724 posts
|
Brexit
Oct 18, 2019 18:01:05 GMT
Post by Latecomer on Oct 18, 2019 18:01:05 GMT
Gauke thread on twitter is interesting....he would vote for Letwin amendment and then the deal tomorrow (which means deal is not passed tomorrow until Withdrawl act is all passed)), Boris has to ask for extension, then suggests amending the actual withdrawal agreement act to make sure no crash out at the end of 2020 if full trade agreement not signed. Only problem with that is if that amendment wins support (no reason why it wouldn’t - parliament doesn’t want no deal) then ERG will be cross......so withdrawal bill may be voted down....getting a deal is like trying to catch frogs!
I’m calling it tomorrow.....Letwin amendment win, amended deal voted through.
For the record I cant believe this huge act of self harm. What idiots we are.....
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Brexit
Oct 18, 2019 18:45:36 GMT
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Oct 18, 2019 18:45:36 GMT
Gauke thread on twitter is interesting....he would vote for Letwin amendment and then the deal tomorrow (which means deal is not passed tomorrow until Withdrawl act is all passed)), Boris has to ask for extension, then suggests amending the actual withdrawal agreement act to make sure no crash out at the end of 2020 if full trade agreement not signed. Only problem with that is if that amendment wins support (no reason why it wouldn’t - parliament doesn’t want no deal) then ERG will be cross......so withdrawal bill may be voted down....getting a deal is like trying to catch frogs! I’m calling it tomorrow.....Letwin amendment win, amended deal voted through. For the record I cant believe this huge act of self harm. What idiots we are..... Aside from the expected, there are two more groups that haven’t really had much examination. First are the ‘chaos voters’ who were an important factor in the referendum win. Those who wanted to bring down what exists, hoping for a chance that it would give them something in return (the ‘house price fallers, for example, who wanted a collapse in the economy so that house prices crashed (yes, I know, I don’t understand the thought process either)). Increasingly, however, I’ve come across ‘punishment Brexiters’, who want the worst possible outcome, so that it kills off any chance of it being successful or lasting. I have to admit that, at times, I’ve had to stop myself going down that route. I would be okay but I just can’t allow those who are less secure to suffer in order to teach someone a lesson. Neither group is massive but 1 in a 100 can make a difference when things are close.
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Oct 18, 2019 19:05:31 GMT
Gauke thread on twitter is interesting....he would vote for Letwin amendment and then the deal tomorrow (which means deal is not passed tomorrow until Withdrawl act is all passed)), Boris has to ask for extension, then suggests amending the actual withdrawal agreement act to make sure no crash out at the end of 2020 if full trade agreement not signed. Only problem with that is if that amendment wins support (no reason why it wouldn’t - parliament doesn’t want no deal) then ERG will be cross......so withdrawal bill may be voted down....getting a deal is like trying to catch frogs! I’m calling it tomorrow.....Letwin amendment win, amended deal voted through. For the record I cant believe this huge act of self harm. What idiots we are..... Aside from the expected, there are two more groups that haven’t really had much examination. First are the ‘chaos voters’ who were an important factor in the referendum win. Those who wanted to bring down what exists, hoping for a chance that it would give them something in return (the ‘house price fallers, for example, who wanted a collapse in the economy so that house prices crashed (yes, I know, I don’t understand the thought process either)). Increasingly, however, I’ve come across ‘punishment Brexiters’, who want the worst possible outcome, so that it kills off any chance of it being successful or lasting. I have to admit that, at times, I’ve had to stop myself going down that route. I would be okay but I just can’t allow those who are less secure to suffer in order to teach someone a lesson. Neither group is massive but 1 in a 100 can make a difference when things are close. No one thinks like that do they? Not even our Postman
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Brexit
Oct 18, 2019 19:58:36 GMT
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Oct 18, 2019 19:58:36 GMT
