Quite. We are continually told by "Leave" supporters on here that it is not their job to lay out what happens post exit, that is for the Government to do. Well if the Government did back Leave then that would be absolutely true and you would probably find a lot of Leavers rather unhappy about what they were proposing.
You are suggesting that the Government should only prepare contingency plans for things it likes?
Of course the Government should prepare contingency plans. However if they were backing "Leave" then that contingency plan would have had to be fully worked out, costed and watertight.
As it is any contingency plans are currently probably far more broadbrush and plenty of "to be worked on" in the intervening period. I'm fairly sure that whatever the Government current contingency plans/options are in the event of a vote to leave, they aren't at a level to withstand the heat of a referendum campaign. This is all in the context of people saying that Cameron backing leave would have been the easy option.
So you think government contingency plans for things it doesn't like should be uncosted, not fully worked out, and not watertight.
That's the concept of contingency yes.
If the government spent billions fully costing, working out and making water tight every possible contingency then that would be a waste of money. There should be just enough planning to ensure that you're not flatfooted and are able to adapt.
It's the difference between a plan for something that might happen, and a plan for something that either is going to happen or (in context) something that you are advocating to happen.
I wonder if we can have a non partisan discussion.
This queue that Obama speaks of - how long is it? Its a serious question, I'd like to establish how many countries are trying to trade with the US and what obstacles they are up against, if any.
As far as I know you do not need a "tread deal" to trade with the US (or anybody else for that matter)
The whole issue is nonsense really... I think what's offended a lot of people is more the way he said it rather than what he said.
Absolutely, the anti-TTIP rantings of some Leavers makes me almost tempted to switch back to Remain. TTIP is a great deal.
TTIP is a left/right thing rather than leave/remain.
It's curious to see just how many on the left seem content to accept lower wages, higher prices and privatisation of public services as a price worth paying to get one over on UKIP/The Daily Mail etc.
No it isn't, my objections to TTIP are purely right wing common sense.
I wonder if we can have a non partisan discussion.
This queue that Obama speaks of - how long is it? Its a serious question, I'd like to establish how many countries are trying to trade with the US and what obstacles they are up against, if any.
As far as I know you do not need a "tread deal" to trade with the US (or anybody else for that matter)
The whole issue is nonsense really... I think what's offended a lot of people is more the way he said it rather than what he said.
Absolutely, the anti-TTIP rantings of some Leavers makes me almost tempted to switch back to Remain. TTIP is a great deal.
TTIP is a left/right thing rather than leave/remain.
It's curious to see just how many on the left seem content to accept lower wages, higher prices and privatisation of public services as a price worth paying to get one over on UKIP/The Daily Mail etc.
Possibly but the US may not be willing to let us join TTIP. TPP is more likely to be their preferred starting point.
Though it's also very possible that were we to leave and join the EFTA then the proposed suggestion of a TAFTA (Trans Atlantic Free Trade Area) encompassing NAFTA and EFTA could be implemented instead of TTIP. Would likely set back TTIP negotiations by a few years though so the US wouldn't be keen on that.
Leavers do need to get away from process et al and focus on a positive vision outside the EU rinstead. Farage last night on AQ no doubt to the mystification of the audience drew attention to Obama's use of the word queue rather than line. It has been mentioned on here. The point is that is of no interest unless you're a long term committed leaver and a politico to boot. It is the sort of point made by people who have been obsessed by the subject for all too many years like Farage himself. It goes down well at rallies of the true believers. It leaves the majority scratching their heads.
I wonder if we can have a non partisan discussion.
This queue that Obama speaks of - how long is it? Its a serious question, I'd like to establish how many countries are trying to trade with the US and what obstacles they are up against, if any.
As far as I know you do not need a "tread deal" to trade with the US (or anybody else for that matter)
The whole issue is nonsense really... I think what's offended a lot of people is more the way he said it rather than what he said.
Absolutely, the anti-TTIP rantings of some Leavers makes me almost tempted to switch back to Remain. TTIP is a great deal.
I distrust the motives of those who are pushing TTIP. I cannot be adamant that it 'is' a bad deal, because I haven't read it. Neither have you. So how you can say it's a great deal is beyond me. Mystic Meg would be jealous.
Because it will lower trade barriers between the UK and USA and I believe in lower trade barriers.
The fact that most complaints against it are for things I'd agree with (like increased competition) again confirms my views.
Sorry but to say that a specific trade deal is a 'great deal' because you believe in a broad concept of 'lower trade barriers' is absurdly simplistic, and there's no other way of describing it.
Well my post was simplistic, if you want to go into greater detail then there is a character cap here.
Though we're all having a good time establishing whether Obama would ever say 'queue' in normal life etc., this is very arcane politico froth. Like Osbornes '£4300 per household' it's the headline that impacts; recriminations, claim and counter-claim are neither here nor there.
There is no doubt in my mind that Osborne's claim was as wounding to Leave as anything that could have been said. It remains to be seen whether Obama's intervention, whilst also headline grabbing, is wounding to Leave or a self-inflicted wound to Remain. Public perception of this is what matters.
I think you have that just about right. The only part of the 'froth' that might become significant effects the personel. As SO has said Johnson and Farage referring to Obama as they did might persuade some on the Leave side that it's time to give them a back seat.
I asked Southam Observer what Nigel said about Obama and he hasn't replied. Perhaps you can help me out. I've googled it and all I can find is Nigel criticising what he said, not what he is.
Thanks, it would be helpful, I need to know if Nigel was insulting or you're making things up.
It was the Vote Leavers’ worst nightmare. For years – no, decades – the anti-EU camp has suggested that Britain’s natural habitat is not among its continental neighbours but in “the Anglosphere”, that solar system of English-speaking planets which revolves around the United States. Break free from Brussels and we could embrace our kindred spirits in Sydney, Toronto and especially New York, Washington and Los Angeles. The Brexit camp has long been like the man who dreams of leaving his wife for another woman, one who really understands him.
Obama is that other woman. And today he told the outers their fantasies were no more than that. First in print and then, more explicitly, in person he spelled out that America has no intention of forming some new, closer relationship with a Brexited Britain. On the contrary, a post-EU Britain would be at “the back of the queue” if it sought to agree its own, new trade treaty with the US.
Quite. We are continually told by "Leave" supporters on here that it is not their job to lay out what happens post exit, that is for the Government to do. Well if the Government did back Leave then that would be absolutely true and you would probably find a lot of Leavers rather unhappy about what they were proposing.
You are suggesting that the Government should only prepare contingency plans for things it likes?
Of course the Government should prepare contingency plans. However if they were backing "Leave" then that contingency plan would have had to be fully worked out, costed and watertight.
As it is any contingency plans are currently probably far more broadbrush and plenty of "to be worked on" in the intervening period. I'm fairly sure that whatever the Government current contingency plans/options are in the event of a vote to leave, they aren't at a level to withstand the heat of a referendum campaign. This is all in the context of people saying that Cameron backing leave would have been the easy option.
So you think government contingency plans for things it doesn't like should be uncosted, not fully worked out, and not watertight.
That's the concept of contingency yes.
If the government spent billions fully costing, working out and making water tight every possible contingency then that would be a waste of money. There should be just enough planning to ensure that you're not flatfooted and are able to adapt.
What bizarrely low expectations you have of our enormous civil service. Let's hope you're wrong, and the next national emergency doesn't result in a non watertight, partly worked out, uncosted report being slapped on the PM's desk.
Quite. We are continually told by "Leave" supporters on here that it is not their job to lay out what happens post exit, that is for the Government to do. Well if the Government did back Leave then that would be absolutely true and you would probably find a lot of Leavers rather unhappy about what they were proposing.
You are suggesting that the Government should only prepare contingency plans for things it likes?
Of course the Government should prepare contingency plans. However if they were backing "Leave" then that contingency plan would have had to be fully worked out, costed and watertight.
As it is any contingency plans are currently probably far more broadbrush and plenty of "to be worked on" in the intervening period. I'm fairly sure that whatever the Government current contingency plans/options are in the event of a vote to leave, they aren't at a level to withstand the heat of a referendum campaign. This is all in the context of people saying that Cameron backing leave would have been the easy option.
So you think government contingency plans for things it doesn't like should be uncosted, not fully worked out, and not watertight.
That's the concept of contingency yes.
If the government spent billions fully costing, working out and making water tight every possible contingency then that would be a waste of money. There should be just enough planning to ensure that you're not flatfooted and are able to adapt.
Not every possible contingency, no. But once a referendum was happening it was imperative that the government planned for a Leave vote.
I believe that they have done so and just aren't telling us because they think it would increase the chance of a Leave vote.
Incidentally my ideal outcome has long been to see the EU/EFTA/NAFTA merged and have a single free trade area encompassing Europe and North America with the freedom of movement across all the nations. But without the sovereignty infringements the EU insists on.
I wonder if we can have a non partisan discussion.
This queue that Obama speaks of - how long is it? Its a serious question, I'd like to establish how many countries are trying to trade with the US and what obstacles they are up against, if any.
As far as I know you do not need a "tread deal" to trade with the US (or anybody else for that matter)
The whole issue is nonsense really... I think what's offended a lot of people is more the way he said it rather than what he said.
Absolutely, the anti-TTIP rantings of some Leavers makes me almost tempted to switch back to Remain. TTIP is a great deal.
