Those are the rules. If more than 5% of visa requests overall are rejected by HO, then their visa sponsor status is put under review and they are given a year to improve.

Change the names if you like but you’re missing the wood for the trees if you think it’s of any importance.

Stupid analogy. Also historically wrong as it happens - the Whigs were the opposition to the Tories. They later evolved into the Liberals. Remain and Leave are still the names most apply to their Brexit related political identities. That’s why they work as symbols/shorthand.

Can’t decide if you’re being intentionally ironic here or

Though if true that could point to trouble ahead because while you can carry on going to the local lidl as Mayor, just about, I doubt you can as PM

Yes but something a wise observer of AB told me once has stuck - “he sets his compass by the conversations he has in the local Lidl where he lives” - explains a lot about his unusual strengths (and weaknesses) - this might be a case in point.

Yes but it feels like it won’t be for long I suspect - and then all of a sudden everyone will be like “backing rejoin is obviously a good idea, everyone I know has always thought this.”

Yes and it feels like a real puzzle to me as I’ve observed a lot of the people involved in generating such effects up close for some time now and there really is this mysterious “when the herd moves, it moves” dynamic. Everyone thinks one thing, whatever the evidence. Then they all move. Why? IDK

It is something that repeats so often that one day I’d like to try and study it properly - when, how and why does an elite consensus become resistant to new info that is neither hard to find nor hard to correctly interpret? Because it happens a lot, but not always. What are the preconditions?

Yes indeed, as is often the case. See also: “Labour are losing more votes to the left than the right”, “Kemi is more popular but the Tories are not”, and “Most people really dislike Nigel Farage” - all as obvious as the Pope’s confessional status, yet all routinely missed or ignored.

Oh I think the politics of actually rejoining would be much messier. My point was about the politics of supporting the idea of rejoining.

If you like. Doesn’t really matter, people know what is meant in both cases

No not really. People know what is involved

Those who were old enough to vote in 2016 but didn’t also now break heavily Remain. So three forces all steadily pulling electorate in same direction. The politics which makes sense in a 52/48 nation may not make sense in a 40/60 nation. And we are 40/60 nation now.

This is both due to Leave voters changing their minds as Brexit has disappointed (Leave to Remain switching much more common than opposite), and due to demographic drift - Leave voters were old, more of them have died. Young ppl joining electorate skew heavily Remain.

Also obvious and often forgotten: underlying maths here changed. A lot of people still analyse politics of Brexit as if the split in the public is still 52/48, with leave both an overall majority and more efficiently spread, with most seats majority Leave. None of that true now

It is indeed remarkably self-defeating

That's disappointing to hear - how did you phrase the reply?

Good stuff, and good on her for taking responsibility and correcting course.

Thoughts on Holborn & St P: Not ideal Green territory. May's locals were a Labour-Green toss-up here, so with Labour's position improving under Burnham, a fairly comfortable hold was to be expected. But it means that in the places where the Greens actually beat Labour in May, they remain a threat.