The now-enacted will of (some of) the people

[a m ole]

39 minutes ago, snowychap said:

[Chindie]

Odds on frantic stories of No Deal planning coming back in mid June/October?

£4bn spent on it to date. As a threat to the country.

Beneath contempt.

[snowychap]

[bickster]

7 minutes ago, snowychap said:

Typical Cabinet Meeting

[ml1dch]

Who could fail to be cheered by such a thing:

 

[snowychap]

On 09/04/2019 at 21:18, ml1dch said:

A question: 

The final legislative session of the current European parliament is April 18th.

The withdrawal agreement cannot be incorporated into EU law without the agreement of the European parliament. 

What happens if the withdrawal agreement is passed by the UK parliament after the final sitting of this European parliament? When does that necessary vote happen?

From Hansard today:

Quote

Martin Whitfield (East Lothian) (Lab)

The deal will require ratification by the European Parliament. The current European Parliament will sit for the last time a week from today, and then after the elections it will meet just once in July to sort itself out. It will not really meet properly until October or November. Is an earlier leaving date not actually an impossibility, because the deal cannot be ratified?

The Prime Minister

No, it is not an impossibility. It is possible for the European Parliament to ratify in advance of the United Kingdom ratifying.

If it isn't ratified in advance by them, i.e. by next Thursday, then isn't she saying that it is an impossibility?

[bickster]

8 minutes ago, snowychap said:

It is possible for the European Parliament to ratify in advance of the United Kingdom ratifying.

Does she realise the implications of that? If they ratified before we did then that definitely only gives three ultimate options. Her WA, No Withdrawal Agreement or Sack it off. Given the mood of both the country and parliament that surely makes it a straight fight between No Deal and Remain?

[ml1dch]

31 minutes ago, snowychap said:

From Hansard today:

If it isn't ratified in advance by them, i.e. by next Thursday, then isn't she saying that it is an impossibility?

Thanks. Me and Martin Whitfield from East Lothian - it's like one mind.

Looks like either this should (a) be a bigger problem than is being broadly reported or more likely (b) everyone on all sides just realises that given the problem is contingent on the withdrawal agreement passing here, they might as well be worrying about too many fish falling out of the sky.

Edited April 11, 2019 by ml1dch

[chrisp65]

2 hours ago, Davkaus said:

I can't wait until she's kicked out of office, she has absolutely no shame. 

be careful what you wish for

 

[NurembergVillan]

16 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

Thanks. Me and Martin Whitfield from East Lothian - it's like one mind.

Looks like either this should (a) be a bigger problem than is being broadly reported or more likely (b) everyone on all sides just realises that given the problem is contingent on the withdrawal agreement passing here, they might as well be worrying about too many fish falling out of the sky.

[peterms]

17 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

Thanks. Me and Martin Whitfield from East Lothian - it's like one mind.

Looks like either this should (a) be a bigger problem than is being broadly reported or more likely (b) everyone on all sides just realises that given the problem is contingent on the withdrawal agreement passing here, they might as well be worrying about too many fish falling out of the sky.

This seems to assume that they would prefer to stick to previously agreed dates for recall, and refuse to have an extra meeting, than have an extra session to sort out an important issue.

That seems very unlikely.

[Seat68]

10 hours ago, snowychap said:

Sat with her mates.

[peterms]

 

[bickster]

This aged well then

 

[wazzap24]

 

 

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

The problem with Nigel Farage is that IMO,  the more people ridicule him stronger he will get.  Plays too the plucky underdog vs the Establishment image.  He is a dangerous and quite a clever bloke to be fair and should not be underestimated in the damage he is capable of.

[StefanAVFC]

 

[bickster]

Quote

Ukip has been ordered to fully reveal details of how it used nearly £300,000 of political data services in the run-up to the Brexit vote and the 2015 general election after the party lost a two-year legal battle to block disclosure.

An appeals tribunal found the political party, led at the time by Nigel Farage, failed to properly answer the information commissioner’s questions. It is now legally obliged to provide detailed answers to questions about how it spent political donations and used polling companies and data.

