I also see that VoteLeave have belatedly started thinking about what Leave might look like. It's a curious suggestion they are making: they seem to be suggesting that the period of financial, market and business uncertainty should be extended, by not invoking Article 50 for a considerable time. This suggests that they don't understand what the problem will be - indeed some of them even make the ludicrous claim that 'in the event of a Leave result, nothing will change on June 24th because we'll stil be in the EU'. Well, yes, we will still be in the EU, and nothing will immediately change in terms of rules, regulations, customs procedures, and freedom of movement, but everything will change in terms of business confidence, investment, company behaviour, and even consumer behaviour.
Nonsense, the period of uncertainty is NOW. As soon as we get a result, everyone can start making plans again.
You are partially right, the period of uncertainty has started, and is having a clear effect on both the markets and economic activity. But until recently Brexit has seemed a fairly remote risk.
All that, though, is nothing compared with the complete political (and therefore economic) chaos which a Leave result would provoke on June 24th. Fasten your seatbelts.
John McDonnell confirms Labour would vote against Osborne's budget. Osborne really is an idiot.
Was waiting for this and glad Labour have come out against it. Osborne hasnt thought this through.
He has. What he is essentially promising in the event of a Leave vote is a general election.
You really think that is within his powers from the backbenches?
Well, who on the Leave side is going to point that out? They have all said they want the PM to continue whatever the result and the Chancellorship is in the PM's gift.
The IMF, or someone who thinks BOLLOCKS constitutes an argument?
Tough one.....
I'm certainly not trying to persuade you, I simply find such claims ludicrous. There's simply no agreed definition of what developed means. It's a bit like poverty, and has the same issues with relative and absolute measures. Invariably countries, governments, and people point at the particular definition they like best which suits their arguments and fits their biases. Basically it's BOLLOCKS.
Forgive this southern jessie but why would Sunderland vote leave? I thought that city's lifeblood was Nissan. Why will they back Leave when the car industry almost went down the pan in this country in the not so distant past. Could someone please do a voxpox on the factory floor as the skilled workers will swing this result.
Mr. Pulpstar, interesting post. I did wonder some time ago if couples (ahem, or friends) might vote in cancelling pairs, as happened in the Scottish vote.
Nothing has changed from my early May hypothesis, IMHO.
British voters *as a whole* want to give the UK and the EU a very nasty shock, and then deliver the closest Remain vote humanly possible. So voters will now calibrate themselves back a tad from Leave to deliver it, in my view.
That then puts our EU membership on probation. "One last chance" etc.
I agree the public probably are thinking along those lines, the danger for remain being that tactical voting isn't always guaranteed to work. It's like the Scottish election, with RISE and greens etc saying to split votes, tactically not voting for the SNP, backfired and ended with them losing the majority
No individual voter can calibrate how to do that. If you vote LEAVE you are voting to leave and correspondingly if you vote REMAIN.
Most of the other developed nations around the world are in the EU.
BOLLOCKS.
The IMF calls 39 economies 'advanced'.....25 of them are in the EU, and some of the others (Hong Kong, Singapore, San Marino, Macau are 'City States' and one (Puerto Rico) effectively part of another advanced economy, the US.....so 25 out of 34 ain't bad.....
It is a completely arbitrary statistic when no two organisations can even agree on a common definition of what developed means or where to draw the line, and it invariably takes a western and capitalist definition.
It was Casino_Royale who initially claimed that
"No, they mean the UK becoming a fully self-governing liberal democracy again, just like most other developed nations around the world."
Perhaps you'd better ask him which criteria for a developed nation he is using.
I also see that VoteLeave have belatedly started thinking about what Leave might look like. It's a curious suggestion they are making: they seem to be suggesting that the period of financial, market and business uncertainty should be extended, by not invoking Article 50 for a considerable time. This suggests that they don't understand what the problem will be - indeed some of them even make the ludicrous claim that 'in the event of a Leave result, nothing will change on June 24th because we'll stil be in the EU'. Well, yes, we will still be in the EU, and nothing will immediately change in terms of rules, regulations, customs procedures, and freedom of movement, but everything will change in terms of business confidence, investment, company behaviour, and even consumer behaviour.
With all the knock-ons that will have for the government's ability to raise revenue and hit the deficit elimination targets that all Tory Leavers are signed up to. I am really struggling to see how they do not understand this.
The one thing I just can't get over is Cameron's protestations that nothing was off the table and he could vote leave. Surely if leave was going to be an unmitigated disaster, why even offer it as an option, let alone say you might support it.
That's true. He should never have offered the bloody referendum in the first place. But we are we are. Now he must make damned sure Remain win. Otherwise utter chaos will ensue.
No, it won't. But he views it as in his interests to absolutely maximise the *threat* of chaos in the event of a Leave vote (thus encouraging the markets to react accordingly) in order to secure the Remain vote he wants.
Check today's market. That's going well then with the FTSE up and cable up a cent since last night...
John McDonnell confirms Labour would vote against Osborne's budget. Osborne really is an idiot.
Was waiting for this and glad Labour have come out against it. Osborne hasnt thought this through.
He has. What he is essentially promising in the event of a Leave vote is a general election.
You really think that is within his powers from the backbenches?
Problem is, even if Boris or someone from the Tory hard-right seizes control, they'll still have to rely on the Tory moderates to get their emergency budget through. And Labour won't support it no matter what. The Tories will not want a general election. I suspect Cameron, Osborne, Boris and Gove will come to an agreement on the thrust of the emergency budget, around which both Tory Leavers and Remainers can unite.
Mr. Pulpstar, interesting post. I did wonder some time ago if couples (ahem, or friends) might vote in cancelling pairs, as happened in the Scottish vote.
Nothing has changed from my early May hypothesis, IMHO.
British voters *as a whole* want to give the UK and the EU a very nasty shock, and then deliver the closest Remain vote humanly possible. So voters will now calibrate themselves back a tad from Leave to deliver it, in my view.
That then puts our EU membership on probation. "One last chance" etc.
I agree the public probably are thinking along those lines, the danger for remain being that tactical voting isn't always guaranteed to work. It's like the Scottish election, with RISE and greens etc saying to split votes, tactically not voting for the SNP, backfired and ended with them losing the majority
It's probably easier to get the tactical result you want with First Past the Post than it is with FPTP combined with PR.
For many people, the ideal result would be Remain 50.01%, Leave 49.99%.
John McDonnell confirms Labour would vote against Osborne's budget. Osborne really is an idiot.
Was waiting for this and glad Labour have come out against it. Osborne hasnt thought this through.
He has. What he is essentially promising in the event of a Leave vote is a general election.
You really think that is within his powers from the backbenches?
Well, who on the Leave side is going to point that out? They have all said they want the PM to continue whatever the result and the Chancellorship is in the PM's gift.
Eurosceptics are going to walk straight into Osborne's trap...???
I also see that VoteLeave have belatedly started thinking about what Leave might look like. It's a curious suggestion they are making: they seem to be suggesting that the period of financial, market and business uncertainty should be extended, by not invoking Article 50 for a considerable time. This suggests that they don't understand what the problem will be - indeed some of them even make the ludicrous claim that 'in the event of a Leave result, nothing will change on June 24th because we'll stil be in the EU'. Well, yes, we will still be in the EU, and nothing will immediately change in terms of rules, regulations, customs procedures, and freedom of movement, but everything will change in terms of business confidence, investment, company behaviour, and even consumer behaviour.
Nonsense, the period of uncertainty is NOW. As soon as we get a result, everyone can start making plans again.
I think that's optimistic. Our camp contains two competing ideologies: one (mine) wishes to Leave the EU because we want to open our economy up to the world; the other (Sandy's, for example) wishes to Leave so we can close our economy. The former group wants to sign an FTA group with China, while the latter group sees Leave as an opportunity to impose tariffs on Chinese steel to protect Port Talbot.
There needs to be a fight, maybe a General Election, to decide which of these two visions will be the one that prevails.
Mr. Pulpstar, interesting post. I did wonder some time ago if couples (ahem, or friends) might vote in cancelling pairs, as happened in the Scottish vote.
Nothing has changed from my early May hypothesis, IMHO.
British voters *as a whole* want to give the UK and the EU a very nasty shock, and then deliver the closest Remain vote humanly possible. So voters will now calibrate themselves back a tad from Leave to deliver it, in my view.
That then puts our EU membership on probation. "One last chance" etc.
I agree the public probably are thinking along those lines, the danger for remain being that tactical voting isn't always guaranteed to work. It's like the Scottish election, with RISE and greens etc saying to split votes, tactically not voting for the SNP, backfired and ended with them losing the majority
No individual voter can calibrate how to do that. If you vote LEAVE you are voting to leave and correspondingly if you vote REMAIN.
Two voters with a high degree of mutual trust can do it together. I am doing so
You are partially right, the period of uncertainty has started, and is having a clear effect on both the markets and economic activity. But until recently Brexit has seemed a fairly remote risk.
The FTSE is 50pts up on the day and about 400 pts above where it was in February, and above where it was last Aug-Sep, were those both due to Brexit fears as well ? The GBP is climbing against both the EUR and the USD, and even against the PHP
After 4 hours at work, I tuned in to get an update on where things are. To sum up this morning, today the REMAIN campaign re-launches itself led by probably the worst person that it is possible to have fronting REMAIN (from REMAIN's viewpoint). Osborne is well regarded as a Leader by just 2% of the voters. He is reviled and despised by many times that number. Have REMAIN taken "leave" of their senses? I am happy for LEAVE, but it is a disaster for the Conservative party.
Forgive this southern jessie but why would Sunderland vote leave? I thought that city's lifeblood was Nissan. Why will they back Leave when the car industry almost went down the pan in this country in the not so distant past. Could someone please do a voxpox on the factory floor as the skilled workers will swing this result.
1 reason is that Renault continually threaten the factory as their try and keep their unproductive French factories working...
But Nissan doesn't employ everyone and for others it probably wouldn't impact their decision...
The politics of the aftermath is this. Whoever loses will be vindicated. Mass immigration will continue if we Remain. They'll be some sort of short and medium term economic shock if we Leave.
Mass immigration will continue if we Leave also.
and economic shocks if we Remain also, like when Greece or Italy goes t*ts up
If Italy goes t*ts up, it will f*ck us, whether we're in the EU or not.
The politics of the aftermath is this. Whoever loses will be vindicated. Mass immigration will continue if we Remain. They'll be some sort of short and medium term economic shock if we Leave.
Mass immigration will continue if we Leave also.
and economic shocks if we Remain also, like when Greece or Italy goes t*ts up
Leavers don't care about the economy. They care about sovereignty and immigration.
The politics of the aftermath is this. Whoever loses will be vindicated. Mass immigration will continue if we Remain. They'll be some sort of short and medium term economic shock if we Leave.
Mass immigration will continue if we Leave also.
Yes. You could flip my observation over. They'll be some sort of economic shock if we Remain. We're due a recession. Mass immigration will certainly continue if we Leave. I'm genuinely at a loss as to why we'd cut EU immigration after a Brexit when we don't cut non EU immigration now. So. who ever wins everyone's greatest fear comes true and primary goal isn't achieved.
You are partially right, the period of uncertainty has started, and is having a clear effect on both the markets and economic activity. But until recently Brexit has seemed a fairly remote risk.
The FTSE is 50pts up on the day and about 400 pts above where it was in February, and above where it was last Aug-Sep, were those both due to Brexit fears as well ? The GBP is climbing against both the EUR and the USD, and even against the PHP
Well the last two days have now made it clear that the eurosceptics care about one thing, and one thing only – leaving the EU. Nothing else matters to them.
Yesterday we witnessed their willing negative equity on millions, unemployment for further millions, Xpts off GDP, dwindling pension funds and market chaos.
Today we see that a £30bn budgetary black hole should be allowed to fester, as a price worth paying so they can ride their sovereignty hobby horse.
I also see that VoteLeave have belatedly started thinking about what Leave might look like. It's a curious suggestion they are making: they seem to be suggesting that the period of financial, market and business uncertainty should be extended, by not invoking Article 50 for a considerable time. This suggests that they don't understand what the problem will be - indeed some of them even make the ludicrous claim that 'in the event of a Leave result, nothing will change on June 24th because we'll stil be in the EU'. Well, yes, we will still be in the EU, and nothing will immediately change in terms of rules, regulations, customs procedures, and freedom of movement, but everything will change in terms of business confidence, investment, company behaviour, and even consumer behaviour.
