No, he mentioned in his speech that some people thought he didn't like Larry.
‘The rumour that somehow I don't love Larry, I do... I have photographic evidence to prove it.
'I can't take Larry with me, he belongs to the house and the staff love him very much, as do I, Mr Cameron said.
The Cabinet Office said yesterday that Larry will continue his work when the new Prime Minister.
Having a cat in your lap is no proof of loving a cat. The cat chooses whose laps it occupies, and many cats will actually prefer the person who likes them least.
This is because cats communicate affection (or at least being nonthreatening) through narrowed eyes and slow blinks. The wide-eyed excitement that people who love cats/animals sometimes display is often interpreted as threatening.
So, cats go to the person they think likes them the most, even if it's actually the person who likes them the least!
Eh, I dunno about that. Many dogs do the same thing.
She has to respect the referendum or she'll split the party and hemorrhage MPs/votes to UKIP
She certainly has to appear to be making Brexit happen, and putting the Leavers in a position of responsibility is indeed a clever stroke politically. But I also think she's setting it up to fail. At the end of the day, the headwind against Brexit is really strong:
-A super-majority of MPs are against it, including a majority of her own MPs.
-The Tory donor class is overwhelmingly against it.
-UK industry and business communities are overwhelmingly against it.
I mean... maybe she's the Horton the elephant of UK pols and she'll vigorously fight to honor the will of a slight majority of the electorate at the expense of her own beliefs, the beliefs of a majority of her party, and the beliefs of the people who give money to her party, but... I'm skeptical. There's lots of ways for her to surreptitiously work to keep Brexit from happening, but it'd be political suicide for her to admit that's her plan.
She has to respect the referendum or she'll split the party and hemorrhage MPs/votes to UKIP
She certainly has to appear to be making Brexit happen, and putting the Leavers in a position of responsibility is indeed a clever stroke politically. But I also think she's setting it up to fail. At the end of the day, the headwind against Brexit is really strong:
-A super-majority of MPs are against it, including a majority of her own MPs.
-The Tory donor class is overwhelmingly against it.
-UK industry and business communities are overwhelmingly against it.
I mean... maybe she's the Horton the elephant of UK pols and she'll vigorously fight to honor the will of a slight majority of the electorate at the expense of her own beliefs, the beliefs of a majority of her party, and the beliefs of the people who give money to her party, but... I'm skeptical. There's lots of ways for her to surreptitiously work to keep Brexit from happening, but it'd be political suicide for her to admit that's her plan.
Problem is, she can't delay A50 indefinitely, and once A50 happens, the only way to cancel it is to get the other 27 countries to agree to cancel it, and I suspect that to be hard to pull off.
She has to respect the referendum or she'll split the party and hemorrhage MPs/votes to UKIP
She certainly has to appear to be making Brexit happen, and putting the Leavers in a position of responsibility is indeed a clever stroke politically. But I also think she's setting it up to fail. At the end of the day, the headwind against Brexit is really strong:
-A super-majority of MPs are against it, including a majority of her own MPs.
-The Tory donor class is overwhelmingly against it.
-UK industry and business communities are overwhelmingly against it.
I mean... maybe she's the Horton the elephant of UK pols and she'll vigorously fight to honor the will of a slight majority of the electorate at the expense of her own beliefs, the beliefs of a majority of her party, and the beliefs of the people who give money to her party, but... I'm skeptical. There's lots of ways for her to surreptitiously work to keep Brexit from happening, but it'd be political suicide for her to admit that's her plan.
Problem is, she can't delay A50 indefinitely, and once A50 happens, the only way to cancel it is to get the other 27 countries to agree to cancel it, and I suspect that to be hard to pull off.
No, legally the UK can stop the A50 withdrawal process itself at any point. Only when the Article 50 decision is agreed and ratified does it become much harder to reverse. The UK would have to apply to become a new member of the EU under Article 49 of the EU Treaty. This is a good source of information about Article 50: http://verfassungsblog.de/brexit-article-50-duff/
She has to respect the referendum or she'll split the party and hemorrhage MPs/votes to UKIP
She certainly has to appear to be making Brexit happen, and putting the Leavers in a position of responsibility is indeed a clever stroke politically. But I also think she's setting it up to fail. At the end of the day, the headwind against Brexit is really strong:
-A super-majority of MPs are against it, including a majority of her own MPs.