Aside from the expected, there are two more groups that haven’t really had much examination. First are the ‘chaos voters’ who were an important factor in the referendum win. Those who wanted to bring down what exists, hoping for a chance that it would give them something in return (the ‘house price fallers, for example, who wanted a collapse in the economy so that house prices crashed (yes, I know, I don’t understand the thought process either)). Increasingly, however, I’ve come across ‘punishment Brexiters’, who want the worst possible outcome, so that it kills off any chance of it being successful or lasting. I have to admit that, at times, I’ve had to stop myself going down that route. I would be okay but I just can’t allow those who are less secure to suffer in order to teach someone a lesson. Neither group is massive but 1 in a 100 can make a difference when things are close. No one thinks like that do they? Not even our Postman Both do, very much, exist, ’Chaos Voters’ have been the subject of study recently and, via a NYT column, here’s a quick precis. ”Petersen, Osmundsen and Arceneaux find that those who meet their definition of having a “need for chaos” express that need by willingly spreading disinformation. Their goal is not to advance their own ideology but to undermine political elites, left and right, and to “mobilize others against politicians in general.” These disrupters do not “share rumors because they believe them to be true. For the core group, hostile political rumors are simply a tool to create havoc.” www.nytimes.com/2019/09/04/opinion/trump-voters-chaos.htmlSo, trying to argue with them about political ideas is worthless, they simply do not care. On a global basis, we can also see this through the actions of such as Putin. Truth is merely a weakness when untruths are more powerful. The ‘Punishment Brexiters’ are often found on the left. The idea of a hard Brexit leading to a socialist utopia as a way out of chaos, isn’t that uncommon. On the right, the idea of ‘punishment’ is more baked into the actual idea, as we’ve seen. They also want to hurt the same group but at least it’s their opponents they want to hurt rather than those they purport to want to help! In making some sort of theatre link, here’s an article by Eddie Marsan who articulates this idea. ”Now, I’ve never met Seumas Milne or Andrew Murray, the two aides who are said to have the greatest influence over Corbyn, but if I was writing this as a script, I couldn’t create two more caricatured personifications of the phenomenon I have just outlined. One is a Winchester-educated revolutionary, son of a former BBC director general, the other has an aristocratic background and an entry in Debrett’s Peerage. Together, they are trying to stop ordinary people having an informed vote over the most important issue they’ve ever faced. The right-wing Brexiteers believe that a free market utopia will rise from the ashes of destruction that our departure from the EU will bring; left-wing Brexiteers say it will be a socialist utopia which will emerge. What both have in common is that they believe the destruction is a price worth paying.” www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/eddie-marsan-corbyn-betraying-working-class-1-5846443
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Oct 18, 2019 20:12:16 GMT
Is there a group that thinks it's just a trade deal that became weirdly intrusive?
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Brexit
Oct 19, 2019 10:59:32 GMT
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Oct 19, 2019 10:59:32 GMT
It looks as though Johnson’s gameplan is to replace the DUP, who turned out to be too focused, with the Labour Brexit fringe, hoping that they don’t realise that they are the new patsies. There is a supreme irony in this that Johnson’s putative deal is, literally, a surrender bill as regards the UK and Northern Ireland.
DUP support, people may not know, is predominantly working class unionists. Of course, Johnson was going to betray them, just as he will use and discard any of the ‘useful idiots’ from Labour who betray the working class.
|
|
5,593 posts
|
Brexit
Oct 19, 2019 11:19:53 GMT
Post by lynette on Oct 19, 2019 11:19:53 GMT
All I’m thinking is that James Graham must be overheating with potential play ideas. The corridors must be like a sauna of conspiracy.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Oct 19, 2019 11:50:45 GMT
All I’m thinking is that James Graham must be overheating with potential play ideas. The corridors must be like a sauna of conspiracy. He’ll have to wait a few decades, as per This House, to do it justice. Sadly, I fear I may not be around when the consequences have fully been lived through (Graham’s 37, so has a better chance!) Starmer currently showing the Labour leadership up by having read the bill and therefore being able to take it forensically apart. If only he, or someone with a brain, was the leader of the Labour party in the past few years.
