# Immediate General Election



## Judgemental (4 November 2016)

If Mrs May were to call an immediate General Election, it would be very welcome.

An election that turns on BREXIT and who runs this country, Parliament or the Judiciary would give the Conservative party a majority of at least 60.

Indeed it could be fitted into the calendar just before Christmas. The Fixed Term Parliament Act is neither here nor there and can be easily dealt with.

Then no problem repealing the Hunting Act 2004 with a Conservative majority.


----------



## Orangehorse (5 November 2016)

Well at least it would turn the Country's attention back to hunting again instead of this endless Brexit stuff.


----------



## Judgemental (5 November 2016)

Orangehorse said:



			Well at least it would turn the Country's attention back to hunting again instead of this endless Brexit stuff.
		
Click to expand...

Exactly Orange Horse, let's get our priorities in the right order

Has anybody any news of Alec Swan who is conspicuous by his absence.


----------



## JanetGeorge (6 November 2016)

Judgemental said:



			Has anybody any news of Alec Swan who is conspicuous by his absence.
		
Click to expand...

Still busy on FB - he's probably just gone off HHO for now - but I'm sure he'll be back!


----------



## KautoStar1 (6 November 2016)

Honestly JM repeal of the hunting act is the least of this countries worries and no government is going to prioritise it.  You are still hunting. Get over it and get on with it.


----------



## Countryman (6 November 2016)

JM the odds of an early election (think Spring 2017 though rather than immediate) have certainly shortened. It is worth remembering this had been mooted several months ago as a way to cement Mrs May's rule and take advantage of JC before he is replaced by somebody possibly more competent... 

However if this were to happen it is not certain the Tories would win a 60 seat majority, though I suspect they would increase their current one. Remember this would not be fought on the new, more fair electoral boundaries (which have not yet been through Parliament) and would be on the old system.

While I agree if they were, this may well be to the advantages of hunting I speak in the medium term, I think it is quite clear in the short term there are more pressing issues.

This will only be the case however if we try our hardest to ensure ALL Conservative candidates understand the truth about hunting and are correspondingly supportive. The selection of candidates for winnable seats will be starting in earnest soon, and indeed in some seats has already begun. All country people must really work very hard to ensure these candidates do not believe the myths about hunting and are firmly ' on side'. Unless this is done, frankly, there is little point (from a hunting point of view) in elections, majorities etc.


----------



## Judgemental (6 November 2016)

Countryman said:



			JM the odds of an early election (think Spring 2017 though rather than immediate) have certainly shortened. It is worth remembering this had been mooted several months ago as a way to cement Mrs May's rule and take advantage of JC before he is replaced by somebody possibly more competent... 

However if this were to happen it is not certain the Tories would win a 60 seat majority, though I suspect they would increase their current one. Remember this would not be fought on the new, more fair electoral boundaries (which have not yet been through Parliament) and would be on the old system.

While I agree if they were, this may well be to the advantages of hunting I speak in the medium term, I think it is quite clear in the short term there are more pressing issues.

This will only be the case however if we try our hardest to ensure ALL Conservative candidates understand the truth about hunting and are correspondingly supportive. The selection of candidates for winnable seats will be starting in earnest soon, and indeed in some seats has already begun. All country people must really work very hard to ensure these candidates do not believe the myths about hunting and are firmly ' on side'. Unless this is done, frankly, there is little point (from a hunting point of view) in elections, majorities etc.
		
Click to expand...

Countryman the British people are sick and tired of being told what to do over BREXIT and I have no doubt, boundary changes or not, the Conservative party would have a dramatically increased majority. Especially if the matter also turned on the issue of the Judiciary interfering with Parliament.

It seems that if there are boundary changes, in any event it's a forgone result in favor of the Conservative party.

Also it is time Mrs May stamped her authority on proceedings with a iron fist.

Thus any foreign born vain glorious grand standing traitorous individual, would have the nation's best interests at heart and think twice, before trotting into the Royal Courts of Justice for their own self aggrandisement, 

As for Kauto Star's comment above your's.

Totally defeatist "oh we are still hunting" you call that hunting.

My idea of hunting is to a hunting at least a brace and half of foxes and having a nice point on each, with some serious hedges in between.

In the alternative to go out with the Stag Hounds, Tuft a stag for at least two hours and then have a least a five mile point.

The important point, both fox hounds and deer hounds hunt a proper quarry for which they are bred. All this smelly rag business is deplorable and not doing their indigenous scenting attributes any good, so far as long term breeding is concerned. Also their stamina is not required to peak on a proper hunt and thus in turn damaging confirmation.


----------



## Countryman (6 November 2016)

Judgemental said:



			Countryman the British people are sick and tired of being told what to do over BREXIT and I have no doubt, boundary changes or not, the Conservative party would have a dramatically increased majority. Especially if the matter also turned on the issue of the Judiciary interfering with Parliament.

.
		
Click to expand...

Fine, but that won't help hunting unless that majority is substantially pro. It should be, but be in no doubt our enemies are working hard to peddle misinformation and change the minds of many of those who would make up that majority.


----------



## Judgemental (6 November 2016)

Countryman said:



			Fine, but that won't help hunting unless that majority is substantially pro. It should be, but be in no doubt our enemies are working hard to peddle misinformation and change the minds of many of those who would make up that majority.
		
Click to expand...

Come on Countryman, you and I both know what the arrangements are and that in a new Parliament, the SNP are going to be wholly emasculated and will have no say in repeal of the Hunting Act 2004.


----------



## Countryman (6 November 2016)

Judgemental said:



			Come on Countryman, you and I both know what the arrangements are and that in a new Parliament, the SNP are going to be wholly emasculated and will have no say in repeal of the Hunting Act 2004.
		
Click to expand...

I certainly hope so, But I must admit I see no prospect of a firmer EVEL being introduced in the near future, much as I wish it were otherwise.


----------



## Roasted Chestnuts (6 November 2016)

They will have no say south of the border I think is will hat you meant to say judgemental. 

God such shortmindedness the hunting act is he least of this country's problems on this short route to destruction we seem to be stuck on. Between brexit, another Tory in Downing Street sucking the life out of the working class and serious benefits culture I'd imagine implosion is in order. So **** the hunting act at the moment, low on the totem pole to anyone with a shred of common sense.


----------



## turnbuckle (7 November 2016)

Blackbeastie, I like yr thinking - although it's THIS Tory I object to - a saner softer one would do me just fine.

The truth is any Govt which suggests repealing the Act is going to have 60% of the population calling them horrid fox-murderers. It ISN'T GOING TO HAPPEN.

The current system (sort of) works. Perhaps we should all be grateful that it does and just kick on...?


----------



## Judgemental (7 November 2016)

Black Beastie said:



			They will have no say south of the border I think is will hat you meant to say judgemental.
		
Click to expand...

Barnet INCONSEQUENTIAL


----------



## Lizzie66 (7 November 2016)

I don't think she will call a General Election until Brexit has happened, there is too much risk.

If the Liberals ran on a Remain ticket along with SNP then you could find that many people that do not want to Brexit would vote for them. With the Brexit voters being split between Conservatives, UKIP and Labour this could allow the Liberals to win back a fair few of the seats they lost last time around and you could end up with a Labour/Liberal/SNP alliance. This would be an absolute nightmare for the country and could result in a lot of civil unrest.

We cannot afford as a country to have 6 months of campaigning for votes when we have too much else to do.


----------



## turnbuckle (7 November 2016)

Lizzie66 said:



			......This would be an absolute nightmare for the country and could result in a lot of civil unrest.
		
Click to expand...

Oh? Really? Why? Do tell, please.....


----------



## JDee (8 November 2016)

As I remember there were plenty of Conservative MP's that voted against hunting so I doubt there would be a majority for a repeal even with a majority Tory government
I hunted before the ban and have no problems with it but to be honest I don't think it'll ever come back so you have to make the most of what you're left with and do everything you can to hang on to that
For every one person that recognizes that hunting was a quick effective way to kill a fox and far more humane than snares and the like you'll find thousands that can't get their head around a pack of hounds followed by a group of what they see as elitist riders chasing some cute disney-esque creature to the point of exhaustion and then ripped apart while they all stand around drooling overcome with some macabre sort of bloodlust


----------



## Judgemental (8 November 2016)

JDee said:



			As I remember there were plenty of Conservative MP's that voted against hunting so I doubt there would be a majority for a repeal even with a majority Tory government
I hunted before the ban and have no problems with it but to be honest I don't think it'll ever come back so you have to make the most of what you're left with and do everything you can to hang on to that
For every one person that recognizes that hunting was a quick effective way to kill a fox and far more humane than snares and the like you'll find thousands that can't get their head around a pack of hounds followed by a group of what they see as elitist riders chasing some cute disney-esque creature to the point of exhaustion and then ripped apart while they all stand around drooling overcome with some macabre sort of bloodlust
		
Click to expand...

JDee, Since you are in CT and assuming you are not offended by the question, did you vote for The Donald or The Sister. Assuming you were allowed to vote.

On the other hand for whom would you have voted?


----------



## ycbm (9 November 2016)

Lizzie66 said:



			I don't think she will call a General Election until Brexit has happened, there is too much risk.

