#ALSO THE FACT THAT MICHAEL GOVE IS THE ONE GETTING THIS GROUP TOGETHER?!!!

[gayforcarstairsgirls]

This is literally like watching a political drama unfolding before our eyes oh my god

[whyintheworldblog-blog]

2019 Tory Leadership Election

One of these men will be the next Prime Minister. Sadly, they are all men but information is necessary to understand what they stand for individually and where they came from. 

Starting with Jeremy Hunt (top left) he actually campaigned to remain in the 2016 EU referendum but has since supposedly reinvented himself into a Brexiteer. However, he does acknowledge that it would be ‘political suicide’ to leave the European Union in October without a deal. This in my opinion suggests that he isn’t as invested in leaving the European Union as he may claim. This could be an attempt to keep both sides of the fence happy, as he is already seen as a traitor by Remainers. If he has easily given up what he supposedly believed in in the 2016 Referendum how can party members believe he is being genuine now with his deflection to Leave. Furthermore, he is seen as quite a controversial cabinet member after his long running post as health secretary. Throughout his office position he was involved in various changes, most which were quite controversial resulting in a number of walk outs in 2015 by junior doctors. This therefore makes him a risky candidate however, with 43 votes in the first round he is the second favourite. 

Moving on from Hunt, we come onto the party favourite Boris Johnson. He has been a leading Brexiteer since the Referendum campaign in 2016 so much so that he quit as foreign secretary over his displeasure of Theresa May’s deal. This favour of leaving the EU has been reflected in his attitude towards a deal. He is very much under the view that on the 31st of October, the UK should leave the EU ‘deal or no deal’. He is widely popular throughout the party which is reflected in his proportion of the votes (114). Since the first vote, Matt Hancock has withdrawn from the race, and has since put his faith in Boris, BBC journalist Laura Kuenssberg explains this. She suggests that Hancock knows that Johnson will be Prime Minister and therefore wants to keep a comfy cabinet position which is always easier to gain when you support the front runner. She goes onto explain what most already know, the fact that the Conservative party is a boys club and they all link up when its necessary. Laura highlights how some MPs who are concerned about what Johnson would do if he got into office have aligned themselves to him to ensure that he doesn’t go too far right. This is emulated in the recent move of the Evening Standard to become much friendlier towards the prospective leader. Could this have something to do with it’s editor the previous chancellor, George Osborne. Perhaps Johnson understands that in order to get the position he is vying for he needs the support of middle ground members of the party and not just the hard Brexiteers. Johnson is an enigma of a man, not due to his complexities, more due to the fact he is always acting like a buffoon. Does he do this to appear more likeable, more down to earth because it does not work. Why on earth would someone think a man, who constantly speaks about people from different backgrounds or of different cultures being below him, be a good candidate for Prime Minister? It baffles me. 

Thirdly, Michael Gove who led the vote leave campaign in 2016 will most likely be remembered for foiling Johnson’s leadership plans in 2016 when David Cameron stepped down. His backstabbing of his supposed friend not only ruined Johnson’s chances of being Prime Minister but also his own. He is most notable in the cabinet for being Education Secretary in which he had many issues including a clash with teachers and unions which made him very unpopular with the wider public. Most recently, he has announced that 20 years ago he used cocaine in a social situation which has had many people calling him a hypocrite due to his view on drug control and punishment. The issue i have with this is that he is in the very fortunate position that he has no concern about the cost of his mistake. However, it is important to note that he had banned teachers for possesion of drugs whilst being the education secretary. When he announced his leadership run most journalists were curious as to why he feels he should be allowed to run when having admitted to drug use. This i feel is sort of irrelevant, i do not feel the issue should be ignored however, these teachers were banned because they had drugs on their person whilst being in the teaching profession, not 20 years before they took up the role. I do not feel these two things can be compared. Nevertheless, in the first round of votes, Gove got 37 votes. 

The last three are more unknown than the other candidates starting with Rory Stewart who only got his first cabinet position in May this year (2019). He has been clear with highlighting that he was a remainer but is supposedly only interested in bringing the country together and creating unity. In recent days he has been questioned regarding his links to MI6 because some party members are concerned that his campaign may actually have the momentum to take on Boris Johnson. It appears that Sajid Javid is concerned as he thought it was necessary to suggest that the final two candidates should have differing backgrounds, highlighting this because Stewart, went to Eton like Johnson. It is clear that not everyone is buying into the fact that Stewart is going to deliver Brexit with Gove also weighing in on the debate suggesting that the final two candidates should not be so different that they polarise the party. These just seem like a grab at straws because they are concerned that this relatively new cabinet minister could take the leadership out from under them. However, you do have to question how genuine the candidate is if they have always previously been a remainer. 

Dominic Raab has a similar standpoint to Johnson that Brexit must happen again ‘deal or no deal’. However, he has gone further suggesting that he would not rule out shutting down Parliament if that was the only way to get Brexit over and done with. He was sacked as Justice Minister in 2015 by Theresa May but in July 2018 secured a position as Brexit Secretary, which he resigned from months later because he couldn’t support May’s deal. He gained 27 votes in the first round. 

Finally, Sajid Javid who is currently the Home Secretary. He backed a remain vote but claimed that he didn’t do it wholeheartedly. He claims to have been a Eurosceptic all along. Again, this has the same issues as other candidates, is he just saying all this because he wants to be Prime Minister? I mean in reality how do you ever know if a politician is being genuine, it’s literally their job to lie most of the time. He was a successful investment banker before becoming a politician. He was also a second generation migrant who went to a public school. He had 23 votes in the first round. 

There is a debate on BBC 1 tonight at 8pm where all the candidates will be involved. Whether this will shed any light on who is a better candidate for the role or not is yet to be seen. It seems that there is not that much difference between any of the candidates, they are all middle aged men after all. As a young woman fiercely interested in politics however, not a Conservative supporter it is still disheartening to see no women get through the first stage of the election. I hope in the future there will be representatives of varying nationalities, genders and age groups to attempt to bring together a country that at the moment couldn’t be more divided.

[scifigeneration]

Aliens, very strange universes and Brexit – Martin Rees Q&A

by Martin Rees

Martin Rees is Emeritus Professor of Cosmology and Astrophysics, at the University of Cambridge, the Astronomer Royal, a member of Britain’s House of Lords, and a former President of the Royal Society. The following interview was conducted at Trinity College, Cambridge, by The Conversation’s Matt Warren.

Into space

Q: How big is the universe … and is it the only one?

Our cosmic horizons have grown enormously over the last century, but there is a definite limit to the size of the observable universe. It contains all the things from which light has been able to reach us since the Big Bang, about 14 billion years ago. But the new realisation is that the observable universe may not be all of reality. There may be more beyond the horizon, just as there’s more beyond the horizon when you’re observing the ocean from a boat.

What’s more, the galaxies are likely to go on and on beyond this horizon, but more interestingly, there is a possibility that our Big Bang was not the only one. There may have been others, spawning other universes, disconnected from ours and therefore not observable, and possibly even governed by different physical laws. Physical reality on this vast scale could therefore be much more varied and interesting than what we can observe.

Plenty more over the horizon. Shutterstock

The universe we can observe is governed by the same laws everywhere. We can observe a distant galaxy and see that the atoms emitting the light are just the same as the ones in the lab. But there may be physical domains that are governed by completely different laws. Some may have no gravity, or not allow for nuclear physics. Ours may not even be a typical domain.

Even in our own universe, there are only so many ways you can assemble the same atoms, so if it is large enough it is possible that there is another Earth, even another avatar you. If this were the case, however, the universe would have to be bigger than the observable one by a number which to write down would require all the atoms in the universe. Rest assured, if there’s another you, they are a very, very long way away. They might even be making the same mistakes.

Q: So how likely is alien life in this vast expanse?

We know now that planets exist around many, even most, stars. We know that in our Milky Way galaxy there are likely millions of planets that are in many ways like the Earth, with liquid water. The question then is whether life has developed on them – and we can’t yet answer that.

Although we know how via Darwinian selection a complex biosphere evolved on Earth around 4 billion years ago, we don’t yet understand the actual origin of life – the transition from complex chemistry to the first metabolising, replicating structures. The good news is that we will have a better idea of how that happened within the next ten or 20 years and crucially, how likely it was to happen. This will give us a better understanding of how likely it is to happen elsewhere. In that time, we will also have technologies that will allow us to better search for alien life.

Intelligence has an uncertain future. Shutterstock

But just because there’s life elsewhere doesn’t mean that there is intelligent life. My guess is that if we do detect an alien intelligence, it will be nothing like us. It will be some sort of electronic entity.

If we look at our history on Earth, it has taken about 4 billion years to get from the first protozoa to our current, technological civilisation. But if we look into the future, then it’s quite likely that within a few centuries, machines will have taken over – and they will then have billions of years ahead of them.

In other words, the period of time occupied by organic intelligence is just a thin sliver between early life and the long era of the machines. Because such civilisations would develop at different rates, it’s extremely unlikely that we will find intelligent life at the same stage of development as us. More likely, that life will still be either far simpler, or an already fully electronic intelligence.

On intelligence

Q: Do you believe that machines will develop intelligence?

There are many people who would bet on it. The second question, however, is whether that necessarily implies consciousness – or whether that is limited to the wet intelligence we have within our skulls. Most people, however, would argue that it is an emergent property and could develop in a machine mind.

