The explosive amendment is that the European Parliament now gets to decide if we use our ludicrous emergency brake on benefits. Rendering a feeble change entirely worthless, it seems to me.
If that is true then Dave has to reject.
And he knows that, too, I imagine.
Walk away sir. Let's see some of that establishment gumption that we elected you for.
Come on Dave, this is what we elected you for. Walk away from the table, get the first plane back to London this morning and tell the Cabinet you're recommending we leave.
Delighted others are agreeing with my stance, Cameron finds himself in a tricky position. It has long been assumed on here that whatever he recommends will prevail, strange thing is if he opts to Remain that's far from certain, if he changes course to Leave it's a comfortable Out.
As a long term, committed Outer I'm delighted at what these "negotiations" have proven, but I'm genuinely shocked how poorly Cameron has managed it all, his reputation is irrevocably damaged regardless of the outcome.
Incidentally someone called Penny Mordaunt looks likely to campaign for Out, I'd like to see more of her on tv
I have been a huge Dave fan for 10 years, but shocked at how badly he's played this one. He made it too clear before he started negotiating that he would campaign for Remain whatever the outcome.
The current charade convinces me that the rest of the EU have no interest in helping the PM out, and that he misjudged the reaction of the press to the fig leaf he was given.
The explosive amendment is that the European Parliament now gets to decide if we use our ludicrous emergency brake on benefits. Rendering a feeble change entirely worthless, it seems to me.
If that is true then Dave has to reject.
And he knows that, too, I imagine.
Walk away sir. Let's see some of that establishment gumption that we elected you for.
Come on Dave, this is what we elected you for. Walk away from the table, get the first plane back to London this morning and tell the Cabinet you're recommending we leave.
Delighted others are agreeing with my stance, Cameron finds himself in a tricky position. It has long been assumed on here that whatever he recommends will prevail, strange thing is if he opts to Remain that's far from certain, if he changes course to Leave it's a comfortable Out.
As a long term, committed Outer I'm delighted at what these "negotiations" have proven, but I'm genuinely shocked how poorly Cameron has managed it all, his reputation is irrevocably damaged regardless of the outcome.
Incidentally someone called Penny Mordaunt looks likely to campaign for Out, I'd like to see more of her on tv
It would be an absolute bombshell if Cam recommended leave. I'd love to see how it went down, but doubt it'll happen. A shame
Rob, I have no idea who advises Cameron but I suggest you pop round to No 10 and say:
Look mate, you've misjudged things but you have the chance to change tack and become the greatest Tory PM in history. Recommend Leave due to EU intransigence and doing the right thing for the nation. You'll finish Ukip for good, unite the Eurosceptics and stand down covered in glory.
Worth a try?
It's the best chance he has to stand down covered in glory, rather than covered in sh!t from his own side.
I thought he was now in the US. Could it be he's about as successful over the pond as he was over here?
I see all the Cameroon cheerleaders are desperate to play the man and not the ball, plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
On the radio he was complaining that people like him have been replaced by "people who used to vote Lib Dem".
My reaction: how the heck did his get to the level of Chief of State without realising that's exactly how the Tory Party works & why it has been so successful?
The Conservative Party is the vampire squid of UK politics.
The tactic of losing votes to the right to gain more votes in the centre produced a majority in 2015. With Labour wandering about on the far lefty fringes it looks very likely to be successful again in 2020.
I can fully understand why those who voted for IDS and thought that was actually a good place for the party to be are disappointed about all this but when the party actually was in that place it got absolutely hammered because a very small proportion of the UK public agreed with them.
The Conservative party remains willing to be the broad church but if those who are more interested in ideological purity than winning and providing competent government insist on leaving I think the party can cope.
The party was not hammered under IDS. It actually did better than the polls suggested (and maybe we'd all be rich now if we'd paid more heed to that). Where IDS got hammered was in the House of Commons every week at PMQs which is why MPs lost faith and deposed him.
The Tories lost the 2005 election after Montie and his boss had been kicked out of office by nearly 900K votes and 62 Lib Dem MPs were elected such was the vast void between them and the centre. Compare that to 2015.
There is as little appetite for a radical right wing party in this country as there is for Corbyn and his loons to the left. Montie and others may not like that but it is the truth. He might be happier in America. The loon quotient seems higher there.
Equally importantly, I think one of the lessons of 2015 is that there is a surprising amount of tactical voting against right wing parties. There was a hope that UKIP - in Rochester and the like - would pick up the votes of disgruntled Labour-ites who wanted to give the Conservative Party a kicking. That didn't happen.
Donald's memories don't involve breaking laws on national security and classified data. It's not a valid comparison.
She is in serious legal jeopardy involving felonies. You really don't want the FBI investigating your emails and the Clinton Foundation,
I agree, I added the footnote as I thought it looked like I thought that Clinton was a fantasist (among other things) and the Donald wasn't.
It's hard to find anyone on either side who looks like they're suitable for high office. Kasich? Only cause I don't know anything about him I suspect
Kasich is definitely suitable for high office. Google him and check his experience.
I don't think most folks in the UK realize how much potential trouble she is in.
Not to mention the HUGE misjudgment she made in having a home brewed server holding classified information.
If she has poor judgment like that, what does it say about how fit she is to be POTUS?
Over here, Michael Gove bypassed government servers for email. Over there, so did George W Bush. Scandalous perhaps but surely most of those scandalised were never going to vote for her in the first place.
Gove did that after almost every email he sent through the government servers ended up in the hands of a certain Mr Balls. He quite rightly didn't trust his civil servants so kept political conversations to personal email addresses. Not following protocol certainly, but not a hanging offence given that he was in Education.
If he had been in the Foreign Office, Home Office or Defence, and was routinely sending classified stuff off grid, that would be very, very different.