If the Liberals ran on a Remain ticket along with SNP then you could find that many people that do not want to Brexit would vote for them. With the Brexit voters being split between Conservatives, UKIP and Labour this could allow the Liberals to win back a fair few of the seats they lost last time around and you could end up with a Labour/Liberal/SNP alliance. This would be an absolute nightmare for the country and could result in a lot of civil unrest.

We cannot afford as a country to have 6 months of campaigning for votes when we have too much else to do.
		
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure an election needs only four weeks notice.


----------



## JDee (9 November 2016)

Judgemental said:



			JDee, Since you are in CT and assuming you are not offended by the question, did you vote for The Donald or The Sister. Assuming you were allowed to vote.

On the other hand for whom would you have voted?
		
Click to expand...

We're here under the "Legal Permanent Resident' status so can't vote - so much for the whole taxation without representation thing that started a war!!! 
I would have voted for Clinton - the Trump camp didn't do anything to put me off her with all their melodramatic accusations. He on the other hand is a proven liar, a corrupt businessman who's made whatever money he has (and still no sign of his tax statements) by exploiting whoever he can - he has his goods made in countries like China and most of his employees in his hotels and golf courses are very low paid Latino's and Hispanics because no American will do that sort of work. He's everything that's wrong with this country and yet his sheeple still believe he wants to change things. The man's power crazy and unhinged and now he's the most powerful man in the world - Scary huh?


----------



## popsdosh (10 November 2016)

I just wish people would stop getting excited by this prospect im afraid if the act was repealed it would be very short lived and the backlash on a change of government would finish off what we have at the moment forever. Why make it into a political tennis match ,there is no political will within the conservative party to repeal it so it wont happen and I suspect the consequence of raising it again would cause damage. Sometimes you have tio live with what you have and be thankful it wasnt worse. It sure as hell could have been.


----------



## Judgemental (13 November 2016)

popsdosh said:



			I just wish people would stop getting excited by this prospect im afraid if the act was repealed it would be very short lived and the backlash on a change of government would finish off what we have at the moment forever. Why make it into a political tennis match ,there is no political will within the conservative party to repeal it so it wont happen and I suspect the consequence of raising it again would cause damage. Sometimes you have tio live with what you have and be thankful it wasnt worse. It sure as hell could have been.
		
Click to expand...

How very provincial


----------



## SusannaF (15 November 2016)

Does anyone know where May stands on hunting? My impression is rather that she elbowed out most of the MPs/cabinet members who were sympathetic to it, and she doesn't strike me as the type to care for it. She's trying to rework the Tories as the party of the working man and woman and (yes, I know hunting is more diverse than people think) I don't think legalisation would be "on brand" for that.


----------



## ycbm (15 November 2016)

Judgemental said:



			How very provincial
		
Click to expand...

Popsdosh is a farmer


----------



## Countryman (15 November 2016)

SusannaF said:



			Does anyone know where May stands on hunting? My impression is rather that she elbowed out most of the MPs/cabinet members who were sympathetic to it, and she doesn't strike me as the type to care for it. She's trying to rework the Tories as the party of the working man and woman and (yes, I know hunting is more diverse than people think) I don't think legalisation would be "on brand" for that.
		
Click to expand...

Without wishing to restart this thread, which had died of natural causes, you are mistaken - she is Pro, thankfully, as are almost all of the cabinet and parliamentary party. I agree she perhaps lacks the personal empathy DC had with hunting though.


----------



## SusannaF (15 November 2016)

Thank you &#8211; sorry for reopening the thread. I didn't check the date when I posted. I was curious about May's support for hunting &#8211; good to know where she stands!


----------



## Judgemental (15 November 2016)

Countryman said:



			Without wishing to restart this thread, which had died of natural causes, you are mistaken - she is Pro, thankfully, as are almost all of the cabinet and parliamentary party. I agree she perhaps lacks the personal empathy DC had with hunting though.
		
Click to expand...

Countryman this thread has not died of "natural causes". It has died of weakness. Whilst I am right behind Theresa May she has exhibited a remarkable lack of judgment and incredible weakness. When a Prime Minister is handed the job on a plate, they would be prudent to call a general election, not having fought the campaign as the incumbent. 

Look at what befell Jim Callaghan, John Major and Gordon Brown, all fell at the last fence by not calling an election.

Forget Boundary Changes and the Fixed Term Parliament Act. The latter could have been easily expunged.


----------



## Judgemental (12 December 2016)

I have money on with the bookies we are going to have a February General Election.

With all these court cases what choice is there.


----------



## KautoStar1 (12 December 2016)

well even if that is the case JM, hunting is not going to be on the agenda.  In todays climate it simply isn't important.  You are still hunting, people are still gainfully employed and numbers going out have increased since the ban.
No-one with any sense is going to poke the hornets nest that is repeal.  Its not a vote winner.


----------



## Judgemental (12 December 2016)

KautoStar1 said:



			well even if that is the case JM, hunting is not going to be on the agenda.  In todays climate it simply isn't important.  You are still hunting, people are still gainfully employed and numbers going out have increased since the ban.
No-one with any sense is going to poke the hornets nest that is repeal.  Its not a vote winner.
		
Click to expand...

Hunting, seriously nothing was further from my mind.

No, the immediate point is, that where I taking a Judgemental view in and upon the decision of the Supreme Court, either way Mrs May has to call an election.

If the Supreme court rule against the government, Mrs May is in a right old muddle, with a very modest majority and a number of awkward Conservative members. With the issue of BREXIT being a dominant feature, leading up to the end of march assuming she can keep to her time table.

Then there is the matter of the House of Lords who will almost certainly delay matters. 

Also the Irish sticking their oar into the equation.

The way out of this mess is for an immediate election, which, if Mrs May called it now, in my Judgemental, their lordships in the Supreme Court may have to reserve their judgement, until after the election, for fear of undue influence of parliament and the electorate.

That said, I confidently predict that the British people will vote for Mrs May, if the main platform argument is BREXIT and give her a landslide victory. Possibly bigger that Lady Thatcher's, because the majority, especially the majority who voted for BREXIT are about as p..sed off as I have ever known my fellow Britons, with the variety of folking trying to stop and or slow up BREXIT.    

Then  with a resounding majority Mrs May can steamroller any vote and her timetable  on BREXIT through the Commons, assuming that is necessary if the Supreme Court find in favor of the Claimant.

In the circumstances the Fixed Term Parliament Act can be kicked into the long grass.

As for the Parliamentary Boundary Changes, that will just have to be a temporary casualty of the position.

So Countryman, if you are reading this post, I suggest you have a quiet word in the ear of your chums in the H of C and tell them, they need to heed the words of maturer counsel in my Judgemental.

As for the hunting (shhhhh) once we have a landslide majority...........


----------



## popsdosh (13 December 2016)

However as I said all along I still predict there will be no Brexit. Already we are hearing cabinet members stepping back talking of interim deals and staying part of the single market. Anybody with any degree of sanity knows that there is nothing to gain from staying part of the single market and lots to lose as you end up contributing to Brussels but have no say over their regulations and I certainly did not vote for that. If we are going to contribute we have to have a say!!!

I dont know what it is with those saying we have to stay part of the single market? They assume its a one way street! Somebody put it very well last week if we have to contribute to stay in what are they going to pay to have access to our market as they send more to us. Is this really trade Tariffs by another name. If we stand strong they will back down even as stubborn as they can be they wont bite off their noses.

To your point of a february election Why?  Winter elections are notoriously very unpredictable and the way people have recently voted around the world nothing is a certainty. At the moment The only Mandate we have for Brexit is the referendum and thats not binding all we need is an inconclusive election and the whole thing just sinks into a bigger mire. The media in some quarters are so biased im not sure they live in the same country. I used to listen to radio 5live all the time and now switch it off they are obsessed with staying in the single market and are so twisted in their reporting.


----------



## Judgemental (13 December 2016)

popsdosh said:



			To your point of a february election Why?  Winter elections are notoriously very unpredictable and the way people have recently voted around the world nothing is a certainty. At the moment The only Mandate we have for Brexit is the referendum and thats not binding all we need is an inconclusive election and the whole thing just sinks into a bigger mire. The media in some quarters are so biased i'm not sure they live in the same country. I used to listen to radio 5live all the time and now switch it off they are obsessed with staying in the single market and are so twisted in their reporting.
		
Click to expand...

The point is a majority voted to leave the EU. 

I emphasise a majority.

So far the Government have failed to 'get on with it' and I blame Mrs May who is dawdling through the whole process. She should have triggered Article 50 on the day she stepped into Downing Street.

As for a February election, if the time table is to be kept for triggering Article 50 then she has no choice. If it is not adhered to, Mrs May is going to face huge problems from all her backbench MP's who want to get on with BREXIT.

Also it is an effective way of scuppering all these court cases. If she calls an General Election now, any judgement by the Supreme Court is neutered. 

Also in the circumstances, not having a personal mandate from the people, she needs to obtain that, otherwise she will end up like, Jim Callaghan, John Major and Gordon Brown, all cast out, because they did not go to the country when they inherited Downing Street, rather than winning it in a General Election.

Forget February 'fill dyke' the people will vote and vote in their millions, they don't like all these parasites interfering with the Referendum result and foreigners calling the tune.  