TTIP is a left/right thing rather than leave/remain.
It's curious to see just how many on the left seem content to accept lower wages, higher prices and privatisation of public services as a price worth paying to get one over on UKIP/The Daily Mail etc.
No it isn't, my objections to TTIP are purely right wing common sense.
How can you have objections to it if you haven't read it?
"It's fair to say that maybe some point down the line there might be a UK-US trade agreement but that's not going to happen anytime soon because our focus is negotiating with a big bloc, the European Union, to get a trade agreement done," Obama said.
Quite. We are continually told by "Leave" supporters on here that it is not their job to lay out what happens post exit, that is for the Government to do. Well if the Government did back Leave then that would be absolutely true and you would probably find a lot of Leavers rather unhappy about what they were proposing.
You are suggesting that the Government should only prepare contingency plans for things it likes?
Of course the Government should prepare contingency plans. However if they were backing "Leave" then that contingency plan would have had to be fully worked out, costed and watertight.
As it is any contingency plans are currently probably far more broadbrush and plenty of "to be worked on" in the intervening period. I'm fairly sure that whatever the Government current contingency plans/options are in the event of a vote to leave, they aren't at a level to withstand the heat of a referendum campaign. This is all in the context of people saying that Cameron backing leave would have been the easy option.
So you think government contingency plans for things it doesn't like should be uncosted, not fully worked out, and not watertight.
That's the concept of contingency yes.
If the government spent billions fully costing, working out and making water tight every possible contingency then that would be a waste of money. There should be just enough planning to ensure that you're not flatfooted and are able to adapt.
What bizarrely low expectations you have of our enormous civil service. Let's hope you're wrong, and the next national emergency doesn't result in a non watertight, partly worked out, uncosted report being slapped on the PM's desk.
I'd rather see the civil service slimmed down (as has been happening for years) than see billions wasted on every possible contingency watertight. Especially given most emergencies come as new shocks, while most contingencies tend to be for ones that have already happened.
It was the Vote Leavers’ worst nightmare. For years – no, decades – the anti-EU camp has suggested that Britain’s natural habitat is not among its continental neighbours but in “the Anglosphere”, that solar system of English-speaking planets which revolves around the United States. Break free from Brussels and we could embrace our kindred spirits in Sydney, Toronto and especially New York, Washington and Los Angeles. The Brexit camp has long been like the man who dreams of leaving his wife for another woman, one who really understands him.
Obama is that other woman. And today he told the outers their fantasies were no more than that. First in print and then, more explicitly, in person he spelled out that America has no intention of forming some new, closer relationship with a Brexited Britain. On the contrary, a post-EU Britain would be at “the back of the queue” if it sought to agree its own, new trade treaty with the US.
If Cameron wins on the back of all this, it will be a pyrrhic victory.
I suspect we will end up leaving anyway as the EU steamrollers through Cameron's "deal", and he will have trashed his reputation with many people for nothing.
Quite. We are continually told by "Leave" supporters on here that it is not their job to lay out what happens post exit, that is for the Government to do. Well if the Government did back Leave then that would be absolutely true and you would probably find a lot of Leavers rather unhappy about what they were proposing.
You are suggesting that the Government should only prepare contingency plans for things it likes?
Of course the Government should prepare contingency plans. However if they were backing "Leave" then that contingency plan would have had to be fully worked out, costed and watertight.
As it is any contingency plans are currently probably far more broadbrush and plenty of "to be worked on" in the intervening period. I'm fairly sure that whatever the Government current contingency plans/options are in the event of a vote to leave, they aren't at a level to withstand the heat of a referendum campaign. This is all in the context of people saying that Cameron backing leave would have been the easy option.
So you think government contingency plans for things it doesn't like should be uncosted, not fully worked out, and not watertight.
That's the concept of contingency yes.
If the government spent billions fully costing, working out and making water tight every possible contingency then that would be a waste of money. There should be just enough planning to ensure that you're not flatfooted and are able to adapt.
Not every possible contingency, no. But once a referendum was happening it was imperative that the government planned for a Leave vote.
I believe that they have done so and just aren't telling us because they think it would increase the chance of a Leave vote.
That would be common sense, yes. Besides, it's not possible for Cameron to make watertight what happens after a leave vote since it won't just be up to him. As Obama pointed out yesterday, it won't be just up to Brits as a whole.
. . . Because it will lower trade barriers between the UK and USA and I believe in lower trade barriers.
Do you? Why have any barriers at all? Just open our own borders to cheaper imports and lower prices. That would make us better off. If other countries wish to impoverish their consumers that's their business.
Mr. Hopkins, poor Pyrrhus. He actually won 2/3 battles against Rome when it was very strong, and he was trying to actually succeed (unlike the negotiation).
For those interested, Jeff Champion's written a fairly recent biography of Pyrrhus (and one of Antigonus Monopthalmus, the only man who came close to rebuilding the full Macedonian empire after Perdiccas' less than stellar regency).
Though we're all having a good time establishing whether Obama would ever say 'queue' in normal life etc., this is very arcane politico froth. Like Osbornes '£4300 per household' it's the headline that impacts; recriminations, claim and counter-claim are neither here nor there.
There is no doubt in my mind that Osborne's claim was as wounding to Leave as anything that could have been said. It remains to be seen whether Obama's intervention, whilst also headline grabbing, is wounding to Leave or a self-inflicted wound to Remain. Public perception of this is what matters.
I think you have that just about right. The only part of the 'froth' that might become significant effects the personel. As SO has said Johnson and Farage referring to Obama as they did might persuade some on the Leave side that it's time to give them a back seat.
I asked Southam Observer what Nigel said about Obama and he hasn't replied. Perhaps you can help me out. I've googled it and all I can find is Nigel criticising what he said, not what he is.
Thanks, it would be helpful, I need to know if Nigel was insulting or you're making things up.
I heard Johnson's I didn't hear Farage's. I only know what I read in SO's post.
Thanks, so you made it up. Its important to know who you're dealing with, I'm sure you'll agree.
As it turns out Nigel said something silly but you didn't know that.
Apologies (and to SO). Someone posted the Guardian article first thing this morning which is where I read it. SO's was just the last reference to it.
. . . Because it will lower trade barriers between the UK and USA and I believe in lower trade barriers.
Do you? Why have any barriers at all? Just open our own borders to cheaper imports and lower prices. That would make us better off. If other countries wish to impoverish their consumers that's their business.
Yes I'd be OK with that. It's the number one advantage I see in leaving is we could have lower barriers than those the EU has which will cut our food costs etc
It was the Vote Leavers’ worst nightmare. For years – no, decades – the anti-EU camp has suggested that Britain’s natural habitat is not among its continental neighbours but in “the Anglosphere”, that solar system of English-speaking planets which revolves around the United States. Break free from Brussels and we could embrace our kindred spirits in Sydney, Toronto and especially New York, Washington and Los Angeles. The Brexit camp has long been like the man who dreams of leaving his wife for another woman, one who really understands him.
Obama is that other woman. And today he told the outers their fantasies were no more than that. First in print and then, more explicitly, in person he spelled out that America has no intention of forming some new, closer relationship with a Brexited Britain. On the contrary, a post-EU Britain would be at “the back of the queue” if it sought to agree its own, new trade treaty with the US.
If Cameron wins on the back of all this, it will be a pyrrhic victory.
I suspect we will end up leaving anyway as the EU steamrollers through Cameron's "deal", and he will have trashed his reputation with many people for nothing.
We're no more likely to leave in that eventuality, than we are to have another referendum in 10 or 15 years time as some are suggesting. It's not going to happen.
'Remain' is a vote to integrate. Anyone under the impression that the status quo will continue is fooling themselves.
Wanted to vote first preference for someone other than Zac... But the choice is dreadful:
(1) Sadiq Khan - no way. Poor judgement in friends and quotas are terrible (2) Sian Berry (Green) - rent controls and forcing people to let their properties is a terrible move in terms of the quality of long-term housing stock (3) Lee Harris - weed-obsessed (4) Ankit Love - self-obsessed (5) George Galloway - left wing nutter (6,7) Paul Golding & David Furness - right wing nutters (8) Prince Zylinski - just a nutter (9) Caroline Pidgeon (Lib Dems) - wants to get develops to build more houses while guaranteeing that 50% of new developments are affordable homes. Doesn't work like that, duckie. (10) Sophie Walker (Women's Equality) - want to stop violence against women but don't seem to have a policy on violence against men (11) Peter Whittle (UKIP) - not while Farage is in charge
Though we're all having a good time establishing whether Obama would ever say 'queue' in normal life etc., this is very arcane politico froth. Like Osbornes '£4300 per household' it's the headline that impacts; recriminations, claim and counter-claim are neither here nor there.
There is no doubt in my mind that Osborne's claim was as wounding to Leave as anything that could have been said. It remains to be seen whether Obama's intervention, whilst also headline grabbing, is wounding to Leave or a self-inflicted wound to Remain. Public perception of this is what matters.
I think you have that just about right. The only part of the 'froth' that might become significant effects the personel. As SO has said Johnson and Farage referring to Obama as they did might persuade some on the Leave side that it's time to give them a back seat.
I asked Southam Observer what Nigel said about Obama and he hasn't replied. Perhaps you can help me out. I've googled it and all I can find is Nigel criticising what he said, not what he is.
