RayC

No evidence that Johnson is calling any shots.

Imo London has had two poor mayors in a row (Johnson and Khan). It would be a reversal of usual practice for the rest of the UK to subsidize London. https://www.theweek.co.uk/checked-out/84933/does-london-really-subsidise-the-uk

Who is Michael Charles?

More Corbyn and less Starmer, and Labour would have fared better in the 2019 election? An "interesting" take on things

Usually I'd take anything that appears in The Express with a truckload of salt, but the article quotes Tony Connelly -who imo is an excellent, well-informed journalist - so there is probably something in this story. Imo just as Johnson needs to move on state aid, so does Macron on fishing. Hopefully, Merkel might still be able to make both see sense? In any event, this highlights what might happen if there is 'No deal' as so many Brexiters wish. Never mind though: We 'hold all the cards', and 'they need us more than we need them'.

YOU have misunderstood and/or misinterpreted my post(s). My post (#59) was an off-the-cuff, sacastic remark to @Loiner , which he appears to have treated with the contempt it probably deserved by ignoring it. So, if it helps put an end to this exchange. No, I don't believe that voters in the UK have been disenfranchised, or that the current government has any plans to do so. I'll try to pre-empt any reply by adding that I expect that the 2024 general election will go ahead as planned.

A very helpful and constructive comment from a member of the ruling party!

Even more painful for me.

And perhaps you ought to understand the nature and context of the conversation in question before trying to pull me up about. Below is @Loiner post which I commented on, together with my reply. Tell me how replacing 48% with 37%, 1% or any number between 0.1 - 100 alters the nub of my argument? Or are you are suggesting that it is ok to disenfranchise part of the electorate? @loiner: Apologies for quoting your post here, but necessary to make my point. _-------- Disenfranchising 48% of the population. Might as well do away with the election in 2024 w

Seems a bit pedantic as the point that I was making wasn't dependent on the numbers; the figure could just as easily been 1% and the argument would remain the same. Nevertheless, I'll change "48% of the population" to "34.656% of the population" if you like.

... And done rather well out of it (although clearly that is a matter of opinion)

Isn't it a bit more specific? "... me and my countrymen" who think like me.

Disenfranchising 48% of the population. Might as well do away with the election in 2024 while you're at it.

So democracy amounts to freedom of expression so long as it's what I say/ want?

Yes. If the UK is relatively poorer in the future, will you reconsider your position advocating being a medium-sized economy outside of the biggest trading bloc in the world? Btw: In terms of productivity, the UK measures up poorly via-a-vis other nations. I imagine that you blame this on the EU constraining the UK (probably a rhetorical question)?