Far far too many outsiders and non-British nationals are intruding on the British way of life, politics, economy and the generality of our genre.

As you say the media are biased and it is quite remarkable, the number of foreigners who seem to think they can pontificate as to our destiny. 

At least we can take comfort in the fact that Horse and Hound is immune to these outside influences.


----------



## Judgemental (27 December 2016)

One does wonder exactly what is happening, especially when it is reported Mrs May will not discuss BREXIT even with Her Majesty The Queen.

Whatever one's opinion of Nigel Farage, he is extremely powerful and has Donald Trump solidly behind him. 

Never let us forget everything we do and say via the Internet is governed via the servers and Internet 'Clearing Houses' that are all controlled by American companies based in California. 

Are we really masters of our own destiny, one wonders.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/74...al-change-2020-General-Election-Brexit-latest 

Nigel Farage gives Theresa May ultimatum - give us hard Brexit or we'll OUST you

NIGEL FARAGE predicted Theresa May and Philip Hammond could be ousted from their roles leading the United Kingdom if they cannot deliver a satisfactory Brexit for the country.

By JOE BARNES
PUBLISHED: 00:01, Tue, Dec 27, 2016 | UPDATED: 11:50, Tue, Dec 27, 2016

The outspoken politician warned that despite Britons voting to leave the European Union, business is still &#8220;not finished yet&#8221; as he urges voters to keep up pressure on the Government.

Mr Farage helped lead the momentous campaign which saw 17.4million voters choose to ditch Britain&#8217;s membership of the bloc, overcoming then Prime Minister David Cameron and his close ally former Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne.

In the wake of his stunning defeat, Mr Cameron stood down as leader of the country, leaving Conservative party members to opt for Theresa May to fill the void in No.10, she would go on to select fellow Remain campaigner Philip Hammond to lead the economy.

While discussing the Government and his belief in their ability to deliver Brexit, Nigel Farage cast doubt on the two politicians leading the apparent charge.

Nigel Farage, Philip Hammond and Theresa MayLBC&#8226;GETTY

Nigel Farage attacked Theresa May and Philip Hammond's ability to deliver Brexit
We&#8217;ve got a Prime Minister who, on the greatest political decision of our lifetime, was on the wrong side
Nigel Farage
He told LBC: &#8220;We&#8217;ve got a Prime Minister who, on the greatest political decision of our lifetime, was on the wrong side and gets rewarded with being Prime Minister &#8211; It&#8217;s a funny old game politics, isn&#8217;t it?&#8221;

Moving on to Chancellor Philip Hammond, the 52-year-old believed he is &#8220;exactly the same&#8221;, and went as far as to say &#8220;nobody has heard of him&#8221; in the scathing attack.

Mr Farage added: &#8220;We had a political revolution on June 23, the majority of the people that voted, the high turnout, voted against what they were told by the Bank of England, the International Monetary Fund &#8211; despite all of that we had this revolution.

&#8220;The problem is with the exception of Cameron and Osborne, all of the same people are still in charge &#8211; they&#8217;ve just been moved around the chess board a little bit.&#8221;

David Cameron and George OsborneGETTY

Mr Farage claims the Remain Government remains intact apart from David Cameron and George Osborne
The former Ukip leader then voiced his concern over the Government&#8217;s credentials, adding that Britons could vote for yet more &#8220;radical change&#8221; when they take to the ballot boxes during the next general election.

He continued: &#8220;I look at America, where the revolution is complete. Trump doesn&#8217;t just win, he now appoints people from outside the world of politics to get on with running the country.

&#8220;Perhaps this is unfinished business. Perhaps, we&#8217;ll come to a general election in 2020 with more radical change needed.&#8221;

The prominent Leave campaigner also accused Mrs May of being too indecisive with Brexit, which has allowed challenges from Remainers, attempting to hold up, or even, block Britain&#8217;s EU divorce altogether.


Mr Farage said: &#8220;My concern is this: She&#8217;s been Prime Minister for basically six months and we&#8217;re having to wait on a Supreme Court decision, that will come in the middle of January and we&#8217;ve got the French aristocrat, former European commissioner Michel Barnier now dictating timetables to us.

&#8220;None of this needed to happen if she&#8217;d been decisive and declared Article 50&#8221;.

Discussing the amount of time that Britain has wasted between the historic referendum in June and the proposed date of March 31 to start formal exit negations, he declared: &#8220;I think that is far too long.

Top 50 influencers on Brexit
Fri, December 2, 2016
Brexit: Independent experts have drawn up a list of the most influential people on Brexit
PLAY SLIDESHOW

1 of 51

Theresa May - British Prime Minister
Angela Merkel - German Chancellor 
Nicola Sturgeon - Scottish First Minister 
Michel Barnier - Chief Brexit negotiator for the European Commission
Donald Tusk - European Council President 
Francois Hollande - French President 
&#8220;I don&#8217;t expect her to put on the table her negotiating strategy but I would like to see some real clarity in terms of where we are going.

&#8220;I think, frankly, at the moment there is a lack of leadership and I think because of that we&#8217;ve got the Cabinet contradicting itself every single day.

&#8220;Let&#8217;s wait and see, but if she&#8217;s as successful as Prime Minister as she was as Home Secretary we&#8217;ve got a bit of a problem.&#8221;


----------



## Judgemental (27 December 2016)

Of course age NOW has a huge bearing on the whole matter of UK governance and global relations.

Mr Trump is 70 his Cabinet has an average age of about 65. One of whom is 80.

The average age of the House of Commons is only 50 and the average age of the Cabinet is 52.

Sir Winston Churchill (our greatest and best Prime Minister) was 66 when he first became Prime Minister in 1940 and in his second term 1951 he was 77.

The average age of the House of Lords is about 70 as are the Supreme Court Judges concerning the BREXIT litigation.

Age and maturity are very important and being able to relate with to the older seniors is a matter of professional courtesy. They do not want to be dealing with young, 'whippersnappers' with whom they have no kindred spirit. 

The other very interesting feature, by way of example in Mr Trump's Cabinet, they are not just millionaires they are billionaires and it can be very difficult to relate to such people, unless one has the same bank balance. 

It was of course so obviously embarrassing in the way Blair exhibited he did not have the Bush wealth, or the vast 1600 acres of Prairie Chapel Ranch in Texas. Although 1600 acres is neither here nor there in the States.


----------



## Judgemental (28 December 2016)

Judgemental said:



			Of course age NOW has a huge bearing on the whole matter of UK governance and global relations.

Mr Trump is 70 his Cabinet has an average age of about 65. One of whom is 80.

The average age of the House of Commons is only 50 and the average age of the Cabinet is 52.

Sir Winston Churchill (our greatest and best Prime Minister) was 66 when he first became Prime Minister in 1940 and in his second term 1951 he was 77.

The average age of the House of Lords is about 70 as are the Supreme Court Judges concerning the BREXIT litigation.

Age and maturity are very important and being able to relate with to the older seniors is a matter of professional courtesy. They do not want to be dealing with young, 'whippersnappers' with whom they have no kindred spirit. 

The other very interesting feature, by way of example in Mr Trump's Cabinet, they are not just millionaires they are billionaires and it can be very difficult to relate to such people, unless one has the same bank balance. 

It was of course so obviously embarrassing in the way Blair exhibited he did not have the Bush wealth, or the vast 1600 acres of Prairie Chapel Ranch in Texas. Although 1600 acres is neither here nor there in the States.
		
Click to expand...

Let us not forget that we cannot hunt because of the 2004 Hunting Act, which was enacted by Tony Blair.

If Mrs May and the Conservative Party wants or needs to be reelected, she will need the support of those who hunt and wish to see the 2004 Hunting Act repealed, amongst other things.


----------



## fburton (28 December 2016)

Judgemental said:



			Nigel Farage gives Theresa May ultimatum - give us hard Brexit or we'll OUST you
		
Click to expand...

All I can say is... Let the oust begin!


----------



## Judgemental (1 January 2017)

fburton said:



			All I can say is... Let the oust begin!
		
Click to expand...

Mrs May is completely out of touch. 

All those who voted for BREXIT (the majority) are thoroughly fed up with the way in which Mrs May won't get on with the job. She should have triggered Article 50 the day she walked into No 10.

Have a look what folk are saying so far as her pathetic New Year address is concerned.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...-grid7|main5|dl1|sec1_lnk1&pLid=-475562976_uk


----------



## popsdosh (1 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			Mrs May is completely out of touch. 

All those who voted for BREXIT (the majority) are thoroughly fed up with the way in which Mrs May won't get on with the job. She should have triggered Article 50 the day she walked into No 10.

Have a look what folk are saying so far as her pathetic New Year address is concerned.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...-grid7|main5|dl1|sec1_lnk1&pLid=-475562976_uk

Click to expand...

I think I have said all along there is no push from government to Brexit not even BJ wanted it they are just waiting to find an excuse to stay in as we all know there is no acceptable middle way its all out or all in still. There is no point being in the single market with no say over where its going. However I really feel that all the remainers really have to little understanding of the power in our hands ,europe need a deal more than we do as they export so much more to us even they wont want that to change.


----------



## Judgemental (9 January 2017)

http://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...raffic.outbrain&utm_campaign=traffic.outbrain

Secret Tory team planning General Election for FEBRUARY to save Brexit

A SECRET group of MPs are pushing for an early General Election to secure Brexit.

By ALIX CULBERTSON
PUBLISHED: 12:45, Sun, Dec 11, 2016 | UPDATED: 17:29, Sun, Dec 11, 2016

Plans are being put together by a secret team of Tory advisors after a surge in support for the Conservative Party.

The move depends entirely on the outcome of the Supreme Court hearing held this week in which the Government appealed a High Court decision which ruled parliamentary approval needs to be given before Article 50 can be triggered to start the process of leaving the European Union (EU).

If the 11 Supreme Court judges rule next month the Government has lost the appeal then Mrs May will call a General Election.

Theresa May electiongetty
Theresa May could call a general election in February if the Government loses the High Court appeal
RELATED ARTICLES
'Childish undermining plot by PM must stop' says Boris' allies
SPLIT! Supreme Court undecided over Article 50 Brexit decision
The team, which has has even been kept secret from the Cabinet, is planning for a &#8220;mandate election&#8221; in which Mrs May would be put forward as the champion of &#8220;the people versus the judges&#8221;, sources told The Mail on Sunday.

Current sentiment points towards Mrs May gaining a strong Commons majority and give her the power to quash any opposition to Brexit from the House of Lords.


----------



## Judgemental (25 January 2017)

In my Judgement if the Government gets too much of a rough ride in the House of Commons, over BREXIT, Mrs May would be well within her rights to call a General Election.

Based upon who runs the country, the Government and Parliament or a collection of unelected Judges.

On that ticket she would have a 100 seat majority.

If the stupid little girl north of the border is smart, she will shut up and accept the status quo.


----------



## Alec Swan (25 January 2017)

If you're right Jm then the cynic in me would wonder that if a General Election were called after the Parliamentary vote on Brexit,  then there would be many Tories who would lose their seats.  Should there be a GE before the Brexit vote,  then Mrs May will be likely to be guaranteed a further 4 years in office.

Am I being too simplistic?

Alec.


----------



## Judgemental (25 January 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			If you're right Jm then the cynic in me would wonder that if a General Election were called after the Parliamentary vote on Brexit,  then there would be many Tories who would lose their seats.  Should there be a GE before the Brexit vote,  then Mrs May will be likely to be guaranteed a further 4 years in office.

Am I being too simplistic?

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Alec you are right and going right back to basics to add an overworked cliche, the British people are fed up with politicians constant talking about BREXIT and all jockeying for political positions and one up-man-womenship (no sexism here). 

The old adage of 'what happens in America today happens here tomorrow' could not be more relevant, because folk are already saying, to their politicians stop thinking and behaving like one and think and behave like a businessman or women.

Donald Trump's cabinet is entirely made up of highly experienced extremely well heeled businessmen and women who are non-politicians, with an average age of about 70.

If an election were called here, could we see a whole host of mature well heeled businessmen and women standing for Parliament.

(Bring back Edwina Curry age 70 all is forgiven:wink3 

Whoever stands and is elected in the current climate, it would be a landslide for Mrs May who is 60. Lady Thatcher was only 54 when she became Prime Minister.

Of course Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965) was 77 when he became Prime Minister for the second time in 1951. Nice to see he is back in the Oval Office.


This age issue and maturity is going to a play a great part especially bearing in mind the complete hash that whipper snapper Cameron made of the show.


----------



## Roasted Chestnuts (25 January 2017)

Well seeing those south of the border are ignoring the fact that you dragged us into brexit and now your 'supreme' court are not giving us a say! 

Devolved parliaments arent getting any voice in how we leave the EU, bring on the next Indy ref I say as I can't see us staying in this bully boy establishment any longer. Completely alienating the people who you begged  to stay as part of the union. Beggars belief. Reneging on promises made then this?! 

JM don't bother with your up yourself establishment guff as I won't be reading any further had my say and I won't be bandying words with your boorish persona.


----------



## ROG (25 January 2017)

I do not get the Scotland issue and the EU

Scotland had a free vote and decided to remain part of the UK - they could always have another vote if they wanted to on that issue within the next 2 years and if the vote went the other way then they could remain in the EU ..... would make for interesting border issues !

Being that Scotland is part of the UK then they should accept the free vote result where the majority of the UK decided to leave the EU


----------



## Goldenstar (25 January 2017)

Black Beastie said:



			Well seeing those south of the border are ignoring the fact that you dragged us into brexit and now your 'supreme' court are not giving us a say! 

Devolved parliaments arent getting any voice in how we leave the EU, bring on the next Indy ref I say as I can't see us staying in this bully boy establishment any longer. Completely alienating the people who you begged  to stay as part of the union. Beggars belief. Reneging on promises made then this?! 

JM don't bother with your up yourself establishment guff as I won't be reading any further had my say and I won't be bandying words with your boorish persona.
		
Click to expand...

Begged you to stay !
Many many of have no wish to remain yoked to Scotland and hear the constant whinging .
I at the start of Scottish referendum was strongly pro union at the end I would have been very very happy to see the back of Scotland and those within it who think that expressing anti English sentiments is ok .
It seems that everyone has the right to self detmination except the English .We have the biggest population , sorry can't do anything about it .
Is there any reason why England should stay in the EU just because Scotland wants to .


----------



## popsdosh (25 January 2017)

Goldenstar said:



			Begged you to stay !
Many many of have no wish to remain yoked to Scotland and hear the constant whinging .
I at the start of Scottish referendum was strongly pro union at the end I would have been very very happy to see the back of Scotland and those within it who think that expressing anti English sentiments is ok .
It seems that everyone has the right to self detmination except the English .We have the biggest population , sorry can't do anything about it .
Is there any reason why England should stay in the EU just because Scotland wants to .
		
Click to expand...

Totally agree.  What Scotland forgets although maybe NS knows is if they go for independence they will just by that move remove themselves from EU membership! It is not a question of them just staying in there but to state the obvious they have never been a member. They will find it difficult to be accepted as they will not be able to fulfill the financial criteria as the EU does not need anymore lame duck states at the moment. Like I say I think NS knows this as recently her tone has changed no end and she is just trying to maintain single market access which is certainly not an option if we have to pay for it. What I find interesting is that now the EU realises we really arent going to roll over to have our tummies tickled they are starting to give ground so much so the guy dealing with the EU side has been holding talks to guarantee that europe will have access to the London financial markets . 
What I think will be great to see if Scotland does go for independence again and the rest leaves the EU if the people of Scotland will accept the same levels of foreign labour as we have south of the Border! Oh and perhaps Scotland would like Corby as an overseas dependency


----------



## popsdosh (25 January 2017)

Black Beastie said:



			Well seeing those south of the border are ignoring the fact that you dragged us into brexit and now your 'supreme' court are not giving us a say! 

Devolved parliaments arent getting any voice in how we leave the EU, bring on the next Indy ref I say as I can't see us staying in this bully boy establishment any longer. Completely alienating the people who you begged  to stay as part of the union. Beggars belief. Reneging on promises made then this?! 

JM don't bother with your up yourself establishment guff as I won't be reading any further had my say and I won't be bandying words with your boorish persona.
		
Click to expand...

I promise you BB let the English vote in your indepedence Referendum and you will get it without doubt. The politicians wanted you to stay because they knew what was best for you!


----------



## Judgemental (25 January 2017)

Black Beastie said:



			Well seeing those south of the border are ignoring the fact that you dragged us into brexit and now your 'supreme' court are not giving us a say! 

Devolved parliaments arent getting any voice in how we leave the EU, bring on the next Indy ref I say as I can't see us staying in this bully boy establishment any longer. Completely alienating the people who you begged  to stay as part of the union. Beggars belief. Reneging on promises made then this?! 

JM don't bother with your up yourself establishment guff as I won't be reading any further had my say and I won't be bandying words with your boorish persona.
		
Click to expand...

I must say I am rather surprised to receive a bol...king from you on this subject, what was wrong with my suggestions, perhaps it is because I harbour a dislike for the young lady with piscatorial attributes.

Far too young for the job north of the border and needs to mature.

But then I suspect you 'enjoy' giving me a bol...king at any opportunity. Any excuse is better than none. Especially mature men who speak their mind :wink3:.

Establishment, not really.


----------



## Goldenstar (25 January 2017)

popsdosh said:



			I promise you BB let the English vote in your indepedence Referendum and you will get it without doubt. The politicians wanted you to stay because they knew what was best for you!
		
Click to expand...

And many are attached to the union and genuinely see the Uk as one country although why the English put up with a system that can stuff imposed on them in parliament by the votes of people who would not impose the same on their own constituents I just don't know .
So we are leaving the EU the power of England will grow within the union as we are numerically bigger ( always good in a democracy) .
Soon a polictians will come along who can exploit that to their advantage .


----------



## Alec Swan (25 January 2017)

popsdosh said:



			I promise you BB let the English vote in your indepedence Referendum and you will get it without doubt. &#8230;&#8230;..
		
Click to expand...