The ruling is the latest watchdog finding to cast a shadow over the 2016 EU referendum and to raise concerns about the use of political and social media data.

Last year the Electoral Commission found both the official Vote Leave campaign – in which Boris Johnson and Michael Gove played key roles – and the unofficial Leave.EU campaign guilty of breaking electoral law. The commission fined both campaigns and referred its findings to the police.

When the investigation opened in 2017, the information commissioner, Elizabeth Denham, said more than 30 organisations were under scrutiny. While some were cooperating, she said, “others are making it difficult.”

In the latest ruling, Judge Nicholas Wikeley criticised Ukip’s failure to cooperate with the ICO, saying: “Its answers arrived late and were brief and unsatisfactory, not least in being inconsistent with publicly available information previously supplied by Ukip itself. Overall, Ukip’s response gave the commissioner the clear impression that the party was not taking the request seriously.”

When the commissioner first wrote to Ukip, the party replied: “It turns out we hardly use data at all.”

It specifically denied using the services of Constituency Polling Ltd, which is linked to polling firm Survation, even though the Electoral Commission’s register showed that Ukip spent £186,613.13 with the company during the 2015 general election.

Ukip also later admitted in further correspondence to the data commissioner: “In the past we have used targeted ad [sic] on Facebook during the referendum and we have used the boost service for our ads. We have not granulated data any further than that.”

The commissioner has found that many political parties bought marketing lists and lifestyle information from data brokers “without sufficient due diligence” as to their activities. They also used third-party data analytics companies without checking if users had given consent for their personal information to be passed on and used for political purposes.

Ukip was specifically asked about its links to another organisation called NationBuilder, an online campaigning platform which the ICO said was used by up to 200 political parties or campaign groups during the 2017 general election. NationBuilder has a “match function” allowing parties to match their own databases with social media data from public profiles, which the regulator said could be happening without the people affected knowing. NationBuilder said the match function was optional and could be switched off by its clients.

In its appeal, Ukip argued the information commissioner did not have the power to make such demands on it. It also said it was “a relatively small, modestly funded organisation with largely part-time staff. Ukip does not have great resources and does the best it can with what it has.”

Ukip said: “This case concerned an information notice served on Ukip, which was unclear in its scope. As there were no existing legal authorities on how information notices should be interpreted, Ukip chose to appeal it. This judgment is the final determination in that matter and Ukip has since supplied the information required of it to the ICO.”

2

Guardian

 

[wazzap24]

On 13/04/2019 at 10:06, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

The problem with Nigel Farage is that IMO,  the more people ridicule him stronger he will get.  Plays too the plucky underdog vs the Establishment image.  He is a dangerous and quite a clever bloke to be fair and should not be underestimated in the damage he is capable of.

I sort of do and don’t agree with that. 

You have to ridicule him because he is completely ridiculous, but I can see where you are coming from. 

For my money - the ‘led by donkey’s’  guys on Twitter have it right. They are ridiculing him (and others), but doing it using their own words against them. You have to assassinate their character using facts and their own lies IMO. Admittedly, the video I posted did not take this approach, but it was still funny! 

Same with leave voters. You can’t call them all stupid and racist because they aren’t, but as Will Self rightly pointed out in that hilarious exchange with Mark Francois - all of the stupid racist people did vote for it, so how do you separate them? 

You can reason with some leavers, but the ‘lEt’S gO wTo’ moron’s are generally, Stephen Yaxley Little legs supporting bunch of absolute scum bags who won’t listen to facts or reason, so what do you do? 

[bickster]

On 13/04/2019 at 10:06, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

The problem with Nigel Farage is that IMO,  the more people ridicule him stronger he will get.  Plays too the plucky underdog vs the Establishment image.  He is a dangerous and quite a clever bloke to be fair and should not be underestimated in the damage he is capable of.

The other things to consider here are:

• that he can only get stronger to a certain level, I doubt that will ever be more than about 15% of the population. Remember, he's failed to become an MP no less than 7 times, even during "Peak UKIP"
• the stronger he gets, the weaker the Tories get (Evidence of this in today's polls even)