I still don't see how Hilary's reputation comes out of this close to intact, although my experience is in administering mail servers more than running for President!
The point is that by and large, no-one cares. They didn't care when Gove did it, Americans didn't care when Bush did it. Whether or not they should be outraged, this will not change people's votes. If elected, Hillary might become a lame duck president if she has to spend all her time fighting these or other allegations, but until the election it is just noise.
Incidentally, I've never seen conhome nor read his columns but like that prick Hodges he does appear to have an enormous ego and a worrying craving for the limelight.
Also hitting hedge funds with a big stick needn't fall foul of discrimination rulings as most of the Eurozone doesn't really have any, so no worry of double treatment.
Most hedge funds are technically domiciled in the Caribbean, and then they "sub contract" fund management to a team in London. In this way, profits (particularly performance fees) accrue off-shore, and they are essentially exempt from EU regulation.
The explosive amendment is that the European Parliament now gets to decide if we use our ludicrous emergency brake on benefits. Rendering a feeble change entirely worthless, it seems to me.
If that is true then Dave has to reject.
And he knows that, too, I imagine.
Walk away sir. Let's see some of that establishment gumption that we elected you for.
That's the FT's interpretation. It says this is "very tricky" for Cameron. Well, yes.
The language on the non-Euro protections is even worst than the second draft. It now says in no uncertain terms "the singke rulebook is to be applied to all financial institutions and credit institutions". This means not just UK banks come under Eurozone control, but also asset managers, mutual funds and hedge funds.
In addition it also removes any description of differences within the rulebook for non-Euro states. So its gone from different rules, to different application of the same rules, to the same rules. So the ECB decides how it will be done and the Bank of England will have to follow suit. This is a complete disaster. Cameron will have sold out control of the entire UK finance sector if he signs this deal. And whats worse is that he hasn't even got a full proof non-discrimination protection as it can still happen for "objective reasons". And we have to "facilitate" Eurozone integration without raising more objections.
The French have won hook line and sinker if this goes through.
Faisal Islam:
Latest final draft deal inserts FIVE references to the European Parliament where there were 0 before @MartinSchulz
It does look like a text which is designed for a British "rejection", cueing up a bogus brawl
Others can expend their emotional energy poring over a draft that will no doubt be renegotiated further. It seems a fruitless endeavour to me unless you're on the negotiating team.
Incidentally, I've never seen conhome nor read his columns but like that prick Hodges he does appear to have an enormous ego and a worrying craving for the limelight.
Yes but perhaps that goes with the territory. Why enter politics without massive self-belief and the sure knowledge that your opinions on the economy or Middle East or whatever are the one true way? Politicians' views may change with time, but not their conviction. Often wrong, never in doubt.
Others can expend their emotional energy poring over a draft that will no doubt be renegotiated further. It seems a fruitless endeavour to me unless you're on the negotiating team.
Others can expend their emotional energy poring over a draft that will no doubt be renegotiated further. It seems a fruitless endeavour to me unless you're on the negotiating team.
The whole thing is fruitless, we've been saying that for years.
This charade is finally showing people why we have to Leave, our PM (it happens to be Cameron) is cap in hand begging Heads of minor states permission on how to spend our money.
Forget the nuances, acronyms and all the other bollox, its about our elected PM and parliament governing us.
Others can expend their emotional energy poring over a draft that will no doubt be renegotiated further. It seems a fruitless endeavour to me unless you're on the negotiating team.
Thr vast majority of text has stayed same in every draft. And the only bits likely to change now are in square brackets, so we know what is locked in, pretty much.
To be honest, comparing draft to draft make Cameron look better. Comparing final result with demands in original letter to Tusk, or Bloomberg speech, looks terrible.
Incidentally, I've never seen conhome nor read his columns but like that prick Hodges he does appear to have an enormous ego and a worrying craving for the limelight.
Yes but perhaps that goes with the territory. Why enter politics without massive self-belief and the sure knowledge that your opinions on the economy or Middle East or whatever are the one true way? Politicians' views may change with time, but not their conviction. Often wrong, never in doubt.
Self belief and attention seeking are two different things. Hodges ran down Whitehall naked, Montgomorie is full of self importance.
I saw some data the other day that showed our proportion of trade conducted with the EU as a global percentage had dropped from 61% to 43% in little over a decade ending in 2013.
In the not too distant future, won't China's currency be of greater significance than the Euro?
The EU/Euro = Louis Van Gaal China/Remnimbi = Pochettino
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Mr. 63, quite. He should, leaving aside the politics, have enough self-respect to just say no.
Instead, like a man desperate to save his marriage, he's agreeing his wife can sleep with other men, but he can't sleep with other women, and he'll keep paying the mortgage.
The explosive amendment is that the European Parliament now gets to decide if we use our ludicrous emergency brake on benefits. Rendering a feeble change entirely worthless, it seems to me.
If that is true then Dave has to reject.
And he knows that, too, I imagine.
Walk away sir. Let's see some of that establishment gumption that we elected you for.
That's the FT's interpretation. It says this is "very tricky" for Cameron. Well, yes.
The language on the non-Euro protections is even worst than the second draft. It now says in no uncertain terms "the singke rulebook is to be applied to all financial institutions and credit institutions". This means not just UK banks come under Eurozone control, but also asset managers, mutual funds and hedge funds.
In addition it also removes any description of differences within the rulebook for non-Euro states. So its gone from different rules, to different application of the same rules, to the same rules. So the ECB decides how it will be done and the Bank of England will have to follow suit. This is a complete disaster. Cameron will have sold out control of the entire UK finance sector if he signs this deal. And whats worse is that he hasn't even got a full proof non-discrimination protection as it can still happen for "objective reasons". And we have to "facilitate" Eurozone integration without raising more objections.
The French have won hook line and sinker if this goes through.