Thanks, it would be helpful, I need to know if Nigel was insulting or you're making things up.
It was the Vote Leavers’ worst nightmare. (snip for length)
It is a very good article, and very true. The 'special relationship' has always been a very one-sided affair, and America's strategic interests have always been served by 'having someone' inside the EU. Without being able to pull the EU strategically toward America's will, what use are we? We can grovel and join every war they've got going, but we do that anyway.
I doubt voters will forgive a party that does not accept whatever the result is in June. The EU is a minority obssession. Those that keep coming back to it are going to marginalise themselves.
I wonder if we can have a non partisan discussion.
This queue that Obama speaks of - how long is it? Its a serious question, I'd like to establish how many countries are trying to trade with the US and what obstacles they are up against, if any.
As far as I know you do not need a "tread deal" to trade with the US (or anybody else for that matter)
The whole issue is nonsense really... I think what's offended a lot of people is more the way he said it rather than what he said.
Absolutely, the anti-TTIP rantings of some Leavers makes me almost tempted to switch back to Remain. TTIP is a great deal.
TTIP is a left/right thing rather than leave/remain.
It's curious to see just how many on the left seem content to accept lower wages, higher prices and privatisation of public services as a price worth paying to get one over on UKIP/The Daily Mail etc.
No it isn't, my objections to TTIP are purely right wing common sense.
How can you have objections to it if you haven't read it?
Because I'm profoundly suspicious of the motives behind it.
If Cameron wins on the back of all this, it will be a pyrrhic victory.
I suspect we will end up leaving anyway as the EU steamrollers through Cameron's "deal", and he will have trashed his reputation with many people for nothing.
That has been my view for a few months now. The chances of there both being a functioning EU and us being in it, in say five years looks, low and in ten year, remote in the extreme.
We will not join the Euro, because that one the public are un-"Project Fear"able on, its politically completely unacceptable. As a result there will be an increasing expectation mismatch until it becomes unbearable probably as the result of a necessity of the federalising Eurozone which bad inconveniences us.
In my view leaving the EU (or it collapsing) in the next decade is close to inevitable, and the best time to leave therefore is now before more integration gives a bigger "cold turkey" effect when we leave. But I guess if Cameron wants to feck his party to put off the inevitable for a few years, that's his business.
Wanted to vote first preference for someone other than Zac... But the choice is dreadful:
(1) Sadiq Khan - no way. Poor judgement in friends and quotas are terrible (2) Sian Berry (Green) - rent controls and forcing people to let their properties is a terrible move in terms of the quality of long-term housing stock (3) Lee Harris - weed-obsessed (4) Ankit Love - self-obsessed (5) George Galloway - left wing nutter (6,7) Paul Golding & David Furness - right wing nutters (8) Prince Zylinski - just a nutter (9) Caroline Pidgeon (Lib Dems) - wants to get develops to build more houses while guaranteeing that 50% of new developments are affordable homes. Doesn't work like that, duckie. (10) Sophie Walker (Women's Equality) - want to stop violence against women but don't seem to have a policy on violence against men (11) Peter Whittle (UKIP) - not while Farage is in charge
Galloway.
I don't agree with him, but like Corbyn, what you see is what you get.
Incidentally my ideal outcome has long been to see the EU/EFTA/NAFTA merged and have a single free trade area encompassing Europe and North America with the freedom of movement across all the nations. But without the sovereignty infringements the EU insists on.
It's not going to happen but one can hope.
The trade bit could happen if we all wanted to do it America's way, its pretty much going to be there with TPP/TIPP anyway. The free movement hasn't got a prayer, there is not the slightest chance the US will give anyone else the right to say who crosses their borders.
Though we're all having a good time establishing whether Obama would ever say 'queue' in normal life etc., this is very arcane politico froth. Like Osbornes '£4300 per household' it's the headline that impacts; recriminations, claim and counter-claim are neither here nor there.
There is no doubt in my mind that Osborne's claim was as wounding to Leave as anything that could have been said. It remains to be seen whether Obama's intervention, whilst also headline grabbing, is wounding to Leave or a self-inflicted wound to Remain. Public perception of this is what matters.
I think you have that just about right. The only part of the 'froth' that might become significant effects the personel. As SO has said Johnson and Farage referring to Obama as they did might persuade some on the Leave side that it's time to give them a back seat.
I asked Southam Observer what Nigel said about Obama and he hasn't replied. Perhaps you can help me out. I've googled it and all I can find is Nigel criticising what he said, not what he is.
Thanks, it would be helpful, I need to know if Nigel was insulting or you're making things up.
I doubt voters will forgive a party that does not accept whatever the result is in June. The EU is a minority obssession. Those that keep coming back to it are going to marginalise themselves.
Could somebody please clarify the situation on TTIP ratification for me?
Dates, processes etc.
TTIP is still being negotiated. The negotiators hope to conclude a proposal later this year, although they may think it wise to do it after the US election in November. If they do, it requires approval by both the United States Congress and the European institutions (Britain, if still a member, will have a veto - this is not a QMV issue). There is significant opposition in both the European Parliament (which IMO will be overcome) and Congress (not so sure).
Wanted to vote first preference for someone other than Zac... But the choice is dreadful:
(1) Sadiq Khan - no way. Poor judgement in friends and quotas are terrible (2) Sian Berry (Green) - rent controls and forcing people to let their properties is a terrible move in terms of the quality of long-term housing stock (3) Lee Harris - weed-obsessed (4) Ankit Love - self-obsessed (5) George Galloway - left wing nutter (6,7) Paul Golding & David Furness - right wing nutters (8) Prince Zylinski - just a nutter (9) Caroline Pidgeon (Lib Dems) - wants to get develops to build more houses while guaranteeing that 50% of new developments are affordable homes. Doesn't work like that, duckie. (10) Sophie Walker (Women's Equality) - want to stop violence against women but don't seem to have a policy on violence against men (11) Peter Whittle (UKIP) - not while Farage is in charge
First preference for someone who is not going to win is about sending a message.
Who on the list will do that for you (whether they are a nutter or not).
If Cameron wins on the back of all this, it will be a pyrrhic victory.
I suspect we will end up leaving anyway as the EU steamrollers through Cameron's "deal", and he will have trashed his reputation with many people for nothing.
We will not join the Euro, because that one the public are un-"Project Fear"able on, its politically completely unacceptable.
Out of interest, how do you think 'we will not join the Euro', if HMG decides it's in the UK's best interests to do so? What mechanism exists to stop them?
Wanted to vote first preference for someone other than Zac... But the choice is dreadful:
(1) Sadiq Khan - no way. Poor judgement in friends and quotas are terrible (2) Sian Berry (Green) - rent controls and forcing people to let their properties is a terrible move in terms of the quality of long-term housing stock (3) Lee Harris - weed-obsessed (4) Ankit Love - self-obsessed (5) George Galloway - left wing nutter (6,7) Paul Golding & David Furness - right wing nutters (8) Prince Zylinski - just a nutter (9) Caroline Pidgeon (Lib Dems) - wants to get develops to build more houses while guaranteeing that 50% of new developments are affordable homes. Doesn't work like that, duckie. (10) Sophie Walker (Women's Equality) - want to stop violence against women but don't seem to have a policy on violence against men (11) Peter Whittle (UKIP) - not while Farage is in charge
Galloway.
I don't agree with him, but like Corbyn, what you see is what you get.
But if i don't like what i see, that's hardly a plus, is it? It's like describing someone as 'principled' - no good if i don't like their principles.
I doubt voters will forgive a party that does not accept whatever the result is in June. The EU is a minority obssession. Those that keep coming back to it are going to marginalise themselves.
How many posts have you made about the EU in the last 24 hours?
Wanted to vote first preference for someone other than Zac... But the choice is dreadful:
(1) Sadiq Khan - no way. Poor judgement in friends and quotas are terrible (2) Sian Berry (Green) - rent controls and forcing people to let their properties is a terrible move in terms of the quality of long-term housing stock (3) Lee Harris - weed-obsessed (4) Ankit Love - self-obsessed (5) George Galloway - left wing nutter (6,7) Paul Golding & David Furness - right wing nutters (8) Prince Zylinski - just a nutter (9) Caroline Pidgeon (Lib Dems) - wants to get develops to build more houses while guaranteeing that 50% of new developments are affordable homes. Doesn't work like that, duckie. (10) Sophie Walker (Women's Equality) - want to stop violence against women but don't seem to have a policy on violence against men (11) Peter Whittle (UKIP) - not while Farage is in charge
Galloway.
I don't agree with him, but like Corbyn, what you see is what you get.
But if i don't like what i see, that's hardly a plus, is it? It's like describing someone as 'principled' - no good if i don't like their principles.
Look at that list - it's hard to find any other criteria on which to select a deadbeat from the 11 shown.
Wanted to vote first preference for someone other than Zac... But the choice is dreadful:
(1) Sadiq Khan - no way. Poor judgement in friends and quotas are terrible (2) Sian Berry (Green) - rent controls and forcing people to let their properties is a terrible move in terms of the quality of long-term housing stock (3) Lee Harris - weed-obsessed (4) Ankit Love - self-obsessed (5) George Galloway - left wing nutter (6,7) Paul Golding & David Furness - right wing nutters (8) Prince Zylinski - just a nutter (9) Caroline Pidgeon (Lib Dems) - wants to get develops to build more houses while guaranteeing that 50% of new developments are affordable homes. Doesn't work like that, duckie. (10) Sophie Walker (Women's Equality) - want to stop violence against women but don't seem to have a policy on violence against men (11) Peter Whittle (UKIP) - not while Farage is in charge
It would appear to me that you need to decide whether you're voting for who you wish to become Mayor, or who you wish to support politically. If you dismiss the top 2 (which you have) I would suggest you have no likelihood of your candidate winning, so go for someone you wouldn't mind getting more votes politically.
Wanted to vote first preference for someone other than Zac... But the choice is dreadful:
(1) Sadiq Khan - no way. Poor judgement in friends and quotas are terrible (2) Sian Berry (Green) - rent controls and forcing people to let their properties is a terrible move in terms of the quality of long-term housing stock (3) Lee Harris - weed-obsessed (4) Ankit Love - self-obsessed (5) George Galloway - left wing nutter (6,7) Paul Golding & David Furness - right wing nutters (8) Prince Zylinski - just a nutter (9) Caroline Pidgeon (Lib Dems) - wants to get develops to build more houses while guaranteeing that 50% of new developments are affordable homes. Doesn't work like that, duckie. (10) Sophie Walker (Women's Equality) - want to stop violence against women but don't seem to have a policy on violence against men (11) Peter Whittle (UKIP) - not while Farage is in charge
First preference for someone who is not going to win is about sending a message.
Who on the list will do that for you (whether they are a nutter or not).
That's the problem - no one does. (I voted for the Christian People's Party for the Assembly - they actually seem to have a pretty sensible range of policies)
I doubt voters will forgive a party that does not accept whatever the result is in June. The EU is a minority obssession. Those that keep coming back to it are going to marginalise themselves.
How many posts have you made about the EU in the last 24 hours?
Laura Kuenssberg @bbclaurak Out MP @andrewpercy: No US President would allow a British PM to do the same. Our Government has done Britain down today and diminished us”
Did he complain when Obama intervened in SINDYRef?
Don't know,I know he's very keen on a English parliament and he did tweet this in jest ;-)
Andrew Percy @andrewpercy I would vote Yes to Scottish independence if the deal includes removing the bagpiper on Westminster Bridge. I like the pipes, but not daily!
He's also keen on Cameron:
He was wrong but the PM still has my support and I've no truck with those who want him replacing.
And if cameron was for leave,so would you - is that how it works ?
Ten years from now all these Tory pom pom wavers on here like Scott and Richard Nabavi and Carlotta will be cheering on the attempts of the PM of the day to get us into the Euro...
Maybe we'll have a US President flying in to tell us how we've just GOT to join the Euro because if we stick with the Pound we'll be sent to the back of the queue... You just know it's gonna happen...
Your guys seriously muffed up their response to Obama - get over it.
It wasn't as though they had to dig far into history (22 months...) to see how to handle it.....
Wanted to vote first preference for someone other than Zac... But the choice is dreadful:
(1) Sadiq Khan - no way. Poor judgement in friends and quotas are terrible (2) Sian Berry (Green) - rent controls and forcing people to let their properties is a terrible move in terms of the quality of long-term housing stock (3) Lee Harris - weed-obsessed (4) Ankit Love - self-obsessed (5) George Galloway - left wing nutter (6,7) Paul Golding & David Furness - right wing nutters (8) Prince Zylinski - just a nutter (9) Caroline Pidgeon (Lib Dems) - wants to get develops to build more houses while guaranteeing that 50% of new developments are affordable homes. Doesn't work like that, duckie. (10) Sophie Walker (Women's Equality) - want to stop violence against women but don't seem to have a policy on violence against men (11) Peter Whittle (UKIP) - not while Farage is in charge
Your vote will be interpreted as showing support, so if you think they're all rubbish you shouldn't vote for any of them. If you don't like Zac but much prefer him to Sadiq you should vote for him, I suppose, but an option is to spoil your ballot paper with a note on your preferred cause (Heathrow or whatever) - candidates do get a list of the things written and may give them a passing glance, if only for amusement. The influence on the outcome of one vote will be appproximately similar, so it depends on whether you want a microscopic policy hint or a microscopic support for Zac.
Wanted to vote first preference for someone other than Zac... But the choice is dreadful:
(1) Sadiq Khan - no way. Poor judgement in friends and quotas are terrible (2) Sian Berry (Green) - rent controls and forcing people to let their properties is a terrible move in terms of the quality of long-term housing stock (3) Lee Harris - weed-obsessed (4) Ankit Love - self-obsessed (5) George Galloway - left wing nutter (6,7) Paul Golding & David Furness - right wing nutters (8) Prince Zylinski - just a nutter (9) Caroline Pidgeon (Lib Dems) - wants to get develops to build more houses while guaranteeing that 50% of new developments are affordable homes. Doesn't work like that, duckie. (10) Sophie Walker (Women's Equality) - want to stop violence against women but don't seem to have a policy on violence against men (11) Peter Whittle (UKIP) - not while Farage is in charge
It would appear to me that you need to decide whether you're voting for who you wish to become Mayor, or who you wish to support politically. If you dismiss the top 2 (which you have) I would suggest you have no likelihood of your candidate winning, so go for someone you wouldn't mind getting more votes politically.
I was planning to vote Zac second, but didn't want to give him wholehearted support. But couldn't find any non-viable candidate who's "message" I wanted to support. If someone more sensible than Farage had been in charge I'd probably have voted for UKIP.
Wanted to vote first preference for someone other than Zac... But the choice is dreadful:
(1) Sadiq Khan - no way. Poor judgement in friends and quotas are terrible (2) Sian Berry (Green) - rent controls and forcing people to let their properties is a terrible move in terms of the quality of long-term housing stock (3) Lee Harris - weed-obsessed (4) Ankit Love - self-obsessed (5) George Galloway - left wing nutter (6,7) Paul Golding & David Furness - right wing nutters (8) Prince Zylinski - just a nutter (9) Caroline Pidgeon (Lib Dems) - wants to get develops to build more houses while guaranteeing that 50% of new developments are affordable homes. Doesn't work like that, duckie. (10) Sophie Walker (Women's Equality) - want to stop violence against women but don't seem to have a policy on violence against men (11) Peter Whittle (UKIP) - not while Farage is in charge
Your vote will be interpreted as showing support, so if you think they're all rubbish you shouldn't vote for any of them. If you don't like Zac but much prefer him to Sadiq you should vote for him, I suppose, but an option is to spoil your ballot paper with a note on your preferred cause (Heathrow or whatever) - candidates do get a list of the things written and may give them a passing glance, if only for amusement. The influence on the outcome of one vote will be appproximately similar, so it depends on whether you want a microscopic policy hint or a microscopic support for Zac.
My message to Zac is that it's not right to spend five years of your married life shagging another woman.
As a remainer I am very saddened to see Boris losing it but maybe while he has a high intellect he is rubbish at politics but unparalleled in the classics. I do not know where leave go from the last 24 hours to regain the initiative. I would like to comment that I share leave's dismay in all aspects of the EU but I do believe that it is the UK's best interests to remain. In the event of a remain vote I would expect that from the 24th June and the following weeks to see a huge increase in confidence in the UK with many Companies wanting to relocate into London and massive investment and a much strengthen pound. The question re David Cameron's future will in some ways depend on this prospective endorsement of the UK's economy and in that event I think it will be difficult for a case to be made to bring forward his succession
If Cameron wins on the back of all this, it will be a pyrrhic victory.
I suspect we will end up leaving anyway as the EU steamrollers through Cameron's "deal", and he will have trashed his reputation with many people for nothing.
We will not join the Euro, because that one the public are un-"Project Fear"able on, its politically completely unacceptable.
Out of interest, how do you think 'we will not join the Euro', if HMG decides it's in the UK's best interests to do so? What mechanism exists to stop them?
Well there is a vague hope even the craptastic referendum lock might come into play, I mean I know it has been drafted with the intention of avoiding being used, but adopting the Euro would seem to be a big enough transfer of power that it is going to be hard to avoid.
Possibly more importantly it is the change that all the public will have an opinion on, the pound in their pocket isn't an issue that half the electorate don't care about. Any politician trying to force that on the public without a cast iron reason and a referendum would lose the next election to Jeremy Corbyn's more extreme twin.
Mr. NorthWales, although I'm not as well-versed in politics as many others, Boris' wibbling does reassure me that my lightweight-o-meter remains in tiptop condition (picked out Burnham when others thought he was a potential competent leader, likewise Javid, and Jeremy Hunt).
Wanted to vote first preference for someone other than Zac... But the choice is dreadful:
(1) Sadiq Khan - no way. Poor judgement in friends and quotas are terrible (2) Sian Berry (Green) - rent controls and forcing people to let their properties is a terrible move in terms of the quality of long-term housing stock (3) Lee Harris - weed-obsessed (4) Ankit Love - self-obsessed (5) George Galloway - left wing nutter (6,7) Paul Golding & David Furness - right wing nutters (8) Prince Zylinski - just a nutter (9) Caroline Pidgeon (Lib Dems) - wants to get develops to build more houses while guaranteeing that 50% of new developments are affordable homes. Doesn't work like that, duckie. (10) Sophie Walker (Women's Equality) - want to stop violence against women but don't seem to have a policy on violence against men (11) Peter Whittle (UKIP) - not while Farage is in charge
It would appear to me that you need to decide whether you're voting for who you wish to become Mayor, or who you wish to support politically. If you dismiss the top 2 (which you have) I would suggest you have no likelihood of your candidate winning, so go for someone you wouldn't mind getting more votes politically.
