Skip to content

Just a thought that’s occurred to me

The Senior Lecturer hasn’t been writing much at The Conversation, has he? Despite it being a terribly important site designed just for academics to teach us all.

Is it because he doesn’t get to moderate the comments there?

9 thoughts on “Just a thought that’s occurred to me”

  1. I’ve looked into my crystal ball and see two things – the outline of some large creature hiding under a bridge, and Snippa being asked a sinal question on this on his blog tomorrow.

  2. TC likes to indulge lefty academics like Danny Dorling but maybe they noticed how thoroughly shredded Murphy was last time he wrote a piece for TC?

  3. just had a glance at the conversation – my god it appears even more deranged than the guardian – and that takes so doing. I suspect it only has readers from the more deranged wing of the guardian readership. Surprised not to see the equivalent of the guardian begging boxes on each page.

  4. @moqifen, December 12, 2018 at 12:07 am

    The Conversation is similar to May, Remainers & EU vs Reality

    US Ambassador to the EU Calls EU ‘Utterly Obstructionist’

    American Ambassador to the European Union and former businessman and financier Gordon Sondland has told Politico that he finds the EU to be ‘utterly obstructionist’ on negotiating freer trade between the two blocs. Accusing the EU of deliberately stalling trade negotiations, Sondland said that his joke today is “if I ask someone at the EU what time it is, the answer is ‘no’.”

    Having dealt with the EU now for more than half a year, his verdict is cutting…

    “The Commission in particular is out of touch with reality. They are off in a cloud, regulating to the heart’s content — and regulating some things that don’t even need to be regulated, because they haven’t even occurred yet — while stifling growth and innovation.”

    Better off out.

    Voters Want MPs to Reject the Deal by More Than 2 to 1

    MPs will be getting the chance to vote on Theresa May’s Brexit deal… at some point within the next six weeks according to her spokesman, who has confirmed that the vote will be held before January 21. Of course, her spokesman was insisting 24 hours ago that the vote was going ahead today…

    Had MPs been able to vote the deal down today as expected, the British public would have been behind them. The latest Lord Ashcroft poll found voters against the deal by more than a margin of 2 to 1, with 53% in favour of MPs voting to “reject the Brexit agreement even if it is not clear what the outcome would then be” compared to only 24% in favour of MPs voting to “accept the Brexit agreement as an imperfect compromise and move on to other issues”.

    Opposition to the deal has grown in the three weeks since Ashcroft first asked the question, with a 9% swing against the deal. Voters aren’t falling for May’s strategy of boring them into backing the deal…

    Voters’ responses to what they considered the most important Brexit outcomes were also very revealing. The most important outcome among Leave and Remain voters combined was “the UK being able to do its own free trade deals with countries outside the EU”, ahead of “continuing to trade freely with EU countries with no tariffs or customs checks”. May’s approach has been the other way round…

    Both Tory and Labour Leave voters agreed that the most important issue was “the UK making all its own laws and no longer being subject to rulings from the European Court of Justice” – ending free movement was only ranked as the fifth most important issue.

    Once again proving the Remainer narrative wrong that the Leave vote was nothing more than a small-minded backlash against immigration…

    Trust in May and anything she “Believes is right for UK” is negative in polls. Useless bureaucrat, not a leader.

  5. Theresa May’s mistakes in the Brexit Odyssey are well documented. But it’s not all down to one imperfect human being

    Matthew D’Ancona writing at the weekend offers the following claim:

    “The right to think again is a foundation stone of any civilised society. Yet the Brexiteers treat the referendum result as though it were a cross between a sequel to Magna Carta and the most sacred pinky-promise in the history of the world. This is politics reduced to toddler talk.”

    Interesting point. Can he develop it? Helpfully, he does. Elsewhere in the article Mr D’Ancona writes in favour of a second referendum on the grounds that:

    “The “cooling-off period” is a cornerstone of consumer rights legislation”.

    So just to be clear: reference to Magna Carta constitutes “toddler talk”; but comparing a reversal of the 2016 referendum result to returning a shirt to Marks and Spencer is a form of serious analysis.

    D’Ancona wishes to encourage a second referendum on the grounds that since the referendum things have changed. And his premise is sound. Things have changed. They have a habit of doing that. Spring will often give way to Summer; right-leaning journalists find employment by left-wing newspapers and suddenly become left-leaning journalists

    What D’Ancona and his commentariat colleagues are attempting is a courtship of the UK polity that has two stages: persuasion that a second referendum is necessary and then an insistence that such a referendum must have Remain as an option. But this is impossible.

    In order for such a referendum to take place it would be necessary to refuse to implement the first referendum; and if politicians refuse to implement that referendum then they will be removing the single necessary condition of legitimacy that would make it a genuine one. That people can trust it…

    Knives Out For Theresa May’s Whips

    There was a mix of derision and laughter from opposition benches – and stony silence from the Tory benches behind her. “On one issue, the Northern Ireland backstop, there remains widespread and deep concern…” May admitted.

    The most telling vignette came on the night of November 19. The DUP had just fired a ‘warning shot’ across the bows of the government by voting with Labour and against the Tories on the budget.

    In the Members’ Dining Room, Williamson decided to sit with DUP MPs and chat to his old friends to rebuild bridges, despite their apparent break with the confidence and supply agreement that props May up in power.

    Yet when Chief Whip Julian Smith happened to arrive in the same room, he acknowledged his colleague but blanked the entire DUP gathering. The snub did not go unnoticed.

    The DUP also ‘heartily loathe’ new Northern Ireland Secretary Karen Bradley, another MP confided. “She makes absolutely zero effort to understand them.” The minister’s admission in a House magazine interview in the summer, that she hadn’t previously realised that nationalists and loyalists vote along sectarian lines, was just one example.

    “Williamson’s beloved by the DUP. He gets their concerns, they have contempt for Bradley and for their official handlers, Damian Green and then Lidington, aren’t on their wavelength at all.

    One grandee said that the most telling incident in recent days was that many MPs had gone to Williamson rather than Smith to pass on their concerns that the party would split if May went ahead with the vote. And cabinet ministers relate that Smith has gone from reassuring the PM that she had ‘the numbers’ to becoming one of those warning postponement was vital to protecting the government.

    On Monday evening, the chaotic nature of this ‘zombie’ government on its most shambolic day yet was underlined with yet more ridicule. In line with convention, a junior whip tried to shout ‘tomorrow!’ to formally defer the Brexit vote to an unspecified date.

    “It’s common in the House to say ‘tomorrow’, this allow the Government to bring back a debate on a date of its choosing. This does not mean the debate will continue tomorrow,” a No.10 source said.

    The move worked, but it left a sour taste in the mouth of both Tory Brexiteers and Labour MPs….

    Theresa the Appeaser ranked as worse than Chamberlain, Brown, Blair, Cameron, Major, Wilson, Heath weeks/months ago.

  6. I see that the ECJ has gracefully allowed us to suspend article 50 an re-enter the EU on our previous terms.

    But only after consulting the EU 27.
    An independent judiciary? Perish the thought!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *