The title of this post is from a poem by Rudyard Kipling, but could the 2017 General Election be a rerun of the 1983 General Election, where Margaret Thatcher gave Michael Foot, the order of the boot?
Jeremy Corbyn is actually two years younger than Michael Foot was at the 1983 General Election, which was incidentally when he was elected for the first time.
At the 1983 General Election Margaret Thatcher was in her late-fifties and now Theresa May is in her early-sixties.
I think that humorists and cartoonists will be having a good election, drawing comparisons.
Thatcher won her biggest victory in the Falklands, so will May win her victory in the Brexit negotiations?
I certainly feel that far outposts like the Falklands and Gibraltar could figure in this election.
I come from mixed Jewish/Huguenot lines and my philosophy is probably humanist, although I’m a confirmed atheist.
But if I’m wrong, finding Heaven could be a bonus when I die!
This article on the BBC is entitled Labour ruling ‘fails Jewish community’, says Chief Rabbi.
Individuals, like Livingstone have no place in an inclusive political party.
This article on the BBC is entitled Date announced for London ultra low emission zone.
I am not against the ultra low emission zone, just the way that it is being brought in unilaterally in London.
We need ultra low emission zones all over the country and there is many things we can do.
- Cross-city railways and trams.
- More hybrid and electric buses when they are available at an affordable cost.
- Park-and-ride facilities.
- Trucks should be more environmentally and cyclist friendly.
- Grants will probably be needed to scrap older diesel vehicles and invest in new trucks and buses.
The one thing that is right is to bring in the zone in 2019, which will be just after the Central London section of Crossrail has opened.
There needs to be measures from Central Government, but as ever, staying in power comes first.
I have a feeling that London’s ultra low emission zone will not be good for Sadiq Khan in London, as it’s going to cause inconvenience for many in London.
Replying to Theresa May’s announcement of Article 51, Jeremy Corbyn gave a speech that was probably nine month’s late. If he had been so anti-Brexit last summer, perhaps the result of the Referendum would have been different.
This article on the BBC is entitled White House bans certain news media from briefing. This is said.
The White House has barred several major broadcasters and newspapers from attending an informal press briefing.
The BBC, CNN, the New York Times and others were excluded from an audience with Press Secretary Sean Spicer, with no reason given.
If you don’t like the messenger, perhaps they’ve not the problem, but what the message might be.
Recent stories on the BBC web site include.
- Mexico Warns US Over Border Wall Funding
- India Shocked Over US Bar Shooting
- Trump Aid Pressed FBI On Russia Reports
- Caithlyn Jenner To Donald Trump “Call Me!”
But those who voted for Trump think he’s right.
Supporters thought that about Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Saddam Hussein, Qaddafi and Hitler.
Politicians should be wary of being selective with the messages they will accept.
Especially, when you consider that many English speakers throughout the world, get their American world news as it effects them from the BBC or CNN and not from Trump TV!
My father told me all about the Zinoviev Letter, which was written around the time of the 1924 General Election and published in the Daily Mail.
He certainly knew all about the letter, but I doubt he was anything to do with its production, as he’d only have been twenty at the time.
But in the 1920s and 1930s he moved in left-wing Tory political circles, so he probably knew the truth, even if all he told me was the basic story, you can now read on Wikipedia.
The Zinoviev letter would certainly be considered Fake News today.
This is the headline on a post on an article on the BBC.
Perhaps, I’m wrong, but I always thought that any successful politician needed the media on their side.
Or is it different across the pond?
I hsve just read this page on The Official Monster Raving Looney Web Site, which is entitled The Incredible Flying Brick will save Stoke.
As Screaming Lord Sutch used to say “Vote Loony! You know it makes sense!”
I first came across him in the 1966 General Election, where he stood in the Huyton consituency, which was where I was living at the time.
I remember him appearing on the radio in the 1990s and going through the original manifesto from one of his first elections.
Strangely several of his proposals had been put into law, like lowering the voting age to 18.
There is a by-election in the Copeland constituency, if you haven’t noticed and this is the BBC’s guide to the election.
When I was at Liverpool University in the 1960s, one of C’s friends used to live near Barrow-in-Furness. I remember we had a drink with her once and she told us how she used to have to take five trains and umpteen hours to get between Barrow and Liverpool.
Liverpool to Barrow-in-Furness now takes just over two and a half hours with a single change at Preston.
So when I heard someone from UKIP say that HS2 wouldn’t benefit Copeland on the BBC, I thought I’d check the times.
HS2 opens to Crewe in 2027 and I suspect that trains going to the North of Crewe will use HS2 to Crewe and then run on the classic lines to go North.
Euston to Crewe currently takes 90 minutes, but after HS2 opens this time will reduce to 58 minutes. Times are from this page in The Guardian.
The fastest trains to Barrow-in-Furness currently take three hours fifty-three minutes with a change at either Preston or Lancaster.
So just reducing this time by the thirty two minutes saved South of Crewe, brings the time down to three hours twenty-one minutes.
But I think we’ll see innovation in HS2’s trains.
It seems to be the policy now for a company to have short and long trains, as both the Class 800 trains and Greater Anglia’s Aventras come in both short and long versions, where two short trains can join together for flexibility of operation.
Could Hs2 take this further and say have five-car short trains, three of which could join together for the fast run to and from London?
So will we see five-car trains that can serve places like Barrow-in-Furness, Blackpool and Burnley, joining at Preston for a fast run on HS2 to London?
I also think that by the mid-2020s, all electric trains will have the capability to fit onboard energy storage to give them access to places like Barrow-in-Furness, which may not be electrified.
So could we see a high speed train serving Barrow-in-Furness in 2027? After all Barrow-in-Furness to the West Coast Main Line is just twenty-nine miles, which by that date, will be totally in range of a train with onboard energy storage.
If you look at the provisional timetable for Phase 1 of HS2 on Wikipedia, you will see that there is one train per hour (tph) to Preston. Could this be a train created by bringing together portions from Barrow-in-Furness, Blackpool and Burnley? I don’t know, but the French do similar things with TGVs.
I wouldn’t be surprised and with selective improvements to the route North of Preston and on the Furness Line, the time from London to Barrow could be under three hours, when HS2 opens to Crewe.
Effectively, by building HS2 to Crewe and using specially-designed trains, towns like Barrow-in-Furness get a high speed connection to Birmingham and London.
Cancel HS2 and Copeland will still be deep in the past, as far as rail travel is concerned.
That is my one word response to this article on the BBC, which is entitled Michael Flynn resignation: He had to go, says White House.
In this article on the BBC, which is entitled EU chief Jean-Claude Juncker ‘will not seek second term’, this is said.
Mr Juncker also said the UK could divide opinion among EU leaders once Brexit negotiations begin.
I think that will be highly likely, as putting 27 people in a room and asking themany question, will give several different answers.
This is a paragraph from the article, which talks about implementing signalling post-Brexit.
The endless committees to discuss and agree how the standards will be implemented do not get in the way. Whilst not suitable for main line usage (at least in the foreseeable future), there could be suburban routes around cities (for example Merseyrail) that could benefit from CBTC deployment.
I know it is talking about one small part of railway signalling, but if the states of Europe can’t agree a common position on that, how will they agree a common position on how to deal with the UK during and after Brexit?
In some ways, the biggest problem with Brexit, is that we will still be arguing about the details of the settlement well into the 2030s and beyond.
I can see some absolutely silly arguments going on and on!