Q: So if the universe is populated by electronic super minds, what questions will they be pondering?

We can’t conceive that any more than a chimp can guess the things that we spend our time thinking about. I would guess, however, that these minds aren’t on planets. While we depend on a planet and an atmosphere, these entities would be happy in zero G, floating freely in space. This might make them even harder to detect.

Q: How would humanity respond to the discovery of alien life?

It would certainly make the universe more interesting, but it would also make us less unique. The question is whether it would provoke in us any sense of cosmic modesty. Conversely, if all our searches for life fail, we’d know more certainly that this small planet really is the one special place, the single pale, blue dot where life has emerged. That would make what happens to it not just of global significance, but an issue of galactic importance, too.

And we are likely to be fixed to this world. We will be able to look deeper and deeper into space, but travelling to worlds beyond our solar system will be a post-human enterprise. The journey times are just too great for mortal minds and bodies. If you’re immortal, however, these distances become far less daunting. That journey will be made by robots, not us.

Q: What scientific advances would you like to see over the coming century?

Cheap, clean energy, for one. Artificial meat is another. But the idea is often easier than the application. I like to tell my students the story of two beavers standing in front of a huge hydroelectric dam. “Did you build that?” asks one. “No,” says the other. “But it is based on my idea”. That’s the essential balance between scientific insight and engineering development.

On expertise

Q: Michael Gove [the British politician who was a leader of the campaign for the UK to leave the EU] said people have had enough of experts. Have they?

I wouldn’t expect anything more from Mr Gove, but there is clearly a role for experts. If we’re sick, we go to a doctor, we don’t look randomly on the internet. But we must also realise that most experts only have expertise within their own area, and if we are scientists we should accept that. When science impacts on public policy, there will be elements of economics, ethics and politics where we as scientists speak only as laymen. We need to know where the demarcation line is between where we are experts and where we are just citizens.

If you want to influence public policy as a scientist, there are two ways to do it. You can aspire to be an adviser within government, which can be very frustrating. Or you can try and influence policy indirectly. Politicians are very much driven by what’s in their inbox and what’s in the press, so the scientists with the greatest influence are those who go public, and speak to everyday people. If an idea is picked up by voters, the politicians won’t ignore it.

Q: Brexit – good or bad?

I am surprised to find myself agreeing with Lord Heseltine [former UK Conservative government minister] and Tony Blair [former Labour prime minister], but it is a real disaster, which we have stumbled into. There is a lot of blame to be shared around, by Boris Johnson et al, but also by Jeremy Corbyn [leader of the UK Labour party] for not fighting his corner properly. I have been a member of the Labour Party for a very long time, but I feel badly let down by Corbyn – especially as Labour voters supported Remain two to one. He has been an ineffective leader, and also ambivalent on this issue. A different leader, making a vocal case for Remain, could have tilted the vote.

On the other side, Boris Johnson [now UK foreign secretary – who campaigned for Britain to leave the EU] has been most reprehensible. At least Gove has opinions, which he has long expressed. Boris Johnson had no strong opinions, and the honourable thing to do if that is the case is to remain quiet. But he changed his stance opportunistically (as in the Eton debating society) and swung the vote.

Boris Johnson: ‘reprehensible’. Shutterstock

Q: But why is it such a disaster?

My concerns are broad geopolitical ones. In the world as it is now, with America becoming isolationist and an increasingly dominant Russia, for Europe to establish itself as a united and powerful counterweight is more important than ever. We are jeopardising something that has held Europe together, in peace, for 60 years, and could also break up the United Kingdom in the process. We will be remembered for that and it is something to deplore.

One thing astronomers bring to the table is an awareness that we have a long potential future, as well as the universe’s long past – and that this future could be jeopardised by what happens in the coming decades.

Q: More broadly, how much danger is the human race in?

I have spent a lot of time considering how we as a species can make it into the next century – and there are two main classes of problems. First, the collective impact of humanity as its footprint on the planet increases due to a growing population more demanding of resources. Second, the possible misuse by error or design of ever more powerful technology – and most worryingly, bio-tech.

There is certainly a high chance of a major global setback this century, most likely from the second threat, which increasingly allows individual groups to have a global impact. Added to this is the fact that the world is increasingly connected, so anything that happens has a global resonance. This is something new and actually makes us more vulnerable as a species than at any time in our past.

Q: So terrorism will pose an even greater threat in the coming century?

Yes, because of these technologies, terrorists or fanatics will be able to have a greater impact. But there’s also the simple danger of these technologies being misused. Engineering or changing viruses, for example, can be used in benign ways – to eradicate Zika, for example – but there’s obviously a risk that such things can get out of control.

Bio-tech: one of the great threats. Shutterstock

Nuclear requires large, conspicuous and heavily-protected facilities. But the facilities needed for bio-tech, for example, are small-scale, widely understood, widely available and dual use. It is going to be very hard indeed properly to regulate it.

In the short and intermediate term, this is even more worrying than the risks posed by climate change – although in the long term, that will be a very major problem, especially as both people and politicians find it very difficult to focus on things further down the line.

I have been very involved in campaigns to get all countries involved in research and development into alternative, clean energy sources. Making them available and cheap is the only way we are going to move towards a low carbon future. The level of money invested in this form of research should be equivalent to the amount spent on health or defence, and nuclear fusion and fourth generation nuclear fission should be part of that.

Q: In the medieval world, people would start building cathedrals that only later generations would finish. Have we lost that long-term perspective?

That’s right. In fact, one very important input behind the political discussion prior to the Paris climate agreement was the 2015 Papal Encyclical. I’m a council member of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, which helped to initiate the scientific meetings which were important in ensuring that the encyclical was a highly respected document. Whatever one thinks of the Catholic church, one cannot deny its long-term vision, its global range and its concern for the world’s poor. I believe that the encyclical, six months before the Paris conference, had a big impact on the leaders and people in South America, Africa and Asia. Religion clearly still has a very important role to play in the world.

Q: Have you ever encountered anything in the cosmos that has made you wonder whether a creator was behind it?

No. Personally, I don’t have any religious beliefs. But I describe myself as a cultural Christian, in that I was brought up in England and the English church was an important part of that. Then again, if I had been born in Iran, I’d probably go to the mosque.

Martin Rees is Emeritus Professor of Cosmology and Astrophysics at the University of Cambridge.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. 

[mellowfestbanana]

FILE PHOTO: The wording on a slogan is changed after letters fell away from the backdrop as Britain’s Prime Minister Theresa May addresses the Conservative Party conference in Manchester, Britain, October 4, 2017. REUTERS/Phil Noble/File Photo

Boris Johnson would hand Britain’s richest people a vast income tax cut while Michael Gove is fading fast over his cocaine “hypocrisy”. Here are the 5 things you need to know this Monday morning.

160,000 Tory members and just over 300 MPs will decide the next PM (Image: Matt Crossick)

After months of phony war the Tory leadership election officially begins today.

Nominations open at 10am and close at 5pm – with the first knockout round of voting by Tory MPs this Thursday. Anyone without 8 backers must drop out tonight, and without 16 backers, this Thursday.

The contest runs until the end of July and the winner will be Prime Minister of the United Kingdom – decided between a final two by 160,000 Tory members.

Remainers Jeremy Hunt and Matt Hancock and Brexiteer Dominic Raab are all holding launch events this morning.

Michael Gove – whose bid is in crisis over his admission he used cocaine – is hosting a launch this afternoon.

The candidates have unleashed a flurry of policy announcements. Mr Gove said he would replace VATwith a “lower, simpler sales tax” once we have left the EU.

Matt Hancock today pledges to raise the minimum wage for under-25s to £10.21 an hour by 2022. He would also reportedly introduce an insurance system to solve the problem of social care.

Sam Gyimah said he would eliminate stamp duty on all homes worth less than £1million.

But then there’s Boris…

READ MORE

Kevin Maguire: Give us a chance to vote these coke-snorting Tories out

2. Boris Johnson is handing Britain’s richest people an outrageous £6,000-a-year tax cut

Boris Johnson is planning to spend an absolute fortune on the rich (Image: PA Archive/PA Images)

Boris Johnson has unveiled plans to raise the 40p income tax threshold in a massive tax cut for Britain’s richest people – including himself and all his MP mates.

Under current plans people start paying 40p tax, not 20p, on every pound they earn beyond £50,000 a year.

Tories gave this same elite a huge tax cut just three years ago, raising the threshold from £42,385.

Yet if Boris Johnson becomes Prime Minister they will now go much further and raise it to £80,000.

Anyone earning over that sum would save £6,000 in income tax every year.

It is thought the actual benefit would be smaller as it’d be funded partly by hiking national insurance contributions.

But it’s literally a boost for the 12% – the proportion of UK taxpayers who earned £50,000 or more in 2016/17.

And in reality fewer than 12% of Brits will benefit because millions earn too little to pay income tax. The average income is just £28,400 a year.

The £9.6billion-a-year pledge has raised furious questions about the millionaire Tory’s priorities after he pledged just £48.6million to help struggling schools.

Among the biggest winners will be MPs – who with a wage of £79,468 will creep in just under the threshold.

Tory MP Nicky Morgan demanded: “Why is this a priority?”

Furious Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said: “The Tory leadership race is degenerating into a race to the bottom in tax cuts.

“When there are 4.5 million children in poverty, 1 million elderly in severe poverty, schools’ budgets & our police service stretched to breaking point, this the Tory priority.”