Faisal Islam:
Latest final draft deal inserts FIVE references to the European Parliament where there were 0 before @MartinSchulz
It does look like a text which is designed for a British "rejection", cueing up a bogus brawl
In my opinion Dave will either bang his hand on the table and demand the amendments are changed. He will claim a great victory and use this as an example of the UK's huge influence in the EU.
Or Dave will walk away and state that further talks are required. This will allow him to push the referendum back to winter 2017.
I think Dave will go for the hand banging option. He has seriously misjudged the "deal" and I can see him thinking he is really clever for trying to stage an argument to gain public support.
Montie came to the same conclusion I did two and a half years ago. The Conservative leadership isn't on my side, so why bother donating them £10 a month? Not being Milliband or Corbyn is enough to eke out an election victory, but not really enough to enthuse me.
They are not influenced by anyone, are beholden to no one, which is what you want in an investigative body.
If only this was also true of the supreme court
It was true of Scalia.
What? Scalia was an incrrrdibly political and partisan judge. He repeatedly claimed that his originality stance means the first clause of the 14th amendment only applies to slaves freed after the American civil war (as that is the 'original intent') yet somehow he managed to use it to decide Bush vs Gore.
Must say it sounds like you think we should leave, but that the most vocal leavers are people whom you dislike on a political/personal basis. Making the decision based on association with voters you dislike rather than the issue itself (you do describe the deal as 'pisspoor' and the EU as 'dysfunctional') is up to you, but I think the issue matters more, and hope you reconsider.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
The key players in the Leave campaign have been known for months and in some cases years... Quite surprising you have been so "undecided" for so long.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
You seem to have fallen into same trap as those that tar all immigrants with one brush. Not all leave people have same views. Europeans are not the enemy. They are just negotiating in own national interests. And I barely care about immigration, except so far as it loses the left votes...
Must say it sounds like you think we should leave, but that the most vocal leavers are people whom you dislike on a political/personal basis. Making the decision based on association with voters you dislike rather than the issue itself (you do describe the deal as 'pisspoor' and the EU as 'dysfunctional') is up to you, but I think the issue matters more, and hope you reconsider.
The question for me is about how Britain develops in the future. To Remain or to Leave is a question about means, not ends. Remain is a poor means. But Leave is showing itself to be a worse one.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Totally wrong, as people like Robert Smithson, DavidL and Cyclefree demonstrate. Your prejudices showing again.
This is about your indulgence of those, and the fact you dislike UKIP and their attitudes to gay marriage. None of which have anything to do with it.
You are completely wrong about UKIP too. Brexit is likely to kill it off and the U.K. to be no more 'reactionary' than Canada, Australia or New Zealand.
I can't believe that in 20 years the EU will have developed in a way which is to our advantage [it may not even have developed in a way which is to its own advantage]. Integration will deepen, and it seems we'll be dragged, willing or not, that way. But the diversity of EU nations on demographic, cultural and economic terms means that the one-size-fits-all approach will cause as many, ore more, problems as it solves.
Better for us to leave now. It'd make integration easier for those who want it, and prevents us being governed from overseas.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
To be honest, I would have expected nothing else on your part.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Totally wrong, as people like Robert Smithson, DavidL and Cyclefree demonstrate. Your prejudices showing again.
This is about your indulgence of those, and the fact you dislike UKIP and their attitudes to gay marriage. None of which have anything to do with it.
You are completely wrong about UKIP too. Brexit is likely to kill it off and the U.K. to be no more 'reactionary' than Canada, Australia or New Zealand.
Rational Leavers are going to be the useful idiots of the mob.
It is interesting how far Remain case has fallen that people have gone from "the EU is a great project of integration of peoples of Europe" to "its not perfect but the UK should stay in to effectively reform it" to "well those Leave types are all ghastly".
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
I saw some data the other day that showed our proportion of trade conducted with the EU as a global percentage had dropped from 61% to 43% in little over a decade ending in 2013.
In the not too distant future, won't China's currency be of greater significance than the Euro?
The EU/Euro = Louis Van Gaal China/Remnimbi = Pochettino
China has a closed capital account, so you can't simply trade reminbi in the same way as dollars Euros or Swiss francs. Until that changes, the reminbi will be a side show. (And it will only change if the Chinese government decides it no longer needs control of its currency, so probably not for a decade or two yet.)
I thought he was now in the US. Could it be he's about as successful over the pond as he was over here?
I see all the Cameroon cheerleaders are desperate to play the man and not the ball, plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
On the radio he was complaining that people like him have been replaced by "people who used to vote Lib Dem".
My reaction: how the heck did his get to the level of Chief of State without realising that's exactly how the Tory Party works & why it has been so successful?
The Conservative Party is the vampire squid of UK politics.
The tactic of losing votes to the right to gain more votes in the centre produced a majority in 2015. With Labour wandering about on the far lefty fringes it looks very likely to be successful again in 2020.
I can fully understand why those who voted for IDS and thought that was actually a good place for the party to be are disappointed about all this but when the party actually was in that place it got absolutely hammered because a very small proportion of the UK public agreed with them.
The Conservative party remains willing to be the broad church but if those who are more interested in ideological purity than winning and providing competent government insist on leaving I think the party can cope.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
^This
Above all else, what concerns me is that the people backing Leave will end up dominating public life in Britain.
The epicene pretence, by Alastair Meeks, that he was ever in favour of anything but REMAIN is one of the quirkier delights of PB. Along with the slow-motion self-destruction of Richard Nabavi.
I had my suspicions all along... It was
'let's invite 125,000 of the migrants currently invading Greece to come live in the UK, the public will be ok with it"
According to my Italian friends and neighbours..if a Referendum took plave in Italy right now then Leave would win
Italy is by far the most eurosceptic country on the continent. The issue is that there are three eurosceptic parties, each of which hates each other, and the leading one of which is student politics bonkers, and only one europhilic one, which therefore wind every election.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Totally wrong, as people like Robert Smithson, DavidL and Cyclefree demonstrate. Your prejudices showing again.