Nonsense, the period of uncertainty is NOW. As soon as we get a result, everyone can start making plans again.
I think that's optimistic. Our camp contains two competing ideologies: one (mine) wishes to Leave the EU because we want to open our economy up to the world; the other (Sandy's, for example) wishes to Leave so we can close our economy. The former group wants to sign an FTA group with China, while the latter group sees Leave as an opportunity to impose tariffs on Chinese steel to protect Port Talbot.
There needs to be a fight, maybe a General Election, to decide which of these two visions will be the one that prevails.
The only practical resolution would be to call an election, I think, to determine which option (or to ignore the result, if a party is bold enough).
John McDonnell confirms Labour would vote against Osborne's budget. Osborne really is an idiot.
Was waiting for this and glad Labour have come out against it. Osborne hasnt thought this through.
He has. What he is essentially promising in the event of a Leave vote is a general election.
You really think that is within his powers from the backbenches?
Problem is, even if Boris or someone from the Tory hard-right seizes control, they'll still have to rely on the Tory moderates to get their emergency budget through. And Labour won't support it no matter what. The Tories will not want a general election. I suspect Cameron, Osborne, Boris and Gove will come to an agreement on the thrust of the emergency budget, around which both Tory Leavers and Remainers can unite.
Why would there be an emergency budget. You just schedule things for the Autumn statement...
I know this is probably very marginal, (although marginal could still be important in a close vote), but I like doing my little implied chance bits, so here after the first games are the updated implied percentage chances for which football games the home nations might be facing as referendum day dawns, as per Oddschecker:
As mentioned, opponents are likely not to be known until Wednesday night, due to qualifying third places not being decided until all results are in. Games to be played Saturday unless stated:
ENGLAND: 15% - None / England fail to qualify from group 9% - Romania, Portugal (Mon) 8% - Turkey, Czech Republic, Iceland (Mon), Hungary (Mon) 7% - Germany (almost certainly Sun) 6% - Switzerland, Albania 5% - Austria (Mon) 4% - Croatia 3% - Poland (Sat/Sun) 2% - Spain (Sat/Sun) 1% - Ukraine, Northern Ireland (Bar)
WALES (DAYS SAME AS ENGLAND): 19% - Germany 17% - None / Wales fails to qualify 8% - Portugal, Iceland 7% - Hungary 6% - Romania 5% - Turkey, Czech Republic, Austria, Poland 4% - Switzerland, Croatia 3% - Albania 2% - Spain 1% - Ukraine, Northern Ireland (Bar)
NORTHERN IRELAND: 84% - Fail to qualify 10% - France (Sun) 3% - Switzerland (Sun) 1% - Romania (Sun), England, Wales (Bar) Russia
Expecting the likely options to somewhat narrow after the second game, so will update again Sunday / Monday.
John McDonnell confirms Labour would vote against Osborne's budget. Osborne really is an idiot.
Was waiting for this and glad Labour have come out against it. Osborne hasnt thought this through.
He has. What he is essentially promising in the event of a Leave vote is a general election.
You really think that is within his powers from the backbenches?
Well, who on the Leave side is going to point that out? They have all said they want the PM to continue whatever the result and the Chancellorship is in the PM's gift.
Eurosceptics are going to walk straight into Osborne's trap...???
What trap? Osborne is sacking himself through incompetence.
I also see that VoteLeave have belatedly started thinking about what Leave might look like. It's a curious suggestion they are making: they seem to be suggesting that the period of financial, market and business uncertainty should be extended, by not invoking Article 50 for a considerable time. This suggests that they don't understand what the problem will be - indeed some of them even make the ludicrous claim that 'in the event of a Leave result, nothing will change on June 24th because we'll stil be in the EU'. Well, yes, we will still be in the EU, and nothing will immediately change in terms of rules, regulations, customs procedures, and freedom of movement, but everything will change in terms of business confidence, investment, company behaviour, and even consumer behaviour.
Nonsense, the period of uncertainty is NOW. As soon as we get a result, everyone can start making plans again.