I was planning to vote Zac second, but didn't want to give him wholehearted support. But couldn't find any non-viable candidate who's "message" I wanted to support. If someone more sensible than Farage had been in charge I'd probably have voted for UKIP.
Not going to argue for UKIP. We come at the Farage issue from such profoundly different mindsets, I'll never convince you. Apart from UKIP, I'd probably go for 'doesn't work like that duckie'. She sounds well-intentioned at least.
I doubt voters will forgive a party that does not accept whatever the result is in June. The EU is a minority obssession. Those that keep coming back to it are going to marginalise themselves.
How many posts have you made about the EU in the last 24 hours?
Loads. This is a site for political nerds.
So it's just possible your finger isn't completely on the pulse of what the public will or won't accept
Wanted to vote first preference for someone other than Zac... But the choice is dreadful:
(1) Sadiq Khan - no way. Poor judgement in friends and quotas are terrible (2) Sian Berry (Green) - rent controls and forcing people to let their properties is a terrible move in terms of the quality of long-term housing stock (3) Lee Harris - weed-obsessed (4) Ankit Love - self-obsessed (5) George Galloway - left wing nutter (6,7) Paul Golding & David Furness - right wing nutters (8) Prince Zylinski - just a nutter (9) Caroline Pidgeon (Lib Dems) - wants to get develops to build more houses while guaranteeing that 50% of new developments are affordable homes. Doesn't work like that, duckie. (10) Sophie Walker (Women's Equality) - want to stop violence against women but don't seem to have a policy on violence against men (11) Peter Whittle (UKIP) - not while Farage is in charge
First preference for someone who is not going to win is about sending a message.
Who on the list will do that for you (whether they are a nutter or not).
That's the problem - no one does. (I voted for the Christian People's Party for the Assembly - they actually seem to have a pretty sensible range of policies)
Are none of the dozen candidates giving wholehearted support to the new runway (or two) at LHR?
Mr. NorthWales, although I'm not as well-versed in politics as many others, Boris' wibbling does reassure me that my lightweight-o-meter remains in tiptop condition (picked out Burnham when others thought he was a potential competent leader, likewise Javid, and Jeremy Hunt).
I am quite sorry about Boris as I had hoped for more but how it has come to Farage quoting him about Obama's ancestry is quite bewildering
"But it’s the wider Vote Leave campaign that has found itself in the wrong place. An anti-EU movement can’t also be anti-US, not without looking as if it hates everyone. Nor is it good to pit yourself against an American president who, whatever his domestic standing, remains in high esteem in Britain and Europe. It’s just too irresistibly tweetable to ask: if Obama’s for remain, and Trump and Le Pen are for leave, whose side are you on?"
As a remainer I am very saddened to see Boris losing it but maybe while he has a high intellect he is rubbish at politics but unparalleled in the classics. I do not know where leave go from the last 24 hours to regain the initiative. I would like to comment that I share leave's dismay in all aspects of the EU but I do believe that it is the UK's best interests to remain. In the event of a remain vote I would expect that from the 24th June and the following weeks to see a huge increase in confidence in the UK with many Companies wanting to relocate into London and massive investment and a much strengthen pound. The question re David Cameron's future will in some ways depend on this prospective endorsement of the UK's economy and in that event I think it will be difficult for a case to be made to bring forward his succession
You appear to have gone from "with great regret" and "with a heavy heart" that you have just scraped into the remain camp for the good for nation to a proto-Meeks in the space of about a week
As a remainer I am very saddened to see Boris losing it but maybe while he has a high intellect he is rubbish at politics but unparalleled in the classics. I do not know where leave go from the last 24 hours to regain the initiative. I would like to comment that I share leave's dismay in all aspects of the EU but I do believe that it is the UK's best interests to remain. In the event of a remain vote I would expect that from the 24th June and the following weeks to see a huge increase in confidence in the UK with many Companies wanting to relocate into London and massive investment and a much strengthen pound. The question re David Cameron's future will in some ways depend on this prospective endorsement of the UK's economy and in that event I think it will be difficult for a case to be made to bring forward his succession
Leave haven't had the initiative since IDS said we'd all be flooded with migrants. Some events since than have favoured them, but they haven't had the initiative. They're not a campaign, they're a bunch of people.
Could somebody please clarify the situation on TTIP ratification for me?
Dates, processes etc.
TTIP is still being negotiated. The negotiators hope to conclude a proposal later this year, although they may think it wise to do it after the US election in November. If they do, it requires approval by both the United States Congress and the European institutions (Britain, if still a member, will have a veto - this is not a QMV issue). There is significant opposition in both the European Parliament (which IMO will be overcome) and Congress (not so sure).
I think there are two general objections to TTIP. One concerns food safety and the other concerns sovereignty.
The food safety concern is the lowering of standards towards US standards which might include accepting eg growth hormone in meat and chlorine blanched chicken. The US approach is generally that you can do anything unless it is proven to be unsafe whereas the European approach is generally you can only do things that are proven safe. This results in the US population being guinea pigs for new technologies and processes (eg GM food). Many people object to that being extended to Europe.
The sovereignty issue concerns the ISDS provisions. With an ISDS system in place, corporations would be able to challenge governments in a private trade tribunal. There are concerns that such a system would give companies excessive power over national authorities and allow them to sue governments every time legislation was introduced that might harm their profits, including changes to NHS provisioning.
Among EU countries, the UK government is keenest on TTIP. It was supported by Conservatives, Labour and LibDems at the last election and only opposed by Green (environmental) and UKIP (sovereignty), though Corbyn has come out against it. The Germans are most anti-TTIP with mass demonstrations.
If LEAVE wins, I suspect we will get a US biased TTIP for the UK when our turn in the queue comes up. If REMAINS wins, I suspect we will get a heavily watered down version of TTIP without ISDS.
"But it’s the wider Vote Leave campaign that has found itself in the wrong place. An anti-EU movement can’t also be anti-US, not without looking as if it hates everyone. Nor is it good to pit yourself against an American president who, whatever his domestic standing, remains in high esteem in Britain and Europe. It’s just too irresistibly tweetable to ask: if Obama’s for remain, and Trump and Le Pen are for leave, whose side are you on?"
That might be considered a bit of a hostage to fortune if in a years time Obama is playing golf and Trump and Le Pen are sitting in their respective presidential residences
As a remainer I am very saddened to see Boris losing it but maybe while he has a high intellect he is rubbish at politics but unparalleled in the classics. I do not know where leave go from the last 24 hours to regain the initiative. I would like to comment that I share leave's dismay in all aspects of the EU but I do believe that it is the UK's best interests to remain. In the event of a remain vote I would expect that from the 24th June and the following weeks to see a huge increase in confidence in the UK with many Companies wanting to relocate into London and massive investment and a much strengthen pound. The question re David Cameron's future will in some ways depend on this prospective endorsement of the UK's economy and in that event I think it will be difficult for a case to be made to bring forward his succession
You appear to have gone from "with great regret" and "with a heavy heart" that you have just scraped into the remain camp for the good for nation to a proto-Meeks in the space of about a week
Maybe each day enforces my decision but I believe I am one of many eurosceptic remainers who wants to fight from inside the EU
I don't think it'll be Kasich if the convention does look beyond Trump and Cruz - it'd be better to have someone who hasn't stood than someone who's been rejected. And I don't think Trump and Cruz delegates will want to look elsewhere anyway. But it's useful to know that the rules don't actually prevent it.
If LEAVE wins, I suspect we will get a US biased TTIP for the UK when our turn in the queue comes up. If REMAINS wins, I suspect we will get a heavily watered down version of TTIP without ISDS.
I was with you until the last sentence. There won't be a deal without ISDS or something very similar. The most adventurous proposals so far talk about making the hearings a bit less private, and for there being rather more consideration about how the judges are appointed. Ultimately investors are not going to put their money down where there isn't some impartial system for judging if a country is trying to bend/break the rules in its own interests.
As a remainer I am very saddened to see Boris losing it but maybe while he has a high intellect he is rubbish at politics but unparalleled in the classics. I do not know where leave go from the last 24 hours to regain the initiative. I would like to comment that I share leave's dismay in all aspects of the EU but I do believe that it is the UK's best interests to remain. In the event of a remain vote I would expect that from the 24th June and the following weeks to see a huge increase in confidence in the UK with many Companies wanting to relocate into London and massive investment and a much strengthen pound. The question re David Cameron's future will in some ways depend on this prospective endorsement of the UK's economy and in that event I think it will be difficult for a case to be made to bring forward his succession
Leave haven't had the initiative since IDS said we'd all be flooded with migrants. Some events since than have favoured them, but they haven't had the initiative. They're not a campaign, they're a bunch of people.
IDS column in the Daily Mail today played the immigration card in a big way and it looks as if that is all leave have left
"But it’s the wider Vote Leave campaign that has found itself in the wrong place. An anti-EU movement can’t also be anti-US, not without looking as if it hates everyone. Nor is it good to pit yourself against an American president who, whatever his domestic standing, remains in high esteem in Britain and Europe. It’s just too irresistibly tweetable to ask: if Obama’s for remain, and Trump and Le Pen are for leave, whose side are you on?"
