GRcade

Drumstick wrote:If and when there is a GE, do people here genuinely believe there will be a Lib Deb surge? I just can't see them picking up more than 25 seats.

Mystical Ninja Starring Danmon wrote:It depends. If the opposition parties were smart the LDs could pick up lots of seats.

I have absolutely no idea why Labour, LDs, Greens, SNP and PC aren't talking to one another about the upcoming election. If they agree to only field one candidate from their parties in each constituency (either incumbents or the closest loser from the last GE) they'd wipe out the Conservatives.

Karl_ wrote:Lib Dems are naturally more at home with Tories it seems, when push comes to shove on every issue bar Brexit, they'll compromise to the right not to the left. I think it was Owen Jones that tweeted the other day, "the only consistent Lib Dem policy is to prevent a Labour government." That's why we won't see a pact.

Still, I agree it would be good hypothetically for Labour to step aside in seats that are 100% LD vs. CON and vice versa. There's just probably too much distrust and ideological division.

Blue Eyes wrote:Anyone see that banana split Alan Sugar having a go at Diane Abbott yesterday? He's such an embarrassing thick strawberry floating turd. Hate him.

captain red dog wrote:I've never understood why a Tory and Lib Dem pact always seems more possible than a Labour one. For as long a so can remember, generally Lib Dem and Labour have been pretty much aligned on policy. The only big disagreement I remember was over the Iraq war.

But when you compare Lib Dem policy to Tory policy, there are very little similarities.

Drumstick wrote:If and when there is a GE, do people here genuinely believe there will be a Lib Deb surge? I just can't see them picking up more than 25 seats.

International students will be allowed to stay in the UK for two years after graduation to find a job, under new proposals announced by the Home Office.

The move reverses a decision made in 2012 by then-Home Secretary Theresa May that forced overseas students to leave four months after finishing a degree.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson said the change would see students "unlock their potential" and begin careers in the UK.

But campaign group Migration Watch called it a "retrograde" step.

The change will apply to international students in the UK - there were around 450,000 last year - who start courses at undergraduate level or above from next year onwards.

They must be studying at an institution with a track record in upholding immigration checks.

Under the proposals, there is no restriction on the kinds of jobs students would have to seek and no cap on numbers.

Chancellor Sajid Javid tweeted that the move was "about time", adding that the government "should have reversed this silly policy years ago".

Alistair Jarvis, chief executive of Universities UK, welcomed the decision, saying it would benefit the UK economy and reinstate the UK as a "first choice study destination".

"Evidence shows that international students bring significant positive social outcomes to the UK as well as £26bn in economic contributions, but for too long the lack of post-study work opportunities in the UK has put us at a competitive disadvantage in attracting those students," he said.

But Alp Mehmet, chairman of Migration Watch UK, said the decision was an "unwise" step that would "likely lead to foreign graduates staying on to stack shelves".

"Our universities are attracting a record number of overseas students so there is no need to devalue a study visa by turning it into a backdoor route for working here," he added.

KK wrote:

Chancellor Sajid Javid tweeted that the move was "about time", adding that the government "should have reversed this silly policy years ago".

twitter.com/Peston/status/1171757156317761536

Moggy wrote:

captain red dog wrote:I've never understood why a Tory and Lib Dem pact always seems more possible than a Labour one. For as long a so can remember, generally Lib Dem and Labour have been pretty much aligned on policy. The only big disagreement I remember was over the Iraq war.

But when you compare Lib Dem policy to Tory policy, there are very little similarities.

Has anybody said a Tory/LD pact is more possible?

I’d say that was utterly impossible at the moment with their Brexit stances.

Left wingers see the LDs as centre-right, right wingers see them as centre-left. They are either Tory stooges or loony lefties.

captain red dog wrote:

Moggy wrote:

captain red dog wrote:I've never understood why a Tory and Lib Dem pact always seems more possible than a Labour one. For as long a so can remember, generally Lib Dem and Labour have been pretty much aligned on policy. The only big disagreement I remember was over the Iraq war.

But when you compare Lib Dem policy to Tory policy, there are very little similarities.

Has anybody said a Tory/LD pact is more possible?

I’d say that was utterly impossible at the moment with their Brexit stances.

Left wingers see the LDs as centre-right, right wingers see them as centre-left. They are either Tory stooges or loony lefties.

Sorry Moggy, didn't see this until this morning. I meant outside of the Brexit debate, it always seems more likely the LDs would go in with the Tories rather than Labour. It always baffles me. When you look at the coalition in 2010, LD support was destroyed because they followed Tory policy which was so completely at odds with their own values, and indeed manifesto.

Take the tuition fee debacle. They'd probably have got that policy through, or something very close to it, if they went into power with Labour in 2010. Instead they found themselves wedded to austerity and doing the exact opposite.