Article 50

UKIP not fragmented Durhamj? Or was it a jest.
Last I heard the UKIP contingent had fallen out in the Welsh Assembly with the horrible Hamilton appointed as leader in the house and Nathan Gill still leader of the party in Wales... but now he's removed himself from the UKIP group in the Assembly but still a member of the UKIP group in the EU parliament, where he also has a seat.
And one of the UKIP AMs in trouble this week for trying to get a job advert changed to make it more favourable to her brother.

Jen, I didn't say anything derogatory about you nor did I suggest you thought the political right were OK. Please read what I wrote again. I think you may have misunderstood my post. I wasn't commenting about you personally in anyway although I did challenge the idea that those who do not feel extreme, who I had termed the pragmatic voter, didn't vote.

The whole point of what I had written (but obviously not well enough ) was to say that those who are absolutely convinced about staying in to the degree they believe their views are the only truth are only a proportion of those voting remain and those who are absolutely convinced about coming out to the degree they believe their views are the only truth are only a proportion of those voting leave. In the middle and on both sides of voting are some who are more ready to deal with things sensibly and realistically in a way that is based on practical rather than theoretical considerations, i.e., pragmatic.

My post saying this was apropos of nothing that had come before except an overall sense that not only on here but also on other forums and in the press those two extremes are hogging the limelight and little is heard from the voter who was unconvinced either was the best way and voted for the least worst.

I agree with JessM. UKIP is most certainly fragmented. Carswell (their only MP) is a maverick and out on his own. Farage and Banks can't stand him. They also hate Suzanne Evans. There are even rumours that Farage and Nuttall have fallen out. It wouldn't be surprising if Banks stops funding UKIP, if Nuttall loses Stoke. He was muttering about starting a new party at the end of last year and he's already set up a Breitbart-style newspaper. He has a huge database of supporters.

Which newspaper dd please?

Oh, thanks, gracesgran, but daphne says I am in an extremist niche now. Having read Corbyn's latest speech, there is nothing extremist about it. If there is, I'd like it pointed out to me, please.
Jess, I meant that UKIP are not divided on Brexit. Haven't heard of any of them wanting to stay in Europe. Which is jesting, of course, considering their name.

Yes sorry, not reading carefully enough. slaps own wrist.
Scary though the thing about Banks and his newspaper.

'Extremist' is the wrong word dj, but I'm afraid Corbyn doesn't appeal to the majority of potential Labour voters. I don't think he's particularly extremist either (see my previous posts) - he's certainly not a Communist, but he chooses issues which most people don't really see as important and flip flops about issues which do matter. It doesn't help that the MSM were against him from the start and I gave him a chance, but I honestly think that he's not up to the role.

Not sure I really want to advertise it, but you'd find it by Googling anyway. It's called Westmonster.

One day without us today.

action.hopenothate.org.uk/page/m/4c1883c/618bba6a/63a6decf/167ee080/677075664/VEsF/

Theresa May's wishful thinking.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/feb/20/divide-and-rule-tactics-could-leave-uk-without-deal-say-eu-politicians

This is an interesting article, showing what the other 27 countries think is the most important deal with the UK.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/ng-interactive/2017/feb/20/what-the-eu27-want-brexit-red-lines-from-the-other-side-of-the-table

And more from the Guardian about the negotiations.
“At the moment, it seems like Mrs May thinks of the EU as a restaurant where she can walk in order everything on the menu and then demand that the restaurant itself pays the bill,” the former Bulgarian prime minister Sergei Stanishev said last week.
etc
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/feb/20/divide-and-rule-tactics-could-leave-uk-without-deal-say-eu-politicians?CMP=share_btn_tw

The Stop trump demo outside the houses of parliament is not just Stop trump. It's also the onedaywithoutus demo.

www.facebook.com/1DayWithoutUs/

A good video on here. That restaurant might not be open today, Jess.
I read that lots of MacDonalds were closed last week in the US for the same reason. They could not find out if the owners just closed them in solidarity, or if they did not have enough staff.

I don't think the lords should go on so long. There are a few of them asleep there.

Doesn't matter how long it goes on dj some of them are asleep anyway. Think care home and the residents dozing through the morning.

Think unelected getting £300 just for turning up and falling asleep.

Time for a quick cull. Bring in a retirement age in line with top judges?

Which is 75. This would give an "expert" a ten year stint after retirement.
17% are 80 or over and the 70-80 band is the most populous. So retiring just the over 80s would not make enough of an inroad into the 840.
Yup, I think 75 would do nicely.

Think going in to sign on and claim the allowance then outside again to the waiting taxi.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/21/peer-kept-taxi-running-claiming-300-house-lords-allowance/

'Meet The Lords' on BBC2 next Monday at 9pm

I think it likely that some of the H oL work very hard. The programmes starting next week look interesting.

Straying back to Article 50, today's Times front page story to the effect that David Davies has said that we will still need a lot of EU migrants to fill lower paid jobs for a long time to come.

I'm currently watching Sir Ivan Rogers giving his account to the Select Committee rooms now, ' live ', on BBC Parliament.

A conservative MP has just raised an interesting question as to the 'supposed' 60 billion we ' could possibly owe ' the EU and raised the point a lot of it is for PENSIONS . He pointed out the poor quality of the EU Finances with regard to process and auditing . No argument from Sir Ivan Rogers I felt.

As for the Lords I firmly believe as with Parliament anybody who is 'called to speak' should ' declare their interest ' and those who have a pension or indeed any dealings with the European Union 'should' declare an interest.

Why? Because they swear an 'Oath of Allegience' to the EU which is applicable whilst ' serving ' and afterwards whist receiving an EU Pension'

" Having been appointed as a Member of the European Commission by the European Council, following the vote of consent by the European Parliament I solemnly undertake: to respect the Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in the fulfilment of all my duties; to be completely independent in carrying out my responsibilities, in the general interest of the Union; in the performance of my tasks, neither to seek nor to take instructions from any Government or from any other institution, body, office or entity; to refrain from any action incompatible with my duties or the performance of my tasks.

I formally note the undertaking of each Member State to respect this principle and not to seek to influence Members of the Commission in the performance of their tasks. I further undertake to respect, both during and AFTER MY TERM OF OFFICE, the obligation arising therefrom, and in particular the duty to behave with integrity and discretion as regards the acceptance, after I have ceased to hold office, of certain appointments or benefits."

This has always been a sore point but the Referendum Result , Triggering of Article 50 has once again reared the ugly head of why they do not have to ' declare their interest ' over any personal EU finances such as pensions.

PS

Moved to live coverage from Parliament now!

Cor! What a news and politics junkie you are POGS!