Oh, he's dead wrong there. A self-pleasing conclusion (my opponent can't win), but not an accurate one. I should have read the whole article, naughty me.
Framing this argument as the people vs. the establishment is the ideal circumstance for Leave. Both the US and the EU are very much part of that.
Beyond the referendum here, there's a wider theme of the establishment having to 'spend' its power (and as any physicist will tell you, to use power is to lose it) as never before just to stand still.
My message to Zac is that it's not right to spend five years of your married life shagging another woman.
So put that on the ballot paper. He'll probably be shown it. Your vote won't be counted, but as there's nobody you like and nobody's going to win by 1, do you care?
I'm uploading the backup files to the server. I hadn't realised (a) how big they were, and (b) how slow my work Internet connection is. Estimated "PB back again" time: 14:25
As a remainer I am very saddened to see Boris losing it but maybe while he has a high intellect he is rubbish at politics but unparalleled in the classics. I do not know where leave go from the last 24 hours to regain the initiative. I would like to comment that I share leave's dismay in all aspects of the EU but I do believe that it is the UK's best interests to remain. In the event of a remain vote I would expect that from the 24th June and the following weeks to see a huge increase in confidence in the UK with many Companies wanting to relocate into London and massive investment and a much strengthen pound. The question re David Cameron's future will in some ways depend on this prospective endorsement of the UK's economy and in that event I think it will be difficult for a case to be made to bring forward his succession
You appear to have gone from "with great regret" and "with a heavy heart" that you have just scraped into the remain camp for the good for nation to a proto-Meeks in the space of about a week
Maybe each day enforces my decision but I believe I am one of many eurosceptic remainers who wants to fight from inside the EU
Explain to me how that will happen with QMV, we have next to no influence now and it will disappear completely soon.
Mr. NorthWales, alas, I fear that those who hold that position (sceptics who want to Remain for reform) will end up disappointed.
If reform does occur, obviously that's your perfect scenario. But if it doesn't, would you want another vote [not necessarily immediately, of course] and vote to Leave?
You appear to have gone from "with great regret" and "with a heavy heart" that you have just scraped into the remain camp for the good for nation to a proto-Meeks in the space of about a week
Maybe each day enforces my decision but I believe I am one of many eurosceptic remainers who wants to fight from inside the EU
No harm in adding to that list of 70-odd British proposals that the EU have rejected I guess.
If Cameron is forced out by the losers should the referendum be lost the Tory party need only to look back to 1997 for their likely future. I suspect it won't happen but it's possible.
If LEAVE wins, I suspect we will get a US biased TTIP for the UK when our turn in the queue comes up. If REMAINS wins, I suspect we will get a heavily watered down version of TTIP without ISDS.
I was with you until the last sentence. There won't be a deal without ISDS or something very similar. The most adventurous proposals so far talk about making the hearings a bit less private, and for there being rather more consideration about how the judges are appointed. Ultimately investors are not going to put their money down where there isn't some impartial system for judging if a country is trying to bend/break the rules in its own interests.
Yes; TPP ISDS tribunals are in private, and the current proposal (which is by no means certain to be approved), is for TIPP ones to have public deliberations.
My message to Zac is that it's not right to spend five years of your married life shagging another woman.
So put that on the ballot paper. He'll probably be shown it. Your vote won't be counted, but as there's nobody you like and nobody's going to win by 1, do you care?
Yes, because I believe in the importance of democratic participation. Not voting is not an option for me (and that includes spoiling my ballot)
Could somebody please clarify the situation on TTIP ratification for me?
Dates, processes etc.
TTIP is still being negotiated. The negotiators hope to conclude a proposal later this year, although they may think it wise to do it after the US election in November. If they do, it requires approval by both the United States Congress and the European institutions (Britain, if still a member, will have a veto - this is not a QMV issue). There is significant opposition in both the European Parliament (which IMO will be overcome) and Congress (not so sure).
I think there are two general objections to TTIP. One concerns food safety and the other concerns sovereignty.
The food safety concern is the lowering of standards towards US standards which might include accepting eg growth hormone in meat and chlorine blanched chicken. The US approach is generally that you can do anything unless it is proven to be unsafe whereas the European approach is generally you can only do things that are proven safe. This results in the US population being guinea pigs for new technologies and processes (eg GM food). Many people object to that being extended to Europe.
The sovereignty issue concerns the ISDS provisions. With an ISDS system in place, corporations would be able to challenge governments in a private trade tribunal. There are concerns that such a system would give companies excessive power over national authorities and allow them to sue governments every time legislation was introduced that might harm their profits, including changes to NHS provisioning.
Among EU countries, the UK government is keenest on TTIP. It was supported by Conservatives, Labour and LibDems at the last election and only opposed by Green (environmental) and UKIP (sovereignty), though Corbyn has come out against it. The Germans are most anti-TTIP with mass demonstrations.
If LEAVE wins, I suspect we will get a US biased TTIP for the UK when our turn in the queue comes up. If REMAINS wins, I suspect we will get a heavily watered down version of TTIP without ISDS.
If you are concerned about TTIP, vote REMAIN.
I don't wholly disagree, but the President just implied the opposite. For those concerned about TTIP on the left, he just gave them one more reason not to vote Remain.
I don't think it'll be Kasich if the convention does look beyond Trump and Cruz - it'd be better to have someone who hasn't stood than someone who's been rejected. And I don't think Trump and Cruz delegates will want to look elsewhere anyway. But it's useful to know that the rules don't actually prevent it.
Kasich's main problem is that I think he'll be barely ahead of Rubio in delegates.
I'm uploading the backup files to the server. I hadn't realised (a) how big they were, and (b) how slow my work Internet connection is. Estimated "PB back again" time: 14:25
Another LEAVE cock-up .... was your grandfather Turkish too? ....
First they came for the satirists, next they came for the journalists...
Merkel enters a new controversy over Turkey by ignoring Erdogan's imprisonment of journalists who exposed his government shipping arms to Syrian extremists. Turkish opposition lays in to German government as complicit in the suspension of rights.
First they came for the satirists, next they came for the journalists...
Merkel enters a new controversy over Turkey by ignoring Erdogan's imprisonment of journalists who exposed his government shipping arms to Sytrian extremists. Turkish opposition lays in to German government as complicit in the suspension of rights.
As a remainer I am very saddened to see Boris losing it but maybe while he has a high intellect he is rubbish at politics but unparalleled in the classics. I do not know where leave go from the last 24 hours to regain the initiative. I would like to comment that I share leave's dismay in all aspects of the EU but I do believe that it is the UK's best interests to remain. In the event of a remain vote I would expect that from the 24th June and the following weeks to see a huge increase in confidence in the UK with many Companies wanting to relocate into London and massive investment and a much strengthen pound. The question re David Cameron's future will in some ways depend on this prospective endorsement of the UK's economy and in that event I think it will be difficult for a case to be made to bring forward his succession
Leave haven't had the initiative since IDS said we'd all be flooded with migrants. Some events since than have favoured them, but they haven't had the initiative. They're not a campaign, they're a bunch of people.
IDS column in the Daily Mail today played the immigration card in a big way and it looks as if that is all leave have left
Don't be silly, they're what, 4/5 points behind? They have everything left, but they won't use it, and we shouldn't expect them to.
Barring a minor miracle, this campaign is Remain's to win or lose. Which is why the reception to Obama is so interesting.
Wanted to vote first preference for someone other than Zac... But the choice is dreadful:
(1) Sadiq Khan - no way. Poor judgement in friends and quotas are terrible (2) Sian Berry (Green) - rent controls and forcing people to let their properties is a terrible move in terms of the quality of long-term housing stock (3) Lee Harris - weed-obsessed (4) Ankit Love - self-obsessed (5) George Galloway - left wing nutter (6,7) Paul Golding & David Furness - right wing nutters (8) Prince Zylinski - just a nutter (9) Caroline Pidgeon (Lib Dems) - wants to get develops to build more houses while guaranteeing that 50% of new developments are affordable homes. Doesn't work like that, duckie. (10) Sophie Walker (Women's Equality) - want to stop violence against women but don't seem to have a policy on violence against men (11) Peter Whittle (UKIP) - not while Farage is in charge
Your vote will be interpreted as showing support, so if you think they're all rubbish you shouldn't vote for any of them. If you don't like Zac but much prefer him to Sadiq you should vote for him, I suppose, but an option is to spoil your ballot paper with a note on your preferred cause (Heathrow or whatever) - candidates do get a list of the things written and may give them a passing glance, if only for amusement. The influence on the outcome of one vote will be appproximately similar, so it depends on whether you want a microscopic policy hint or a microscopic support for Zac.
My message to Zac is that it's not right to spend five years of your married life shagging another woman.
Sounds like you should vote Womens Equality Party then.
First they came for the satirists, next they came for the journalists...
Merkel enters a new controversy over Turkey by ignoring Erdogan's imprisonment of journalists who exposed his government shipping arms to Sytrian extremists. Turkish opposition lays in to German government as complicit in the suspension of rights.