The Referendum debate on here was interesting as was the post-debate.  I'm quite sure that had there been an immediate and second chance to vote,  the decision would have gone the other way.  Which ever way the individual Scots voted,  many seemed to have had an about turn immediately afterwards!  As others I was fiercely pro-union.  Now,  if Scotland were to be given the chance to leave,  I'd bid them farewell,  being sick and tired of the minority having sway.  That said though,  should there be a snap GE and should it be a landslide victory for the Tories,  as many seem to think,  then I strongly suspect that the first head to fall will be Sturgeon's.

There's no question that there's a great deal of English resentment to the reversal of the Scottish assurance that they wouldn't interfere on matters which solely concerned England,  only to have that assurance broken.  I suppose that it was too powerful a weapon for that dreadful woman Sturgeon to abandon.

Alec.


----------



## Lizzie66 (25 January 2017)

Personally I am not so sure that a snap election is the way to go. You only need to see what happened to Zac Goldsmith. We have voted out but if Liberals and SNP stood on a "remain in the EU" ticket they could grab 40%+ of the electorate. This would be enough to return an overall majority in Westminster and effectively keep us in the EU either literally or in all but name with a "soft" exit if article 50 is already triggered. It would fly in the face of the referendum but arguably it would be the democratic choice of the people to elect MPs that belong to parties declaring themselves as pro-EU.

We need Article 50 triggering and the trade deals signing. Once this is done then there can be GE. If the boundaries have been amended then unless Labour have managed to persuade JC to step down then the probability is that Tories would get back in with a similar majority to the present, who else is there ?


----------



## Alec Swan (25 January 2017)

Judgemental said:



			&#8230;&#8230;..

This age issue and maturity is going to a play a great part especially bearing in mind the complete hash that whipper snapper Cameron made of the show.
		
Click to expand...

Pitt the Younger was a mere 24 years of age when he was PM.  It seems unthinkable now,  doesn't it? 

Alec.


----------



## Goldenstar (25 January 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			Pitt the Younger was a mere 24 years of age when he was PM.  It seems unthinkable now,  doesn't it? 

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

I used to say that Cameron was a lucky polictian and he was an odd one sort of untouched by power after TB and GB both of whom were driven to  near madness IMO I found him quite refreshing .
But the EU referendum campaign may go down in history as the disastrous miscalculation in this century .
So now it's down to TM to do the deal ,this deal that shapes our future I have watched her a long time and she's another interesting one about a quarter of the way into the referendum campaign I suddenly sussed what she was up to it showed a certain ruthlessness .


----------



## ycbm (25 January 2017)

Goldenstar said:



			I used to say that Cameron was a lucky polictian and he was an odd one sort of untouched by power after TB and GB both of whom were driven to  near madness IMO I found him quite refreshing .
But the EU referendum campaign may go down in history as the disastrous miscalculation in this century .
So now it's down to TM to do the deal ,this deal that shapes our future I have watched her a long time and she's another interesting one about a quarter of the way into the referendum campaign I suddenly sussed what she was up to it showed a certain ruthlessness .
		
Click to expand...

It was clever, wasn't it?  She was going to be PM whichever way the vote went.


----------



## Goldenstar (25 January 2017)

ycbm said:



			It was clever, wasn't it?  She was going to be PM whichever way the vote went.
		
Click to expand...

Yup she let the posh boys hang themselves then walked quietly in .

Organised quiet ruthless not bad qualities for what's coming ,which I would wish on no one .


----------



## Alec Swan (25 January 2017)

Goldenstar said:



			..
But the EU referendum campaign may go down in history as the disastrous miscalculation in this century .
.. .
		
Click to expand...

Miscalculation or a calculated deception?

Alec.

edit:  The latter,  I'd suggest.


----------



## Goldenstar (25 January 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			Miscalculation or a calculated deception?

Alec.

edit:  The latter,  I'd suggest.
		
Click to expand...

You think Cameron wanted to leave the EU and give up being PM .


----------



## Fidgety (25 January 2017)

Goldenstar said:



			You think Cameron wanted to leave the EU and give up being PM .
		
Click to expand...

No, that's why he fell on his sword/spat out his dummy (delete as applicable) when the public called his buff and revealed his game.


----------



## Alec Swan (25 January 2017)

Goldenstar said:



			You think Cameron wanted to leave the EU and give up being PM .
		
Click to expand...

The problem that most have,  those who live in an etherial world where they are far removed from reality,  is that they have no possible comprehension of the common man,  and Cameron was once such person.

Alec.


----------



## popsdosh (26 January 2017)

BJs miscalculation was the biggest one! Really did he think he was a creditable Brexiteer having always been pro europe. He never expected for one minute to win the vote hence the rabbit in the headlights reaction and leaving MG trying to save face lol. His calculation was to get a a very slim margin to stay in which could then be held over europe to achieve the changes to make it more palatable to the people . A bit like NS north of the border is trying to do on independence. Dont really want it but needs the power to achieve what they want.

I still dont think its going to happen a compromise will be sorted at the eleventh hour. Whatever is said TM and team have no conviction to conclude Brexit if there was article 50 would have been started straight away before there could have been any interference of any sort.


----------



## Goldenstar (26 January 2017)

popsdosh said:



			BJs miscalculation was the biggest one! Really did he think he was a creditable Brexiteer having always been pro europe. He never expected for one minute to win the vote hence the rabbit in the headlights reaction and leaving MG trying to save face lol. His calculation was to get a a very slim margin to stay in which could then be held over europe to achieve the changes to make it more palatable to the people . A bit like NS north of the border is trying to do on independence. Dont really want it but needs the power to achieve what they want.

I still dont think its going to happen a compromise will be sorted at the eleventh hour. Whatever is said TM and team have no conviction to conclude Brexit if there was article 50 would have been started straight away before there could have been any interference of any sort.
		
Click to expand...

I disagree .
They needed thetime to arrange their team and make some plans .


----------



## Judgemental (28 January 2017)

Told you so............

Theresa May urged to call General Election NEXT MONTH to push Brexit through quickly

THERESA May could call a General Election as early as next month in a bid to give the Prime Minister further legitimacy to push ahead with Brexit.

By ALIX CULBERTSON
PUBLISHED: 18:26, Sat, Jan 28, 2017 | UPDATED: 18:32, Sat, Jan 28, 2017
Theresa May
Theresa May could call a General Election as early as next month
A covert group of Tory MPs, kept secret from even the Cabinet, has been putting together a plan since early December for the Prime Minister to call an election for February following a surge in support for the Conservative Party.

The move depended entirely on the outcome of the Supreme Court hearing held last month, with the Tory advisers saying the election would only happen if judges ruled against the Government&#8217;s appeal of a High Court decision which ruled parliamentary approval needs to be given before Article 50 can be triggered to start the process of leaving the European Union (EU).

On Tuesday, Supreme Court judges did just that, triggering the plans for a &#8220;mandate election&#8221; in which Mrs May would be put forwards as the champion of &#8220;the people versus the judges&#8221;.

RELATED ARTICLES
Donald Trump ally: Theresa May has already impressed White House
Donald Trump confirms Brexit trade deal after Theresa May meeting
Although the Prime Minister remains popular, the secret Tory group, originally revealed by the Mail on Sunday last year, does not want her lack of a personal mandate to hold her back, as it did with Jim Callaghan and Gordon Brown.

Without a majority in the House of Lords and a smaller working majority than when she took over from David Cameron, thanks to the loss of Zac Goldsmith&#8217;s Richmond Park, a General Election win would bolster Mrs May&#8217;s position as leader and make Article 50 amendments run more smoothly.


Growing approval for the Conservatives amid plunging support for Labour has buoyed the secret Tory group into wanting to hold a General Election as soon as possible to ride the wave of support.

Polling this week by respected pollsters ICM put the Conservatives on 42 per cent (unchanged over the past fortnight), Labour on 26 per cent (down two per cent), Ukip on 13 per cent (up one per cent) and the Lib Dems on 10 per cent (up one per cent). 

Government Loses Brexit Vote Appeal
Tue, January 24, 2017
Britain's most senior judges ruled that Prime Minister Theresa May does not have the power to trigger the formal process Article 50 for the UK's exit from the European Union without Parliament having a say.
PLAY SLIDESHOW
Brexit PA
1 of 12
Issued by the Supreme Court of (top row, from the left) Lord Neuberger, Lord Mance, Lord Kerr, Lord Sumption, (bottom row, from the left) Lady Hale, Lord Clarke, Lord Wilson and Lord Hodge, who agreed with the majority decision that the Government could not trigger Article 50 without Parliamentary approval.
Brexit
Brexit
Lead claimant in the Article 50 case, Gina Miller delivers a statement outside the Supreme Court in London
Lead claimant in the Article 50 case, Gina Miller delivers a statement outside the Supreme Court in London
Gina Miller speaks outside the Supreme Court following the decision of a court ruling that Theresa May's government requires parliamentary approval to start the process of leaving the EU
Lord Neuberger, President of the Supreme Court, announcing that the  Government has lost its appeal against a ruling that the Prime Minister must seek MPs' approval to trigger the process of taking Britain out of the European Union
President of the Supreme Court David Neuberger (C) as he delivers judgement in case to decide whether or not parliamentary approval is needed before the government can begin Brexit negotiations, inside the Supreme Court in London
In pro-Brexit Stoke-on-Trent, where a by-election will take place on February 23, Labour faces an even more dramatic collapse, with a Facebook poll by Labour Leave showing the party slumping 10 points behind Ukip. 