Mr Johnson, who also called for a cut to corporation tax, claimed the move would help people who’ve been caught in the 40p rate by “fiscal drag”.

3. Jeremy Hunt has won a key Tory’s backing – despite a furious abortion row

JEREMY HUNT SAYS HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE LEGAL TIME LIMIT ON ABORTIONS REDUCED FROM 24 WEEKS TO 12

Jeremy Hunt has won a major backer in his race to be Prime Minister despite a furious row over abortion.

Amber Rudd, who leads the ‘One Nation’ group of Tories, backed the Foreign Secretary today saying he’s “risen above playground politics” and can “bring all wings of the party together”.

With Michael Gove’s campaign faltering it ramps up Mr Hunt’s chances of getting to the final two and fighting against Boris Johnson for No10.

But it comes hours after Mr Hunt confirmed he backs slashing the abortion time limit from 24 weeks’ pregnancy to 12.

He said “it won’t be Government policy to change the law” – but the British Pregnancy Advisory Service warned it will force young women to become “mothers against their will”.

READ MORE

Jeremy Hunt wants the abortion time limit reduced from 24 to 12 weeks

Amber Rudd squirmed over her backing for the anti-abortion-rights candidate (Image: AFP/Getty Images)

“You don’t think women should be trusted to make their own decisions about their own bodies and what is best for themselves and their families. But we do,” the campaign group said.

The Lib Dems branded the decision “alarming” and Labour MP Helen Goodman said it would rule out a legal route to abortion as amniocentesis results only come after 12 weeks.

Squirming Ms Rudd – the UK’s former minister for women and equalities – was forced today to insist “this government will always protect women’s rights”.

Saying it was his “personal private” opinion she added: “I have spoken to Jeremy and there will be no change to abortion law if and when he becomes Prime Minister.”

4. The Stop ‘magic beans’ Boris campaign is ramping up

“It is not enough to be told to shut your eyes, cross your fingers, pick up some magic beans and believe in Britain” (Image: Daily Mirror)

Furious Tories attacked Boris Johnson as unfit for the job as he looks set to reach the final two candidates for PM.

Steven Norris, who was the Conservative candidate for London Mayor in 2000 and 2004, told the BBC the former mayor doesn’t even read his paperwork properly.

He “doesn’t read the official papers terribly well, he didn’t do it when he was in City Hall,” Mr Norris said.

“He relied heavily on a group of colleagues who actually ran City Hall.

“I just don’t think he’s got the seriousness and the bottom to do the job.”

Despite being in talks over a possible ‘Bamber’ joint ticket just weeks ago, Amber Rudd today savaged Mr Johnson as a man who wants to enact Brexit with ‘magic beans’.

She wrote in The Times: “It is not enough to be told to shut your eyes, cross your fingers, pick up some magic beans and believe in Britain.

“We need a skilled negotiator and deal-maker, not an instruction for more optimism.

“These are serious times. They require a serious leader who will be listened to in Brussels.”

5. Michael Gove is treading a thin line

He took the thin white line – but thanks to class and race, avoided the thin blue line (Image: REUTERS)

Michael Gove is facing mounting calls to pull out of the Tory leadership race after he admitted taking cocaine.

The Environment Secretary acknowledged he was “fortunate” not to have gone to prison after taking the class A drug on several occasions around 20 years ago.

Former Tory chairwoman Baroness Warsi said it was “completely inappropriate” for him to remain in the contest to be the next prime minister.

Lady Warsi said: “This case isn’t just about drug taking, it is about trust, it is about hypocrisy of the highest order and it cannot be that we have somebody who is now mired in this issue of trust and hypocrisy feel that it is still appropriate for him to stand as leader of the Conservative Party and a prime minister of this country.”

The former CPS solicitor told Channel 4 News it was “a matter for the Crown Prosecution Service” whether Mr Gove should face prosecution for the offence, which was committed while he was a journalist.

READ MORE

Gove the cocaine hypocrite must quit race for PM, demands Baroness Warsi

Tory leadership contest: 5 facts to know as campaigns kickoff Boris Johnson would hand Britain's richest people a vast income tax cut while Michael Gove is fading fast over his cocaine "hypocrisy".

[gyrlversion]

Johnson takes painful decision to vote for the deal amid Tory race

Boris Johnson confirmed today he had taken the ‘painful’ decision to vote for Theresa May’s Brexit deal as the rivals to replace her jostle for position.

The Vote Leave leader said he would back the deal to stop Brexit being halted altogether despite spending months condemning the package. He branded it ‘dead’ as recently as yesterday. 

Mr Johnson is one of a raft of Brexiteer contenders for the Tory leadership after Mrs May admitted on Wednesday night she would resign if the deal gets over the line. 

How the leading candidates split on the deal today will be keenly watched for signals of how the Tory race will play out. The hardline European Research Group led by Jacob Rees-Mogg is thought likely to back a single candidate. 

Former Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab had been expected to vote against the deal for a third time in a stark contrast with Mr Johnson. There are reports he could flip.

Other leading contenders on the backbenches include Esther McVey. A raft of candidates inside Government are under orders to vote for Mrs May’s deal today.  

Boris Johnson confirmed today he had taken the ‘painful’ decision to vote for Theresa May’s Brexit deal as the rivals to replace her jostle for position

As debate on the deal began again today the Vote Leave leader said he would back the deal to stop Brexit being halted altogether despite spending months condemning the package

As today’s debate began Mr Johnson wrote on Twitter: ‘I have been and remain intensely critical of the deal. But we have a choice to make now, and that means choosing between options that actually exist.

‘I have come to the sad conclusion that neither this Government nor this Parliament is willing to leave with no deal.

‘We therefore run the risk of being forced to accept an even worse version of Brexit or losing Brexit altogether.

‘A bad deal that we have a chance to improve in the next stage of negotiations must be better than those alternatives.

‘It is very painful to vote for this deal. But I hope we can now work together to remedy its defects, avoid the backstop trap and strive to deliver the Brexit people voted for.’

Overnight Brexiteer MPs backing Mr Raab accused his rival of ‘flipping’ at the last minute and showing ‘poor judgment’ after Mr Johnson announced he was backing the Prime Minister’s deal.

One MP said: ‘It’s a massive cock up, isn’t it? It doesn’t show very good judgment, does it? Boris backs a deal he might not even get to vote on. 

Imagine being the standard bearer for the Eurosceptics then flipping at the last minute to back the deal. One up for Dom, one down for Boris.’

A raft of candidates inside Government such as Michael Gove (pictured arriving in Parliament today) are under orders to vote for Mrs May’s deal today

Meanwhile, supporters of Michael Gove suggested he might have as many as 50 MPs signed up to back him.

One minister said the Environment Secretary was someone with ‘impeccable Leave credentials’ who had also ‘bothered to reach out to Remainers’.

According to Paddy Power, Mr Gove is the favourite to be next Tory leader at 7/2, followed by Mr Johnson (4/1), Jeremy Hunt (8/1), Mr Raab (8/1), Sajid Javid (12/1) and Matt Hancock (18/1).

Last night Mr Johnson appeared to win the backing of Donald Trump. In a response to a question about the Tory leadership battle and Brexit, the President replied: ‘I like Boris Johnson a lot. He’s a friend of mine.’

Mr Johnson revealed his change of heart on the withdrawal agreement at a meeting of the European Research Group of MPs on Tuesday night, just minutes after Theresa May said she was prepared to step down as leader if her deal passed the Commons. 

He had previously described the deal as a ‘suicide vest’ but now fears Brexit may be lost altogether and doesn’t want to be blamed if it is.

Former Brexit secretary Mr Raab is among a small group of 30 to 40 Tory Eurosceptics refusing to fall in line, and yesterday he endorsed a so-called ‘managed’ No Deal.

Mr Raab told Sky News that Mrs May should go back to Brussels and demand a ‘legally-binding’ exit from the backstop and if that didn’t work she should discuss how to manage a No Deal Brexit.

Former Brexit secretary Mr Raab is among a small group of 30 to 40 Tory Eurosceptics refusing to fall in line

Speaking outside his home in Surrey, he said: ‘I think this is a time for pragmatism and realism.

One thing I would like to see is us go back to the EU again, keep the arm of friendship open, explain that there is still time for an exchange of letters providing a legally-binding exit from the backstop. 

I know a lot of people will say, well, the EU just won’t move; that’s been treated as a fixture of these negotiations, rather than being tested.

‘But if they still don’t move, I think we should have sensible conversations over the two weeks we’ve got left over the suite of No Deal arrangements that can be made to mitigate any of the potential damage on either side, to European jobs and livelihoods, but also to UK jobs and livelihoods.’

An ally of Mr Johnson said: ‘His position is the same. He is going to vote for the deal. If it doesn’t go through he’s not going to get the blame.’

Asked about Mr Raab’s intervention, he said: ‘Apart from the ERG I don’t know who you’re impressing.’

A report yesterday suggested Mr Johnson had told friends the deal was ‘dead’ despite his last-minute conversion. Sources close to Mr Johnson denied the claim. 

Supporters of Environment Secretary Michael Gove suggested he might have as many as 50 MPs signed up to back him

Meanwhile, other potential candidates were also gearing up their campaigns. Allies of Health Secretary Mr Hancock were yesterday calling MPs to sound out whether they might support him.