As a remainer I am very saddened to see Boris losing it but maybe while he has a high intellect he is rubbish at politics but unparalleled in the classics. I do not know where leave go from the last 24 hours to regain the initiative. I would like to comment that I share leave's dismay in all aspects of the EU but I do believe that it is the UK's best interests to remain. In the event of a remain vote I would expect that from the 24th June and the following weeks to see a huge increase in confidence in the UK with many Companies wanting to relocate into London and massive investment and a much strengthen pound. The question re David Cameron's future will in some ways depend on this prospective endorsement of the UK's economy and in that event I think it will be difficult for a case to be made to bring forward his succession
You appear to have gone from "with great regret" and "with a heavy heart" that you have just scraped into the remain camp for the good for nation to a proto-Meeks in the space of about a week
Maybe each day enforces my decision but I believe I am one of many eurosceptic remainers who wants to fight from inside the EU
Explain to me how that will happen with QMV, we have next to no influence now and it will disappear completely soon.
I do believe everything happening in the EU at present is so chaotic that it represents an opportunity for the UK to be at the forefront of the inevitable change that is coming, whether it is precipatated by the migration crisis, Greece, the German and French elections , or by an ever rising rejection of the eurocrats
As a remainer I am very saddened to see Boris losing it but maybe while he has a high intellect he is rubbish at politics but unparalleled in the classics. I do not know where leave go from the last 24 hours to regain the initiative. I would like to comment that I share leave's dismay in all aspects of the EU but I do believe that it is the UK's best interests to remain. In the event of a remain vote I would expect that from the 24th June and the following weeks to see a huge increase in confidence in the UK with many Companies wanting to relocate into London and massive investment and a much strengthen pound. The question re David Cameron's future will in some ways depend on this prospective endorsement of the UK's economy and in that event I think it will be difficult for a case to be made to bring forward his succession
Leave haven't had the initiative since IDS said we'd all be flooded with migrants. Some events since than have favoured them, but they haven't had the initiative. They're not a campaign, they're a bunch of people.
IDS column in the Daily Mail today played the immigration card in a big way and it looks as if that is all leave have left
It's not all Leave have left but I'm more concerned that this type of article for the benefit of Daily Mail readers is once again simply preaching to the converted. Frankly less effort should be spent on the 40% who are going to vote Out regardless. Instead establish a Mrs Thatcher circa 1978-79 sense of mission to attract the waverers and undecided. There seems to be a lack of focus from the disparate leadership.
If LEAVE wins, I suspect we will get a US biased TTIP for the UK when our turn in the queue comes up. If REMAINS wins, I suspect we will get a heavily watered down version of TTIP without ISDS.
I was with you until the last sentence. There won't be a deal without ISDS or something very similar. The most adventurous proposals so far talk about making the hearings a bit less private, and for there being rather more consideration about how the judges are appointed. Ultimately investors are not going to put their money down where there isn't some impartial system for judging if a country is trying to bend/break the rules in its own interests.
You might be right that there won't be a deal without ISDS or something very similar because of the US insistence on it. However that is likely to mean there won't be a deal - full stop. There is major resistance in Europe to ISDS and the new version you linked to. http://www.ip-watch.org/2016/02/19/ttip-alternative-isds-no-real-alternative-ngos-warn/
Also Clinton is very sceptical unlike Obama. Sanders is very anti. Trump is anti TTP and it is struggling in Congress.
All this talk about trade deals with the US might come to nothing.
My big fear is if LEAVE wins, the UK will do its own TTIP like deal and undermine our food safety and our sovereignty.
Incidentally my ideal outcome has long been to see the EU/EFTA/NAFTA merged and have a single free trade area encompassing Europe and North America with the freedom of movement across all the nations. But without the sovereignty infringements the EU insists on.
It's not going to happen but one can hope.
The trade bit could happen if we all wanted to do it America's way, its pretty much going to be there with TPP/TIPP anyway. The free movement hasn't got a prayer, there is not the slightest chance the US will give anyone else the right to say who crosses their borders.
"If he makes these numbers, Trump would finish the primary season with at least 1,240 delegates – over the magic number. Obviously, this would be a perilous path with little margin for error. A loss in Indiana, for instance, would knock his final number well under 1,237. That said, a stronger win in California than we’re penciling in here could push him well past 1,237."
Mr. NorthWales, although I'm not as well-versed in politics as many others, Boris' wibbling does reassure me that my lightweight-o-meter remains in tiptop condition (picked out Burnham when others thought he was a potential competent leader, likewise Javid, and Jeremy Hunt).
Just back from an extended morning walk during which I got ambushed by a lady from the local Labour Party who were out leafleting and accosting passers-by in the High Street. She asked me if I would be voting in the referendum, I told her I would most certainly be doing so and she was pleased. I told her I would be voting to Leave, she looked horrified and started wibbling on about the economic arguments. I politely cut her short and told her that the issue of trade was, as far as I am concerned, neither here nor there; the people of the UK have been trading with the rest of the world since the bronze age and always will. However, I would prefer to see the UK return to being a self-governing state where the laws are made by Parliament and interpreted and enforced by UK judges and courts. She said, "So you are isolationist".
Nice lady, middle-class retired teacher, though the fact that she could interpret a person wanting to be in an outward-facing, but self-governing, trading nation as an "isolationist" makes me fear for her former pupils. Still being called an isolationist was a pleasant change of insult and perhaps a bit nicer that the usual cries of headbanger, swivel-eyed loon, and obsessive etc. that get thrown at people who are in favour of "Out" on this site.
I'm uploading the backup files to the server. I hadn't realised (a) how big they were, and (b) how slow my work Internet connection is. Estimated "PB back again" time: 14:25
Good luck with the server restore and hope it goes well. Been there, done that...
Just back from an extended morning walk during which I got ambushed by a lady from the local Labour Party who were out leafleting and accosting passers-by in the High Street. She asked me if I would be voting in the referendum, I told her I would most certainly be doing so and she was pleased. I told her I would be voting to Leave, she looked horrified and started wibbling on about the economic arguments. I politely cut her short and told her that the issue of trade was, as far as I am concerned, neither here nor there; the people of the UK have been trading with the rest of the world since the bronze age and always will. However, I would prefer to see the UK return to being a self-governing state where the laws are made by Parliament and interpreted and enforced by UK judges and courts. She said, "So you are isolationist".
Nice lady, middle-class retired teacher, though the fact that she could interpret a person wanting to be in an outward-facing, but self-governing, trading nation as an "isolationist" makes me fear for her former pupils. Still being called an isolationist was a pleasant change of insult and perhaps a bit nicer that the usual cries of headbanger, swivel-eyed loon, and obsessive etc. that get thrown at people who are in favour of "Out" on this site.
I'd the same experience yesterday, I was called a Little Englander and inward looking, how that squares with wanting to trade with the whole world escapes me.
Just back from an extended morning walk during which I got ambushed by a lady from the local Labour Party who were out leafleting and accosting passers-by in the High Street. She asked me if I would be voting in the referendum, I told her I would most certainly be doing so and she was pleased. I told her I would be voting to Leave, she looked horrified and started wibbling on about the economic arguments. I politely cut her short and told her that the issue of trade was, as far as I am concerned, neither here nor there; the people of the UK have been trading with the rest of the world since the bronze age and always will. However, I would prefer to see the UK return to being a self-governing state where the laws are made by Parliament and interpreted and enforced by UK judges and courts. She said, "So you are isolationist".
Nice lady, middle-class retired teacher, though the fact that she could interpret a person wanting to be in an outward-facing, but self-governing, trading nation as an "isolationist" makes me fear for her former pupils. Still being called an isolationist was a pleasant change of insult and perhaps a bit nicer that the usual cries of headbanger, swivel-eyed loon, and obsessive etc. that get thrown at people who are in favour of "Out" on this site.
Think that quote of isolation was used by Obama this morning at his Town Hall meeting
I don't think it'll be Kasich if the convention does look beyond Trump and Cruz - it'd be better to have someone who hasn't stood than someone who's been rejected. And I don't think Trump and Cruz delegates will want to look elsewhere anyway. But it's useful to know that the rules don't actually prevent it.
I'm not sure it matters.
It would make it incredibly politically difficult to elect Kasich, which is probably good enough. It would look 100% like a stich up, which of course it is.
Wanted to vote first preference for someone other than Zac... But the choice is dreadful:
(1) Sadiq Khan - no way. Poor judgement in friends and quotas are terrible (2) Sian Berry (Green) - rent controls and forcing people to let their properties is a terrible move in terms of the quality of long-term housing stock (3) Lee Harris - weed-obsessed (4) Ankit Love - self-obsessed (5) George Galloway - left wing nutter (6,7) Paul Golding & David Furness - right wing nutters (8) Prince Zylinski - just a nutter (9) Caroline Pidgeon (Lib Dems) - wants to get develops to build more houses while guaranteeing that 50% of new developments are affordable homes. Doesn't work like that, duckie. (10) Sophie Walker (Women's Equality) - want to stop violence against women but don't seem to have a policy on violence against men (11) Peter Whittle (UKIP) - not while Farage is in charge
As a remainer I am very saddened to see Boris losing it but maybe while he has a high intellect he is rubbish at politics but unparalleled in the classics. I do not know where leave go from the last 24 hours to regain the initiative. I would like to comment that I share leave's dismay in all aspects of the EU but I do believe that it is the UK's best interests to remain. In the event of a remain vote I would expect that from the 24th June and the following weeks to see a huge increase in confidence in the UK with many Companies wanting to relocate into London and massive investment and a much strengthen pound. The question re David Cameron's future will in some ways depend on this prospective endorsement of the UK's economy and in that event I think it will be difficult for a case to be made to bring forward his succession
Leave haven't had the initiative since IDS said we'd all be flooded with migrants. Some events since than have favoured them, but they haven't had the initiative. They're not a campaign, they're a bunch of people.