An Express.co.uk poll of 11,115 people revealed 78 per cent believe Mrs May will win if she holds a General Election in February.

The Prime Minister has repeatedly said she will remain with the electoral timetable which would mean an Election in 2020.

However, as she gains more and more ground from floundering Labour her advisors are keen to move the vote forward. 

Some political commentators are putting May 4 in the diary for an election but the Tory group is believed to be keen for the election to go ahead before Article 50 is triggered at the end of March.

Following the Supreme Court announcement on Tuesday, Mrs May wasted no time in promising a White Paper detailing the Government&#8217;s Brexit plans would go ahead.

Yesterday the Government published its bill asking Parliament for permission to trigger the official Brexit process.

But MPs, especially Labour politicians, hit out at at the time-scale which gives them three days to debate the European Union Notification of Withdrawal Bill next Tuesday and Wednesday with a third day of debate and a vote on February 8.

Former shadow business secretary Chuka Umunna accused ministers of attempting to &#8220;muzzle&#8221; the Commons by rushing the bill through in just a fortnight.

The uproar could boost the Tory&#8217;s decision to hold a General Election as two Labour frontbenchers have quit after Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn laid down a three-line whip to get his MPs to support triggering Article 50.


----------



## Goldenstar (28 January 2017)

Of she could but then she could do lots of things .
Then again she might not .


----------



## Judgemental (1 March 2017)

With the debacle in the House of Lords, Mrs May has very good grounds to call a General Election. Fixed term Parliament Act or no fixed term Parliament Act. Boundary changes or no Boundary changes.

We cannot go on like this with first the Supreme Court interfering with BREXIT now the House of Lords. Unelected people all in a position of sinecure. 

As Lord Tebbit said at the end of the debate, "why are we worrying about all these foreigners". Quite, show them the door.

Are we on the threshold of paradise and total utopia, with a Conservative government that will have a sufficient majority to repeal the Hunting Act 2004. We all need to pray so so hard.

The British people are livid about this latest turn of events and Mrs May will, if she goes to the country win with a massive majority. She is a lovely and a very decent caring person and deserves an electoral mandate in her own right, that I am sure will be the view of the majority.


----------



## Alec Swan (1 March 2017)

Considering The lords,  I'd suggest that as a body they are on very thin ice,  a fact of which I would hope,  they are aware.

Liberalism and The lords,  need to be distanced if either or both aren't to give way to the far right.

Alec.


----------



## Isbister (2 March 2017)

I don't agree that there is either the need or the justification for a general election now. There is no need for one to confer legitimacy on Brexit - this already has majority approval. Nor does the Lords' attempt to put a spanner in the works constitute adequate cause.
An election now, when Labour are so clearly weak, would risk seeming like a tacit admission that, in the fullness of time, in 2020, the stars may not be so opportunely aligned. By then, either Brexit will be working or it will turn out we have made a mistake - making a strategic side-step now to score an easy goal would betray a worrying lack of confidence in the long-term outcome. The government just about has a workable majority as things are, but even if this was boosted tenfold, let's not fool ourselves that repealing the Hunting Act would be very far up their agenda.


----------



## Judgemental (2 March 2017)

Isbister said:



			I don't agree that there is either the need or the justification for a general election now. The government just about has a workable majority as things are, but even if this was boosted tenfold, let's not fool ourselves that repealing the Hunting Act would be very far up their agenda.
		
Click to expand...

The issue of the Hunting Act 2004 is never far from any conversation with rural MP's when the opportunity arises and as one gets closer to an election, it is raised time and time again.

Why, because many many hunting people are the foot soldiers, delivering fliers etc. They were mobilised at the last election, travelling from their rural 'lairs' deep into enemy territory, i.e,  inner cities. 

So far their efforts have proved to be in vain. No doubt come the next election, again they will be called upon. There some Conservative MP's in very marginal urban seats who say, their ability to canvass would be seriously diluted without the help of hunting folk.

I am sure you get my drift.


----------



## Isbister (2 March 2017)

Judgemental said:



			The issue of the Hunting Act 2004 is never far from any conversation with rural MP's when the opportunity arises and as one gets closer to an election, it is raised time and time again.

Why, because many many hunting people are the foot soldiers, delivering fliers etc. They were mobilised at the last election, travelling from their rural 'lairs' deep into enemy territory, i.e,  inner cities. 

So far their efforts have proved to be in vain. No doubt come the next election, again they will be called upon. There some Conservative MP's in very marginal urban seats who say, their ability to canvass would be seriously diluted without the help of hunting folk.

I am sure you get my drift.
		
Click to expand...

I do. Hunting people are indeed invaluable foot soldiers - I have seen this so many times, and there will certainly be some Conservative MPs whose survival depends on their continued support. 

Nevertheless, I think their loyalty is to some extent presumed. Hunting remains a marginal and rather controversial pursuit in the country at large and I suspect the party more generally would be cautious of seeming to align itself too closely with the interests of our particular minority. Rightly or wrongly, we are perceived in some quarters - especially in the many marginal urban constituencies - as wealthy, archaic and rather cruel. I know this (my daughter lives in Hackney, so I should). The cultivation of support in those areas may well be deemed more essential than in the dependable shires.

Repeal will take a great deal of time and stealthy work, I don't think it can be expected to happen soon.


----------



## Fred66 (2 March 2017)

Judgemental said:



			With the debacle in the House of Lords, Mrs May has very good grounds to call a General Election. Fixed term Parliament Act or no fixed term Parliament Act. Boundary changes or no Boundary changes.

We cannot go on like this with first the Supreme Court interfering with BREXIT now the House of Lords. Unelected people all in a position of sinecure. 

As Lord Tebbit said at the end of the debate, "why are we worrying about all these foreigners". Quite, show them the door.

Are we on the threshold of paradise and total utopia, with a Conservative government that will have a sufficient majority to repeal the Hunting Act 2004. We all need to pray so so hard.

The British people are livid about this latest turn of events and Mrs May will, if she goes to the country win with a massive majority. She is a lovely and a very decent caring person and deserves an electoral mandate in her own right, that I am sure will be the view of the majority.
		
Click to expand...

The GE needs to wait, we need to focus on getting Article 50 triggered, the Brexit negotiations started and finalised and the constituency boundaries altered. A GE now would potentially allow the remainers to consolidate their votes in one party and derail the Brexit process. 

Unfortunately the HoL have managed to make the status of EU residents into a bargaining chip in the upcoming negotiations as HoC now either have to reject their amendments (and suffer potential ill will from the EU) or accept them and have their hands tied. The EU have made it quite clear that they will not discuss exit terms etc until Article 50 is triggered, we should therefore abide by this as should the HoL.

However interestingly today Juncker has put forward a 5 option plan of what the EU could move into being in the future one of which options is the possibility of restricted movement and making it back into a trading block. It is a shame that this was not muted prior to our referendum as depending upon the outcome of the EU opinion on these plans we may well have voted differently.


----------



## Alec Swan (2 March 2017)

Fred66 said:



			..

However interestingly today Juncker has put forward a 5 option plan of what the EU could move into being in the future one of which options is the possibility of restricted movement and making it back into a trading block. It is a shame that this was not muted prior to our referendum as depending upon the outcome of the EU opinion on these plans we may well have voted differently.
		
Click to expand...

It all sounds rather like the wife demanding a divorce,  and the dimwitted husband calling her bluff,  only to realise that THIS TIME she means it,  and he then decides,  too late perhaps (hopefully),  that perhaps he should compromise.

I cannot understand the stupidity of Juncker and crew.  With the UK leaving the EU and with other right-handed political parties in France and Germany gaining in popularity,  then disbandment of the failing regime is highly likely.  To cap it all,  Juncker continues with his refusal to accept any negotiation until Article 50 is triggered.  Perhaps I'm missing something but it wouldn't surprise me to learn that Juncker finds cold comfort in a bed-sit.

Alec.


----------



## Judgemental (7 March 2017)

If Lord Hague says there should be a General Election, there is no argument..... better get on with it.....


Theresa May should scrap fixed-term parliaments and hold early election, says William Hague
 William Hague
William Hague wants an early election CREDIT: PAUL GROVER FOR THE TELEGRAPH
list of article image 2
Lions fly-half: who should get the nod?
George Fords cool or Johnny Sextons drive? Pick your fly-half  Read more 
Sponsored
Gordon Rayner, political editor 
6 MARCH 2017  9:30PM

Theresa May should scrap fixed-term parliaments and call an early general election, the former Tory leader Lord Hague says today, as a poll showed support for Jeremy Corbyn collapsing among Labour Party members.

Lord Hague warns that trouble is coming over the next two years as the Government tries to implement Brexit, and says the Prime Minister needs a bigger Commons majority to force through change.

The next general election is due to take place in May 2020, but Lord Hague argues in the Daily Telegraph that if the Fixed Term Parliaments Act did not exist, the case for an election this spring would have been very strong indeed.

