I think the Obama thing could play very badly for Remain. At my work this morning, people (even ones who said they liked Obama generally) were incensed at the idea of "America again coming over and treating us like their poodle, telling us what to do".
TBH, I think it will have bugger all effect. We'll benefit from people not liking being told what to do by foreigners. But Remain will benefit from those who were nervous. I reckon it'll be a wash.
By far the most damaging thing that has happened to Leave was the decision not to go the EEA route. I've gone from enthusiastic Leaver, to resigned one. It wouldn't take much to stop me bothering going to the polling station at all.
Come over to the dark side. We have lebkuchen....
And the prospect of the NHS being broken up when TTIP goes through, and the market is opened up to US healthcare businesses. Yay!
I keep hearing about this but at the moment no one seems to have presented me with any evidence of it at all. I was of the understanding that the TTIP negotiations are not even finished yet and that TTIP is a very different thing to the TTP deal that was struck in the Pacific. So exactly what is this claim being based on?
I would love to be able to use the example of TTIP as a means of persuading left wing voters to support Brexit but I am not going to tell people it is a threat if it turns out to be just another scare story.
A threat by its nature is unproven. Equally unproven are people saying that TTIP will be great, and that its opponents 'don't understand it'. No, we don't, and nor do others who've never read it.
Has anyone read it ? I thought the provisions were being kept secret at the moment (never a good sign) and all we had were a few leaks and some warm words as we wait for the official unveiling.
I think the Obama thing could play very badly for Remain. At my work this morning, people (even ones who said they liked Obama generally) were incensed at the idea of "America again coming over and treating us like their poodle, telling us what to do".
TBH, I think it will have bugger all effect. We'll benefit from people not liking being told what to do by foreigners. But Remain will benefit from those who were nervous. I reckon it'll be a wash.
By far the most damaging thing that has happened to Leave was the decision not to go the EEA route. I've gone from enthusiastic Leaver, to resigned one. It wouldn't take much to stop me bothering going to the polling station at all.
Who's made that decision for Leave though? Who has the authority to make it? I'm not being sarcastic here. Leave's strength was that it doesn't have leaders and doesn't have a position. Has one section with an agenda assumed control?
I think that decision was made by those running Vote Leave once they had been assigned the official status. Like Robert it is not a decision I am happy with but I just have to live with it given that the worst possible outcome from my perspective is staying in the EU.
I can't see how they could have made a different decision (except by trying to fudge it forever) if they had said EEA, 3 million kipper voters would have concluded (or been led to conclude) that it was no real difference to being in the EU, and no difference at all on immigration, and would have stayed on their sofas.
Again, there are plenty of free market ways to dramatically restrict immigration as part of the EEA. Make residence for more than three months require possession of NHS Insurance (cost £5,000 per year), and you'd eliminate 95% of economic migrants.
I am coming to the conclusion I live in a very atypical bubble. I rarely if ever hear anyone at my work talking about the referendum, it's never a conversation subject around the family dinner table and I have yet to come across any real life campaigners.
I think the Obama thing could play very badly for Remain. At my work this morning, people (even ones who said they liked Obama generally) were incensed at the idea of "America again coming over and treating us like their poodle, telling us what to do".
TBH, I think it will have bugger all effect. We'll benefit from people not liking being told what to do by foreigners. But Remain will benefit from those who were nervous. I reckon it'll be a wash.
By far the most damaging thing that has happened to Leave was the decision not to go the EEA route. I've gone from enthusiastic Leaver, to resigned one. It wouldn't take much to stop me bothering going to the polling station at all.
Come over to the dark side. We have lebkuchen....
And the prospect of the NHS being broken up when TTIP goes through, and the market is opened up to US healthcare businesses. Yay!
I keep hearing about this but at the moment no one seems to have presented me with any evidence of it at all. I was of the understanding that the TTIP negotiations are not even finished yet and that TTIP is a very different thing to the TTP deal that was struck in the Pacific. So exactly what is this claim being based on?
I would love to be able to use the example of TTIP as a means of persuading left wing voters to support Brexit but I am not going to tell people it is a threat if it turns out to be just another scare story.
A threat by its nature is unproven. Equally unproven are people saying that TTIP will be great, and that its opponents 'don't understand it'. No, we don't, and nor do others who've never read it.
Has anyone read it ? I thought the provisions were being kept secret at the moment (never a good sign) and all we had were a few leaks and some warm words as we wait for the official unveiling.
I am coming to the conclusion I live in a very atypical bubble. I rarely if ever hear anyone at my work talking about the referendum, it's never a conversation subject around the family dinner table and I have yet to come across any real life campaigners.
Isn't it more about procurement,?who can and can't bid for contracts, and under what terms? Not that I know much about it, to be fair.
To paraphrase what I said a few days ago, if the UK government were to introduce a rule that said that "all pills to treat depression must be made in Yorkshire", as a way of preventing competition for a local pharmaceutical company, then - yes - Pfizer might be able to being a case under ISDS rules.
But even this looks to have been eliminated from the TTIP. Specifically - to take it from the NHS Confederation website (that notoriously right wing site) that the draft specifically excludes "the provision of all health services which receive public funding or state support in any form".
So, it's worse than a straw man, it's deliberate lying.
I am coming to the conclusion I live in a very atypical bubble. I rarely if ever hear anyone at my work talking about the referendum, it's never a conversation subject around the family dinner table and I have yet to come across any real life campaigners.
I'm still yet to here anyone bring it up in real life too.
The news I hear discussed is either the doctors strike (for news) or will Leicester win the league (for sport).
I think the Obama thing could play very badly for Remain. At my work this morning, people (even ones who said they liked Obama generally) were incensed at the idea of "America again coming over and treating us like their poodle, telling us what to do".
TBH, I think it will have bugger all effect. We'll benefit from people not liking being told what to do by foreigners. But Remain will benefit from those who were nervous. I reckon it'll be a wash.
By far the most damaging thing that has happened to Leave was the decision not to go the EEA route. I've gone from enthusiastic Leaver, to resigned one. It wouldn't take much to stop me bothering going to the polling station at all.
Who's made that decision for Leave though? Who has the authority to make it? I'm not being sarcastic here. Leave's strength was that it doesn't have leaders and doesn't have a position. Has one section with an agenda assumed control?
I think that decision was made by those running Vote Leave once they had been assigned the official status. Like Robert it is not a decision I am happy with but I just have to live with it given that the worst possible outcome from my perspective is staying in the EU.
I can't see how they could have made a different decision (except by trying to fudge it forever) if they had said EEA, 3 million kipper voters would have concluded (or been led to conclude) that it was no real difference to being in the EU, and no difference at all on immigration, and would have stayed on their sofas.
I would suggest that those 3 million Kipper voters are probably going to all vote Out anyway no matter what the official campaign position is. It is the other 17 or so million non Kipper votes that we are going to need that we need to be concerned about.
I honestly don't know which of immigration vs the economy is the bigger winner. What I do know is that the opportunity for a simple message about the economy has been lost by choosing to reject the EEA route.
As an example, Obama's threat about the UK going to the back of the queue would have been far less effective if he had been forced to say that he was moving EFTA to the back of the queue.
I have visitors in the armed forces staying this weekend. Apparently there was an incident at an evening event on Thursday, following which two corporals came to blows, finishing up in the cells overnight. The cause? Disagreeing about the referendum.
In a sense it's good to know we have such a highbrow military.
I think the Obama thing could play very badly for Remain. At my work this morning, people (even ones who said they liked Obama generally) were incensed at the idea of "America again coming over and treating us like their poodle, telling us what to do".
TBH, I think it will have bugger all effect. We'll benefit from people not liking being told what to do by foreigners. But Remain will benefit from those who were nervous. I reckon it'll be a wash.
By far the most damaging thing that has happened to Leave was the decision not to go the EEA route. I've gone from enthusiastic Leaver, to resigned one. It wouldn't take much to stop me bothering going to the polling station at all.
Who's made that decision for Leave though? Who has the authority to make it? I'm not being sarcastic here. Leave's strength was that it doesn't have leaders and doesn't have a position. Has one section with an agenda assumed control?
I think that decision was made by those running Vote Leave once they had been assigned the official status. Like Robert it is not a decision I am happy with but I just have to live with it given that the worst possible outcome from my perspective is staying in the EU.
I can't see how they could have made a different decision (except by trying to fudge it forever) if they had said EEA, 3 million kipper voters would have concluded (or been led to conclude) that it was no real difference to being in the EU, and no difference at all on immigration, and would have stayed on their sofas.
Again, there are plenty of free market ways to dramatically restrict immigration as part of the EEA. Make residence for more than three months require possession of NHS Insurance (cost £5,000 per year), and you'd eliminate 95% of economic migrants.
No you wouldn't, but you'd cut out the weakest economic migrants. Health insurance in the USA costs a similar amount and they still get a large number of economic migrants.
We should have a bury the hatchet, let's all be friends again PB piss up after this referendum is done. We all want the same thing, it's just that we disagree over how to get there. We'll all get over it.
I think the Obama thing could play very badly for Remain. At my work this morning, people (even ones who said they liked Obama generally) were incensed at the idea of "America again coming over and treating us like their poodle, telling us what to do".
TBH, I think it will have bugger all effect. We'll benefit from people not liking being told what to do by foreigners. But Remain will benefit from those who were nervous. I reckon it'll be a wash.
By far the most damaging thing that has happened to Leave was the decision not to go the EEA route. I've gone from enthusiastic Leaver, to resigned one. It wouldn't take much to stop me bothering going to the polling station at all.
Who's made that decision for Leave though? Who has the authority to make it? I'm not being sarcastic here. Leave's strength was that it doesn't have leaders and doesn't have a position. Has one section with an agenda assumed control?
I think that decision was made by those running Vote Leave once they had been assigned the official status. Like Robert it is not a decision I am happy with but I just have to live with it given that the worst possible outcome from my perspective is staying in the EU.
I can't see how they could have made a different decision (except by trying to fudge it forever) if they had said EEA, 3 million kipper voters would have concluded (or been led to conclude) that it was no real difference to being in the EU, and no difference at all on immigration, and would have stayed on their sofas.
Again, there are plenty of free market ways to dramatically restrict immigration as part of the EEA. Make residence for more than three months require possession of NHS Insurance (cost £5,000 per year), and you'd eliminate 95% of economic migrants.
No you wouldn't, but you'd cut out the weakest economic migrants. Health insurance in the USA costs a similar amount and they still get a large number of economic migrants.
Yes, but you can be resident in the US without health insurance.
I am coming to the conclusion I live in a very atypical bubble. I rarely if ever hear anyone at my work talking about the referendum, it's never a conversation subject around the family dinner table and I have yet to come across any real life campaigners.
I was at a party last night and for the three minutes the referendum was mentioned it was about bad Boris looked. The most interesting comment was from a girl who arrived late to the conversation and all she added was "Urgh. Who'd want to F*** that"
Bravo for offering. It must have been disappointing to get that response, but it's her loss.
We should have a bury the hatchet, let's all be friends again PB piss up after this referendum is done. We all want the same thing, it's just that we disagree over how to get there. We'll all get over it.
If it was a one off decision with no consequences then you might be right. As it is, the pain that is going to be inflicted on the country after a Remain vote is such that I doubt very much there can be a reconciliation.
I think the Obama thing could play very badly for Remain. At my work this morning, people (even ones who said they liked Obama generally) were incensed at the idea of "America again coming over and treating us like their poodle, telling us what to do".
TBH, I think it will have bugger all effect. We'll benefit from people not liking being told what to do by foreigners. But Remain will benefit from those who were nervous. I reckon it'll be a wash.
By far the most damaging thing that has happened to Leave was the decision not to go the EEA route. I've gone from enthusiastic Leaver, to resigned one. It wouldn't take much to stop me bothering going to the polling station at all.
Come over to the dark side. We have lebkuchen....
And the prospect of the NHS being broken up when TTIP goes through, and the market is opened up to US healthcare businesses. Yay!
I keep hearing about this but at the moment no one seems to have presented me with any evidence of it at all. I was of the understanding that the TTIP negotiations are not even finished yet and that TTIP is a very different thing to the TTP deal that was struck in the Pacific. So exactly what is this claim being based on?
I would love to be able to use the example of TTIP as a means of persuading left wing voters to support Brexit but I am not going to tell people it is a threat if it turns out to be just another scare story.
A threat by its nature is unproven. Equally unproven are people saying that TTIP will be great, and that its opponents 'don't understand it'. No, we don't, and nor do others who've never read it.
Has anyone read it ? I thought the provisions were being kept secret at the moment (never a good sign) and all we had were a few leaks and some warm words as we wait for the official unveiling.
We should have a bury the hatchet, let's all be friends again PB piss up after this referendum is done. We all want the same thing, it's just that we disagree over how to get there. We'll all get over it.
you don't think some of the hatchets might get buried in people's heads then ?
I think the Obama thing could play very badly for Remain. At my work this morning, people (even ones who said they liked Obama generally) were incensed at the idea of "America again coming over and treating us like their poodle, telling us what to do".
TBH, I think it will have bugger all effect. We'll benefit from people not liking being told what to do by foreigners. But Remain will benefit from those who were nervous. I reckon it'll be a wash.
By far the most damaging thing that has happened to Leave was the decision not to go the EEA route. I've gone from enthusiastic Leaver, to resigned one. It wouldn't take much to stop me bothering going to the polling station at all.
Who's made that decision for Leave though? Who has the authority to make it? I'm not being sarcastic here. Leave's strength was that it doesn't have leaders and doesn't have a position. Has one section with an agenda assumed control?
I think that decision was made by those running Vote Leave once they had been assigned the official status. Like Robert it is not a decision I am happy with but I just have to live with it given that the worst possible outcome from my perspective is staying in the EU.
I can't see how they could have made a different decision (except by trying to fudge it forever) if they had said EEA, 3 million kipper voters would have concluded (or been led to conclude) that it was no real difference to being in the EU, and no difference at all on immigration, and would have stayed on their sofas.
Again, there are plenty of free market ways to dramatically restrict immigration as part of the EEA. Make residence for more than three months require possession of NHS Insurance (cost £5,000 per year), and you'd eliminate 95% of economic migrants.
No you wouldn't, but you'd cut out the weakest economic migrants. Health insurance in the USA costs a similar amount and they still get a large number of economic migrants.
Yes, but you can be resident in the US without health insurance.
Are you suggesting 95% of economic migrants in the US don't have it though?
And Barack said "whose was that old duffer that spent an hour telling me all about some woman called Margaret from somewhere called Milton Keynes who has a problem with her tax credits..."
We should have a bury the hatchet, let's all be friends again PB piss up after this referendum is done. We all want the same thing, it's just that we disagree over how to get there. We'll all get over it.
If it was a one off decision with no consequences then you might be right. As it is, the pain that is going to be inflicted on the country after a Remain vote is such that I doubt very much there can be a reconciliation.
I think like the Remainers proclaiming the end of civilization if we vote leave that here you are greatly exaggerating.
I'm trying to imagine a world where the EU went down a path that would remove three of the six largest contributors to the EU budget. And failing.
The EU always plays the long game. It will be a war of attrition and salami tactics. They wont be stupid enough to force people to try and join the Euro, there will just be a succession of very minor looking changes that will slowly move various groups in society behind joining the Euro, until at some point it will seem like the natural thing to do to the opinion formers in society.. then as usual the rest of society will get shafted.
Dude.
You are the sole factor pushing me towards Remain.
You obviously missed Farage on Any Questions today. Or Maybe Indigo IS Farage!
Well, I have a foreign wife, but I hope rather better taste in ties, aside from that I am not a kipper, which is a small, but I hope not insurmountable problem with your theory
Long John Baldry said "My woman follows me wherever I go. If I see her behind me I know I'm on the right road"
If I found myself in a line behind Nigel Farage I would know I in the wrong queue.
We should have a bury the hatchet, let's all be friends again PB piss up after this referendum is done. We all want the same thing, it's just that we disagree over how to get there. We'll all get over it.
Hear hear!
( Although it wouldn't be PB without endless bickering over minutiae that almost no one else has noticed, much less cares about )
We should have a bury the hatchet, let's all be friends again PB piss up after this referendum is done. We all want the same thing, it's just that we disagree over how to get there. We'll all get over it.
If it was a one off decision with no consequences then you might be right. As it is, the pain that is going to be inflicted on the country after a Remain vote is such that I doubt very much there can be a reconciliation.
Real politicians, that's true, Dave can go and whistle for my vote, and Osborne if it comes to that. People on here bickering about politics not so much, we are all grown-ups here, and we have very little influence on anything.
'So then we thought about the Little Mermaid and how she becomes voiceless. We’ve taken lots from the original version but made it, I hope, a bit more relevant to the modern age.’
How so? ‘There’s some ecological stuff in there, so there’s an oil spill in the sea, and lots of stuff about the acidification of the sea. And then there’s also stuff about isolation and then eventually connectivity... I feel like [it’s] one of society’s major issues.’
We should have a bury the hatchet, let's all be friends again PB piss up after this referendum is done. We all want the same thing, it's just that we disagree over how to get there. We'll all get over it.
you don't think some of the hatchets might get buried in people's heads then ?
We should have a bury the hatchet, let's all be friends again PB piss up after this referendum is done. We all want the same thing, it's just that we disagree over how to get there. We'll all get over it.
The thing is we don't all want the same thing. Some people naively believe we will be able to influence and reform the EU, others are desperate for us to be part of a United States of Europe, others are convinced the status quo is available to us.
All the evidence suggests that further integration and marginalisation will be the only things the UK will be getting over the next couple of decades. If this is the case we may get another referendum. It certainly will not come from Labour so we are completely reliant on the Tories whose senior figures are mainly Europhiles and will argue that the matter is settled.
We should have a bury the hatchet, let's all be friends again PB piss up after this referendum is done. We all want the same thing, it's just that we disagree over how to get there. We'll all get over it.
If it was a one off decision with no consequences then you might be right. As it is, the pain that is going to be inflicted on the country after a Remain vote is such that I doubt very much there can be a reconciliation.
We've got to make the best of whatever is decided. There is no way I'll be campaigning for us to go back into the EU if the vote is to Leave. I'd like to get the old black passport back, though I guess it won't be hardback anymore.
Obama's threat about the UK going to the back of the queue
When is a statement of fact a threat, and where do you normally join a queue?
If Leave wanted to convince people they had taken leave of their senses, they couldn't have engineered it better than this
Clearly another one who is need of English comprehension lessons.
Threat: A statement of an intention to inflict pain, injury, damage, or other hostile action on someone in retribution for something done or not done:
Now unless you feel being consigned to the back of the queue is not intended as a damaging act - and clearly the Remainders do - then I would suggest the use of the word treat is absolutely correct.
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
It's quite possible that we will see the return of who Mr Major described as "The Bastards" in the 1990s. Cameron - if he survives - will be in a very weak position with such a small majority in the Commons and none at all in the Lords.
But my point is that the threat has to be based on something. One could just as easily say that TTIP will lead to the extinction of all hedgehogs. No one has yet been able to explain exactly what part of TTIP means that the NHS would be exposed to enforced privitisation?
'Privatisation' is something of a red-herring word imo. I'd love the NHS to be 'privatised' but I want privatisation of demand, not necessarily supply. At the moment we just have subcontracting - the client is still HMG, and that distorts incentives.
Leaving that aside, the fear is surely that at present the final adjudicator is our own Government, and in the future matters will be decided by an entirely different legal process, which may or may not be held behind closed doors. This could lead to a flood of litigation from disappointed American corporations with deep pockets. Despite my criticisms of our current Government, I want the UK Government to be able to decide how it spends our money. That doesn't seem to me to be a very unreasonable position.
I'm a historian (BA), so I'm sceptical of people getting misty-eyed over 'free trade' as a universally applied concept. Often, free trade is a weapon of the mighty against the less mighty. See Britain and China. Britain and India. Conquistadors and the Incas (was it the Incas?). Conversely, German industry developed into its mighty state by protectionism against British industrial imports. There is nothing new under the sun, and as far as I can see, America is heavily in debt to China, and is simply trying to push this spate of deals through to get more cash. Remember, after all the froth, there will be a net loser and a net beneficiary of all this. My money isn't on the US being the net loser.
We should have a bury the hatchet, let's all be friends again PB piss up after this referendum is done. We all want the same thing, it's just that we disagree over how to get there. We'll all get over it.
The thing is we don't all want the same thing. Some people naively believe we will be able to influence and reform the EU, others are desperate for us to be part of a United States of Europe, others are convinced the status quo is available to us.
All the evidence suggests that further integration and marginalisation will be the only things the UK will be getting over the next couple of decades. If this is the case we may get another referendum. It certainly will not come from Labour so we are completely reliant on the Tories whose senior figures are mainly Europhiles and will argue that the matter is settled.
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
Nothing they won't deserve. Then it will be my turn to break out the popcorn and enjoy the fight.
As I have said before if the referendum results in a remain vote and subsequently there is a huge boost to investment and Company's locating for low tax rates (corporation tax going down to 17%) I can see a boost to the Government's popularity. I would say that David Cameron's speech following the result does need to be conscillatory and he will need to send a warning to the EU that we do not accept the status quo and that we are going to lead for change in the EU and UK's best interests. He also must follow up by giving leading outers positions in a unifying cabinet
'So then we thought about the Little Mermaid and how she becomes voiceless. We’ve taken lots from the original version but made it, I hope, a bit more relevant to the modern age.’
How so? ‘There’s some ecological stuff in there, so there’s an oil spill in the sea, and lots of stuff about the acidification of the sea. And then there’s also stuff about isolation and then eventually connectivity... I feel like [it’s] one of society’s major issues.’
Threat: A statement of an intention to inflict pain, injury, damage, or other hostile action on someone in retribution for something done or not done:
Now unless you feel being consigned to the back of the queue is not intended as a damaging act - and clearly the Remainders do - then I would suggest the use of the word treat is absolutely correct.
I say again, where do you normally join a queue?
I didn't realise my local supermarket were threatening me every time they served a customer before me.
Maybe I need to demand a safe space in which to complete my shopping.
I think the Obama thing could play very badly for Remain. At my work this morning, people (even ones who said they liked Obama generally) were incensed at the idea of "America again coming over and treating us like their poodle, telling us what to do".
TBH, I think it will have bugger all effect. We'll benefit from people not liking being told what to do by foreigners. But Remain will benefit from those who were nervous. I reckon it'll be a wash.
By far the most damaging thing that has happened to Leave was the decision not to go the EEA route. I've gone from enthusiastic Leaver, to resigned one. It wouldn't take much to stop me bothering going to the polling station at all.
This isn't the Eurovision song contest. People won't ignore the message because they believe it shouldn't have been delivered.
I'm afraid it's out there.
To some it'll be important and to some it won't. But they wont vote against their interest because they're cross with Obama.
I think the Obama thing could play very badly for Remain. At my work this morning, people (even ones who said they liked Obama generally) were incensed at the idea of "America again coming over and treating us like their poodle, telling us what to do".
TBH, I think it will have bugger all effect. We'll benefit from people not liking being told what to do by foreigners. But Remain will benefit from those who were nervous. I reckon it'll be a wash.
By far the most damaging thing that has happened to Leave was the decision not to go the EEA route. I've gone from enthusiastic Leaver, to resigned one. It wouldn't take much to stop me bothering going to the polling station at all.
Who's made that decision for Leave though? Who has the authority to make it? I'm not being sarcastic here. Leave's strength was that it doesn't have leaders and doesn't have a position. Has one section with an agenda assumed control?
Gove made a speech:
- no EEA - no contributions to the EU budget - no supremacy of EU law
While I'm obviously in favour of the last of these, and would like the second (although think it optimistic), the first is definitely something I'm very unhappy with.
Fair enough. Weird that Gove should be deciding policy though. His group is supposed to be making the case for an option in a referendum - not running for office.
Indeed - "Vote Leave" does not become the Government of the country if "Leave" wins.
"Vote Leave" is in no position to make any such decision.
It will be up to the Government to conduct Leave negotiations - it's perfectly possible that we could end up in the EEA.
On other matters how many people have seen the Shakespeare google doodle ?
I correctly guessed 7 of the 8 plays featured.
5/8 - Not bad imho, for a literary philistine
8/8.
But why we are celebrating the greatest literary hoax of all time never ceases to amaze. The man from Stratford never wrote a word of it!
How could he, when he could barely scratch his own name? His parents, wife, children and grandchildren were illiterate, and there is not one contemporaneous record linking him to the plays published under the name "Shakespeare" (a spelling the Stratford man never used) in his own lifetime, although there are plenty of records indicating he was a businessman, grain-dealer and moneylender - and every other Elizabethan playwright has a paper-trail directly linking them to their works.
In his will he left not a book, or a paper, nor mention of "his" 18 hitherto-unpublished plays, and although wealthy from his business dealings, he made no provision for his family's education, no bequest to the local school, etc.
Moreover, his death in 1616 passed entirely un-noticed. No eulogies or panegyrics. NOTHING. SILENCE.
For Seven Years.
Only then did a expensively-printed collection of plays appear (the First Folio), for the first-time explicitly pointing to the Stratford man as author, complete with a ludicrous engraving of him smirking from the frontispiece...
Oddly, several of the plays had been revised, with new lines and thousands of small changes, that must have been made (deduced from printers errors that were still carried over) after 1622.
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
My view is that the government will pass legislation in the next four years.
Government by concession. They'll have trouble passing wind at the rate they're going.
If Blair could continue governing after Iraq then the Tories - a far less ideologically and far more power-grasping amalgamation - can soldier on after this. MPs will be far less bothered than the diehards on here anyway. There'll be careers to enhance and seats to retain. Things will cary on like before. Sorry to disappoint.
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
Nothing they won't deserve. Then it will be my turn to break out the popcorn and enjoy the fight.
As I have said before if the referendum results in a remain vote and subsequently there is a huge boost to investment and Company's locating for low tax rates (corporation tax going down to 17%)
Why would that happen. Its the status quo. At the moment a few companies are holding fire on investment to see which way the wind is blowing, but aside from that why should anyone invest anything new they were not going to invest before. Substitute the word "modest" for the word "huge" and I might be with you, but it won't be enough to save anyone's political bacon, especially since the people benefiting from that investment will be the very well off who vote Tory under any circumstance anyway.
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
My view is that the government will pass legislation in the next four years.
Government by concession. They'll have trouble passing wind at the rate they're going.
If Blair could continue governing after Iraq then the Tories - a far less ideologically and far more power-grasping amalgamation - can soldier on after this. MPs will be far less bothered than the diehards on here anyway. There'll be careers to enhance and seats to retain. Things will cary on like before. Sorry to disappoint.
How ?
The leader has announced he is resigning. That's a huge difference from post Iraq
Obama's threat about the UK going to the back of the queue
When is a statement of fact a threat, and where do you normally join a queue?
If Leave wanted to convince people they had taken leave of their senses, they couldn't have engineered it better than this
But Leave aren't part of the discussion. Roger's party notwithstanding, people will be talking about Obama. As much as Remain fans are trying to make this about Boris and Nige being oafs, it isn't, any more than £4300 day was about Osborne's calculations being lies. It's the initial headline that counts. Remain aimed for it, Remain got it. Now they got it, it's in the lap of the gods whether people like it or not. No good trying to frantically point at Boris saying something about Kenyans; its irrelevant outside twitter.
Threat: A statement of an intention to inflict pain, injury, damage, or other hostile action on someone in retribution for something done or not done:
Now unless you feel being consigned to the back of the queue is not intended as a damaging act - and clearly the Remainders do - then I would suggest the use of the word treat is absolutely correct.
I say again, where do you normally join a queue?
I didn't realise my local supermarket were threatening me every time they served a customer before me.
Maybe I need to demand a safe space in which to complete my shopping.
people with special relationships with the management usualyy skip the queue altogether.
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
My view is that the government will pass legislation in the next four years.
Government by concession. They'll have trouble passing wind at the rate they're going.
If Blair could continue governing after Iraq then the Tories - a far less ideologically and far more power-grasping amalgamation - can soldier on after this. MPs will be far less bothered than the diehards on here anyway. There'll be careers to enhance and seats to retain. Things will cary on like before. Sorry to disappoint.
You mean like the humiliating government U-turns we've recently seen on pensions and benefits ?
You might also like to remember how Blair's majority contrasted with Cameron's.
Threat: A statement of an intention to inflict pain, injury, damage, or other hostile action on someone in retribution for something done or not done:
Now unless you feel being consigned to the back of the queue is not intended as a damaging act - and clearly the Remainders do - then I would suggest the use of the word treat is absolutely correct.
I say again, where do you normally join a queue?
I didn't realise my local supermarket were threatening me every time they served a customer before me.
Maybe I need to demand a safe space in which to complete my shopping.
people with special relationships with the management usually skip the queue altogether.
Obama's threat about the UK going to the back of the queue
When is a statement of fact a threat, and where do you normally join a queue?
If Leave wanted to convince people they had taken leave of their senses, they couldn't have engineered it better than this
But Leave aren't part of the discussion. Roger's party notwithstanding, people will be talking about Obama. As much as Remain fans are trying to make this about Boris and Nige being oafs, it isn't, any more than £4300 day was about Osborne's calculations being lies. It's the initial headline that counts. Remain aimed for it, Remain got it. Now they got it, it's in the lap of the gods whether people like it or not. No good trying to frantically point at Boris saying something about Kenyans; its irrelevant outside twitter.
The Ashcroft focus group showed two big numbers got cut through, 3 million more immigrants and £4.3k
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
Nothing they won't deserve. Then it will be my turn to break out the popcorn and enjoy the fight.
As I have said before if the referendum results in a remain vote and subsequently there is a huge boost to investment and Company's locating for low tax rates (corporation tax going down to 17%)
Why would that happen. Its the status quo. At the moment a few companies are holding fire on investment to see which way the wind is blowing, but aside from that why should anyone invest anything new they were not going to invest before. Substitute the word "modest" for the word "huge" and I might be with you, but it won't be enough to save anyone's political bacon, especially since the people benefiting from that investment will be the very well off who vote Tory under any circumstance anyway.
Ordinary people no longer benefit from economic growth.
I think the Obama thing could play very badly for Remain. At my work this morning, people (even ones who said they liked Obama generally) were incensed at the idea of "America again coming over and treating us like their poodle, telling us what to do".
TBH, I think it will have bugger all effect. We'll benefit from people not liking being told what to do by foreigners. But Remain will benefit from those who were nervous. I reckon it'll be a wash.
By far the most damaging thing that has happened to Leave was the decision not to go the EEA route. I've gone from enthusiastic Leaver, to resigned one. It wouldn't take much to stop me bothering going to the polling station at all.
Who's made that decision for Leave though? Who has the authority to make it? I'm not being sarcastic here. Leave's strength was that it doesn't have leaders and doesn't have a position. Has one section with an agenda assumed control?
Gove made a speech:
- no EEA - no contributions to the EU budget - no supremacy of EU law
While I'm obviously in favour of the last of these, and would like the second (although think it optimistic), the first is definitely something I'm very unhappy with.
Fair enough. Weird that Gove should be deciding policy though. His group is supposed to be making the case for an option in a referendum - not running for office.
Indeed - "Vote Leave" does not become the Government of the country if "Leave" wins.
"Vote Leave" is in no position to make any such decision.
It will be up to the Government to conduct Leave negotiations - it's perfectly possible that we could end up in the EEA.
FFS.. We have had Remainers bitching for weeks here that Leave have not decided what the policy for after leaving should be, despite many of us saying they were in no position to make any such promises and it was up to the government, but no, Nabavi, Meeks, Stark Raving, all the usual suspected were adamant that Leave should have a policy, so they state one, and now everyone is saying how dare Leave decide what happens after the referendum, it's not up to them!
The Obama thing hardens, but does not change opinion.
Not for the people at my work, vast majority of them in the conversation were undecided - they said that Obama was the first thing that had really made them pay attention to the whole EU issue at all.
To be fair they didn't actually say that Obama was enough on its own to push them over to Leave, most were saying they still didn't know anywhere near enough to make up their minds. But the anger at the temerity of "America" returning to type, by trying to give the Brits orders, was intense.
Good point. Among us politically engaged types it appears that Obama's intervention has hardened rather than changed opinions, but as @Danny565 notes it would be interesting to see the reaction of those who are less engaged than we are here. Some polling next week will be very useful.
It is quite possible that the headline polls will worsen for LEAVE but the real underlying position could be improving. The motivation to vote for LEAVE supporters has been strengthened. A street poll today in southern AB land, amongst mainly retireds was finding a very large majority for LEAVE and almost 9 in 10 of everyone expressing negative comments about Obama.
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
Nothing they won't deserve. Then it will be my turn to break out the popcorn and enjoy the fight.
As I have said before if the referendum results in a remain vote and subsequently there is a huge boost to investment and Company's locating for low tax rates (corporation tax going down to 17%)
Why would that happen. Its the status quo. At the moment a few companies are holding fire on investment to see which way the wind is blowing, but aside from that why should anyone invest anything new they were not going to invest before. Substitute the word "modest" for the word "huge" and I might be with you, but it won't be enough to save anyone's political bacon, especially since the people benefiting from that investment will be the very well off who vote Tory under any circumstance anyway.
Ordinary people no longer benefit from economic growth.
Threat: A statement of an intention to inflict pain, injury, damage, or other hostile action on someone in retribution for something done or not done:
Now unless you feel being consigned to the back of the queue is not intended as a damaging act - and clearly the Remainders do - then I would suggest the use of the word treat is absolutely correct.
I say again, where do you normally join a queue?
I didn't realise my local supermarket were threatening me every time they served a customer before me.
Maybe I need to demand a safe space in which to complete my shopping.
What queue? The US pursues multiple trade negotiations with multiple countries all the time. Contrary to popular belief American officials are able to walk and chew gum at the same time.
Obama's threat about the UK going to the back of the queue
When is a statement of fact a threat, and where do you normally join a queue?
If Leave wanted to convince people they had taken leave of their senses, they couldn't have engineered it better than this
But Leave aren't part of the discussion. Roger's party notwithstanding, people will be talking about Obama. As much as Remain fans are trying to make this about Boris and Nige being oafs, it isn't, any more than £4300 day was about Osborne's calculations being lies. It's the initial headline that counts. Remain aimed for it, Remain got it. Now they got it, it's in the lap of the gods whether people like it or not. No good trying to frantically point at Boris saying something about Kenyans; its irrelevant outside twitter.
The Ashcroft focus group showed two big numbers got cut through, 3 million more immigrants and £4.3k
Looking at the VOTE LEAVE leaflets and other material, no mention of 3 million more immigrants. Q: Too polite to push it?
Indeed, Europe is presently made up of the Eurozone, countries in the Euro but outside the Eurozone ie the UK, Sweden, Denmark and much of Eastern Europe and countries outside the EU altogether ie Norway and Switzerland. Something has to be done to reconcile those different arrangements whether Remain or Leave win
Threat: A statement of an intention to inflict pain, injury, damage, or other hostile action on someone in retribution for something done or not done:
Now unless you feel being consigned to the back of the queue is not intended as a damaging act - and clearly the Remainders do - then I would suggest the use of the word treat is absolutely correct.