This is about your indulgence of those, and the fact you dislike UKIP and their attitudes to gay marriage. None of which have anything to do with it.
You are completely wrong about UKIP too. Brexit is likely to kill it off and the U.K. to be no more 'reactionary' than Canada, Australia or New Zealand.
Rational Leavers are going to be the useful idiots of the mob.
Us 'rational idiots' (ain't that a contradiction in terms?) will be the median voters post-Brexit. While UKIP types will fall from grace as they won't be able to win support from middle from "open door immigration" any more.
Mr. Wanderer, even if that happened, you can vote out a government once every 5 years. The EU is something we'll be stuck with for decades if we remain in.
It is interesting how far Remain case has fallen that people have gone from "the EU is a great project of integration of peoples of Europe" to "its not perfect but the UK should stay in to effectively reform it" to "well those Leave types are all ghastly".
Yes. It's basically a remix of what Emma Thompson said. Britain is a sad, fat, cake-eating grey old country. And British patriots are awful little people with their biscuits and chips. The main thing in this debate is that I'm not associated with these dreadful oiks. So I'm voting REMAIN. That's what Mr Meeks just said.
It is interesting how far Remain case has fallen that people have gone from "the EU is a great project of integration of peoples of Europe" to "its not perfect but the UK should stay in to effectively reform it" to "well those Leave types are all ghastly".
Yes. It's basically a remix of what Emma Thompson said. Britain is a sad, fat, cake-eating grey old country. And British patriots are awful little people with their biscuits and chips. The main thing in this debate is that I'm not associated with these dreadful oiks. So I'm voting REMAIN. That's what Mr Meeks just said.
For a man who makes his living by writing, you suck at reading.
Also hitting hedge funds with a big stick needn't fall foul of discrimination rulings as most of the Eurozone doesn't really have any, so no worry of double treatment.
Most hedge funds are technically domiciled in the Caribbean, and then they "sub contract" fund management to a team in London. In this way, profits (particularly performance fees) accrue off-shore, and they are essentially exempt from EU regulation.
If the EU can find a way to discourage this sort of behaviour, they'll be doing us all a favour.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Mr. Wanderer, even if that happened, you can vote out a government once every 5 years. The EU is something we'll be stuck with for decades if we remain in.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Totally wrong, as people like Robert Smithson, DavidL and Cyclefree demonstrate. Your prejudices showing again.
This is about your indulgence of those, and the fact you dislike UKIP and their attitudes to gay marriage. None of which have anything to do with it.
You are completely wrong about UKIP too. Brexit is likely to kill it off and the U.K. to be no more 'reactionary' than Canada, Australia or New Zealand.
There are some great posters here who support Leave (you could include yourself in the list). It seems certain, though, that we would have a far more stridently right-wing government post-Leave that would rely on Corbyn to make itself electable. Obviously that appeals to some of us but not all.
It is interesting how far Remain case has fallen that people have gone from "the EU is a great project of integration of peoples of Europe" to "its not perfect but the UK should stay in to effectively reform it" to "well those Leave types are all ghastly".
Yes. It's basically a remix of what Emma Thompson said. Britain is a sad, fat, cake-eating grey old country. And British patriots are awful little people with their biscuits and chips. The main thing in this debate is that I'm not associated with these dreadful oiks. So I'm voting REMAIN. That's what Mr Meeks just said.
Its what killed New Labour. Yes, they overspent a bit and didn't see crisis coming, but foundations of project had been rotten for several years. Main problem was they rolled their eyes at working class so no one stuck by them when times got tough. Despite being far economically closer to these people than George Osborne ever has been.
For the vast majority the EU deal will be assessed by what Sky and BBC place on their ticker tape rolling news on the bottom of the screens. This will be assessed as commuters throw on their coat, pick up their bag as they kiss the kids and run for the train in the morning with the last piece of neatly cut toast clenched between the teeth.
The rest of the debate is just noise in the background I'm afraid and rarely listened to let alone evaluated. I suspect that is what Cameron is banking on.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Not getting into the wider issues of the EU or whatever the rights and wrongs of your political views.
But the whole basis of your decision (which will come as a surprise to nobody) is 'take it from them and give it to me'.
We are increasingly becoming a zero-sum socio-economic-political mentality which is making the country a worse place to live in.
"My guess is that Tim will feel less constrained not being a party member."
Er ....well yes, you could be right there Mike!
Btw, has anyone worked out exactly what happens if the EU throws out Cameron's renegotiated deal? I only ask because The Telegraph is reporting this morning that it is in considerable trouble, unless of course this is the usual EU 11th hour bluff. Seriously though, what happens next and in particular what happens to Cameron and does the referendum still go ahead?
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Totally wrong, as people like Robert Smithson, DavidL and Cyclefree demonstrate. Your prejudices showing again.
This is about your indulgence of those, and the fact you dislike UKIP and their attitudes to gay marriage. None of which have anything to do with it.
You are completely wrong about UKIP too. Brexit is likely to kill it off and the U.K. to be no more 'reactionary' than Canada, Australia or New Zealand.
Rational Leavers are going to be the useful idiots of the mob.
Yesterday you were telling us you were obliged to be "neutral" on the subject of immigration, as to do anything else would be a "dereliction of duty". Now you're suddenly 100% REMAIN as eurosceptics are horrible Nazis. Has it occurred to you that what you are, in fact, is a liar? Consider the possibility.
I've considered the possibility. I've reread what I wrote. And once again, I find you suck at reading. Can I suggest you re-enrol in primary school?
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Totally wrong, as people like Robert Smithson, DavidL and Cyclefree demonstrate. Your prejudices showing again.
