Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

I don't think the Conservatives would have him back, Haystack, and they certainly don't need him now they have a majority. If he quits UKIP, I'm pretty sure he'd be forced into becoming an independent.

It would be nice if he did come back. It would do serious damage to UKIP and get the Conservatives more votes next time and increase their majority now. He might choose to trigger a by election though with uncertain results. He wasn't popular in the Conservative party and was regarded as a trouble maker. I think he left the party as he could see there was no chance of promotion and the same applied to Reckless.

the return of prodigal sheep is often more than welcome
that they might be occasionally ornery, would be no bad thing either

churchill switched parties and returned

If he is ornery, I would think he will feel at home in the tory party.

If he is ornery, I would think he will feel at home in the tory party.

indeed, just as does dennis skinner :-)

SNP to escalate battle for Commons front bench amid fury at Labour's 'absolutely pathetic' behaviour

SNP ready to order MPs into Parliament for 7am and block Labour committee appointments if Dennis Skinner's side does not back down in seats row



Nicola and the wee beasties




By Ben Riley-Smith, Political Correspondent

5:30PM BST 03 Jun 2015



The SNP is threatening a major escalation in its battle over a Commons front bench after branding Labour's refusal to hand over the seats "absolutely pathetic".


It is understood the leadership is willing to order MPs to get into Parliament at 7am and block Labour appointments on Commons committees if the row is not resolved.


"If they want to play silly games, we'll play silly games", a senior figure told this newspaper after admitting to being "f***ing furious" with Labour's attitude.


It comes with half a dozen Labour backbenchers – led by veteran Labour MP Dennis Skinner – continuing to refuse to give up their front bench seats in the Commons to the SNP.


There is anger among the SNP that despite getting official third party status in Westminster Labour is refusing to fully vacate the second opposition front bench.



the other beast



more: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/SNP/11649598/SNP-to-escalate-battle-for-Commons-front-bench-amid-fury-at-Labours-absolutely-pathetic-behaviour.html

I see that Jeremy Corbyn is running for the Labour leadership. I hope he wins as he would be even more unelectable than Michael Foot, Neil Kinnock and Ed Milband.

Max,

Start counting the u-turns of this U-bend government from now.

At the end of its period in "office", I think it will make FIFA look like a charity!

Tony Blair has denied reports he refused to speak at a world hunger conference because the organizers refused to pay him a £330,000 fee.

The former prime minister’s office said there had been no negotiations over how much he would earn.

Blair’s strong denial comes after an anonymous source told the Mail talks broke down over the speaking engagement because the event’s sponsors refused to pay the fee.

A senior figure at Eat, the British food chain sponsoring the hunger conference, confirmed the deal had fallen through because the fee was too high.

The controversial former Labour leader allegedly demanded £330,000 as a donation to his wife Cherie’s charity when approached by the Kruger Crowne talent agency.

The conference paid former US President Bill Clinton £327,000 to speak last year, but intimated Blair was not worth a similar sum, according to the Mail.

“Blair is just not Clinton, and even his star power is fast diminishing,” a source told the Mail.

“So for his talent reps to think Eat was going to pay massive bucks for him shows they overestimated his worth. My impression of the asking price is it was way beyond what he was worth for Eat. Blair is also controversial. His background and history as prime minister is controversial because of the role he played in Iraq.

“Some people don’t like his past, so when the forum organizers took that and the asking price into account, they decided to make do without him,” the source added.

Eat’s executive producer, Odd Arvid Stromstad, confirmed the fee was too high for the company to pay.

Stromstad told the Mail: “We were in contact but the fee they wanted was quite high, so we didn’t want to go into it.”

Tony Blair’s office strongly denied the allegations.

A spokesperson said in a statement: “We have never had any contact with this talent agency and they were not acting on our behalf.

“They approached the Cherie Blair Foundation for Women out of the blue, representing Eat, and all of their contacts were with the Foundation.

“They asked if Mr Blair would give the keynote speech in exchange for a donation to the Foundation, but Mr Blair was unable to do so because prior commitments meant it would be logistically impossible. This is the reason why he can’t attend,” they added.

Blair has come under scrutiny in recent years for his multimillion pound property portfolio and lucrative consultancy fees.

Some of Blair’s controversial clients include the government of Kazakhstan, which stands accused of human rights abuses.

I really do love you mummy!




UGGGH!

Fred take note .....................................

Talks go on and on ........

Iran And Six World Powers Start New Round Of Nuclear Deal Drafting
Thu, 4th Jun 2015 11:43

Vienna (Alliance News) - Senior diplomats from Iran and six major powers met on Thursday in Vienna to tackle remaining disagreements over the text of a planned nuclear deal that would bring Iran back into the international fold.

They have less than four weeks until their deadline to finalize the deal that would force Iran to curb its nuclear activities and accept intrusive inspections, in return for the lifting of sanctions.

What inspectors will be allowed to see, and how fast sanctions will be lifted, have emerged as two sticking points.

Tehran's negotiators are unhappy about inspections of military sites, which may have been used in the past for developing nuclear weapons parts, according to International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) findings.

Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said in Vienna that the issue would be tackled at this round.
"The talks are tough and complicated, but we still have a few weeks to go," he told Iranian state broadcaster IRIB.

While Britain, China, France, Russia, the US and Germany are worried that Iran could use its civilian nuclear facilities to make nuclear weapons material, Tehran says such suspicions are based on flawed Western intelligence.
Ending the long-standing nuclear dispute could also end Iran's diplomatic isolation and would make it easier for other powers to seek Iranian help in easing regional tensions.

not half as worried as israel!
however, realpolitik says that a deal needs to be done with iran for all sorts of reasons, oil of course being one of the more important

Any chance of curbing Israel's nuclear programme. They have had nuclear weapons since 1966.

ah well, those are defensive only :-)
to be fair, israel has been under very real and considerable threat for many decades, though some of that is self-inflicted, but assuredly far from all

Peace be upon you...or else!