That argument was strengthened on Monday by a YouGov opinion poll that found half of Labour Party members believe Jeremy Corbyn should step down as leader before the next election.

hague and may
William Hague pictured with Theresa May in 2015 CREDIT: GETTY
A total of 36 per cent of Labour Party members believe Mr Corbyn should quit immediately, with another 14 per cent saying he should resign before the country goes to the polls in three years time. An equivalent poll by the same company last year found that 63 per cent of members wanted him to fight the next election.

Mr Corbyn already lacks support among Labour MPs, but the YouGov poll is highly significant because it was Labour members who chose him as leader, and it is his backing from the membership which has, until now, deterred other potential leaders from challenging him.

ADVERTISING

If Mr Corbyns base erodes further, it could encourage a fresh attempt to replace him with a leader who could mount a stronger challenge to Mrs May in 2020.

Jeremy Corbyn
Jeremy Corbyn's popularity with Labour members is waning CREDIT: I-IMAGES
Lord Hague said Mr Corbyn was Labours least credible leader ever and had led his party to its worst condition since the 1930s.

The Conservatives historic by-election win in Copeland last month, when the Government became the first to gain a seat from an opposition party for 35 years, had already prompted calls from some Tory MPs for an early election, with at least two Cabinet ministers said to be in favour of one.

But fixed-term parliaments - introduced as a concession to the Liberal Democrats during the coalition government - can only be overridden by a Commons vote in which at least two-thirds of MPs back an early election, or by a vote of no confidence in the Government.

Lord Hague, the most senior Conservative figure to call publicly for an early election, suggests that with Labour MPs unlikely to back an early election, repealing the Fixed Term Parliaments Act is the only answer.

Theresa May at school
Theresa May, pictured visiting a school on Monday, does not favour an early election CREDIT: PA
He writes that while the Act was necessary to satisfy the LibDems and enable the formation of a coalition government, six years on the circumstances are very different, and it is time to question whether a fixed parliamentary term is in the interests of the country as we withdraw from the European Union.

He adds: We have a new Prime Minister and Cabinet facing the most complex challenges of modern times: Brexit negotiations, the Trump administration, the threat from Scottish nationalists, and many other issues.

There is no doubt that they would be in a stronger position to take the country through these challenges successfully if they had a large and decisive majority in the Commons and a new full term ahead of them.

Mrs May has made it clear to her Cabinet colleagues that she does not favour an early election, because she thinks it would be self-serving and create added uncertainty at a time when the country needs stability.

Lord Hague, however, argues that she would be doing the right thing for the country by calling an election, as a larger Commons majority would strengthen her hand during Brexit negotiations with the EU.



It would also be desirable when it comes to getting the final Brexit deal through Parliament. Any deal is bound to be full of compromises which one group or another in Parliament finds difficult to stomach, writes Lord Hague. As British law needs to be amended countless times to take account of leaving the EU treaties, the Government could face many close votes, concessions or defeats as it tries to implement Brexit.

That prospect will embolden the EU negotiators, and makes an agreement that is good for the UK harder to achieve. It could also lead to a situation where the Prime Minister faces a standoff with parliament over a deal that will have taken two years to negotiate and is nearly impossible to change.

Today the Government faces its second Parliamentary defeat on Brexit in the space of a week, when Lords vote on a proposed amendment to the Article 50 bill which would give the Commons a meaningful vote on the final Brexit deal before it is finalised.

Last week peers voted to amend the Bill to guarantee the rights of EU citizens living in the UK. The amendments are expected to be overturned in the Commons next week.


----------



## Isbister (10 March 2017)

Judgemental said:



			If Lord Hague says there should be a General Election, there is no argument..... better get on with it.....


...
		
Click to expand...

The Chancellor's tax-grab aimed at the self-employed is a classic example of biting the hand that feeds - something that, historically, the Labour party has always had a shrewder grasp of than the Conservatives, who are cavalier in their disregard for their core vote - first, the hunting community, and now white van man.

This folly suggests to me that Philip Hammond is not planning for a general election in the immediate future.


----------



## Judgemental (10 March 2017)

Isbister said:



			The Chancellor's tax-grab aimed at the self-employed is a classic example of biting the hand that feeds - something that, historically, the Labour party has always had a shrewder grasp of than the Conservatives, who are cavalier in their disregard for their core vote - first, the hunting community, and now white van man.

This folly suggests to me that Philip Hammond is not planning for a general election in the immediate future.
		
Click to expand...

Those were my thoughts too. Especially the question of not calling a General Election. 

That said, the tax issue is not due to kick in until April 2018 and clearly there is the Autumn Budget, where it can be watered down. Frankly it's neither here nor there in the great scheme of things, bearing in mind Labour had prior sight of the Chancellor's budget and did not mention the matter until the Conservative pheasants of the party, started squawking into their roosts. 

I was wondering if Spreadsheet Phil has been crafty by providing:

a) Some smoke to cover Mrs May's visit to Brussels
b) More smoke for the idiots in the House of Lords concerning BREXIT
c) Running an intentional 'heel line' to draw the pack off the idea of an Election when in fact, the Vixen is heading for that very earth.

I use the adjective vixen in the nicest possible way, because Mrs May is a lovely lady and damn clever with it. Indeed far cleverer than Lady Thatcher.     

My money is still for the calling of an election very shortly after Mrs May has written her Article 50 Letter.


----------



## fburton (10 March 2017)

Isbister said:



			The Chancellor's tax-grab aimed at the self-employed is a classic example of biting the hand that feeds - something that, historically, the Labour party has always had a shrewder grasp of than the Conservatives, who are cavalier in their disregard for their core vote - first, the hunting community, and now white van man.
		
Click to expand...

I thought only the better off self-employed would have to pay more NI, and half of those registered as self-employed, who earn less than £16,250, would be better off. Is that not correct?


----------



## ycbm (10 March 2017)

On a different track, I'm now worried if they don't call an election and get an overwhelming mandate for exit. I just found out that the recent law cases have come to the conclusion that although it's not specifically worded, if we fail to reach an agreement at the end of two years, we can stay in the EU. So is obvious what the Lords is trying to do -  get themselves two years to persuade MPs to vote against whatever deal is achieved, and keep us in. That's why this current battle with the Lords is so crucial.


----------



## Isbister (10 March 2017)

fburton said:



			I thought only the better off self-employed would have to pay more NI, and half of those registered as self-employed, who earn less than £16,250, would be better off. Is that not correct?
		
Click to expand...

It depends what you mean by 'better off', I would think it's well north of £16,250.



ycbm said:



			On a different track, I'm now worried if they don't call an election and get an overwhelming mandate for exit. I just found out that the recent law cases have come to the conclusion that although it's not specifically worded, if we fail to reach an agreement at the end of two years, we can stay in the EU. So is obvious what the Lords is trying to do -  get themselves two years to persuade MPs to vote against whatever deal is achieved, and keep us in. That's why this current battle with the Lords is so crucial.
		
Click to expand...

It's a worrying thought. At one point it was being reported that, once Article 50 is triggered, the process is irreversible. But apparently that is not the case. Clearly the Remainers are massing for a counter-attack.

See here: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...r-bettel-i-love-you-theresa-may-a7621091.html
http://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...ourg-PM-May-Global-Britain-Article-50-revoked


----------



## fburton (10 March 2017)

Isbister said:



			It depends what you mean by 'better off', I would think it's well north of £16,250.
		
Click to expand...

I meant that self employed people earning £16,250 or less would have paid less NI in the future under the proposed tax change - i.e. they would have more money left in their pocket. At least according to the Deloitte figures (https://interactive.guim.co.uk/uploader/embed/2017/03/nics-zip/giv-3902nUcaPmhCcENI/) they would. And if "around half of the 4.8 million workers registered as self-employed earn less than £13,000", that means that around half of the self-employed would have been taxed less - i.e. they wouldn't have experienced a tax-grab.

ETA: "If you're one of those families... you're just managing... I want to address you directly". Well, no help for the self-employed who are "just managing".


----------



## Isbister (10 March 2017)

fburton said:



			I meant that self employed people earning £16,250 or less would have paid less NI in the future under the proposed tax change - i.e. they would have more money left in their pocket. At least according to the Deloitte figures (https://interactive.guim.co.uk/uploader/embed/2017/03/nics-zip/giv-3902nUcaPmhCcENI/) they would. And if "around half of the 4.8 million workers registered as self-employed earn less than £13,000", that means that around half of the self-employed would have been taxed less - i.e. they wouldn't have experienced a tax-grab.

ETA: "If you're one of those families... you're just managing... I want to address you directly". Well, no help for the self-employed who are "just managing".
		
Click to expand...

That may be how the Treasury wish to spin it, but the other half will be worse off. 1% and then 2% in a year's time or so may not be too big a deal to make a fuss over but it's a worrying sign of the current direction of travel. I thought I had voted for a tax-cutting government, but it seems I was mistaken - tax is a bigger proportion of GDP now than it has been for over 20 years.


----------



## Judgemental (10 March 2017)

ycbm said:



			On a different track, I'm now worried if they don't call an election and get an overwhelming mandate for exit. I just found out that the recent law cases have come to the conclusion that although it's not specifically worded, if we fail to reach an agreement at the end of two years, we can stay in the EU. So is obvious what the Lords is trying to do -  get themselves two years to persuade MPs to vote against whatever deal is achieved, and keep us in. That's why this current battle with the Lords is so crucial.
		
Click to expand...