It was also claimed Home Secretary Mr Javid had floated the idea of a ‘dream ticket’ with him as Prime Minister and Mr Gove as Chancellor.

The idea, which was dismissed out of hand by Mr Javid’s friends, would be used to shut Mr Johnson out of Downing Street, it was said.

A senior Tory source described the idea as a ‘grown-up and sensible solution’ that would bring ‘stability’ at the top of the party, adding: ‘We know Michael Gove’s limitations in terms of public appeal.

Sajid Javid has broad support around the country, the polling evidence proves that. And the fact that he has a back story that no one else in the party has.’

In a speech to business chiefs yesterday, Treasury chief secretary Liz Truss endorsed the idea of securing a Canada-style trade deal – based on the free trade agreement negotiated between the EU and Canada – in the second round of the negotiations.

Miss Truss, who backed Remain, told the British Chambers of Commerce conference: ‘I’m a free trader, I believe that we need to open our economy to the rest of the world.’

It was also claimed Home Secretary Mr Javid (pictured in Downing Street) had floated the idea of a ‘dream ticket’ with him as Prime Minister and Mr Gove as Chancellor

The post Johnson takes painful decision to vote for the deal amid Tory race appeared first on Gyrlversion.

from WordPress https://www.gyrlversion.net/johnson-takes-painful-decision-to-vote-for-the-deal-amid-tory-race/

[workreveal-blog]

What does the dropping of school education bill mean?

New Post has been published on https://workreveal.biz/what-does-the-dropping-of-school-education-bill-mean/

What does the dropping of school education bill mean?

The authorities have introduced it’s far losing its deliberate education invoice in England, notwithstanding it being included in the Queen’s speech. How did that manifest?

Five months is a long term in training coverage. The “training for all” invoice, whose provisions were unveiled by way of the then chancellor George Osborne in his March price range, was quietly ditched on Thursday after some indirect feedback in a written assertion by using education secretary Justine Greening. It becomes a depressing quit for Nicky Morgan’s legacy as Greening’s predecessor, and the termination of the David Cameron-Michael Gove generation of educational coverage-making.

  education

Has this been given anything to do with grammar faculties?

No longer without delay. In fact, Greening’s announcement, ostensibly announcing a brand new technical and also training invoice, become blunt on that point: the current “faculties that paintings for all and sundry” consultation remain on track, “including selective locations for neighbourhood areas that want them”. However Labour detects symptoms that the authorities are having the second mind about grammar schools, and actually, the consultation on selection is open until later in November, with a white paper to return early subsequent 12 months – and presumably another training invoice will appear after that. Greening’s move is a clearing of the decks: doing away with the leftovers from the Morgan regime as a way to press on with grammar schools and different higher priorities.

What has been lost with the loss of life of the school education bill?

Morgan’s signature measure – that each one state faculties could be pressured to grow to be academies by way of 2022 – had already been rowed back upon. However, Greening’s non-assertion does kill off the government’s said dedication to convert all colleges into academies, even without a time frame. Greening’s position is that “our attention … is on encouraging faculties to switch voluntarily”. The various provisions to head is one which required all schools in “underperforming” neighbourhood authorities to emerge as academies. Another is the abolition of statutory locations for parent-governors at the boards of maintained faculties.

Wherein does this depart local authorities and the teachers they will nonetheless be overseeing?

The old invoice could efficiently have ended the function of nearby bodies in colleges (other than going for walks admissions), placing school development inside the arms of nearby faculties commissioners. The authorities have already budgeted cuts of £600m for nearby power schools services subsequent yr. Now nearby government had been left in limbo: they still have college-development duties, a huge number of correctly first colleges to supervise, and no money to do it with. Naturally, they’re hoping the government will reverse the cuts and allow them to fund school development and different academic functions.

So why did the authorities wait to see you later to drop the bill?

It took the Department of Education this lengthy to recognise how plenty work it has in front of it. It has most effective these days finished taking duty for higher training from the old Department of Business Innovation and Science, a merger that added with it every other bill to pilot through parliament. Then there has been the favourite children and social paintings bill and, as of Thursday, the technical and also schooling invoice, that means that the DfE had three bills on the cross. On top of that, the Branch has the colleges consultation – including the thorny difficulty of grammar schools – to put together. Then there’s the problem of a promised new colleges investment components, to update the present day byzantine machine. It’s a complex difficulty that has already been delayed, with Greening closing summer season promising a DfE response by using q4. That’s Now not to say the Branch’s each day paintings of pushing along academies and loose faculties, and a plethora of different troubles.

bill

Why are abrupt modifications in coverage so commonplace at the moment?

Which could have plenty to do with the post-Brexit alternate of the presidency, with new ministers and leaders No longer dedicated to current regulations and capable of ditching those who had proved to be unpopular or inconvenient – even those proposed in a Queen’s speech. Greening has even dropped a 2015 manifesto commitment that might have seen resists for kids who underperformed in maths and reading assessments at the end of number one school. A debatable primary school spelling, punctuation and grammar check has additionally been placed on hold after Greening referred to as for the issue of number one faculty evaluation to be retooled.

What may other U-turns be in the manner?

The outlook for a regulation allowing new grammar faculties remains fraught: there appears to be little enthusiasm for it amongst Conservatives. Even if the SNP stays impartial, any new law ought to get blocked within the Residence of Lords. But one coverage that could without problems be dropped is compelled retakes for scholars who fail to gain as a minimum a C in maths and English GCSEs – every other Gove-era legacy that is very unpopular among head instructors.

Peers have defeated arguably authorities reforms of higher schooling that would have made it less difficult for new profit-making colleges to award levels and end up universities.

Labour, Liberal Democrat and crossbench Peers within the Residence of Lords exceeded an amendment to scupper reforms to the higher schooling and research invoice through 248 votes to 221, voicing fears that they would unacceptably commercialise the arena using allowing non-public colleges to make the most of awarding ranges.

Ministers argued that the invoice might boost requirements by increasing competition, using “making it less difficult for brand new vendors to begin up and attain degree-awarding powers, and in the end secure college status”.

Led using Wilf Stevenson of Labour, Friends tabled amendments annoying universities are barred from in search of profit and continue to be self-sufficient our bodies, with entrenched instructional and political freedom, forcing an extraordinary committee-stage vote. The modification surpassed through Friends might correctly limit the powers of the brand new companies that the government had intended to create. Greater than 500, in general, have been tabled.

“The purpose of our amendment is straightforward: the bill does Now not outline a college, and we suppose it is crucial that it does,” Lord Stevenson wrote. “We do No longer certainly itemise a few core capabilities of a university However also scope out the function, with implicit beliefs of responsibility, engagement and public carrier.”

college leaders had warned that the invoice gave the newly created Workplace of Students the energy to revoke acts of parliament or royal charters that caused the creation of universities, which includes prestigious institutions like Oxford and Cambridge.

The modifications in the authorities invoice have been defined by using Oxford University chancellor Chris Patten, the former Conservative celebration chair, as “ham-fisted” in a piece of writing for the Observer. “How can it’s proper to permit institutions, some very historical standing, to be abolished with most efficient vulnerable parliamentary scrutiny?” he wrote. “Did Thomas Cromwell write this part of the bill?”

Sue Garden, the Liberal Democrat higher schooling spokeswoman in the Lords, stated the law changed into “Now not in shape for a reason” and useless while universities were already steeling themselves for pressures on their funding and scholar numbers after the vote to go away the Eurasian Union.

school

“With this vote today we have taken a step to ensure the independence of universities, unfastened from the political interference of this and destiny governments,” Lawn stated.

A Department for Education spokesperson said: “We want Extra younger people to have the possibility to access a university training, and the measures proposed for the better teaching and research invoice are critical to creating this viable.

“This bill will power up the standard of instruction at universities, deliver more opposition and preference for college kids, even as safeguarding institutional autonomy and educational freedom. even as nowadays’s result is disappointing, the parliamentary technique is ongoing, and we stay up for the subsequent level of the invoicing procedure.”

This newsletter becomes amended on 10 January 2017 to make clear that it was the reforms that had been defeated, Now not the bill itself. It’s a heat September afternoon inside the Kallio district of Helsinki. Out inside the Franzen daycare centre playground, agencies of four- and Five-12 months-olds roam contentedly. “would you want an ice-cream?” asks one, having set up her severe “stall” on the brink of the sandpit. Kindergarten group of workers flow Among the kids, chatting, looking at and making written notes.

There may be not anything outwardly extraordinary about the centre, although, with 200 children, It is the metropolis’s largest. it is tall. Indeed four former universities are constructing, created in the 1930s and converted to its gift function the final year. It’s miles in locations inclusive of this oddly homespun centre with its typical echoes of paperwork, walls plastered with children’s art and piles of play paraphernalia, that the Finnish education “miracle” starts to take shape.

In Finland, whose comprehensive college gadget has sat at the top of Europe’s ratings for the beyond sixteen years, the slender, heated debates on college governance and structure that obsess the UK – unfastened faculties, academies, grammars – do No longer exist. Schools ultimately deliver academic fulfillment, the Finns could agree – and there was excessive global interest in how they manage it (see below) – But they could additionally argue that basis for appropriate overall college performance starts of evolved earlier, long before kids enter formal school, and arguably whilst their future students are nevertheless in nappies.

[gyrlversion]

Brexit delay could last FIVE YEARS if May’s deal is not passed

Theresa May will challenge MPs to finally back Brexit this afternoon – on the day Britain was supposed to leave the EU.