I say again, where do you normally join a queue?
I didn't realise my local supermarket were threatening me every time they served a customer before me.
Maybe I need to demand a safe space in which to complete my shopping.
What queue? The US pursues multiple trade negotiations with multiple countries all the time. Contrary to popular belief American officials are able to walk and chew gum at the same time.
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
Nothing they won't deserve. Then it will be my turn to break out the popcorn and enjoy the fight.
As I have said before if the referendum results in a remain vote and subsequently there is a huge boost to investment and Company's locating for low tax rates (corporation tax going down to 17%)
Why would that happen. Its the status quo. At the moment a few companies are holding fire on investment to see which way the wind is blowing, but aside from that why should anyone invest anything new they were not going to invest before. Substitute the word "modest" for the word "huge" and I might be with you, but it won't be enough to save anyone's political bacon, especially since the people benefiting from that investment will be the very well off who vote Tory under any circumstance anyway.
Ordinary people no longer benefit from economic growth.
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
My view is that the government will pass legislation in the next four years.
Government by concession. They'll have trouble passing wind at the rate they're going.
If Blair could continue governing after Iraq then the Tories - a far less ideologically and far more power-grasping amalgamation - can soldier on after this. MPs will be far less bothered than the diehards on here anyway. There'll be careers to enhance and seats to retain. Things will cary on like before. Sorry to disappoint.
You mean like the humiliating government U-turns we've recently seen on pensions and benefits ?
You might also like to remember how Blair's majority contrasted with Cameron's.
What's that got to do with EU referendum? I thought the point was that Tory Leave MPs would be so miffed with Dave that they'd vote against his every piece of legislation as a kind of punishment, for nearly half a decade to come. I don't think it will happen.
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
My view is that the government will pass legislation in the next four years.
Government by concession. They'll have trouble passing wind at the rate they're going.
If Blair could continue governing after Iraq then the Tories - a far less ideologically and far more power-grasping amalgamation - can soldier on after this. MPs will be far less bothered than the diehards on here anyway. There'll be careers to enhance and seats to retain. Things will cary on like before. Sorry to disappoint.
Blairs had majorities of 167 and then 66. Cameron has a working majority of 18.
The numbers speak for themselves. Cameron's already had trouble scraping votes through, and with a few more 'loons and fruitcakes' to vote against him, it's not looking great.
Threat: A statement of an intention to inflict pain, injury, damage, or other hostile action on someone in retribution for something done or not done:
Now unless you feel being consigned to the back of the queue is not intended as a damaging act - and clearly the Remainders do - then I would suggest the use of the word treat is absolutely correct.
I say again, where do you normally join a queue?
I didn't realise my local supermarket were threatening me every time they served a customer before me.
Maybe I need to demand a safe space in which to complete my shopping.
What queue? The US pursues multiple trade negotiations with multiple countries all the time. Contrary to popular belief American officials are able to walk and chew gum at the same time.
"Jerry Ford is so dumb he can't fart and chew gum at the same time."
Obama's threat about the UK going to the back of the queue
When is a statement of fact a threat, and where do you normally join a queue?
If Leave wanted to convince people they had taken leave of their senses, they couldn't have engineered it better than this
But Leave aren't part of the discussion. Roger's party notwithstanding, people will be talking about Obama. As much as Remain fans are trying to make this about Boris and Nige being oafs, it isn't, any more than £4300 day was about Osborne's calculations being lies. It's the initial headline that counts. Remain aimed for it, Remain got it. Now they got it, it's in the lap of the gods whether people like it or not. No good trying to frantically point at Boris saying something about Kenyans; its irrelevant outside twitter.
The Ashcroft focus group showed two big numbers got cut through, 3 million more immigrants and £4.3k
Looking at the VOTE LEAVE leaflets and other material, no mention of 3 million more immigrants. Q: Too polite to push it?
Not sure but I think the leaflets I have been delivering were printed well before the 3 million extra immigrants revelation.
The difference in the ground campaign between BSE and Vote Leave/GO where I live is huge. I will write a post about it at some point. Essentially if Remain wins it was certainly not down to their activists who I would argue are an overall negative.
That just shows how much more consequential Germany is for US-Europe relations.
It's a big issue here too in leftie/green circles, just not reported much. UNITE got 1000 people in Broxtowe alone to protest on the issue, and dozens had signs up in their gardens about it. The UK media just don't think it's a very sexy story - they think some sort of treaty, hasn't happened yet, Europe, unions, meh.
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
My view is that the government will pass legislation in the next four years.
Government by concession. They'll have trouble passing wind at the rate they're going.
If Blair could continue governing after Iraq then the Tories - a far less ideologically and far more power-grasping amalgamation - can soldier on after this. MPs will be far less bothered than the diehards on here anyway. There'll be careers to enhance and seats to retain. Things will cary on like before. Sorry to disappoint.
How ?
The leader has announced he is resigning. That's a huge difference from post Iraq
I think that merely advances my point. Dave won't be around for much longer anyway. So why would Tory MPs feel the need to be awkward?
And the prospect of the NHS being broken up when TTIP goes through, and the market is opened up to US healthcare businesses. Yay!
I keep hearing about this but at the moment no one seems to have presented me with any evidence of it at all. I was of the understanding that the TTIP negotiations are not even finished yet and that TTIP is a very different thing to the TTP deal that was struck in the Pacific. So exactly what is this claim being based on?
I would love to be able to use the example of TTIP as a means of persuading left wing voters to support Brexit but I am not going to tell people it is a threat if it turns out to be just another scare story.
A UK/US TTIP deal is a bigger threat to the NHS under Brexit than a EU/UK TTIP deal under REMAIN.
My post from the Vanilla thread:
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.
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
Nothing they won't deserve. Then it will be my turn to break out the popcorn and enjoy the fight.
As I have said before if the referendum results in a remain vote and subsequently there is a huge boost to investment and Company's locating for low tax rates (corporation tax going down to 17%)
Why would that happen. Its the status quo. At the moment a few companies are holding fire on investment to see which way the wind is blowing, but aside from that why should anyone invest anything new they were not going to invest before. Substitute the word "modest" for the word "huge" and I might be with you, but it won't be enough to save anyone's political bacon, especially since the people benefiting from that investment will be the very well off who vote Tory under any circumstance anyway.
How does Company's relocating to the UK for preferential tax rates just benefit the well off. There could be many thousands of new jobs and taxes as the possibility of Brexit is taken off the table for the foreseeable future. I am certain it will be 'huge' for UKPLC and the angst from leavers in the main will dissipate as the Country moves on
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
Nothing they won't deserve. Then it will be my turn to break out the popcorn and enjoy the fight.
As I have said before if the referendum results in a remain vote and subsequently there is a huge boost to investment and Company's locating for low tax rates (corporation tax going down to 17%)
Why would that happen. Its the status quo. At the moment a few companies are holding fire on investment to see which way the wind is blowing, but aside from that why should anyone invest anything new they were not going to invest before. Substitute the word "modest" for the word "huge" and I might be with you, but it won't be enough to save anyone's political bacon, especially since the people benefiting from that investment will be the very well off who vote Tory under any circumstance anyway.
Ordinary people no longer benefit from economic growth.
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
My view is that the government will pass legislation in the next four years.
Government by concession. They'll have trouble passing wind at the rate they're going.
If Blair could continue governing after Iraq then the Tories - a far less ideologically and far more power-grasping amalgamation - can soldier on after this. MPs will be far less bothered than the diehards on here anyway. There'll be careers to enhance and seats to retain. Things will cary on like before. Sorry to disappoint.
How ?
The leader has announced he is resigning. That's a huge difference from post Iraq
I think that merely advances my point. Dave won't be around for much longer anyway. So why would Tory MPs feel the need to be awkward?
because they will all be jockeying for position and most of them will want to kill off Osborne.
Dave will become increasingly irrelevant in a party he has struggled to manage.
Threat: A statement of an intention to inflict pain, injury, damage, or other hostile action on someone in retribution for something done or not done:
Now unless you feel being consigned to the back of the queue is not intended as a damaging act - and clearly the Remainders do - then I would suggest the use of the word treat is absolutely correct.
I say again, where do you normally join a queue?
I didn't realise my local supermarket were threatening me every time they served a customer before me.
Maybe I need to demand a safe space in which to complete my shopping.
What queue? The US pursues multiple trade negotiations with multiple countries all the time. Contrary to popular belief American officials are able to walk and chew gum at the same time.
It would have to start from scratch though, and indeed Brexit may well mean that significant parts of the (r)EU-USA deal may need revision. It would probly delay implementation for all 3 blocs.
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
My view is that the government will pass legislation in the next four years.
Government by concession. They'll have trouble passing wind at the rate they're going.
If Blair could continue governing after Iraq then the Tories - a far less ideologically and far more power-grasping amalgamation - can soldier on after this. MPs will be far less bothered than the diehards on here anyway. There'll be careers to enhance and seats to retain. Things will cary on like before. Sorry to disappoint.