|
|
724 posts
|
Brexit
Oct 19, 2019 15:01:42 GMT
Post by Latecomer on Oct 19, 2019 15:01:42 GMT
Gauke thread on twitter is interesting....he would vote for Letwin amendment and then the deal tomorrow (which means deal is not passed tomorrow until Withdrawl act is all passed)), Boris has to ask for extension, then suggests amending the actual withdrawal agreement act to make sure no crash out at the end of 2020 if full trade agreement not signed. Only problem with that is if that amendment wins support (no reason why it wouldn’t - parliament doesn’t want no deal) then ERG will be cross......so withdrawal bill may be voted down....getting a deal is like trying to catch frogs! I’m calling it tomorrow.....Letwin amendment win, amended deal voted through. For the record I cant believe this huge act of self harm. What idiots we are..... So will he send the letter? I’m guessing yes, at the last minute, so the newspaper headlines are all about “Parliament delays Brexit” This is a fatuous argument as, according to Johnson, there was “plenty of time to get all the legislation done by 31st Oct”....so now let’s see him put that into action.....Perhaps there was only enough time when the threat was no deal alternative...hardly a good way to do business. I thought Kier Stammer was good today.
|
|
2,536 posts
|
Post by n1david on Oct 19, 2019 15:04:10 GMT
Kier Starmer was good today - had a real grasp of the implications of the deal. More like him on both sides of the House would mean we'd be in a much better place than we are. This stuff is complex and many MPs don't have the type of mind to deal with the detail.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Oct 19, 2019 15:18:26 GMT
Kier Starmer was good today - had a real grasp of the implications of the deal. More like him on both sides of the House would mean we'd be in a much better place than we are. This stuff is complex and many MPs don't have the type of mind to deal with the detail. If the bill is amended to place the whole of the UK in the customs union and single market whilst discussions take place on the next stage I’m pretty confident it would pass. Brexiters can say we are not in the EU, business can heave a sigh of relief, the economy doesn’t contract, the union remains in place and no part of this country is given preferential treatment. If the government want to move on to the next stage, there is an answer staring them in the face. Instead we have a government trying to do everything now, when it will only change later if we move into a transition, anyway. (yes, I know, it’s primarily because they will tank in the polls as the Brexit Party rises again. Party before country, once more.)
|
|
724 posts
|
Brexit
Oct 19, 2019 15:48:55 GMT
Post by Latecomer on Oct 19, 2019 15:48:55 GMT
Brexit is on the one hand all about national identity (or it’s been constructed by Vote Leave to be about that) and on the other it’s ALL about the details....rules or origin, frictionless trade, customs, VAT.....and those are hard to understand. I was so enraged when Johnson said on the BBC news that he would be organising a free trade deal with the EU and Laura K didn’t point out that this would mean border checks.....I think that’s one reason Brexit is hard....people tune out when you get to real practical details. I thought Stammer was good explaining some of that today. Industry just needs to relentlessly point out that they will be forced to cease business here unless customs union and as close as possible to single market. I agree with CP above that I reckon they could get a deal through (it is essentially what Labour argued for)
|
|
|
Brexit
Oct 19, 2019 16:04:36 GMT
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2019 16:04:36 GMT
Kier Starmer was good today - had a real grasp of the implications of the deal. More like him on both sides of the House would mean we'd be in a much better place than we are. This stuff is complex and many MPs don't have the type of mind to deal with the detail. Kier is the former Head of the CPS and a QC so he is a very sharp guy. Fair play to him in actually deciding to become an MP when he could have easily gone back to far more lucrative legal work, taken on some nice directorships or just had a seat in the Lords.
|
|
|
Brexit
Oct 19, 2019 16:09:59 GMT
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2019 16:09:59 GMT
Letwin has said he will support Boris' bill now. He merely wanted to get the idea of No Deal out of the way. Other former Tories may get behind this now along with fringes from the Labour Party or former Labour MPs who are sitting as independents. But without DUP support the numbers for Boris to pass it will be fairly hard.
We've still got the Queen's Speech to be debated, a new Speaker to be chosen and a possible election. I think with No Deal off the table then there could be a move for an election to be called in a couple of weeks and taking place late Nov/Early Dec. The only issue here is it eats into the extension time unless an outline deal has been passed and the assumption is whichever comes first the deal is passed or extension time expires.
Even Jared O'Mara showed up today in Parliament!
|
|
1,846 posts
|
Brexit
Oct 19, 2019 16:24:40 GMT
via mobile
Post by NeilVHughes on Oct 19, 2019 16:24:40 GMT
Letwin was always the only real way forward today and a certainty once the DUP said they were considering it this morning, this was their payback for Johnson selling them out.