In a high-stakes gamble, Mrs May will throw down the gauntlet to Labour and her own Eurosceptic MPs, amid fears that she risks a third, and possibly final, defeat.

If she does lose – and Parliament tries to make her accept a customs union and second referendum – allies fear she could be forced to call a General Election as early as next week.

The Prime Minister made her move after deciding to take the dramatic step of splitting her deal in the hope of getting it through the Commons.

British Prime Minister Theresa May speaking at the House of Commons on Wednesday. She faces a third attempt to get her meaningful vote through 

A dark cloud looms over the House of Parliament on Thursday evening as British MPs prepare to debate and vote on the withdrawal agreement on Friday

A cross-party group of MPs led by Sir Oliver Letwin and Yvette Cooper threatened to change the law next week to force Mrs May to pursue a soft Brexit option, such as a customs union

Tory leadership candidate Michael Gove leaves home for a run on Thursday as the Prime Minister fights to save her deal. Jacob Rees-Mogg (pictured on Thursday) has urged hardline Eurosceptics to back Theresa May or face losing Brexit

The meeting with the Speaker shortly before Commons leader Andrea Leadsom made a cryptic announcement about a debate and vote on Friday

Theresa May is rolling the dice on another vote on her divorce deal on Friday after finding a way around John Bercow’s (pictured on Thursday in the Commons) ‘sabotage’ of the plan 

MPs will vote only on the ‘divorce’ element of the deal today – and not the political declaration on Britain’s future relationship with the EU.

If Mrs May wins, the date of Brexit would be fixed at May 22, and Britain would not have to hold European Parliament elections the following day. 

David Cameron refuses to say who he thinks should replace Theresa May 

Former prime minister David Cameron urged warring MPs to ‘compromise’ to get some sort of Brexit deal through the ‘stuck’ Parliament.

The ex-Tory leader, who quit after leaving the failed Remain campaign in the 2016 election said two of four main factions in the Commons – spanning all opinions on Brexit – would have to ‘compromise’.

But he declined to say who he would back to replace Theresa May when she stands down, telling ITV News on Thursday: ‘It’s not for me to say.’

He said: ‘The basic problem is that Parliament is stuck.

‘There are four groups in Parliament; people who want the PM’s deal, people who want no deal, people who want a second referendum and people who want a softer Brexit.

‘We – the Government – has to try and find a way of getting at least two of those groups to work together, to combine their options, to compromise to find that partnership agreement and I hope that is what will happen.’

However, if she loses the vote, Mrs May is likely to have to return to the EU to seek another, longer delay – guaranteeing we would elect MEPs.

A Whitehall source said another defeat for the Prime Minister’s deal could see Brexit delayed for up to five years.

‘Once you have taken part in the European elections, there is no limit on the number of extensions you could have during the lifetime of the parliament,’ they said. 

The warning came as: 

 A cross-party group of MPs led by Sir Oliver Letwin and Yvette Cooper threatened to change the law next week to force Mrs May to pursue a soft Brexit option, such as a customs union;

Boris Johnson, who dropped his opposition to the deal after Mrs May agreed to step down, was reported to have declared it ‘dead’;

Former Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab made a bid for the Eurosceptic vote in the coming leadership election by refusing to back the deal and urging Mrs May to go back to Brussels and negotiate;

Former chief whip Mark Harper and Tory grandee Crispin Blunt indicated they would now back the deal;

Mrs May’s former deputy Damian Green suggested she would ‘soldier on’ as Prime Minister if her deal is defeated, despite ministers warning privately she could not lead the party into another election;

Writing in the Mail, Iain Duncan Smith urged his fellow European Research Group members to back the deal, saying ‘Brussels will have Britain over a barrel’ if the vote is lost;

Nigel Farage will lead a pro-Brexit rally outside Parliament while MPs are voting.

Ministers hope the symbolism of MPs voting on the day the UK was originally due to leave the European Union will pile pressure on opponents of the deal to back down. They also believe the public would blame MPs for blocking Brexit.

On Thursday Boris Johnson branded Theresa May’s Brexit deal ‘dead’ – less than 24 hours after he sensationally backed it  – and will call on Mrs May to quit even if she doesn’t deliver Brexit

Attorney General Geoffrey Cox (pictured left, on Thursday) and David Lidington (pictured right on Thursday) confronted John Bercow on Thursday morning to establish whether he would allow a new vote on the Brexit deal

The Prime Minister will use what was supposed to be Brexit Day to hold a vote on just the legally binding divorce deal and not the political declaration – meaning the Speaker could not rule it out

Tory and hardline Brexiteer Mark Francois said on Thursday he wouldn’t vote for the PM’s deal even with a gun in his mouth

Attorney General Geoffrey Cox, who will open today’s debate, said the vote would give MPs the last opportunity to lock in the May 22 departure date and avoid further debilitating uncertainty and delays.

Commons Speaker John Bercow, who had threatened to block a third vote on Mrs May’s deal unless it was ‘substantially’ different, last night approved the vote, saying the decision to split the deal met his test.

Javid and Gove consider ‘stop Boris’ joint bid for Tory leadership after May

Sajid Javid is floating the idea of a ‘dream ticket’ with Michael Gove as Chancellor that could see him become Prime Minister and would also shut Boris Johnson out of Downing Street, MailOnline can reveal.

The pair are mulling whether Jeremy Hunt could be offered Home Secretary to drop his candidacy as part of the pact, while fellow Brexiteers Penny Mordaunt and Andrea Leadsom could also be handed promotions to fall into line, allies of Mr Javid have suggested.

The ‘Stop Boris’ plot came as Mr Johnson – who is joint-favourite with Mr Gove to be the next Tory leader – backed Mrs May’s Brexit deal only to pronounce it ‘dead’ hours later.

The Prime Minister on Wednesday offered to sacrifice her leadership to win rebel Tories’ backing for her deal, saying she will quit on May 22 if her deal passes this week.

If the deal does not pass on Friday, May could stay and Brexit will thrown into chaos with rebel MPs trying to force a softer exit from the EU and ministers threatening to call an election.

But Boris is now reportedly insisting Mrs May steps down even if her deal fails. MailOnline can reveal there are genuine fears that unless Mr Johnson’s rivals agree a deal ahead of a leadership campaign their support could splinter, opening the door for the former Foreign Secretary to take over. 

As many as eight Cabinet ministers are expected to put their names forward and several are already out on manoeuvres today with former Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab positioning himself as the No Deal candidate.

Speaking on Thursday he said Mrs May should return to Brussels and demand they reopen negotiations so Britain can achieve a ‘legally-binding exit from the Irish backstop’.

He added: ‘I think we should have sensible conversations over the two weeks we’ve got left around the suite of No Deal arrangements that can be made to mitigate any of the potential damage on either side’. 

But senior Tories acknowledge they face an uphill battle. 

Mrs May’s DUP allies last night said they would vote against the deal, despite days of frantic negotiations to win them round. 

And despite Mrs May offering to resign before the second stage of Brexit talks, only a trickle of Tory Eurosceptics have switched sides.

MPs will today vote only on the withdrawal agreement, which sets out the separation terms. 

They will not vote on the ‘political declaration’, which sets out the Government’s vision for a close economic partnership outside both the customs union and single market. 

The two documents have previously been bundled together.

Until now, Labour has objected to only the political declaration.

Justice minister Rory Stewart acknowledged that, with a bunch of hardline Eurosceptics dubbed ‘the Spartans’ still holding out, the Government would need the backing of some Labour MPs. 

He said: ‘What happens depends on Labour. The Labour front bench has said their problem is with the political declaration, not the withdrawal agreement. There is no reason for them to oppose it.’

But former minister Richard Benyon said Tory hardliners also had to face the reality that if they continue to reject the deal they will face a soft Brexit – or risk not leaving the EU at all. 

He added: ‘They need to recognise that there will be a softer Brexit if they don’t help get this through. And tough on them, frankly.’

Mr Duncan Smith said: ‘If I believed there was a scintilla of a chance that we could leave the EU with no deal, then I would not vote for Mrs May’s deal today. But the brutal fact is that there isn’t.’

The EU has indicated it is happy for the two elements to be split, with one source saying it was ‘not an issue’. 

If the withdrawal agreement is passed today, the UK’s exit date would be fixed at May 22. But Mrs May would still have to implement both elements of the deal before then – or risk setting up another No Deal ‘cliff edge’ in late May.

Whitehall sources acknowledged that the odds are stacked against her winning today’s vote. 

But they warn she is running out of options. MPs are due to seize control of the parliamentary agenda again on Monday in the hope of identifying a majority for options such as a customs union or a second referendum.

Mrs May has said she will not accept options that breach the last Tory manifesto. 

But Sir Oliver has indicated he will try to legislate on Wednesday to force her hand. One ally of Mrs May said she would have little choice but to call an election, as pursuing a customs union would tear the Tories apart.

As senior Tories began campaigning to replace Mrs May as party leader, one Cabinet minister raged last night: ‘Everyone is building leadership campaigns and just looking at the prize. 

But no one is doing anything to get the deal done.

‘There’s going to be nothing left! They’re going to be fighting to be leader of the opposition.’

Brexit ‘black hole’ caused by MPs ‘chasing rainbows’ is costing jobs, say business leaders 

Jobs are being lost and firms are going to the wall because of the ‘Brexit black hole’ of uncertainty over the British economy, a business leader said.