This is about your indulgence of those, and the fact you dislike UKIP and their attitudes to gay marriage. None of which have anything to do with it.
You are completely wrong about UKIP too. Brexit is likely to kill it off and the U.K. to be no more 'reactionary' than Canada, Australia or New Zealand.
There are some great posters here who support Leave (you could include yourself in the list). It seems certain, though, that we would have a far more stridently right-wing government post-Leave that would rely on Corbyn to make itself electable. Obviously that appeals to some of us but not all.
There is some truth to that, sadly.
Whilst Liam Fox hasn't a hope of becoming leader of the Tory party (Tory MPs have more sense than to elect someone who has repeatedly failed to attain or keep high office), there are others who might pip.
It is the main reason why I am actually quite chipper about the deal being rubbish. It might convince Gove, one of my political heroes, to join Leave.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Totally wrong, as people like Robert Smithson, DavidL and Cyclefree demonstrate. Your prejudices showing again.
This is about your indulgence of those, and the fact you dislike UKIP and their attitudes to gay marriage. None of which have anything to do with it.
You are completely wrong about UKIP too. Brexit is likely to kill it off and the U.K. to be no more 'reactionary' than Canada, Australia or New Zealand.
There are some great posters here who support Leave (you could include yourself in the list). It seems certain, though, that we would have a far more stridently right-wing government post-Leave that would rely on Corbyn to make itself electable. Obviously that appeals to some of us but not all.
The epicene pretence, by Alastair Meeks, that he was ever in favour of anything but REMAIN is one of the quirkier delights of PB. Along with the slow-motion self-destruction of Richard Nabavi.
I had my suspicions all along... It was
'let's invite 125,000 of the migrants currently invading Greece to come live in the UK, the public will be ok with it"
...that was the giveaway
I imagine that view is quite common with those involved in the London dinner party scene. Anyone even slightly concerned about immigration is viewed as a swivel eyed loon.
"My guess is that Tim will feel less constrained not being a party member."
Er ....well yes, you could be right there Mike!
Btw, has anyone worked out exactly what happens if the EU throws out Cameron's renegotiated deal? I only ask because The Telegraph is reporting this morning that it is in considerable trouble, unless of course this is the usual EU 11th hour bluff. Seriously though, what happens next and in particular what happens to Cameron and does the referendum still go ahead?
Part of the reason I took the 12-1 on Cameron going this year was that I assumed that this referendum was happening this year. I'm not so sure now, though as you say it could all be the usual stand off.
I don't think it's quite the election that never was in 2007 but Cameron had practically fired the starting gun a few weeks ago and it would put him in a difficult position if this drags on beyond this weekend.
As many had previously predicted Europe had the potential to wreck the Tory Party for years and leave Labour a clear field. Unfortunately in one of those historical missed opportunities they had the wrong leader at the wrong time.....
As for Tim Montgomerie...I'd be surprised if he's known to 2% of the population and half of those will think he had something to do with the war
But he makes the point. This regerendum battle will come down to who is on which side. This is all about celebrity endorsement.
What the 'Leavers' have in common is that they seem to fit a mould. Mavericks dyed-in-the wool Tories or fuddy duddy fruitcakes.
My sense is that the more Boris's who clamber on board the bigger the lead for 'Remain' will be. When it comes to the real campaign this is a decision the public will take seriously.
'Remain' have all the respected politicians and commentators of the last 20 years. Major Blair Ashdown Cameron Hague Campbell Steel Owen David Miliband etc etc. Against a ragtag of fruitcakes and opportunists there really isn't a contest.
The only pity is that when it's over and the Tory Party start to eat itself the emasculated left-of-centre wont be in a position to take advantage
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Totally wrong, as people like Robert Smithson, DavidL and Cyclefree demonstrate. Your prejudices showing again.
This is about your indulgence of those, and the fact you dislike UKIP and their attitudes to gay marriage. None of which have anything to do with it.
You are completely wrong about UKIP too. Brexit is likely to kill it off and the U.K. to be no more 'reactionary' than Canada, Australia or New Zealand.
Rational Leavers are going to be the useful idiots of the mob.
Yesterday you were telling us you were obliged to be "neutral" on the subject of immigration, as to do anything else would be a "dereliction of duty". Now you're suddenly 100% REMAIN as eurosceptics are horrible Nazis. Has it occurred to you that what you are, in fact, is a liar? Consider the possibility.
What seems odd to me is that the irrational bigots have always supported Leave. And he knew this while on fence. Only new people that have swung across are centre-right and centre-left types what felt deal failed.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Totally wrong, as people like Robert Smithson, DavidL and Cyclefree demonstrate. Your prejudices showing again.
This is about your indulgence of those, and the fact you dislike UKIP and their attitudes to gay marriage. None of which have anything to do with it.
You are completely wrong about UKIP too. Brexit is likely to kill it off and the U.K. to be no more 'reactionary' than Canada, Australia or New Zealand.
Rational Leavers are going to be the useful idiots of the mob.
Yesterday you were telling us you were obliged to be "neutral" on the subject of immigration, as to do anything else would be a "dereliction of duty". Now you're suddenly 100% REMAIN as eurosceptics are horrible Nazis. Has it occurred to you that what you are, in fact, is a liar? Consider the possibility.
Sean, you know full well that the first person to mention the Nazis has thereby lost the argument. I thought you had more sense. A lot more sense.
UKIP certainly wouldn't come to power in the event of Leave, but the Tories probably would move towards a more right wing leadership. If you think that's the worst thing that could happen to this country (obviously I don't) then it makes sense to vote Remain.
Sky had some great voxpops on Leave, one from a blue collar guy saying he couldn't see how it was fair that he'd colleagues filling in forms to send our child benefit back to Poland or wherever.