Legislation of this magnitude should always be considered in depth before becoming law and an extension on this premise is more than valid.
If Johnson has started negotiating immediately with the EU his negotiated Deal (which he most probably never wanted) could have been reached much earlier and introduced to Parliament with plenty of time to achieve his promise to leave on the 31st as he would have had the numbers and the good will of the Tory Rebels.
His humiliation and having to request an extension is self inflicted and deserved for the way he believes and has acted as if he is above the Democratic norms of this Country and dismissed anyone with a contrary view.
If he does not request an extension this evening and is found in contempt of Parliament he should be treated as every other citizen who breaks the law and all that this entails.
|
|
1,909 posts
|
Post by sf on Oct 19, 2019 21:11:09 GMT
Kier Starmer was good today - had a real grasp of the implications of the deal. More like him on both sides of the House would mean we'd be in a much better place than we are. This stuff is complex and many MPs don't have the type of mind to deal with the detail.
It's not just that many MPs don't have the type of mind to do a forensic analysis of the details. A fair few of them don't even have the inclination.
|
|
4,458 posts
|
Post by poster J on Oct 19, 2019 22:12:20 GMT
Just when I thought Boris couldn't get any more infantile...
I'm actually lost for words now, his complete lack of respect for the constitution of the country that he supposedly leads (and a huge swathe of its electorate) is appalling, indefensible and and utterly incomprehensible.
|
|
4,631 posts
|
Brexit
Oct 19, 2019 22:21:44 GMT
Post by Phantom of London on Oct 19, 2019 22:21:44 GMT
Gauke thread on twitter is interesting....he would vote for Letwin amendment and then the deal tomorrow (which means deal is not passed tomorrow until Withdrawl act is all passed)), Boris has to ask for extension, then suggests amending the actual withdrawal agreement act to make sure no crash out at the end of 2020 if full trade agreement not signed. Only problem with that is if that amendment wins support (no reason why it wouldn’t - parliament doesn’t want no deal) then ERG will be cross......so withdrawal bill may be voted down....getting a deal is like trying to catch frogs! I’m calling it tomorrow.....Letwin amendment win, amended deal voted through. For the record I cant believe this huge act of self harm. What idiots we are..... Aside from the expected, there are two more groups that haven’t really had much examination. First are the ‘chaos voters’ who were an important factor in the referendum win. Those who wanted to bring down what exists, hoping for a chance that it would give them something in return (the ‘house price fallers, for example, who wanted a collapse in the economy so that house prices crashed (yes, I know, I don’t understand the thought process either)). Increasingly, however, I’ve come across ‘punishment Brexiters’, who want the worst possible outcome, so that it kills off any chance of it being successful or lasting. I have to admit that, at times, I’ve had to stop myself going down that route. I would be okay but I just can’t allow those who are less secure to suffer in order to teach someone a lesson. Neither group is massive but 1 in a 100 can make a difference when things are close. Although I wouldn’t like to see the economy suffer, as jobs tend to go, less tax collected, public services get hit, it turns into a viscous circle (I think this is the place you were coming from.) But I also believe in don’t bite the hand that feeds you, the 2 groups that were the most vocal for Brexit being farmers and fishermen, who also enjoyed great EU subsidies and both used more than their fair quotas on EU workers, so why should the government now bail these 2 industries out, with central government grants.
|
|
5,593 posts
|
Brexit
Oct 19, 2019 22:31:20 GMT
Post by lynette on Oct 19, 2019 22:31:20 GMT
Farmers and fishermen may have been taking the long view. They might have been thinking about future generations having control of our food production. The Leave vote wasn’t all about individual and short term bank balances.
|
|
4,631 posts
|
Brexit
Oct 19, 2019 22:32:13 GMT
Post by Phantom of London on Oct 19, 2019 22:32:13 GMT
See the spineless Saint Theresa May voted for her Boris ‘lago’’ Johnson again. At least Phillip Hammond has the courage of his convictions.
