Alex Andreouಪರಿಶೀಲಿಸಿದ ಖಾತೆ

It’s beginning to look a lot like the Gatwick disruption is more deliberate sabotage than accident or hoax.https://twitter.com/bbcnews/status/1075728280601296896 …

O M F Ghttps://twitter.com/andrew__roth/status/1075712710371930112 …

And is doubly bitter for coming from someone whose migrant bus driver father would be considered valueless and undesirable under the criteria conceived by his own son. Although, I’m sure, even @sajidjavid finds ways to intellectualise why it somehow doesn’t mean that.

By saying “oh, this doesn’t apply to you; it applies to THEM”, it stratifies an entire society, including the people endorsing such a philosophy, in a way that entrenches the notion a sportsman or a hedge fund manager are of more value to society than a teacher or a nurse.

The toxic effect of an immigration salary threshold is that it equates “value” to a society to “making money”; it lures us into accepting that anyone making less than £30k is a drain, even though that includes the vast majority of us. It’s a national statement of self-disrespect.

The incredible spectacle of a priest actually getting off on causing half the country emotional distress and plunging three million disenfranchised migrants into helplessness and insecurity. Oh yeah. It’s a wonder the country is divided when the “victors” show such grace.https://twitter.com/giles_fraser/status/1075352794402566144 …

The government expect a no-deal #Brexit can potentially result in homelessness, poverty and suicide. They’re planning for that. But blue passports. So, yay.https://twitter.com/seemamalhotra1/status/1075448861076963328 …

8. This is, naturally, just speculation, albeit educated speculation based on having observed how deals with the EU have worked in the past. But I thought it was worth putting it on record.

7. Now, it is by no means certain the deal would pass at that point. It might still be voted down, but she will have given herself a decent chance against the odds.

6. This, I think, is why the draft from the last EU council changed. Not because the EU were being mean, but because a resolution which said “we will keep working on finding a solution” would have been counterproductive to the sense of “all is lost”, essential to May succeeding.

5. This gives her momentum; it creates a sense of relief in those worried about no deal, making the unpalatable, palatable by virtue of this deus ex machina. It allows her the superiority of being able to say “you said it couldn’t be done, but here it is”, which she loves doing.

4. By delaying the vote she raises the stakes and creates a sense of heightened peril, enhanced by no-deal preparation stories, troops on stand-by etc. She then comes back from Brussels three days before the vote waving some codicil with a time limited backstop (2023? 2028?).

3. Had she come to the House with £39bn to start with, it would have been shouted down. But against a fictional £100bn she can claim to have battled the EU and prevailed (and, indeed, repeatedly has made that claim precisely). And so it may be with her final deal.

2. We saw a dry run of this before. Just like a few well-placed leaks in 2017 that “the EU is demanding £100bn as settlement” when all previous estimates had been around the £40bn that we eventually agreed to. The £100bn rumour was floated purely to give May a perceived victory.

THREAD: 1. The whole May vote delay has a whiff of theatre to it which makes this imposed four-weeks before voting the cliffhanger mid-season break. Everything feels meticulously staged. My sense is a backstop time limit is already agreed; this panto is to give May momentum.