For the vast majority the EU deal will be assessed by what Sky and BBC place on their ticker tape rolling news on the bottom of the screens. This will be assessed as commuters throw on their coat, pick up their bag as they kiss the kids and run for the train in the morning with the last piece of neatly cut toast clenched between the teeth.
The rest of the debate is just noise in the background I'm afraid and rarely listened to let alone evaluated. I suspect that is what Cameron is banking on.
Oh, and on topic, Montie's leaving the party will likely increase Tory vote share. I'm not entirely kidding - if it can be painted as IDS loyalist and right wing Tory thinks the party is too moderate.
That said, the danger of several defections or submission of vote of no confidence to the '22 is now very, very high.
If you were a regular reader of Montie's Times articles you would realise portraying him as a hard right bigot simply doesn't wash. Montie passionately believes we should leave the EU but his early support for the Syrian refugees for example or advocacy of gay marriage were not popular within the wider Tory party and are not views Faragists would support.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Totally wrong, as people like Robert Smithson, DavidL and Cyclefree demonstrate. Your prejudices showing again.
This is about your indulgence of those, and the fact you dislike UKIP and their attitudes to gay marriage. None of which have anything to do with it.
You are completely wrong about UKIP too. Brexit is likely to kill it off and the U.K. to be no more 'reactionary' than Canada, Australia or New Zealand.
There are some great posters here who support Leave (you could include yourself in the list). It seems certain, though, that we would have a far more stridently right-wing government post-Leave that would rely on Corbyn to make itself electable. Obviously that appeals to some of us but not all.
Post-Leave, the party is not going to elect another Cameroon leader and carry on as before.
One minute, the mild-mannered Antifrank. The next minute he scampers into a phone box and reappears as the anti-hero, Mr Meeks, with a large 'B' for Bigot emblazoned on his underwear.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Totally wrong, as people like Robert Smithson, DavidL and Cyclefree demonstrate. Your prejudices showing again.
This is about your indulgence of those, and the fact you dislike UKIP and their attitudes to gay marriage. None of which have anything to do with it.
You are completely wrong about UKIP too. Brexit is likely to kill it off and the U.K. to be no more 'reactionary' than Canada, Australia or New Zealand.
Rational Leavers are going to be the useful idiots of the mob.
Yesterday you were telling us you were obliged to be "neutral" on the subject of immigration, as to do anything else would be a "dereliction of duty". Now you're suddenly 100% REMAIN as eurosceptics are horrible Nazis. Has it occurred to you that what you are, in fact, is a liar? Consider the possibility.
Sean, you know full well that the first person to mention the Nazis has thereby lost the argument. I thought you had more sense. A lot more sense.
To be fair, Mr Meeks did say "who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin". That is tantamount to calling Leavers Nazis.
UKIP certainly wouldn't come to power in the event of Leave, but the Tories probably would move towards a more right wing leadership. If you think that's the worst thing that could happen to this country (obviously I don't) then it makes sense to vote Remain.
I don't think it's the *worst* thing, of course, just relatively speaking bad.
I also don't think Remain is an irrevocable decision btw. We could easily have second referendum if public opinion demanded it.
Osborne is running silent and deep in submarine mode at the moment when he should be offering leadership.I can see Jeremy Corbyn out-doing him on leadership in any future contest.He's another one like Johnson-they have the spine of a lizard.He's still way too short in the leadership market.
UKIP certainly wouldn't come to power in the event of Leave, but the Tories probably would move towards a more right wing leadership. If you think that's the worst thing that could happen to this country (obviously I don't) then it makes sense to vote Remain.
A great benefit from living in a democracy is that should post-Brexit the Tories lurch right and start pushing a nasty right-wing agenda they can be voted out. That is assuming the electorate don't support what they are doing.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Totally wrong, as people like Robert Smithson, DavidL and Cyclefree demonstrate. Your prejudices showing again.
This is about your indulgence of those, and the fact you dislike UKIP and their attitudes to gay marriage. None of which have anything to do with it.
You are completely wrong about UKIP too. Brexit is likely to kill it off and the U.K. to be no more 'reactionary' than Canada, Australia or New Zealand.
Rational Leavers are going to be the useful idiots of the mob.
Yesterday you were telling us you were obliged to be "neutral" on the subject of immigration, as to do anything else would be a "dereliction of duty". Now you're suddenly 100% REMAIN as eurosceptics are horrible Nazis. Has it occurred to you that what you are, in fact, is a liar? Consider the possibility.
Sean, you know full well that the first person to mention the Nazis has thereby lost the argument. I thought you had more sense. A lot more sense.
To be fair, Mr Meeks did say "who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin". That is tantamount to calling Leavers Nazis.
In your view. Not in mine - or, I assume, AM's. He's more than able to write what he means to write.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Totally wrong, as people like Robert Smithson, DavidL and Cyclefree demonstrate. Your prejudices showing again.
This is about your indulgence of those, and the fact you dislike UKIP and their attitudes to gay marriage. None of which have anything to do with it.
You are completely wrong about UKIP too. Brexit is likely to kill it off and the U.K. to be no more 'reactionary' than Canada, Australia or New Zealand.
There are some great posters here who support Leave (you could include yourself in the list). It seems certain, though, that we would have a far more stridently right-wing government post-Leave that would rely on Corbyn to make itself electable. Obviously that appeals to some of us but not all.
I don't think it would be that much more right-wing other than on negotiating the Brexit deal and capping immigration but, if that is true, it's only true because not enough mainstream Cameroon Conservatives have had the courage to come off the fence and declare for Leave.
I have always (and still am) a supporter of Cameron's domestic policy of devolving power, public service reform and his focus on strengthening family and society.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Totally wrong, as people like Robert Smithson, DavidL and Cyclefree demonstrate. Your prejudices showing again.
This is about your indulgence of those, and the fact you dislike UKIP and their attitudes to gay marriage. None of which have anything to do with it.