|
|
4,631 posts
|
Brexit
Oct 19, 2019 22:37:07 GMT
Post by Phantom of London on Oct 19, 2019 22:37:07 GMT
Farmers and fishermen may have been taking the long view. They might have been thinking about future generations having control of our food production. The Leave vote wasn’t all about individual and short term bank balances. They had control over their own food productions, But they were happy to take the ‘tribute money’ for what they were told to grow. They were also so conscientious about the long term, they were happy to employ EU workforce, because it was cheaper, than British.
|
|
|
Brexit
Oct 19, 2019 23:29:19 GMT
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2019 23:29:19 GMT
Well letter was sent and accompanying letter to say ignore the first letter. I don't see how Boris thought he could get a deal through without DUP support.
Perhaps it needs the EU to give us an extension but this will be the final one and we need to get things sorted one way or another or just give us a month but then we call a general election.
What next a State of Emergency gets declared which the Privy Council has the power to do. No doubt Gina Miller would go to court over that unless she was put under house arrest.
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Oct 19, 2019 23:41:23 GMT
I have avoided this thread until now - simply because I want my theatre talk to be as a free from contemporary politics as possible.
However I have spent a lot of this evening looking at the relevant legislation and the letters causing such a kerfuffle.
1 - The sending of the letter is exactly as laid out in the 'Benn' Act. It was sent - as required by law. And it is being acted on by the EU. So the purpose of the Act has been fulfilled. 2 - Nothing in the letter to Tusk (copied to others) is new. Nor does this letter contain any request to ignore the 'Benn' Act letter. There is also nothing in it asking the EU to deny the extension request. It does lay out the legal status of the first letter and the steps being taken to pass the legislation that will render any extension unnecessary.
It is always necessary to look at the detail of these things rather than relying on Twitter or news reports for any real accuracy.
There is a huge amount of sound and fury abroad tonight over these letters. And it is misplaced.
The Act required a letter to be sent. That letter - exactly as set out in the schedule to the Act - has been sent. The EU are now acting on receipt of that letter.
The second letter is a perfectly legitimate letter to send - it is not scandalous or illegal.
I had so hoped that we would be beyond this phase by now. Sadly we aren't. But please - whatever your position on this broader subject, please do read up on the actual content of legislation and documentation - form your own conclusions. Don't just jump because someone on Twitter is making a lot of noise.
We need to take the heat out of this - not contribute to more.
|
|
|
Brexit
Oct 19, 2019 23:59:26 GMT
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2019 23:59:26 GMT
I have avoided this thread until now - simply because I want my theatre talk to be as a free from contemporary politics as possible. However I have spent a lot of this evening looking at the relevant legislation and the letters causing such a kerfuffle. 1 - The sending of the letter is exactly as laid out in the 'Benn' Act. It was sent - as required by law. And it is being acted on by the EU. So the purpose of the Act has been fulfilled. 2 - Nothing in the letter to Tusk (copied to others) is new. Nor does this letter contain any request to ignore the 'Benn' Act letter. There is also nothing in it asking the EU to deny the extension request. It does lay out the legal status of the first letter and the steps being taken to pass the legislation that will render any extension unnecessary. It is always necessary to look at the detail of these things rather than relying on Twitter or news reports for any real accuracy. There is a huge amount of sound and fury abroad tonight over these letters. And it is misplaced. The Act required a letter to be sent. That letter - exactly as set out in the schedule to the Act - has been sent. The EU are now acting on receipt of that letter. The second letter is a perfectly legitimate letter to send - it is not scandalous or illegal. I had so hoped that we would be beyond this phase by now. Sadly we aren't. But please - whatever your position on this broader subject, please do read up on the actual content of legislation and documentation - form your own conclusions. Don't just jump because someone on Twitter is making a lot of noise. We need to take the heat out of this - not contribute to more. Hooray for common sense! Can you please stand at the next election, oxfordsimon - something tells me there are going to be a few vacancies to fill... ;-)
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Brexit
Oct 20, 2019 0:00:01 GMT
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Oct 20, 2019 0:00:01 GMT
The letters are a deliberate distraction, merely to send media on a wild goose chase so that they miss the substance. Ignore.