Blairs had majorities of 167 and then 66. Cameron has a working majority of 18.
The numbers speak for themselves. Cameron's already had trouble scraping votes through, and with a few more 'loons and fruitcakes' to vote against him, it's not looking great.
FFS.. We have had Remainers bitching for weeks here that Leave have not decided what the policy for after leaving should be, despite many of us saying they were in no position to make any such promises and it was up to the government, but no, Nabavi, Meeks, Stark Raving, all the usual suspected were adamant that Leave should have a policy, so they state one, and now everyone is saying how dare Leave decide what happens after the referendum, it's not up to them!
That's because it was a ridiculously obvious bear trap that Vote Leave leaped into with idealistic abandon. Because they're a bunch of chumps.
They should have set out the three alternatives, in simple terms, given them a couple of 'plus and minus' points each, made clear that even the 'no trade deal' option, whilst unlikely, was better long term for the UK the present arrangements, and left it there.
-'So why aren't you outlining a credible vision?' -'We've outlined the three scenarios very clearly, each of which is credible, and preferable to remaining within the EU. Which one we pursue is for the British Government to decide - that's what self-governing nations do.'
Indeed, Europe is presently made up of the Eurozone, countries in the Euro but outside the Eurozone ie the UK, Sweden, Denmark and much of Eastern Europe and countries outside the EU altogether ie Norway and Switzerland. Something has to be done to reconcile those different arrangements whether Remain or Leave win
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
Nothing they won't deserve. Then it will be my turn to break out the popcorn and enjoy the fight.
As I have said before if the referendum results in a remain vote and subsequently there is a huge boost to investment and Company's locating for low tax rates (corporation tax going down to 17%)
Why would that happen. Its the status quo. At the moment a few companies are holding fire on investment to see which way the wind is blowing, but aside from that why should anyone invest anything new they were not going to invest before. Substitute the word "modest" for the word "huge" and I might be with you, but it won't be enough to save anyone's political bacon, especially since the people benefiting from that investment will be the very well off who vote Tory under any circumstance anyway.
How does Company's relocating to the UK for preferential tax rates just benefit the well off. There could be many thousands of new jobs and taxes as the possibility of Brexit is taken off the table for the foreseeable future. I am certain it will be 'huge' for UKPLC and the angst from leavers in the main will dissipate as the Country moves on
Will the fitter in that new plant earn significantly, more than he did in his last job, probably not. So how does he feel any benefit. The shareholders I am sure will get a good return on their investment, and the company will probably employ the usual atrocious British managers for "market rates" which will be substantially more than the 3/- their skills frequently tend to suggest would be value!
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
My view is that the government will pass legislation in the next four years.
Government by concession. They'll have trouble passing wind at the rate they're going.
If Blair could continue governing after Iraq then the Tories - a far less ideologically and far more power-grasping amalgamation - can soldier on after this. MPs will be far less bothered than the diehards on here anyway. There'll be careers to enhance and seats to retain. Things will cary on like before. Sorry to disappoint.
You mean like the humiliating government U-turns we've recently seen on pensions and benefits ?
You might also like to remember how Blair's majority contrasted with Cameron's.
What's that got to do with EU referendum? I thought the point was that Tory Leave MPs would be so miffed with Dave that they'd vote against his every piece of legislation as a kind of punishment, for nearly half a decade to come. I don't think it will happen.
Your line is exactly what was been spouted in 1992.
Now as I said the government's majority is already small and the government has already had humiliating failures because of it.
Do you think things are going to become easier for it ?
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
My view is that the government will pass legislation in the next four years.
Government by concession. They'll have trouble passing wind at the rate they're going.
If Blair could continue governing after Iraq then the Tories - a far less ideologically and far more power-grasping amalgamation - can soldier on after this. MPs will be far less bothered than the diehards on here anyway. There'll be careers to enhance and seats to retain. Things will cary on like before. Sorry to disappoint.
Blairs had majorities of 167 and then 66. Cameron has a working majority of 18.
The numbers speak for themselves. Cameron's already had trouble scraping votes through, and with a few more 'loons and fruitcakes' to vote against him, it's not looking great.
10 Angry backbenchers. That's all it takes.
Do we know how many Tory MPs are planning to retire at the end of this Parliament?
Indeed, Europe is presently made up of the Eurozone, countries in the Euro but outside the Eurozone ie the UK, Sweden, Denmark and much of Eastern Europe and countries outside the EU altogether ie Norway and Switzerland. Something has to be done to reconcile those different arrangements whether Remain or Leave win
That's because it was a ridiculously obvious bear trap that Vote Leave leaped into with idealistic abandon. Because they're a bunch of chumps. '
Well quite, I have been saying as much for a while, although not in as much detail as you. It's a fair rule of thumb around here that if the PBLawyers are pushing a line of attack thinly disguised as a "question to which the public should know the answer" repeatedly to the point of boredom, it's a bear trap they hope you will jump into. No one here was stupid enough, but it seems that LeaveHQ knew better.
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
Nothing they won't deserve. Then it will be my turn to break out the popcorn and enjoy the fight.
As I have said before if the referendum results in a remain vote and subsequently there is a huge boost to investment and Company's locating for low tax rates (corporation tax going down to 17%)
Why would that happen. Its the status quo. At the moment a few companies are holding fire on investment to see which way the wind is blowing, but aside from that why should anyone invest anything new they were not going to invest before. Substitute the word "modest" for the word "huge" and I might be with you, but it won't be enough to save anyone's political bacon, especially since the people benefiting from that investment will be the very well off who vote Tory under any circumstance anyway.
How does Company's relocating to the UK for preferential tax rates just benefit the well off. There could be many thousands of new jobs and taxes as the possibility of Brexit is taken off the table for the foreseeable future. I am certain it will be 'huge' for UKPLC and the angst from leavers in the main will dissipate as the Country moves on
And let me guess, you were saying similar back in 2011 when Osborne was proclaiming the 'March of the Makers'.
£172bn of overborrowing later and with the current account deficit at the highest on record ...
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
Nothing they won't deserve. Then it will be my turn to break out the popcorn and enjoy the fight.
As I have said before if the referendum results in a remain vote and subsequently there is a huge boost to investment and Company's locating for low tax rates (corporation tax going down to 17%)
Why would that happen. Its the status quo. At the moment a few companies are holding fire on investment to see which way the wind is blowing, but aside from that why should anyone invest anything new they were not going to invest before. Substitute the word "modest" for the word "huge" and I might be with you, but it won't be enough to save anyone's political bacon, especially since the people benefiting from that investment will be the very well off who vote Tory under any circumstance anyway.
How does Company's relocating to the UK for preferential tax rates just benefit the well off. There could be many thousands of new jobs and taxes as the possibility of Brexit is taken off the table for the foreseeable future. I am certain it will be 'huge' for UKPLC and the angst from leavers in the main will dissipate as the Country moves on
Will the fitter in that new plant earn significantly, more than he did in his last job, probably not. So how does he feel any benefit. The shareholders I am sure will get a good return on their investment, and the company will probably employ the usual atrocious British managers for "market rates" which will be substantially more than the 3/- their skills frequently tend to suggest would be value!
A lot of the Companies will be high tec high wage ones as UKPLC enters a period of sustained growth with higher tax revenues
I am happy that there is some regulation of animal husbandry to a minimal standard. I would be happier if those standards were far higher, but am quite able to apply those standards in my own life. I do this mostly by eating less meat, and am vegetarian most days (very affordable in the UK).
Obesity is very much a class issue, it would serve poor people as much as anyone else to eat less food and be more selective in what they eat.
So to clarify, you are happy that British farmers are forced to observe minimum standards, but you are also happy that inferior food products that fall *well* below that standard can be imported and compete without labelling.
Unless born of a simple malevolence toward British food production, how do you justify this position?
It is an utterly idiotic statement by Foxinsox anyway given that UK animal husbandry standards were significantly higher than those on the continent. Animal crating, forced feeding, battery farming and the rules governing the transport of animals are all subject to far, far higher control and standards in the UK - or indeed outright banned - compared to the continent.
I agree on the whole, though it's not true of animal policy in general - for instance, there is much more public scrutiny and challenge of animal experiments in Sweden than Britain, and one of the most controversial projects in primate research moved to Britain after being banned in Berlin. I suspect that farmers are a much less powerful lobby in Britain than experimenters, while the opposite is true in, say, France.
I think the Obama thing could play very badly for Remain. At my work this morning, people (even ones who said they liked Obama generally) were incensed at the idea of "America again coming over and treating us like their poodle, telling us what to do".
TBH, I think it will have bugger all effect. We'll benefit from people not liking being told what to do by foreigners. But Remain will benefit from those who were nervous. I reckon it'll be a wash.
By far the most damaging thing that has happened to Leave was the decision not to go the EEA route. I've gone from enthusiastic Leaver, to resigned one. It wouldn't take much to stop me bothering going to the polling station at all.