I think that's optimistic. Our camp contains two competing ideologies: one (mine) wishes to Leave the EU because we want to open our economy up to the world; the other (Sandy's, for example) wishes to Leave so we can close our economy. The former group wants to sign an FTA group with China, while the latter group sees Leave as an opportunity to impose tariffs on Chinese steel to protect Port Talbot.
There needs to be a fight, maybe a General Election, to decide which of these two visions will be the one that prevails.
Or maybe, just maybe, you abandon the whole crazy idea as you have two directly competing ideologies attempting to maintain the pretence that they are as one?
John McDonnell confirms Labour would vote against Osborne's budget. Osborne really is an idiot.
Was waiting for this and glad Labour have come out against it. Osborne hasnt thought this through.
He has. What he is essentially promising in the event of a Leave vote is a general election.
You really think that is within his powers from the backbenches?
Well, who on the Leave side is going to point that out? They have all said they want the PM to continue whatever the result and the Chancellorship is in the PM's gift.
Eurosceptics are going to walk straight into Osborne's trap...???
What trap? Osborne is sacking himself through incompetence.
Forgive this southern jessie but why would Sunderland vote leave? I thought that city's lifeblood was Nissan. Why will they back Leave when the car industry almost went down the pan in this country in the not so distant past. Could someone please do a voxpox on the factory floor as the skilled workers will swing this result.
6700 people work at Nissan Sunderland. Sunderland has about 150,000 voters.
Most of the other developed nations around the world are in the EU.
BOLLOCKS.
The IMF calls 39 economies 'advanced'.....25 of them are in the EU, and some of the others (Hong Kong, Singapore, San Marino, Macau are 'City States' and one (Puerto Rico) effectively part of another advanced economy, the US.....so 25 out of 34 ain't bad.....
It is a completely arbitrary statistic when no two organisations can even agree on a common definition of what developed means or where to draw the line, and it invariably takes a western and capitalist definition.
It was Casino_Royale who initially claimed that
"No, they mean the UK becoming a fully self-governing liberal democracy again, just like most other developed nations around the world."
Perhaps you'd better ask him which criteria for a developed nation he is using.
The World Bank lists 80 high income countries.
If that's the criterion you're using for a "developed nation", your contention that most developed countries aren't in the EU is trivial and meaningless, given that the EU has only 28 members.
Why is anyone surprised by Osborne's point on the public finances? If the economy is smaller as a result of Brexit, which pretty much every informed observer (including most of those who think Brexit would be good in the long term) agrees will be the case for at least a couple of years, then the public finances will be hit. I suppose you could accuse him of stating the obvious.
Forgive this southern jessie but why would Sunderland vote leave? I thought that city's lifeblood was Nissan. Why will they back Leave when the car industry almost went down the pan in this country in the not so distant past. Could someone please do a voxpox on the factory floor as the skilled workers will swing this result.
6700 people work at Nissan Sunderland. Sunderland has about 150,000 voters.
I think nunu makes a point though; Sunderland could have a result 2-4% better for Remain than we might expect from its raw demographics and GE result. So, a 50:50 result for Remain there might just reflect Nissan, rather than a great overall night for Remain.
Well the last two days have now made it clear that the eurosceptics care about one thing, and one thing only – leaving the EU. Nothing else matters to them.
HAHAHAHA
How you can have the front to say that on the day that Dave and George have thrown their party under a bus in a last ditch attempt to the a remain result, demonstrating that they dont care about anything else than remaining. The same Dave that told us last November that there would be no real problem if we left.
John McDonnell confirms Labour would vote against Osborne's budget. Osborne really is an idiot.
Was waiting for this and glad Labour have come out against it. Osborne hasnt thought this through.
He has. What he is essentially promising in the event of a Leave vote is a general election.
You really think that is within his powers from the backbenches?
Problem is, even if Boris or someone from the Tory hard-right seizes control, they'll still have to rely on the Tory moderates to get their emergency budget through. And Labour won't support it no matter what. The Tories will not want a general election. I suspect Cameron, Osborne, Boris and Gove will come to an agreement on the thrust of the emergency budget, around which both Tory Leavers and Remainers can unite.
Is there a budget around which all Tories can unite? There certainly isn't a vision for leave they can agree on. A lot will want EEA/EFTA, the diehards will want a complete break.