You are completely wrong about UKIP too. Brexit is likely to kill it off and the U.K. to be no more 'reactionary' than Canada, Australia or New Zealand.
There are some great posters here who support Leave (you could include yourself in the list). It seems certain, though, that we would have a far more stridently right-wing government post-Leave that would rely on Corbyn to make itself electable. Obviously that appeals to some of us but not all.
Post-Leave, the party is not going to elect another Cameroon leader and carry on as before.
If it's a narrow REMAIN, indeed any kind of REMAIN, there is a strong chance the Tory party will turn on itself, in remorse and anger, and elect a proper sceptic. Cf Scotland after indyref.
Agree about a narrow Remain. I don't really see that after a strong Remain. If Leave gets thumped it's unlikely to gain the ascendancy, surely?
UKIP certainly wouldn't come to power in the event of Leave, but the Tories probably would move towards a more right wing leadership. If you think that's the worst thing that could happen to this country (obviously I don't) then it makes sense to vote Remain.
Whoever governs Britain in the short-term in the longer term the option would also be there for the election of the Left-wing government too with the tools to make it happen. Or even a Liberal government that wants to ultra devolve power with local sales/VAT tax.
This referendum isn't about any one political party or group or their views.
It's about Britain and its democracy; our choices.
It is interesting how far Remain case has fallen that people have gone from "the EU is a great project of integration of peoples of Europe" to "its not perfect but the UK should stay in to effectively reform it" to "well those Leave types are all ghastly".
Yes. It's basically a remix of what Emma Thompson said. Britain is a sad, fat, cake-eating grey old country. And British patriots are awful little people with their biscuits and chips. The main thing in this debate is that I'm not associated with these dreadful oiks. So I'm voting REMAIN. That's what Mr Meeks just said.
As it happens it's not what Mr Meeks said but if he had (give or take the odd word) I'd struggle to disagree.
UKIP certainly wouldn't come to power in the event of Leave, but the Tories probably would move towards a more right wing leadership. If you think that's the worst thing that could happen to this country (obviously I don't) then it makes sense to vote Remain.
I don't think it's the *worst* thing, of course, just relatively speaking bad.
I also don't think Remain is an irrevocable decision btw. We could easily have second referendum if public opinion demanded it.
But as SE says, if the Tories move too far away from public opinion, they'll be voted out.
Now there is always the possibility (and this may be what concerns Alistair most) that post-Brexit, relations between the EU and UK would be so bad, that public opinion would shift in a belligerently nationalistic direction, and political parties would have to shift with it.
I'm astonished that some of the sophisticated PB audience are using the prospect of a short term potential political change of HMG as a reason for their EU ref vote.
This is a strategic decision that will last for decades. Just think of all the governments we've had since 1975.
This isn't Corbyn vs Cameron or whatever, it's where we choose to set the direction of our nation. It's akin to voting Sindy because you liked free tuition.
UKIP certainly wouldn't come to power in the event of Leave, but the Tories probably would move towards a more right wing leadership. If you think that's the worst thing that could happen to this country (obviously I don't) then it makes sense to vote Remain.
Whoever governs Britain in the short-term in the longer term the option would also be there for the election of the Left-wing government too with the tools to make it happen. Or even a Liberal government that wants to ultra devolve power with local sales/VAT tax.
This referendum isn't about any one political party or group or their views.
It's about Britain and its democracy; our choices.
Nothing to stop a left of centre govt with a policy of open door immigration from the EU post Brexit if the people will it
Oh, and on topic, Montie's leaving the party will likely increase Tory vote share. I'm not entirely kidding - if it can be painted as IDS loyalist and right wing Tory thinks the party is too moderate.
That said, the danger of several defections or submission of vote of no confidence to the '22 is now very, very high.
If you were a regular reader of Montie's Times articles you would realise portraying him as a hard right bigot simply doesn't wash. Montie passionately believes we should leave the EU but his early support for the Syrian refugees for example or advocacy of gay marriage were not popular within the wider Tory party and are not views Faragists would support.
I am a regular reader, actually, and a few choice articles aside I imagine that a majority of the public and a majority of the Tory party disagree with him on most issues.
It is the reason why he has never really fit into the modern Tory party. He isn't that interested in power, it would seem, instead more in commenting.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
As it isn't April the first I can only assume the 18th of February is national "flounce on the thinnest most pathetic argument ever" day ?
My day has been made. I've been put in the same bracket as Emma Thompson.
Whisper it, but I think you are secretly quite well respected on here and not a few people are just a tad disappointed in you, particularly since you obviously have the intellectual heft and depth to know that the EU project is fundamentally flawed.
You could have made your own case independently for that, but chose not to - and I think it's because your emotions have taken over your better judgement.
Anyway, I'll say no more.
Incidentally, I clocked your message this morning - sorry I haven't had time to reply yet. I'll try to do so tonight.
UKIP certainly wouldn't come to power in the event of Leave, but the Tories probably would move towards a more right wing leadership. If you think that's the worst thing that could happen to this country (obviously I don't) then it makes sense to vote Remain.
I don't think it's the *worst* thing, of course, just relatively speaking bad.
I also don't think Remain is an irrevocable decision btw. We could easily have second referendum if public opinion demanded it.
But as SE says, if the Tories move too far away from public opinion, they'll be voted out.
Now there is always the possibility (and this may be what concerns Alistair most) that post-Brexit, relations between the EU and UK would be so bad, that public opinion would shift in a belligerently nationalistic direction, and political parties would have to shift with it.
Hasn't it done so already, in shire England at least?
Comments
He's been throwing stones and teddies for years, and done little to support his own Party. I'm happy he's moving on, long overdue.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
This charade is finally showing people why we have to Leave, our PM (it happens to be Cameron) is cap in hand begging Heads of minor states permission on how to spend our money.