Who's made that decision for Leave though? Who has the authority to make it? I'm not being sarcastic here. Leave's strength was that it doesn't have leaders and doesn't have a position. Has one section with an agenda assumed control?
Gove made a speech:
- no EEA - no contributions to the EU budget - no supremacy of EU law
While I'm obviously in favour of the last of these, and would like the second (although think it optimistic), the first is definitely something I'm very unhappy with.
Fair enough. Weird that Gove should be deciding policy though. His group is supposed to be making the case for an option in a referendum - not running for office.
Indeed - "Vote Leave" does not become the Government of the country if "Leave" wins.
"Vote Leave" is in no position to make any such decision.
It will be up to the Government to conduct Leave negotiations - it's perfectly possible that we could end up in the EEA.
FFS.. We have had Remainers bitching for weeks here that Leave have not decided what the policy for after leaving should be, despite many of us saying they were in no position to make any such promises and it was up to the government, but no, Nabavi, Meeks, Stark Raving, all the usual suspected were adamant that Leave should have a policy, so they state one, and now everyone is saying how dare Leave decide what happens after the referendum, it's not up to them!
Well then Remain had set a humongous bear trap, which Leave has walked obligingly into. Personally I think Leave's message should have been: our only concern is with leaving the EU; what other bits and pieces we sign up to thereafter is the decision of any subsequently elected government. Unfortunately this not a good look for people who want clarity and are wary of 'leaps in the dark'. Leave clearly realized this and got spooked.
Threat: A statement of an intention to inflict pain, injury, damage, or other hostile action on someone in retribution for something done or not done:
Now unless you feel being consigned to the back of the queue is not intended as a damaging act - and clearly the Remainders do - then I would suggest the use of the word treat is absolutely correct.
I say again, where do you normally join a queue?
I didn't realise my local supermarket were threatening me every time they served a customer before me.
Maybe I need to demand a safe space in which to complete my shopping.
What queue? The US pursues multiple trade negotiations with multiple countries all the time. Contrary to popular belief American officials are able to walk and chew gum at the same time.
It would have to start from scratch though, and indeed Brexit may well mean that significant parts of the (r)EU-USA deal may need revision. It would probly delay implementation for all 3 blocs.
Seems unlikely, the US only has one trade agreement. TTIP is just TTP with a few rough edges knocked off because the EU made a fuss. If we went along after a Leave vote they would just pull the standard trade agreement out of the drawer, change the title, make a few cosmetic changes, and that would be that.
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
My view is that the government will pass legislation in the next four years.
Government by concession. They'll have trouble passing wind at the rate they're going.
If Blair could continue governing after Iraq then the Tories - a far less ideologically and far more power-grasping amalgamation - can soldier on after this. MPs will be far less bothered than the diehards on here anyway. There'll be careers to enhance and seats to retain. Things will cary on like before. Sorry to disappoint.
Blairs had majorities of 167 and then 66. Cameron has a working majority of 18.
The numbers speak for themselves. Cameron's already had trouble scraping votes through, and with a few more 'loons and fruitcakes' to vote against him, it's not looking great.
10 Angry backbenchers. That's all it takes.
In 12 Angry Men it needed one to see the truth and build a consensus.
Well then Remain had set a humongous bear trap, which Leave has walked obligingly into. Personally I think Leave's message should have been: our only concern is with leaving the EU; what other bits and pieces we sign up to thereafter is the decision of any subsequently elected government. Unfortunately this not a good look for people who want clarity and are wary of 'leaps in the dark'. Leave clearly realized this and got spooked.
Yes indeed. That has been my view here for ages. The Leave Campaign is here to procure a divorce, it is up to the government of the day who they chose to date afterwards, and how they intend to continue relations with the ex.
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
Nothing they won't deserve. Then it will be my turn to break out the popcorn and enjoy the fight.
As I have said before if the referendum results in a remain vote and subsequently there is a huge boost to investment and Company's locating for low tax rates (corporation tax going down to 17%)
Why would that happen. Its the status quo. At the moment a few companies are holding fire on investment to see which way the wind is blowing, but aside from that why should anyone invest anything new they were not going to invest before. Substitute the word "modest" for the word "huge" and I might be with you, but it won't be enough to save anyone's political bacon, especially since the people benefiting from that investment will be the very well off who vote Tory under any circumstance anyway.
How does Company's relocating to the UK for preferential tax rates just benefit the well off. There could be many thousands of new jobs and taxes as the possibility of Brexit is taken off the table for the foreseeable future. I am certain it will be 'huge' for UKPLC and the angst from leavers in the main will dissipate as the Country moves on
And let me guess, you were saying similar back in 2011 when Osborne was proclaiming the 'March of the Makers'.
£172bn of overborrowing later and with the current account deficit at the highest on record ...
No - This is new in that if remain wins, the vote of confidence in the UK will be substantial and many opportunities will open to both UK companies and those looking for inward investment. Ultimately the only way to address the current account deficit is to grow through business investment and innovation
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
Nothing they won't deserve. Then it will be my turn to break out the popcorn and enjoy the fight.
As I have said before if the referendum results in a remain vote and subsequently there is a huge boost to investment and Company's locating for low tax rates (corporation tax going down to 17%)
Why would that happen. Its the status quo. At the moment a few companies are holding fire on investment to see which way the wind is blowing, but aside from that why should anyone invest anything new they were not going to invest before. Substitute the word "modest" for the word "huge" and I might be with you, but it won't be enough to save anyone's political bacon, especially since the people benefiting from that investment will be the very well off who vote Tory under any circumstance anyway.
How does Company's relocating to the UK for preferential tax rates just benefit the well off. There could be many thousands of new jobs and taxes as the possibility of Brexit is taken off the table for the foreseeable future. I am certain it will be 'huge' for UKPLC and the angst from leavers in the main will dissipate as the Country moves on
Will the fitter in that new plant earn significantly, more than he did in his last job, probably not. So how does he feel any benefit. The shareholders I am sure will get a good return on their investment, and the company will probably employ the usual atrocious British managers for "market rates" which will be substantially more than the 3/- their skills frequently tend to suggest would be value!
A lot of the Companies will be high tec high wage ones as UKPLC enters a period of sustained growth with higher tax revenues
Hi tech workers don't materialise out of thin air, the people in that job will be doing high tech jobs already, and move for a minimal increase or personal convenience/interest. I used to be a "high tech worker" and I keep in touch with my ex-colleagues, rates are pretty much what they were ten years ago in absolute terms, in real terms of course much worse.
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
My view is that the government will pass legislation in the next four years.
Government by concession. They'll have trouble passing wind at the rate they're going.
If Blair could continue governing after Iraq then the Tories - a far less ideologically and far more power-grasping amalgamation - can soldier on after this. MPs will be far less bothered than the diehards on here anyway. There'll be careers to enhance and seats to retain. Things will cary on like before. Sorry to disappoint.
Blairs had majorities of 167 and then 66. Cameron has a working majority of 18.
The numbers speak for themselves. Cameron's already had trouble scraping votes through, and with a few more 'loons and fruitcakes' to vote against him, it's not looking great.
10 Angry backbenchers. That's all it takes.
Do we know how many Tory MPs are planning to retire at the end of this Parliament?
Sufficient will either be retiring or moving to the red benches, to allow the change to 600MPs to get through. Does someone here have a list of Tory MPs ordered by age?
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
Nothing they won't deserve. Then it will be my turn to break out the popcorn and enjoy the fight.
As I have said before if the referendum results in a remain vote and subsequently there is a huge boost to investment and Company's locating for low tax rates (corporation tax going down to 17%)
Why would that happen. Its the status quo. At the moment a few companies are holding fire on investment to see which way the wind is blowing, but aside from that why should anyone invest anything new they were not going to invest before. Substitute the word "modest" for the word "huge" and I might be with you, but it won't be enough to save anyone's political bacon, especially since the people benefiting from that investment will be the very well off who vote Tory under any circumstance anyway.
How does Company's relocating to the UK for preferential tax rates just benefit the well off. There could be many thousands of new jobs and taxes as the possibility of Brexit is taken off the table for the foreseeable future. I am certain it will be 'huge' for UKPLC and the angst from leavers in the main will dissipate as the Country moves on
And let me guess, you were saying similar back in 2011 when Osborne was proclaiming the 'March of the Makers'.
£172bn of overborrowing later and with the current account deficit at the highest on record ...
No - This is new in that if remain wins, the vote of confidence in the UK will be substantial and many opportunities will open to both UK companies and those looking for inward investment. Ultimately the only way to address the current account deficit is to grow through business investment and innovation
Forgive me, but this is starting to sound like a CCHQ press release
Threat: A statement of an intention to inflict pain, injury, damage, or other hostile action on someone in retribution for something done or not done:
Now unless you feel being consigned to the back of the queue is not intended as a damaging act - and clearly the Remainders do - then I would suggest the use of the word treat is absolutely correct.