In an angry tirade at Westminster’s politicians, British Chambers of Commerce director general Adam Marshall hit out at the ‘political turmoil’ caused by Brexit and warned that the country was not ready for a ‘messy’ no-deal scenario.

There was already a ‘growing list of business casualties’ and ‘in many parts of our economy, real world damage is happening right now’.

Dr Marshall said firms faced: ‘Increased costs. Orders lost to competitors elsewhere. Contracts unrenewed or put on hold.

‘Investments postponed, cancelled or diverted elsewhere. Queries from customers that simply can’t be answered.’

He added: ‘Business want to get on and escape from the gravitational pull of the Brexit black hole that has sapped energy, investment and business confidence for far too long.

‘But uncertainty is generating a growing list of business casualties and a litany of rising costs. That damage is happening right now.’

In a stark message to MPs he said: ‘To Westminster we say – we are frustrated, we are angry, you have let British business down.

‘You have focused on soundbites not substance, tactics not strategy and politics not prosperity.

‘Listening without hearing.’

MPs could back Theresa May’s Withdrawal Agreement, agree to a long extension to the Brexit process in order to work out a fresh plan or revoke Article 50 altogether and commit to EU membership for the immediate future, he said.

He acknowledged the options were all controversial but MPs could not carry on ‘chasing rainbows’.

‘Like all of us in business, they need to start making tough decisions, however personally or politically difficult they might be,’ Dr Marshall said.

IAIN DUNCAN SMITH: If we don’t back the Prime Minister’s deal, the EU’s got us over a barrel

Yes, Theresa May’s deal is very flawed. But after much reflection, I have reluctantly reached the conclusion that when we MPs debate it again today, I should support it. I urge my fellow members of the European Research Group to do so, too.

Previously, I voted against the deal because I have passionately wanted Britain to get better terms, particularly on the Backstop.

However, as a result of some inept negotiation, that has sadly not been the case. We have therefore been left with a difficult choice.

My concern is that if we don’t approve the Prime Minister’s EU withdrawal deal, Brussels will have Britain over a barrel. Westminster would be obliged to come up with an alternative exit proposal by April 12.

Yes, Theresa May’s deal is very flawed. But after much reflection, I have reluctantly reached the conclusion that when we MPs debate it again today, I should support it, writes Iain Duncan Smith

If that happens, I am convinced that the overwhelmingly Remainer majority in the Commons would try to force through a much softer Brexit, and possibly no Brexit at all.

Not only that. The other 27 national EU leaders now have the power to respond by making it tougher for Britain by demanding an extension to Article 50. This could mean us staying in the EU for another two years and British voters taking part in the European Parliament elections in May.  

If I believed there was a scintilla of a chance that we could leave the EU with no deal, then I would not vote for Mrs May’s deal today. But the brutal fact is that there isn’t.

There are those who argue that the EU won’t offer us an extension to Article 50 because they just want us out. But I don’t agree.

As Donald Tusk and Angela Merkel have made clear, they want Britain to stay and they do not want a No Deal exit.

You only have to look at who, in this country, is arguing for an extension to Article 50 to understand the true threat. They include Tony Blair, who, in recent weeks, has reportedly been briefing France’s president, Emmanuel Macron, on how to force Britain to stay in the EU.

I urge my fellow members of the European Research Group to do so, too, writes Iain Duncan Smith

Blair has made it clear that he wants a long extension, for one simple reason: He knows it’s a means of stopping Brexit.

While there is much wrong with the Government’s deal, it will allow Britain to leave the EU – even if we voluntarily accept the EU’s rules and regulations during an implementation period.

Repealing the 1972 European Community Act at least means, too, that under a new Conservative leader, we would be able to enter trade talks, which are the next stage of the process, with renewed vigour and confidence as a nation. We would be a sovereign nation again.

Above all, we would be able to achieve the kind of settlement that could lead our country out of the mire of protracted Brexit negotiations, which have meant paralysis at Westminster, and towards a bright and prosperous future.

What happens next? JACK DOYLE answers all the questions on May’s last chance to get her Brexit deal over the line

What happens today?

MPs will vote on the Mrs May’s withdrawal agreement. This is the vast, legally binding treaty that deals with the exit part of Brexit and contains the money – about £39 billion – the ‘transition period’ to the end of 2020, and the rights of EU citizens and UK citizens on the continent.

How is this different from previous votes?

The first two times Mrs May put her deal to the Commons, MPs were also voting to approve the so-called ‘political declaration’. This sets out the likely shape of the future relationships between the EU and the UK on trade, immigration and security.

Why has she now separated the two?

Short answer: Speaker Bercow. Invoking ancient Commons rules, he declared last week that the Government could not bring back the same motion before the Commons again and again. This threw a grenade into Downing Street’s strategy. After talks with Attorney General Geoffrey Cox yesterday, he agreed to the new plan. There is also a political reason: to heap pressure on Labour to let Brexit pass. Will the party – and all its MPs in Leave seats – which pledged to respect the referendum result once again vote against Brexit on the day we were originally meant to be leaving?

These are the results of the indicative votes on Brexit, in order of preference. It shows that while MPs can’t find a consensus they lean heavily towards a softer Brexit or second referendum 

Why do it today?

It’s near enough a last roll of the dice. Mrs May might have preferred to take a few more days to rally her MPs but she is up against a fixed deadline, and also has some momentum in her own party. When the EU agreed last week to extend Article 50 – and delay Britain’s Brexit date – it set her a target of 11pm tonight. If the withdrawal agreement is passed by then, she would have until May 22 to pass the rest of it, and related Brexit legislation, and get out. If not, the extension to Brexit is only until April 12, less than two weeks away.

What are the chances of success?

Slim at best. The DUP has already announced it will vote against it. Despite the best efforts of Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson, who was drafted in to try to win the Unionists over, they don’t appear to be budging. Labour will tell its MPs to vote against, calling the proposal ‘the blindest of blind Brexits’, even though the party has accepted in principle the need for the withdrawal agreement and its claim to respect the referendum result. There are also about 50 hardline Brexiteer Tory MPs who are refusing to back the deal. But Labour MPs in Leave seats will come under huge pressure to vote in favour or abstain.

What happens if it passes?

We wouldn’t be guaranteed to leave in an orderly fashion, but it would be a huge step forward. That is a victory ministers would bite your hand off for. The next hurdle would be actually getting the agreement into law via the Withdrawal Act, as well as the political declaration, not to mention any other Brexit legislation – all before May. If Parliament doesn’t manage this, or request another extension, Britain would leave with No Deal, and no transition, on May 22.

How MP’s could split for a third vote on Theresa May’s withdrawal deal due to be heard in the Commons today 

What if it doesn’t pass?

The chaos continues, and the ticking clock gets louder. They could try to have another go next week, but they would be up against a near-impossible April 12 deadline. As Parliament won’t allow No Deal, the UK would be forced to go back to the EU cap in hand to ask for a longer extension of at least a year. That would mean the UK would take part in European Parliament elections in May. Mrs May has repeatedly said she would not swallow a Brexit delay beyond June.

What about this week’s ‘indicative’ votes?

Another key factor. After the process of voting on alternative Brexit options orchestrated by Sir Oliver Letwin failed to find an answer on Wednesday, he’s going to have another go too. On Monday, expect all the alternatives to be put back before MPs – a customs union, a second referendum, the ‘Norway model’ and No Deal. If one passes – and customs union appears to be the only real runner – MPs plan to pass legislation on Wednesday to compel Mrs May to do what they say.

What happens then?

If the Commons agrees to a customs union Brexit, she faces a gruesome choice. Could she really accept something which contradicts her manifesto and delivers a Brexit she knows is worse than hers, and would rip the Tory Party into pieces? Could she try to ‘prorogue’ Parliament – ending the session, suspending the Commons for a few days then coming back to have another go at her deal and killing off any customs union law in the process? Or could she hit the last emergency button at her disposal, and call a General Election?

PM ‘could stay if she loses vote’

Theresa May could ‘soldier on’ in Downing Street indefinitely if her Brexit deal is defeated, a close ally said yesterday.

In a dramatic gamble on Wednesday night, she told Tory MPs she was ready to quit this summer if her twice-defeated Brexit deal is finally approved in in the Commons.

Using that timetable she would resign as Tory leader on May 23, remaining as PM only until the party selects a new leader.

Damian Green, who served as Mrs May’s deputy, predicted she would try to cling on, at least until Britain’s divorce from the EU is finalised

But Downing Street indicated that her offer applied only if her deal gets through in the coming weeks. 

And Damian Green, who served as Mrs May’s deputy, predicted she would try to cling on, at least until Britain’s divorce from the EU is finalised.

With speculation mounting that the Brexit crisis could spark a snap election, Mrs May could even find herself leading the Tories into another poll.

Mr Green, a friend of Mrs May’s since university days, said: ‘She will take the path of soldiering on because she sees the great duty of her and her Government is to get a Brexit deal. She will carry on for as long as she is Prime Minister doing that.

‘Absolutely the last thing the country would need now would be a Prime Minister who walked away and said “OK, choose someone else”. This is very serious.’

Addressing the 1922 Committee of Tory MPs on Wednesday night, the Prime Minister acknowledged there was ‘a desire for a new approach – and new leadership – in the second phase of the Brexit negotiations – and I won’t stand in the way of that’.