You are so correct. There needs to be a wholesale weeding out of the Lords.

Very few are proper gentry. I feel the days of hereditaries are over and there does seem to be a large number that are both moderate and modest having in general, a great deal to be modest about.


----------



## fburton (10 March 2017)

Isbister said:



			That may be how the Treasury wish to spin it, but the other half will be worse off. 1% and then 2% in a year's time or so may not be too big a deal to make a fuss over but it's a worrying sign of the current direction of travel. I thought I had voted for a tax-cutting government, but it seems I was mistaken - tax is a bigger proportion of GDP now than it has been for over 20 years.
		
Click to expand...

Oh yes, some will be worse off - that would have to be true for the govt to get more from the tax! Furthermore, not increasing NI appeared to be one of their election manifesto pledges - although they subsequently went on to explain, in typical politician style, that this wasn't referring to Class 4 NICS paid by the self-employed.


----------



## Judgemental (24 March 2017)

It would be a landslide of historic proportions.

The number of people particularly men who have said, "cometh the hour cometh the woman" is quite phenomenal.

We have one absolutely fantastic Prime Minister in Mrs May, who is a superb leader par excellence and who dare I say, eclipes the late Lady Thatcher in many ways. 

Steely quiet determination, home at Sonning-on-Thames (so so British) and does her own shopping personally in Waitrose.


----------



## Alec Swan (24 March 2017)

Judgemental said:



			&#8230;&#8230;..

We have one absolutely fantastic Prime Minister in Mrs May, who is a superb leader par excellence and who dare I say, eclipes the late Lady Thatcher in many ways. 

Steely quiet determination, home at Sonning-on-Thames (so so British) and does her own shopping personally in Waitrose.
		
Click to expand...

J_m old bean,  I've rumbled you,  you're simply winding others up,  aren't you?  

I suspect that history my have her as an exceptional leader,  but just how where she shops can have any influence,  I'm unsure. 

Alec.


----------



## Judgemental (25 March 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			J_m old bean,  I've rumbled you,  you're simply winding others up,  aren't you?  

I suspect that history my have her as an exceptional leader,  but just how where she shops can have any influence,  I'm unsure. 

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Not in the least Alec, I was merely pointing out we have a splendid leader and Mrs May embodies all that is good about the United Kingdom.

You have omitted "cometh the hour cometh the woman".

Waitrose, Sonning-on-Thames and Churchillian attributes, are indicative of values that cements our society.

In the event a General Election were called, many millions would feel comfortable with Mrs May and identify with her simple but so British lifestyle.

In all the circumstances what is wanted in Britishness.

When Mrs May signs off Article 50 on Wednesday March 29, she will be expressing the above to a greater or lesser extent. We are British. Foreigners will be tolerated but only so long as they respect the United Kingdom and all our ways.


----------



## Judgemental (18 April 2017)

I am sure that folk will not mind my saying, I TOLD YOU SO.

By 1 October 2017, The Hunting Act 2004 will be repealed.


----------



## Isbister (18 April 2017)

Judgemental said:



			I am sure that folk will not mind my saying, I TOLD YOU SO.

By 1 October 2017, The Hunting Act 2004 will be repealed.
		
Click to expand...


Yes you did. Personally I think it's a mistake - there could be some nasty 'what-ifs'.

I'm afraid, even assuming a Conservative landslide, repeal would probably be impossible in that timescale even with an explicit manifesto pledge, which I don't think is likely.


----------



## Judgemental (18 April 2017)

Isbister said:



			Yes you did. Personally I think it's a mistake - there could be some nasty 'what-ifs'.

I'm afraid, even assuming a Conservative landslide, repeal would probably be impossible in that timescale even with an explicit manifesto pledge, which I don't think is likely.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you Isbister.

Clearly Mrs May is thoroughly ticked off with the House of Lords.

They will have to comply with repeal otherwise they will be toast by the New year, especially the hereditaries. 

In other words they will be given an opportunity to redeem themselves via repeal of the Hunting Act.

It's all extremely complex and indicative of the complexities, that caused me to nail my Early General Election colours to the mast.

BTW in my 4th post in this thread on 6 November 2016 I said:

"Come on Countryman, you and I both know what the arrangements are and that in a new Parliament, the SNP are going to be wholly emasculated and will have no say in repeal of the Hunting Act 2004".

In other words Mrs May's other bete noir, Nicola Sturgeon will be finished. I confidently the SNP will lose at least 20 seats.


----------



## hairycob (18 April 2017)

I think you will find that the government has no time to waste on something like hunting that only a small minority even think about let alone like. There are far, far bigger fish to fry and any government that wastes time on issues like this will lose a lot of votes forever. Some who hunt may well be Tory stalwarts but they are a small proportion of that group and a teeny weeny proportion of the total voting population. I know a good few people who hunt and doubt whether any of them would be swayed on that issue alone.


----------



## Tiddlypom (18 April 2017)

Judgemental said:



			I am sure that folk will not mind my saying, I TOLD YOU SO.

By 1 October 2017, The Hunting Act 2004 will be repealed.
		
Click to expand...

Not a chance.


----------



## Isbister (18 April 2017)

To argue that repeal of the Hunting Act plays any part, or ever will, in the government's thinking at the present time seems to me to be getting things a little out of perspective.

I'm happy to take Theresa May at her word on this occasion - the GE is all about Brexit and ensuring the government will have solid support for what seem likely to be some difficult negotiations.

Repeal of the Hunting Act is no more than a little side-show at the moment.


----------



## Judgemental (18 April 2017)

Isbister said:



			To argue that repeal of the Hunting Act plays any part, or ever will, in the government's thinking at the present time seems to me to be getting things a little out of perspective.

I'm happy to take Theresa May at her word on this occasion - the GE is all about Brexit and ensuring the government will have solid support for what seem likely to be some difficult negotiations.

Repeal of the Hunting Act is no more than a little side-show at the moment.
		
Click to expand...

Yes, you have a reasonable point in the great scheme of things but it is symbolic and totemic for many Conservatives.

Assuming the Conservatives win the election, then Repeal of the Hunting Act 2004 is a MANDATORY COLLATERAL BONUS.

Because my MP expects me to put up his signage and boards on our land bordered by roads. I am always being asked for donations.

If a vote to repeal is placed before Parliament and it is successful, my generosity along with many others, will  know no bounds, along with all those who give up a considerable amount of time to canvass. 

On the other hand...........no vote, no success, no money.


----------



## Goldenstar (18 April 2017)

It's only totemic for a tiny minority of conservatives I am with TP not a chance of repeal ATM .
I would like to be wrong of course .


----------



## Isbister (18 April 2017)

Judgemental said:



			...

Because my MP expects me to put up his signage and boards on our land bordered by roads. I am always being asked for donations.

...
		
Click to expand...

Your MP seems to expect a lot from you. You are in a strong position to extract a definite commitment from this MP. Lay down the law. That is the only way you will get your collateral bonus.

However, this election will still be about one thing only, Brexit. This may seem like a golden opportunity to completely crush and destroy Labour, but regardless of how low they are in the polling at present, there are still many seats where their majority is so massive that they may never be defeated. I see the GE as a finely calculated risk.

The SNP stand only to lose, which is good.


----------



## Judgemental (18 April 2017)

Isbister said:



			However, this election will still be about one thing only, Brexit.
		
Click to expand...

Don't forget the issues of North Korea and the US might have whacked them with a nuke and we are in support.

Nothing like a war to strengthen the Conservative party.


----------



## Isbister (18 April 2017)

Judgemental said:



			Don't forget the issues of North Korea and the US might have whacked them with a nuke and we are in support.

Nothing like a war to strengthen the Conservative party.
		
Click to expand...

Let's not wish for a nuclear war just to win the next election...


----------



## Judgemental (19 April 2017)

Isbister said:



			Let's not wish for a nuclear war just to win the next election...
		
Click to expand...

No 'wishing' but from a political standpoint, it may have been factored into Mrs May's thinking.

The Donald tells her everything.


----------



## Alec Swan (19 April 2017)

Despite the fact that most on here hold Ms Sturgeon and the SNP in poor regard,  we need to be careful.  We need to separate our dislike of the woman from our affection for Scotland and it's peoples.  Whilst delighting in her almost inevitable failure,  we need to bear in mind that it's the Scots who may well end up bearing the brunt of our glee and that's a step which we should have no truck with.

Alec.


----------



## Judgemental (19 April 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			Despite the fact that most on here hold Ms Sturgeon and the SNP in poor regard,  we need to be careful.  We need to separate our dislike of the woman from our affection for Scotland and it's peoples.  Whilst delighting in her almost inevitable failure,  we need to bear in mind that it's the Scots who may well end up bearing the brunt of our glee and that's a step which we should have no truck with.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Alec frankly the SNP are akin to SABOTEURS and we all know what that means on this particular website. 

I feel the good and right thinking people of Scotland should be doing more to muzzle Ms Sturgeon and her vain glorious posturing.


----------



## JDee (19 April 2017)

Tempting though it might be, wishing people to fail so that we can gloat and say "I told you so" is rather like shooting yourself in the foot. If the ship sinks then we'll either go down with it or hope that we can find a lifeboat to cling too until something better comes along.
Difficult times.


----------