I say again, where do you normally join a queue?
I didn't realise my local supermarket were threatening me every time they served a customer before me.
Maybe I need to demand a safe space in which to complete my shopping.
What queue? The US pursues multiple trade negotiations with multiple countries all the time. Contrary to popular belief American officials are able to walk and chew gum at the same time.
It would have to start from scratch though, and indeed Brexit may well mean that significant parts of the (r)EU-USA deal may need revision. It would probly delay implementation for all 3 blocs.
Seems unlikely, the US only has one trade agreement. TTIP is just TTP with a few rough edges knocked off because the EU made a fuss. If we went along after a Leave vote they would just pull the standard trade agreement out of the drawer, change the title, make a few cosmetic changes, and that would be that.
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
Nothing they won't deserve. Then it will be my turn to break out the popcorn and enjoy the fight.
As I have said before if the referendum results in a remain vote and subsequently there is a huge boost to investment and Company's locating for low tax rates (corporation tax going down to 17%)
Why would that happen. Its the status quo. At the moment a few companies are holding fire on investment to see which way the wind is blowing, but aside from that why should anyone invest anything new they were not going to invest before. Substitute the word "modest" for the word "huge" and I might be with you, but it won't be enough to save anyone's political bacon, especially since the people benefiting from that investment will be the very well off who vote Tory under any circumstance anyway.
How does Company's relocating to the UK for preferential tax rates just benefit the well off. There could be many thousands of new jobs and taxes as the possibility of Brexit is taken off the table for the foreseeable future. I am certain it will be 'huge' for UKPLC and the angst from leavers in the main will dissipate as the Country moves on
And let me guess, you were saying similar back in 2011 when Osborne was proclaiming the 'March of the Makers'.
£172bn of overborrowing later and with the current account deficit at the highest on record ...
No - This is new in that if remain wins, the vote of confidence in the UK will be substantial and many opportunities will open to both UK companies and those looking for inward investment. Ultimately the only way to address the current account deficit is to grow through business investment and innovation
Forgive me, but this is starting to sound like a CCHQ press release
Post referendum, I wonder what nightmares lie in wait for the Government in the HoC.
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
Nothing they won't deserve. Then it will be my turn to break out the popcorn and enjoy the fight.
As I have said before if the referendum results in a remain vote and subsequently there is a huge boost to investment and Company's locating for low tax rates (corporation tax going down to 17%)
Why would that happen. Its the status quo. At the moment a few companies are holding fire on investment to see which way the wind is blowing, but aside from that why should anyone invest anything new they were not going to invest before. Substitute the word "modest" for the word "huge" and I might be with you, but it won't be enough to save anyone's political bacon, especially since the people benefiting from that investment will be the very well off who vote Tory under any circumstance anyway.
How does Company's relocating to the UK for preferential tax rates just benefit the well off. There could be many thousands of new jobs and taxes as the possibility of Brexit is taken off the table for the foreseeable future. I am certain it will be 'huge' for UKPLC and the angst from leavers in the main will dissipate as the Country moves on
And let me guess, you were saying similar back in 2011 when Osborne was proclaiming the 'March of the Makers'.
£172bn of overborrowing later and with the current account deficit at the highest on record ...
No - This is new in that if remain wins, the vote of confidence in the UK will be substantial and many opportunities will open to both UK companies and those looking for inward investment. Ultimately the only way to address the current account deficit is to grow through business investment and innovation
Forgive me, but this is starting to sound like a CCHQ press release
You do compliment me but I while I am a member I have not been invited by CCHQ to write press relaeses
Comments
Will they be able to pass any legislation over the next 4 years?
The news I hear discussed is either the doctors strike (for news) or will Leicester win the league (for sport).
I honestly don't know which of immigration vs the economy is the bigger winner. What I do know is that the opportunity for a simple message about the economy has been lost by choosing to reject the EEA route.
As an example, Obama's threat about the UK going to the back of the queue would have been far less effective if he had been forced to say that he was moving EFTA to the back of the queue.
If Leave wanted to convince people they had taken leave of their senses, they couldn't have engineered it better than this
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/23/jeremy-corbyn-says-he-had-a-fascinating-discussion-with-presiden/
And Barack said "whose was that old duffer that spent an hour telling me all about some woman called Margaret from somewhere called Milton Keynes who has a problem with her tax credits..."
The world won't end however we vote.
If I found myself in a line behind Nigel Farage I would know I in the wrong queue.
( Although it wouldn't be PB without endless bickering over minutiae that almost no one else has noticed, much less cares about
How so? ‘There’s some ecological stuff in there, so there’s an oil spill in the sea, and lots of stuff about the acidification of the sea. And then there’s also stuff about isolation and then eventually connectivity... I feel like [it’s] one of society’s major issues.’
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/charlotte-church-camerons-chauvinistic-adeles-not-for-me-and-kim/
Think I might give that one a miss...
All the evidence suggests that further integration and marginalisation will be the only things the UK will be getting over the next couple of decades. If this is the case we may get another referendum. It certainly will not come from Labour so we are completely reliant on the Tories whose senior figures are mainly Europhiles and will argue that the matter is settled.
Threat: A statement of an intention to inflict pain, injury, damage, or other hostile action on someone in retribution for something done or not done:
Now unless you feel being consigned to the back of the queue is not intended as a damaging act - and clearly the Remainders do - then I would suggest the use of the word treat is absolutely correct.
Leaving that aside, the fear is surely that at present the final adjudicator is our own Government, and in the future matters will be decided by an entirely different legal process, which may or may not be held behind closed doors. This could lead to a flood of litigation from disappointed American corporations with deep pockets. Despite my criticisms of our current Government, I want the UK Government to be able to decide how it spends our money. That doesn't seem to me to be a very unreasonable position.
I'm a historian (BA), so I'm sceptical of people getting misty-eyed over 'free trade' as a universally applied concept. Often, free trade is a weapon of the mighty against the less mighty. See Britain and China. Britain and India. Conquistadors and the Incas (was it the Incas?). Conversely, German industry developed into its mighty state by protectionism against British industrial imports. There is nothing new under the sun, and as far as I can see, America is heavily in debt to China, and is simply trying to push this spate of deals through to get more cash. Remember, after all the froth, there will be a net loser and a net beneficiary of all this. My money isn't on the US being the net loser.
I didn't realise my local supermarket were threatening me every time they served a customer before me.
Maybe I need to demand a safe space in which to complete my shopping.
I'm afraid it's out there.
To some it'll be important and to some it won't. But they wont vote against their interest because they're cross with Obama.
"Vote Leave" is in no position to make any such decision.
It will be up to the Government to conduct Leave negotiations - it's perfectly possible that we could end up in the EEA.
But why we are celebrating the greatest literary hoax of all time never ceases to amaze. The man from Stratford never wrote a word of it!
How could he, when he could barely scratch his own name? His parents, wife, children and grandchildren were illiterate, and there is not one contemporaneous record linking him to the plays published under the name "Shakespeare" (a spelling the Stratford man never used) in his own lifetime, although there are plenty of records indicating he was a businessman, grain-dealer and moneylender - and every other Elizabethan playwright has a paper-trail directly linking them to their works.
In his will he left not a book, or a paper, nor mention of "his" 18 hitherto-unpublished plays, and although wealthy from his business dealings, he made no provision for his family's education, no bequest to the local school, etc.
Moreover, his death in 1616 passed entirely un-noticed. No eulogies or panegyrics. NOTHING. SILENCE.
For Seven Years.
Only then did a expensively-printed collection of plays appear (the First Folio), for the first-time explicitly pointing to the Stratford man as author, complete with a ludicrous engraving of him smirking from the frontispiece...
Oddly, several of the plays had been revised, with new lines and thousands of small changes, that must have been made (deduced from printers errors that were still carried over) after 1622.
Perhaps the true author was still alive?
The leader has announced he is resigning. That's a huge difference from post Iraq
You might also like to remember how Blair's majority contrasted with Cameron's.
The numbers speak for themselves. Cameron's already had trouble scraping votes through, and with a few more 'loons and fruitcakes' to vote against him, it's not looking great.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-3555192/Fighting-breaks-Manchester-United-Everton-fans-service-station-ahead-FA-Cup-semi-final.html
Dave will become increasingly irrelevant in a party he has struggled to manage.
They should have set out the three alternatives, in simple terms, given them a couple of 'plus and minus' points each, made clear that even the 'no trade deal' option, whilst unlikely, was better long term for the UK the present arrangements, and left it there.
-'So why aren't you outlining a credible vision?'
-'We've outlined the three scenarios very clearly, each of which is credible, and preferable to remaining within the EU. Which one we pursue is for the British Government to decide - that's what self-governing nations do.'
The shared language and the special relationship plus some cash , always has worked before , so they tell us.
Now as I said the government's majority is already small and the government has already had humiliating failures because of it.
Do you think things are going to become easier for it ?
£172bn of overborrowing later and with the current account deficit at the highest on record ...