She was silent on what would happen if her deal failed to get through for a third time.

What sort of Brexit DO MPs want? Commons shows support for a second referendum, a customs union and Labour’s plan for a soft Brexit but with no clear majority for any option

The backbench plot to snatch control of Brexit hit a wall on Wednesday as none of the alternatives to Theresa May’s deal secured a majority – but MPs still showed Britain they favour a softer Brexit or a second referendum – and will never deliver No Deal.  

On Wednesday evening, in an unprecedented move, politicians seized control of the Commons timetable from Theresa May to hold so-called indicative votes.

The poll showed Parliament is close to agreeing on a soft Brexit with a plan for the UK remaining in a customs union with the EU defeated by 272 votes to 264, while a second referendum was rejected by 295 votes to 268. 

MPs were handed green ballot papers on which they voted Yes or No to eight options, ranging from No Deal to cancelling Brexit altogether. However, the votes descended into shambles as MPs rejected each and every one of the proposals – although its architect Sir Oliver Letwin always warned there wouldn’t be a winner first time.

Ten Tories – including ministers Sir Alan Duncan, Mark Field and Stephen Hammond – supported an SNP plan to give MPs the chance to revoke Article 50 if a deal has not been agreed two days before Brexit. Some 60 Tory MPs backed the option of remaining in the single market.

The results of Wednesday’s votes, in order of preference, were: 

Confirmatory public vote (second referendum) – defeated by 295 voted to 268, majority 27. 

Customs union – defeated by 272 votes to 264, majority eight. 

Labour’s alternative plan – defeated by 307 votes to 237, majority 70. 

Revocation to avoid no-deal – defeated by 293 votes to 184, majority 109. 

Common market 2.0: defeated by 283 votes to 188, majority 95. 

No Deal: defeated by 400 votes to 160, majority 240. 

Contingent preferential arrangements – defeated by 422 votes to 139, majority 283.

Efta and EEA: defeated by 377 votes to 65, majority 312. 

Shadow housing minister Melanie Onn resigned after Jeremy Corbyn ordered his MPs to back a raft of soft Brexit plans, as well as a second referendum.

Some 27 Labour MPs defied the whip to reject a so-called ‘confirmatory vote’ on any Brexit deal. The party had instructed them to support the plan just hours after one of its senior frontbenchers publicly warned that it would be a mistake.

Sir Oliver Letwin, the architect of the Commons move, on Thursday insisted the indicative votes were not intended to give a precise answer right away – and will hold another round of votes on Monday. 

MPs are due to hold a second round of votes – unless Mrs May can get her deal through first – after none of the eight options debated on Wednesday was able to command a majority. It could be that the eight options are cut down to the most popular.

Sir Oliver told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme: ‘At some point or other we either have to get her deal across the line or accept that we have to find some alternative if we want to avoid no deal on the 12th, which I think at the moment is the most likely thing to happen.

‘At the moment we are heading for a situation where, under the law, we leave without a deal on the 12th, which many of us think is not a good solution, and the question is ‘Is Parliament on Monday willing to come to any view in the majority about that way forward that doesn’t involve that result?”

MPs will take control of the Commons order paper again on Monday, so they can narrow down the options if Mrs May’s deal has not been agreed by then – or pass legislation to try and impose their choice on her. Speaking in the Commons after the results, Sir Oliver said: ‘It is of course a great disappointment that the House has not chosen to find a majority for any proposition.

‘However, those of us who put this proposal forward as a way of proceeding predicted that we would not even reach a majority and for that very reason put forward a … motion designed to reconsider these matters on Monday.’

The post Brexit delay could last FIVE YEARS if May’s deal is not passed appeared first on Gyrlversion.

from WordPress https://www.gyrlversion.net/brexit-delay-could-last-five-years-if-mays-deal-is-not-passed/

[gyrlversion]

The beguiling beauty reportedly being shut out of Royals circle

The first hint that frost might be forming over relations between the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and some of their high-born friends in Norfolk, came when friends of the Duchess said a former model believed herself to be ‘a rival to her rural crown’.

Then yesterday it was reported the Duchess had instructed her husband to banish the offending female friend from their social circle – following a ‘terrible’ falling out.

Kate and William had long been thought close friends of their Norfolk neighbours, the Marquess and Marchioness of Cholmondeley – he, a 57-year-old Old Etonian, she a 35-year-old former model.

But speculation about a serious rift between Kate and the Marchioness – former model Rose Hanbury – is said to have intensified in recent weeks. 

At their Devon home yesterday, Rose’s parents, Tim and Emma Hanbury, remained tight-lipped, expressing surprise but offering no comment.

So who is the Norfolk beauty whom the future Queen wants ‘phased out’ of her social set?

Rose Hanbury, 35, Marchioness of Cholmondeley, is pictured with William and Kate at a gala dinner in support of East Anglia’s Children’s Hospices Nook appeal 

Described most frequently as a ‘beguiling socialite’, the willowy Rose Hanbury, Marchioness of Cholmondeley, has always commanded attention. As a renowned society beauty and former model with an impeccably aristocratic pedigree, there were no shortage of suitors for her hand including, it was once rumoured, a young Prince William.

That the honour eventually fell to charismatic David Rocksavage, the 7th Marquess of Cholmondeley – a wealthy Old Etonian 23 years her senior – may have raised a few eyebrows on the London scene, particularly when they married just two days after announcing not only their engagement but that Rose was pregnant with twins.

But there is little doubt that the family, which now includes nine-year-old twins Alexander and Oliver, and Iris, three, are today the toast of their North Norfolk enclave.

Ms Hanbury is married to David Rocksavage (pictured left together), the 7th Marquess of Cholmondeley – a wealthy Old Etonian 23 years her senior. She came to public attention in 2005 after the publication of a racy photograph showing her (pictured right with her sister) in matching skimpy pink bikinis flanking then-Prime Minister Tony Blair

Rose attended the royal couple’s wedding and, together with husband David, the four have gone on several double dates (pictured)

They are part of a band of so-called ‘Turnip Toffs’, a party-loving set with bigger homes than the Royals. Fellow members include William’s close friends William and Rosie Van Cutsem, Tom and Polly Coke, the Earl and Countess of Leicester, neighbours at nearby Holkham Hall, and James and Laura Meade, who is a godmother to Prince Louis.

Rose has ‘always liked to defy convention’, according to friends. The tall, leggy and doe-eyed brunette, now 35, signed up to model agency Storm, the firm that was also home to Kate Moss, when she arrived on the London scene with elder sister Marina.

The sisters came to public attention in 2005 after the publication of a racy photograph showing them in matching skimpy pink bikinis flanking then-Prime Minister Tony Blair.

Their younger brother David is a financier in Hong Kong.

The trio were brought up at Wembury House, a Georgian manor house in Devon, by rather unconventional parents. Their father Tim is an Old Etonian website designer and part of the brewing dynasty Truman, Hanbury, Buxton & Co, and their mother is designer Emma, who owns and runs the Marosa fashion label. The couple were ‘more like friends than parents’, a friend of the family once noted.

‘It’s not unusual to see Timmy and Emma at [nightclub] Boujis with the girls.

‘Likewise, Marina and Rose are just as happy in the company of their parents’ friends as they are with their own age group.’

Rose (pictured with William and Kate in 2016) was also, at one stage, named as a potential contender for Prince William’s affections, although when they first met – and whether they ever became close prior to the Cambridge’s move to Norfolk – remains unclear 

Rose’s twin sons are playmates of Prince George and she is also a former model for the same agency that discovered Kate Moss

The family reportedly used to holiday together in Ibiza and ‘really knew how to throw a party’.

Wembury, which the family inherited in 1980, is an eclectic mix of vibrant colours, historic oil paintings and chintz. It has a pool, sweeping gardens with views to Dartmoor, and an elegant dining room draped with fairy lights.

A neighbour in Devon told a newspaper: ‘An invitation to Wembury is much coveted around here. One minute you’ll be talking to one of Emma’s bohemian friends, the next you’ll be talking to a feckless peer. Add to the mix a rock star or an actor and a couple of the girls’ leggy young friends and you get the picture.’

The sisters are certainly of thoroughbred stock. Emma’s mother Lady Elizabeth Longman was a childhood playmate of Queen Elizabeth, and a bridesmaid at her wedding to Prince Philip. The family hosts an annual cricket match where the guest list often includes Zac Goldsmith, Hugh Grant and Imran Khan.

But while Rose could have become a career socialite, she stepped into politics, working as an aide to Michael Gove, at the time Shadow Schools Secretary, while attending a host of glamorous London parties. She and Marina routinely featured on Tatler’s 100 Most Invited list.

Rose (pictured with husband David) has had a flock of aristocratic admirers. She was linked with Lord Freddie Windsor, Lord John Somerset and Lord Lambton’s grandson Fred, to whom she was rumoured to be engaged

Unsurprisingly, there have been a flock of aristocratic admirers. Rose was linked with Lord Freddie Windsor, Lord John Somerset and Lord Lambton’s grandson Fred, to whom she was rumoured to be engaged.

In fact, the families were so close that Fred’s father Ned, the Earl of Durham, later married Marina (again, with an age gap of 20 years between them).