The big story of the week is of betrayal, however. I’m rarely shocked at politics but the brutality and insouciance with which Unionists have been used and dropped is at a whole new level of shamefulness, Not only is it saying that Johnson is happy with destroying the Union but it must give anyone being given promises for voting for his, much more hardline, deal pause. They must surely know now that they will be next for this humiliation ritual.
|
|
|
Brexit
Oct 20, 2019 0:26:15 GMT
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2019 0:26:15 GMT
With the talk about getting the act through the Lords and there could have been delaying tactics how come these weren't used on the Benn Bill.
Plus I'll throw another scenario out there with all these independent MPs and others under threat from deselection etc, are some just thinking they may not stand again so can be as awkward as they like with things as they have nothing to lose.
|
|
|
Brexit
Oct 20, 2019 4:58:15 GMT
Post by londonpostie on Oct 20, 2019 4:58:15 GMT
Almost anything involving Hillary Benn is second-rate nonsense - a poor intellect making a living off his fathers achievements. Hot air, bluster and without any weight.
The yang to Nickolas Soames' yin.
|
|
1,846 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Oct 20, 2019 6:05:09 GMT
On consideration the second letter ironically adds weight to the extension letter.
We have a Sovereign Parliament, Parliament by definition speaks for the whole nation.
Therefore saying that the request for an extension comes from Parliament is actually saying the request for an extension has the ‘will of the people’ as per our representative sovereign Parliament against the opinion of one man who happens to be Prime Minister.
This returns to the calibre of our Prime Minister, a man who lies, is contemptuous of the law, and does not uphold /believe in the Democratic principles of this Country.
He is a disgrace and mocks every core value we expect of our elected representatives and especially our Prime Minister.
The natural next step is a Vote of No Confidence once the EU agree the extension which wil hopefully happen very quickly, the 14 days to build a Government will take us past the 31st.
If not due to the close numbers the opposition Parties could still end up with Johnson’s Deal being passed, the only caveat is they must believe there are the numbers for a confirmatory referendum or an amendment around what happens at the end of the transition period to stop a No-Deal scenario.
Every day in Parliament is engrossing, will the Government force the Bill through on Monday, will the Speaker allow it to be heard, it is not customary to allow two debates on the same Bill and Bercow is not a ‘friend’ of this Government.
Johnson has forgotten this pertinent rule ‘keep your friends close and your enemies even closer’ especially when your enemies appear to be one step ahead of you and greater in number.
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Brexit
Oct 20, 2019 8:00:54 GMT
Post by theglenbucklaird on Oct 20, 2019 8:00:54 GMT
Almost anything involving Hillary Benn is second-rate nonsense - a poor intellect making a living off his fathers achievements. Hot air, bluster and without any weight. The yang to Nickolas Soames' yin. Hero of the right with his war mongering speech last year
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Brexit
Oct 20, 2019 8:05:28 GMT
Post by theglenbucklaird on Oct 20, 2019 8:05:28 GMT
On consideration the second letter ironically adds weight to the extension letter. We have a Sovereign Parliament, Parliament by definition speaks for the whole nation. Therefore saying that the request for an extension comes from Parliament is actually saying the request for an extension has the ‘will of the people’ as per our representative sovereign Parliament against the opinion of one man who happens to be Prime Minister. This returns to the calibre of our Prime Minister, a man who lies, is contemptuous of the law, and does not uphold /believe in the Democratic principles of this Country.
He is a disgrace and mocks every core value we expect of our elected representatives and especially our Prime Minister.The natural next step is a Vote of No Confidence once the EU agree the extension which wil hopefully happen very quickly, the 14 days to build a Government will take us past the 31st. If not due to the close numbers the opposition Parties could still end up with Johnson’s Deal being passed, the only caveat is they must believe there are the numbers for a confirmatory referendum or an amendment around what happens at the end of the transition period to stop a No-Deal scenario. Every day in Parliament is engrossing, will the Government force the Bill through on Monday, will the Speaker allow it to be heard, it is not customary to allow two debates on the same Bill and Bercow is not a ‘friend’ of this Government. Johnson has forgotten this pertinent rule ‘keep your friends close and your enemies even closer’ especially when your enemies appear to be one step ahead of you and greater in number. Definitely the attack point for the Labour party during an election campaign.
|
|