-The Tory donor class is overwhelmingly against it.
-UK industry and business communities are overwhelmingly against it.
I mean... maybe she's the Horton the elephant of UK pols and she'll vigorously fight to honor the will of a slight majority of the electorate at the expense of her own beliefs, the beliefs of a majority of her party, and the beliefs of the people who give money to her party, but... I'm skeptical. There's lots of ways for her to surreptitiously work to keep Brexit from happening, but it'd be political suicide for her to admit that's her plan.
Problem is, she can't delay A50 indefinitely, and once A50 happens, the only way to cancel it is to get the other 27 countries to agree to cancel it, and I suspect that to be hard to pull off.
No, legally the UK can stop the A50 withdrawal process itself at any point. Only when the Article 50 decision is agreed and ratified does it become much harder to reverse. The UK would have to apply to become a new member of the EU under Article 49 of the EU Treaty. This is a good source of information about Article 50: http://verfassungsblog.de/brexit-article-50-duff/
Huh. I assumed A50's silence on cancellation meant the only way to cancel was the same mechanism to extend the two-year deadline.
Interesting that his case is the Referendum's silence on its bindingness means it's binding by default, when I had operated on the opposite assumption, using the AV Referendum as precedent for requiring explicit bindingness
I see no way in which the Department of Business could have anything but a positive effect on climate change and energy; you just have to run energy and climate change like businesses.
The decision to abolish the Department for Energy and Climate Change has been variously condemned as “plain stupid”, “deeply worrying” and “terrible” by politicians, campaigners and experts.
One of Theresa May’s first acts as Prime Minister was to move responsibility for climate change to a new Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy.
Only on Monday, Government advisers had warned of the need to take urgent action to prepare the UK for floods, droughts, heatwaves and food shortages caused by climate change.
+3
GumpyThere is alwaysa greater powerRegistered Userregular
I see no way in which the Department of Business could have anything but a positive effect on climate change and energy; you just have to run energy and climate change like businesses.
I believe its shifted about to make space for the newly created BREXIT department? The department of business used to be where higher education was based, so it's used to having a pretty wide remit
I see no way in which the Department of Business could have anything but a positive effect on climate change and energy; you just have to run energy and climate change like businesses.
You joke, but that's kind of how cap and trade works. Funny how our corporate overlords hate using free market solutions to pollution...
The decision to abolish the Department for Energy and Climate Change has been variously condemned as “plain stupid”, “deeply worrying” and “terrible” by politicians, campaigners and experts.
One of Theresa May’s first acts as Prime Minister was to move responsibility for climate change to a new Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy.
Only on Monday, Government advisers had warned of the need to take urgent action to prepare the UK for floods, droughts, heatwaves and food shortages caused by climate change.
Didn't we decide we're sick of experts? Why are these people wasting their breath.
The decision to abolish the Department for Energy and Climate Change has been variously condemned as “plain stupid”, “deeply worrying” and “terrible” by politicians, campaigners and experts.
One of Theresa May’s first acts as Prime Minister was to move responsibility for climate change to a new Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy.
Only on Monday, Government advisers had warned of the need to take urgent action to prepare the UK for floods, droughts, heatwaves and food shortages caused by climate change.
Didn't we decide we're sick of experts? Why are these people wasting their breath.
That's why noted expert Michael Gove is not in the cabinet
SnicketysnickThe Greatest Hype Man inWesterosRegistered Userregular
I've started to wonder if the recent obsession with "democratically electing" the leaders of our political parties is the fault of the US election starting in August last year and the primary process getting near-saturation coverage. People thinking that getting a say in who runs a party that you then vote for at a later date is the norm when in fact it's America that is the unusual one.
This whole situation with Labour is driving me absolutely berserk with rage
These fucking traitors to the cause of actually supporting the most vulnerable members of our society are more interested in ideological purity than they are in actually getting elected. Either they're incredibly stupid or they're wilfully embracing unelectability in order to preserve their ideals in full
The ordinary people of the UK do not need that. They need a credible and cohesive opposition with a credible and cohesive anti-austerity plan to protect the economy, protect workers rights and protect public services. They don't need Tony Blair to go to the Hague, they don't need Momentum, they don't need this anti-BBC, anti-media drive from Corbyn's supporters.