Rose was also, at one stage, named as a potential contender for Prince William’s affections, although when they first met – and whether they ever became close prior to the Cambridge’s move to Norfolk – remains unclear. William was surrounded by a coterie of hair-flicking beauties, including Jecca Craig, Isabella Calthorpe and Olivia Hunt, both before his relationship with Kate and during the couple’s brief split in 2007.

William, at just two years older than Rose, may once have been considered a more realistic prospect than David.

Indeed, many believed playboy David might never marry. His party-loving friends included Hollywood actor Johnny Depp, rock star Mick Jagger and Peter Mandelson, and there were a string of high-profile flings with model and actress Lisa B, French film star Isabelle Adjani and heiress Sabrina Guinness.

But after meeting Rose at a party at Villa Cetinale, the Italian playground of the Lambton family, the stars finally aligned and they married at Chelsea Town Hall in 2009.

Rose’s parents did not bat an eyelid at their daughters’ unconventional relationships.

A family friend told a newspaper: ‘It’s not about what age they are, it’s about who they are – and by that I mean whether the person is right for their daughters. All they want is for them to be happy.’

And who wouldn’t be happy with such a match? In 1990, Lord Cholmondeley, a direct descendant of Britain’s first Prime Minister, Sir Robert Walpole, inherited £118 million and two stately homes upon the death of his father, the sixth Marquess, and in doing so became ‘the greatest catch in England’.

The Marquess of Cholmondeley is 23 years the Marchioness’s senior and they have three children together (pictured together) 

He owns Cholmondeley Castle in Cheshire but the family home is Norfolk’s Houghton Hall, a 106-room stately home in the Palladian style – constructed in the 1720s for Walpole himself – with a sculpture park, a five-acre walled garden and 1,000 acres of parkland. The Hall is rather more roomy than the average family home, but after the twins were born, David insisted it was very much where the family should be based.

Rose had quit her job in Westminster when severe morning sickness – which also afflicted the Duchess of Cambridge during her pregnancies – took its toll.

The babies were born several months prematurely by Caesarean section – and this posed an unusual conundrum for the couple.

Reportedly, both boys had been born at the same time, so which one should inherit their father’s title and lucrative multi-million pound estate? In the end, it was decided by a fluke of biology. Alexander, known as Xan, who weighed 8ozs more than Oliver, was given the honour.

He is known as the Earl of Rocksavage, while his twin is simply Lord Oliver Cholmondeley.

The family, which expanded in 2016 with the birth of Lady Iris, is now at the centre of the Norfolk set and Rose has, to date, counted Kate as one of her closest friends. Both have young children, live in a rural idyll and occupy a similar position of immense privilege.

Rose and David are extremely well-connected and said to be fabulous hosts and ‘great fun’ – undoubtedly an asset in the Cambridge’s closely guarded inner circle. The Cholmondeley estate is just four miles from the Duke and Duchess’s home, Anmer Hall, and the Royal couple and their children are said to have been regular guests. Indeed, Prince George was a playmate of the Cholmondeley twins.

Their interests, too, are shared – Rose and Kate are patrons of the charity East Anglia’s Children’s Hospices and Kate has attended the Houghton Hall Horse Trials with her brood.

A gala dinner for the charity was hosted by the Cholmondeleys in July 2016, and Kate and Rose were pictured chatting animatedly.

In fact, Rose is considered so much a part of the Royal scene that she sat next to Prince Harry at a Buckingham Palace state banquet in 2017.

If Kate is seeking to extricate Rose, as it is rumoured, it could prove a rather bothersome – and humiliating – business for everyone concerned.

The reported row must indeed have been serious…

She reportedly tells William to shut out model friend Rose Hanbury from their Norfolk circle after ‘terrible clash’

By Ian Gallagher for The Mail on Sunday

The Duchess of Cambridge has reportedly told her husband to banish one of their female friends from their social circle following a ‘terrible’ falling out.

Kate and William have long been close to their Norfolk neighbours, the Marquess and Marchioness of Cholmondeley. But speculation about a serious rift between Kate and the Marchioness – former model Rose Hanbury – is said to have intensified in recent weeks.

It gained further momentum yesterday with a report that the Duchess wants Rose ‘phased out’ as one of her confidantes, though the cause of the apparent friction remains a mystery.

Kate and William have long been close to their Norfolk neighbours, the Marquess and Marchioness of Cholmondeley. But speculation about a serious rift between Kate and the Marchioness (pictured together, with William looking on) – former model Rose Hanbury – is said to have intensified in recent weeks

The report in The Sun newspaper claimed that the alleged rift is ‘much worse’ than has previously been suggested. And it said attempts by William to try to effect a reconciliation between the two women has been cooly rebuffed.

William is said to be good friends with the Marquess, David Rocksavage, who at 58 is 23 years older than Rose.

At their Devon home yesterday, Rose’s parents, Tim and Emma Hanbury, expressed surprise at the reports. Asked whether her daughter had discussed them, Mrs Hanbury glanced at her husband before replying: ‘Nothing to say about it.’ Mr Hanbury then intervened, saying: ‘Got no comment. There is no comment.’

The first inkling that something was awry came when Daily Mail diarist Richard Eden reported that friends of the Duchess claimed ex-model Rose was ‘a rival to her rural crown’.

Among their Norfolk set – affectionately nicknamed the ‘Turnip Toffs’ – it was Kate who was always presumed queen bee. ‘On the face of it, it’s bizarre, but Kate seems to see Rose as a rival,’ one source was quoted as saying.

While Kate and William stay at ten-bedroom Anmer Hall, which was previously rented out to a kitchen timber boss, Rose and her husband live in splendour three miles away at Houghton Hall, one of the country’s finest Palladian houses, surrounded by 1,000 acres of parkland. The Cambridges moved to Anmer on the Sandringham Estate in 2014 when William joined the East Anglian Air Ambulance charity.

While Kate and William stay at ten-bedroom Anmer Hall, which was previously rented out to a kitchen timber boss, Rose and her husband live in splendour three miles away at Houghton Hall (pictured), one of the country’s finest Palladian houses 

One source told The Sun: ‘It is well known that Kate and Rose have had a terrible falling out.

‘They used to be close but that is not the case any more.

‘William wants to play peacemaker so that the two couples can remain friends, given they live so close to each other and share many mutual friends.

‘But Kate has been clear that she doesn’t want to see them any more and wants William to phase them out, despite their social status.’

Rose and her husband have twin boys, Alexander and Oliver, and daughter Iris. The boys have been playmates of Prince George.

At William and Kate’s wedding eight years ago, Rose was widely considered to be the best-dressed guest. In 2016, the Royal couple attended a black-tie gala at Houghton Hall. And the two couples are said to have shared dinner dates.

Rose was on the books of the same modelling agency that discovered Kate Moss. The Marchioness was also briefly a researcher for Tory MP Michael Gove.

Rose was on the books of the same modelling agency that discovered Kate Moss (left). The Marchioness was also briefly a researcher for Tory MP Michael Gove (right) 

She first came to national attention in 2005 when she and her elder sister Marina – both wearing pink bikinis – posed alongside the then Prime Minister Tony Blair.

Her husband, the party-loving Marquess, used to be described as the ‘greatest catch in England’.

When he succeeded his father to the title, he not only became a Hereditary Lord Great Chamberlain but came into a legacy of nearly £120 million – the largest sum ever bequeathed in Britain.

He had relationships with several extremely glamorous women, including model and actress Lisa B, French film star Isabelle Adjani and heiress Sabrina Guinness, but friends believed that he would never marry.

Rose and David first met at a party at Villa Cetinale, the Italian home of the disgraced politician Lord Lambton. They married at Chelsea Town Hall in 2009.

The Marquess is a friend of Prince Charles and would often be invited to Sandringham for tea. When he was 14 the Queen selected him as Page of Honour. Now she sees him once a year as he shuffles backwards in front of her in his role as Lord Great Chamberlain at the State Opening of Parliament.

Last night the Cholmondeleys were unavailable for comment.

A member of staff answering the intercom at Houghton Hall said: ‘They are not available today.’ When asked if the couple knew of the allegations reported in The Sun, the employee said: ‘We are fully aware.’

Last night a Royal source said the rumours of a rift were untrue and upsetting. Kensington Palace declined to comment.

The post The beguiling beauty reportedly being shut out of Royals circle appeared first on Gyrlversion.

from WordPress https://www.gyrlversion.net/the-beguiling-beauty-reportedly-being-shut-out-of-royals-circle/

[idratherhavefreedom]

#literally like the DRAMA is unreal#cause after rishi sunak resigned nadhim zahawi got given his job of chancellor of the exchequer#(which is one of the most important ones so a big promotion given to him by bojo)#but TODAY he is now part of the group that michael gove got together who are gonna tell the prime minister to leave#so he literally went in yesterday and got the big promotion and THEN has agreed that boris needs to go#which means zahawi is in a very good place to succeed him#what an absolute power play#like i hate him cause he's a tory and they're all corrupt but also... gotta respect that political move#ALSO THE FACT THAT MICHAEL GOVE IS THE ONE GETTING THIS GROUP TOGETHER?!!!#AND WAS CONSPICUOUSLY ABSENT FROM HOP TODAY SO EVERYONE KNEW HE WAS UP TO SOMETHING?!!!!#dudeeeee#having the time of my life over here#pleaseeeee i can't wait for boris to go#not to be cruel but i hope he cried like thatcher did#cause what a pillock (via gayforcarstairsgirls)

This is literally like watching a political drama unfolding before our eyes oh my god