10 years.

But we'll never get there because wearing a poppy is much more important.

Labour's policies are popular on the whole, when you take care not to mention who's proposing them.

Isn't there a story that details of the UK welfare state proposals were found in the FuhrerBunker, with approving annotations by Hitler ?

(Times paywall) May needs a mandate as much as a landslide

"The prime minister should risk losing some votes to spell out the hard choices she will make if elected next month."

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/may-needs-a-mandate-as-much-as-a-landslide-085vg32dz

"she needs a mandate to tackle the deficit.

After this election any government will have to continue cutting spending or raise taxes on the broad mass of taxpayers.
Or maybe both.
She should be much more daring than is usual and prudent on this, particularly on tax.
And on pensions.
The triple lock is unsustainable. This surely is the moment to say so.

The deficit risks being the great unmentioned issue of the election.

After the campaign is over, the government can’t just leap out from behind the sofa and shout “surprise!”
It will need public support and political understanding that could come from some frankness before June 8."

Brexit.
A big majority will be essential to carry the day when negotiations are over, but how much better a mandate?

Whatever your view of the consequences of leaving the EU
everyone agrees that Brexit will cost money in the short to medium term, and it is likely to result in instability."
< does everyone ?? >

"The time to lower expectations — to explain that things will be rocky and to outline how you will handle them — is now.

Election night will be wonderful for Tories.
But it won’t be too long before it starts to rain.

Keeping the economy growing will be difficult,
the deficit will be difficult,
Brexit will be difficult.

As someone once said, they should fix the roof while the sun is shining."

Was it Marx, or Lenin that said we needed to go a step backwards to take two forwards ?

But it won’t be too long before it starts to rain.

Keeping the economy growing will be difficult,
the deficit will be difficult,
Brexit will be difficult.

They make it sound like none of this is completely self inflicted. Yes, we could cut spending even more and completely give up on the idea of providing key public services to people who need them most or we could just stop holding the flipping hose over our heads and pretending its raining. This is not an unavoidable act of nature ffs!

(Torygraph paywall) Exclusive: 100 moderate Labour MPs to form breakaway group if Jeremy Corbyn stays on after a Tory landslide

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/09/exclusive-100-moderate-labour-mps-form-breakaway-group-jeremy/

"Labour faces a historic split after the election with as many as 100 of the party’s MPs set to walk out and form their own breakaway group in an attempt to force out Jeremy Corbyn"

"Moderate Labour candidates are already in talks with potential donors about a new “Progressives” group forming in Parliament if Mr Corbyn stays on as leader after a Tory landslide.

One potential scenario is for the MPs to resign the Labour whip and become independents grouped together in the Commons under the Progressives banner.

They could then rejoin the Parliamentary Labour Party once Mr Corbyn had been replaced with a leader they supported.

Dan Jarvis, Yvette Cooper and Sir Keir Starmer could be asked to lead the group, although there is no suggestion they have been approached or been involved in the talks.

Mr Corbyn’s claim earlier this week that he might stay on as leader even if the Conservatives win a landslide on June 8 has caused alarm among moderates, who are talking of
a “blood-letting” when Parliament reconvenes.

Although they do not intend to form a new party, a well-organised anti-Corbyn faction, who would sit together on the back benches, could make it difficult for Mr Corbyn to form a viable Opposition because of a shortage of MPs to take up shadow cabinet posts."

"One senior Labour source said: “There will be a blood-letting in July – sensible people are going to walk away.
There is talk of a realignment because we can’t allow this to continue.”

"The talks are going on in private because Labour candidates are desperate to ensure that they are returned as MPs to the Commons and do not want to appear disloyal.

The source said “about 100” moderate Labour MPs were likely to sit in their own grouping in the Commons after the election.
< I wonder which (ex) Labour MP / MPs are the mysterious source(s) >

Latest polling suggests Labour could have as few as 160 seats after the election, meaning the majority of Labour MPs could be part of the new caucus.

The insider said:
“The Labour party cannot be the same as it was in the last parliament after the election.
There is no cohesion.
They have got to bind together.

The Labour party has got to appeal to moderate people who have got moderate views and that is the majority of the people in this country.”

A spokesman for Mr Corbyn declined to comment on the claims of a walk-out by moderate MPs, saying:
“Jeremy is entirely focused on winning the general election.” < so that's ok then >

I'm very interested that even the Torygraph thinks
"everyone agrees that Brexit will cost money in the short to medium term, and it is likely to result in instability."

I didn't get the impression that rightwing MN Brexiters agreed - isn't that pov still "sabotage" and "nasty" leftwing on multiple other threads ?