It'd be a joke if it wasn't so horrible. What a nightmare.
Posts
They can't pull a plough, either
Eh, I dunno about that. Many dogs do the same thing.
You're not using enough!
I JUST this minute said to my mother "at least none of her lunacies seem to have anything to do with farming"
She certainly has to appear to be making Brexit happen, and putting the Leavers in a position of responsibility is indeed a clever stroke politically. But I also think she's setting it up to fail. At the end of the day, the headwind against Brexit is really strong:
-A super-majority of MPs are against it, including a majority of her own MPs.
-The Tory donor class is overwhelmingly against it.
-UK industry and business communities are overwhelmingly against it.
I mean... maybe she's the Horton the elephant of UK pols and she'll vigorously fight to honor the will of a slight majority of the electorate at the expense of her own beliefs, the beliefs of a majority of her party, and the beliefs of the people who give money to her party, but... I'm skeptical. There's lots of ways for her to surreptitiously work to keep Brexit from happening, but it'd be political suicide for her to admit that's her plan.
Problem is, she can't delay A50 indefinitely, and once A50 happens, the only way to cancel it is to get the other 27 countries to agree to cancel it, and I suspect that to be hard to pull off.
Also someone is suing the NEC to keep Corbyn off the ballot.
No, legally the UK can stop the A50 withdrawal process itself at any point. Only when the Article 50 decision is agreed and ratified does it become much harder to reverse. The UK would have to apply to become a new member of the EU under Article 49 of the EU Treaty. This is a good source of information about Article 50: http://verfassungsblog.de/brexit-article-50-duff/
Wellp
E: wait, that news is five hours old. Did we talk about this already? Did I miss something?
Narp a darp
The department of Energy and Climate Change has been combined with the Department of Business - The remit still exists
Huh. I assumed A50's silence on cancellation meant the only way to cancel was the same mechanism to extend the two-year deadline.
Interesting that his case is the Referendum's silence on its bindingness means it's binding by default, when I had operated on the opposite assumption, using the AV Referendum as precedent for requiring explicit bindingness
I thought the Climate Change remit got shunted over to DEFRA? (Environment, Agriculture etc.)
It's still sucky to take it out of the name.
Climate change department killed off by Theresa May in 'plain stupid' and 'deeply worrying' move
I believe its shifted about to make space for the newly created BREXIT department? The department of business used to be where higher education was based, so it's used to having a pretty wide remit
McScuse me?
You joke, but that's kind of how cap and trade works. Funny how our corporate overlords hate using free market solutions to pollution...
Steam: pazython
PARKER, YOU'RE FIRED! <-- My comic book podcast! Satan look here!
I feel like this could apply to either his rhetorical style or him personally
Didn't we decide we're sick of experts? Why are these people wasting their breath.
That's why noted expert Michael Gove is not in the cabinet
About where I think things will move on from here too.
So are you talking about the heckler or Farage?
did anyone ever think a majority of the left liked corbyn
nevermind a potential majority of the voting population
Link here: https://m.facebook.com/thangam.debbonaire/posts/10157204442320083
D3 Steam #TeamTangent STO
https://medium.com/@rob_francis/labour-leadership-1-the-immorality-of-corbynism-7a66179b4431#.k5sv4aym6
https://theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/16/corbynism-sounds-death-knell-for-labour?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Facebook
I wonder if the government has to worry about defence against the shadow arts minister
WU TANG!
These fucking traitors to the cause of actually supporting the most vulnerable members of our society are more interested in ideological purity than they are in actually getting elected. Either they're incredibly stupid or they're wilfully embracing unelectability in order to preserve their ideals in full
The ordinary people of the UK do not need that. They need a credible and cohesive opposition with a credible and cohesive anti-austerity plan to protect the economy, protect workers rights and protect public services. They don't need Tony Blair to go to the Hague, they don't need Momentum, they don't need this anti-BBC, anti-media drive from Corbyn's supporters.
It'd be a joke if it wasn't so horrible. What a nightmare.