IDS column in the Daily Mail today played the immigration card in a big way and it looks as if that is all leave have left
It's not all Leave have left but I'm more concerned that this type of article for the benefit of Daily Mail readers is once again simply preaching to the converted. Frankly less effort should be spent on the 40% who are going to vote Out regardless. Instead establish a Mrs Thatcher circa 1978-79 sense of mission to attract the waverers and undecided. There seems to be a lack of focus from the disparate leadership.
Leave needs to appeal to the Labour left and the further left if it is going to win. Unfortunately too many of those who could make the case have meekly aligned with Remain.
Comments
Though it's also very possible that were we to leave and join the EFTA then the proposed suggestion of a TAFTA (Trans Atlantic Free Trade Area) encompassing NAFTA and EFTA could be implemented instead of TTIP. Would likely set back TTIP negotiations by a few years though so the US wouldn't be keen on that.
It was the Vote Leavers’ worst nightmare. For years – no, decades – the anti-EU camp has suggested that Britain’s natural habitat is not among its continental neighbours but in “the Anglosphere”, that solar system of English-speaking planets which revolves around the United States. Break free from Brussels and we could embrace our kindred spirits in Sydney, Toronto and especially New York, Washington and Los Angeles. The Brexit camp has long been like the man who dreams of leaving his wife for another woman, one who really understands him.
Obama is that other woman. And today he told the outers their fantasies were no more than that. First in print and then, more explicitly, in person he spelled out that America has no intention of forming some new, closer relationship with a Brexited Britain. On the contrary, a post-EU Britain would be at “the back of the queue” if it sought to agree its own, new trade treaty with the US.
I believe that they have done so and just aren't telling us because they think it would increase the chance of a Leave vote.
It's not going to happen but one can hope.
If Cameron wins on the back of all this, it will be a pyrrhic victory.
I suspect we will end up leaving anyway as the EU steamrollers through Cameron's "deal", and he will have trashed his reputation with many people for nothing.
Just open our own borders to cheaper imports and lower prices. That would make us better off. If other countries wish to impoverish their consumers that's their business.
For those interested, Jeff Champion's written a fairly recent biography of Pyrrhus (and one of Antigonus Monopthalmus, the only man who came close to rebuilding the full Macedonian empire after Perdiccas' less than stellar regency).
'Remain' is a vote to integrate. Anyone under the impression that the status quo will continue is fooling themselves.
Wanted to vote first preference for someone other than Zac... But the choice is dreadful:
(1) Sadiq Khan - no way. Poor judgement in friends and quotas are terrible
(2) Sian Berry (Green) - rent controls and forcing people to let their properties is a terrible move in terms of the quality of long-term housing stock
(3) Lee Harris - weed-obsessed
(4) Ankit Love - self-obsessed
(5) George Galloway - left wing nutter
(6,7) Paul Golding & David Furness - right wing nutters
(8) Prince Zylinski - just a nutter
(9) Caroline Pidgeon (Lib Dems) - wants to get develops to build more houses while guaranteeing that 50% of new developments are affordable homes. Doesn't work like that, duckie.
(10) Sophie Walker (Women's Equality) - want to stop violence against women but don't seem to have a policy on violence against men
(11) Peter Whittle (UKIP) - not while Farage is in charge
[I received a vote in the California governor election which saw Schwarzenegger win office].
We will not join the Euro, because that one the public are un-"Project Fear"able on, its politically completely unacceptable. As a result there will be an increasing expectation mismatch until it becomes unbearable probably as the result of a necessity of the federalising Eurozone which bad inconveniences us.
In my view leaving the EU (or it collapsing) in the next decade is close to inevitable, and the best time to leave therefore is now before more integration gives a bigger "cold turkey" effect when we leave. But I guess if Cameron wants to feck his party to put off the inevitable for a few years, that's his business.
I don't agree with him, but like Corbyn, what you see is what you get.
First preference for someone who is not going to win is about sending a message.
Who on the list will do that for you (whether they are a nutter or not).
Possibly more importantly it is the change that all the public will have an opinion on, the pound in their pocket isn't an issue that half the electorate don't care about. Any politician trying to force that on the public without a cast iron reason and a referendum would lose the next election to Jeremy Corbyn's more extreme twin.
Mr. NorthWales, although I'm not as well-versed in politics as many others, Boris' wibbling does reassure me that my lightweight-o-meter remains in tiptop condition (picked out Burnham when others thought he was a potential competent leader, likewise Javid, and Jeremy Hunt).
"But it’s the wider Vote Leave campaign that has found itself in the wrong place. An anti-EU movement can’t also be anti-US, not without looking as if it hates everyone. Nor is it good to pit yourself against an American president who, whatever his domestic standing, remains in high esteem in Britain and Europe. It’s just too irresistibly tweetable to ask: if Obama’s for remain, and Trump and Le Pen are for leave, whose side are you on?"
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/22/barack-obama-crush-brexit-fantasy-eu-referendum
The food safety concern is the lowering of standards towards US standards which might include accepting eg growth hormone in meat and chlorine blanched chicken. The US approach is generally that you can do anything unless it is proven to be unsafe whereas the European approach is generally you can only do things that are proven safe. This results in the US population being guinea pigs for new technologies and processes (eg GM food). Many people object to that being extended to Europe.
The sovereignty issue concerns the ISDS provisions. With an ISDS system in place, corporations would be able to challenge governments in a private trade tribunal. There are concerns that such a system would give companies excessive power over national authorities and allow them to sue governments every time legislation was introduced that might harm their profits, including changes to NHS provisioning.
Among EU countries, the UK government is keenest on TTIP. It was supported by Conservatives, Labour and LibDems at the last election and only opposed by Green (environmental) and UKIP (sovereignty), though Corbyn has come out against it. The Germans are most anti-TTIP with mass demonstrations.
If LEAVE wins, I suspect we will get a US biased TTIP for the UK when our turn in the queue comes up. If REMAINS wins, I suspect we will get a heavily watered down version of TTIP without ISDS.
If you are concerned about TTIP, vote REMAIN.
So in the interest of fair play, I thought it best to point out that it is Obama's father that is Kenyan.
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/rnc-rules-roadblock-may-no-longer-be-hurdle-kasich-n560151
I don't think it'll be Kasich if the convention does look beyond Trump and Cruz - it'd be better to have someone who hasn't stood than someone who's been rejected. And I don't think Trump and Cruz delegates will want to look elsewhere anyway. But it's useful to know that the rules don't actually prevent it.
This is the current proposal for the "new" ISDS http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-15-5651_en.htm
Framing this argument as the people vs. the establishment is the ideal circumstance for Leave. Both the US and the EU are very much part of that.
Beyond the referendum here, there's a wider theme of the establishment having to 'spend' its power (and as any physicist will tell you, to use power is to lose it) as never before just to stand still.
I'm uploading the backup files to the server. I hadn't realised (a) how big they were, and (b) how slow my work Internet connection is. Estimated "PB back again" time: 14:25
If reform does occur, obviously that's your perfect scenario. But if it doesn't, would you want another vote [not necessarily immediately, of course] and vote to Leave?
Time for some Kenyan coffee ....
Merkel enters a new controversy over Turkey by ignoring Erdogan's imprisonment of journalists who exposed his government shipping arms to Syrian extremists. Turkish opposition lays in to German government as complicit in the suspension of rights.
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/debatten/der-tuerkische-journalist-can-duendar-richtet-einen-dramatischen-appell-an-angela-merkel-14193085.html
Barring a minor miracle, this campaign is Remain's to win or lose. Which is why the reception to Obama is so interesting.
California: Trump 49, Cruz 22, Kasich 20
Indiana: Trump 41, Cruz 33, Kasich 16
Would get Trump the nomination.
having earlier criticised Austria for closing its borders, she is now going cap in hand to Vienna to ask them to keep them closed.
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/fluechtlingskrise/merkel-in-der-fluechtlingskrise-dann-macht-oesterreich-den-brenner-dicht-14195110.html
Also Clinton is very sceptical unlike Obama. Sanders is very anti. Trump is anti TTP and it is struggling in Congress.
All this talk about trade deals with the US might come to nothing.
My big fear is if LEAVE wins, the UK will do its own TTIP like deal and undermine our food safety and our sovereignty.
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/donald-trumps-path-1237-delegates
I rarely eat chicken anyway, just curious.
Nice lady, middle-class retired teacher, though the fact that she could interpret a person wanting to be in an outward-facing, but self-governing, trading nation as an "isolationist" makes me fear for her former pupils. Still being called an isolationist was a pleasant change of insult and perhaps a bit nicer that the usual cries of headbanger, swivel-eyed loon, and obsessive etc. that get thrown at people who are in favour of "Out" on this site.
It would make it incredibly politically difficult to elect Kasich, which is probably good enough. It would look 100% like a stich up, which of course it is.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/03/cannabis-has-been-left-behind-extraordinary-life-lee-harris-hippie-london