Forget the nuances, acronyms and all the other bollox, its about our elected PM and parliament governing us.
To be honest, comparing draft to draft make Cameron look better. Comparing final result with demands in original letter to Tusk, or Bloomberg speech, looks terrible.
In the not too distant future, won't China's currency be of greater significance than the Euro?
The EU/Euro = Louis Van Gaal
China/Remnimbi = Pochettino
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Instead, like a man desperate to save his marriage, he's agreeing his wife can sleep with other men, but he can't sleep with other women, and he'll keep paying the mortgage.
Or Dave will walk away and state that further talks are required. This will allow him to push the referendum back to winter 2017.
I think Dave will go for the hand banging option. He has seriously misjudged the "deal" and I can see him thinking he is really clever for trying to stage an argument to gain public support.
Must say it sounds like you think we should leave, but that the most vocal leavers are people whom you dislike on a political/personal basis. Making the decision based on association with voters you dislike rather than the issue itself (you do describe the deal as 'pisspoor' and the EU as 'dysfunctional') is up to you, but I think the issue matters more, and hope you reconsider.
This is about your indulgence of those, and the fact you dislike UKIP and their attitudes to gay marriage. None of which have anything to do with it.
You are completely wrong about UKIP too. Brexit is likely to kill it off and the U.K. to be no more 'reactionary' than Canada, Australia or New Zealand.
I can't believe that in 20 years the EU will have developed in a way which is to our advantage [it may not even have developed in a way which is to its own advantage]. Integration will deepen, and it seems we'll be dragged, willing or not, that way. But the diversity of EU nations on demographic, cultural and economic terms means that the one-size-fits-all approach will cause as many, ore more, problems as it solves.
Better for us to leave now. It'd make integration easier for those who want it, and prevents us being governed from overseas.
@theobertram: As if more proof were needed that Cameron utterly owns the centreground, here's @montie on why he's quit: https://t.co/6OWqBZDrKp
Is Boris really going to gorge himself at this same feast? Gove? May?
Above all else, what concerns me is that the people backing Leave will end up dominating public life in Britain.
I'm just going to google where bears pooh.
'let's invite 125,000 of the migrants currently invading Greece to come live in the UK, the public will be ok with it"
...that was the giveaway
Breaking: Ireland will seek a bilateral deal with the UK exempting Irish citizens from any in-work benefits restrictions - sources #EUCO
https://loveandgarbage.wordpress.com/2016/02/18/loss-and-absence/
The rest of the debate is just noise in the background I'm afraid and rarely listened to let alone evaluated. I suspect that is what Cameron is banking on.
But the whole basis of your decision (which will come as a surprise to nobody) is 'take it from them and give it to me'.
We are increasingly becoming a zero-sum socio-economic-political mentality which is making the country a worse place to live in.
Er ....well yes, you could be right there Mike!
Btw, has anyone worked out exactly what happens if the EU throws out Cameron's renegotiated deal? I only ask because The Telegraph is reporting this morning that it is in considerable trouble, unless of course this is the usual EU 11th hour bluff.
Seriously though, what happens next and in particular what happens to Cameron and does the referendum still go ahead?
your best to date.
Whilst Liam Fox hasn't a hope of becoming leader of the Tory party (Tory MPs have more sense than to elect someone who has repeatedly failed to attain or keep high office), there are others who might pip.
It is the main reason why I am actually quite chipper about the deal being rubbish. It might convince Gove, one of my political heroes, to join Leave.
Strikes me as rather an absurd assertion.
I don't think it's quite the election that never was in 2007 but Cameron had practically fired the starting gun a few weeks ago and it would put him in a difficult position if this drags on beyond this weekend.
As for Tim Montgomerie...I'd be surprised if he's known to 2% of the population and half of those will think he had something to do with the war
But he makes the point. This regerendum battle will come down to who is on which side. This is all about celebrity endorsement.
What the 'Leavers' have in common is that they seem to fit a mould. Mavericks dyed-in-the wool Tories or fuddy duddy fruitcakes.
My sense is that the more Boris's who clamber on board the bigger the lead for 'Remain' will be. When it comes to the real campaign this is a decision the public will take seriously.
'Remain' have all the respected politicians and commentators of the last 20 years. Major Blair Ashdown Cameron Hague Campbell Steel Owen David Miliband etc etc. Against a ragtag of fruitcakes and opportunists there really isn't a contest.
The only pity is that when it's over and the Tory Party start to eat itself the emasculated left-of-centre wont be in a position to take advantage
One minute, the mild-mannered Antifrank. The next minute he scampers into a phone box and reappears as the anti-hero, Mr Meeks, with a large 'B' for Bigot emblazoned on his underwear.
Which is the truth and which the illusion?
I also don't think Remain is an irrevocable decision btw. We could easily have second referendum if public opinion demanded it.
I have always (and still am) a supporter of Cameron's domestic policy of devolving power, public service reform and his focus on strengthening family and society.
That said, I don't expect any kind of Remain win.
This referendum isn't about any one political party or group or their views.
It's about Britain and its democracy; our choices.
Now there is always the possibility (and this may be what concerns Alistair most) that post-Brexit, relations between the EU and UK would be so bad, that public opinion would shift in a belligerently nationalistic direction, and political parties would have to shift with it.
This is a strategic decision that will last for decades. Just think of all the governments we've had since 1975.
This isn't Corbyn vs Cameron or whatever, it's where we choose to set the direction of our nation. It's akin to voting Sindy because you liked free tuition.
It is the reason why he has never really fit into the modern Tory party. He isn't that interested in power, it would seem, instead more in commenting.
You could have made your own case independently for that, but chose not to - and I think it's because your emotions have taken over your better judgement.
Anyway, I'll say no more.
Incidentally, I clocked your message this morning - sorry I haven't had time to reply yet. I'll try to do so tonight.