John McDonnell confirms Labour would vote against Osborne's budget. Osborne really is an idiot.
Was waiting for this and glad Labour have come out against it. Osborne hasnt thought this through.
He has. What he is essentially promising in the event of a Leave vote is a general election.
You really think that is within his powers from the backbenches?
Problem is, even if Boris or someone from the Tory hard-right seizes control, they'll still have to rely on the Tory moderates to get their emergency budget through. And Labour won't support it no matter what. The Tories will not want a general election. I suspect Cameron, Osborne, Boris and Gove will come to an agreement on the thrust of the emergency budget, around which both Tory Leavers and Remainers can unite.
Why would there be an emergency budget. You just schedule things for the Autumn statement...
Because the entirety of the government's economic policy is currently predicated on EU membership. I suppose the government could wait six months before addressing the new circumstances, but that might look a touch casual. After Brexit, everything changes.
Well the last two days have now made it clear that the eurosceptics care about one thing, and one thing only – leaving the EU. Nothing else matters to them.
Yesterday we witnessed their willing negative equity on millions, unemployment for further millions, Xpts off GDP, dwindling pension funds and market chaos.
Today we see that a £30bn budgetary black hole should be allowed to fester, as a price worth paying so they can ride their sovereignty hobby horse.
At least we now have it clear.
come on that's ridiculous. Of course leavers care about the economy, they either just don't see it as the most important factor or they don't believe the somewhat far fetched doom mongering. I've largely supported Osborne's decisions over the years apart from 1 or 2 U-turns but can you honestly say today's miscalculation fills you with much confidence in the man who is tasked with running the economy?
John McDonnell confirms Labour would vote against Osborne's budget. Osborne really is an idiot.
Was waiting for this and glad Labour have come out against it. Osborne hasnt thought this through.
He has. What he is essentially promising in the event of a Leave vote is a general election.
You really think that is within his powers from the backbenches?
Problem is, even if Boris or someone from the Tory hard-right seizes control, they'll still have to rely on the Tory moderates to get their emergency budget through. And Labour won't support it no matter what. The Tories will not want a general election. I suspect Cameron, Osborne, Boris and Gove will come to an agreement on the thrust of the emergency budget, around which both Tory Leavers and Remainers can unite.
Why would there be an emergency budget. You just schedule things for the Autumn statement...
Because the entirety of the government's economic policy is currently predicated on EU membership. I suppose the government could wait six months before addressing the new circumstances, but that might look a touch casual. After Brexit, everything changes.
Forgive this southern jessie but why would Sunderland vote leave? I thought that city's lifeblood was Nissan. Why will they back Leave when the car industry almost went down the pan in this country in the not so distant past. Could someone please do a voxpox on the factory floor as the skilled workers will swing this result.
6700 people work at Nissan Sunderland. Sunderland has about 150,000 voters.
I think nunu makes a point though; Sunderland could have a result 2-4% better for Remain than we might expect from its raw demographics and GE result. So, a 50:50 result for Remain there might just reflect Nissan, rather than a great overall night for Remain.
Yes that's fair enough. I would be nervous about jumping to any conclusions until quite a lot of results were in, too many local effects pushing the result one way or the other. One might expect Port Talbot to go considerably the other way for example.
I also see that VoteLeave have belatedly started thinking about what Leave might look like. It's a curious suggestion they are making: they seem to be suggesting that the period of financial, market and business uncertainty should be extended, by not invoking Article 50 for a considerable time. This suggests that they don't understand what the problem will be - indeed some of them even make the ludicrous claim that 'in the event of a Leave result, nothing will change on June 24th because we'll stil be in the EU'. Well, yes, we will still be in the EU, and nothing will immediately change in terms of rules, regulations, customs procedures, and freedom of movement, but everything will change in terms of business confidence, investment, company behaviour, and even consumer behaviour.
Nonsense, the period of uncertainty is NOW. As soon as we get a result, everyone can start making plans again.
I think that's optimistic. Our camp contains two competing ideologies: one (mine) wishes to Leave the EU because we want to open our economy up to the world; the other (Sandy's, for example) wishes to Leave so we can close our economy. The former group wants to sign an FTA group with China, while the latter group sees Leave as an opportunity to impose tariffs on Chinese steel to protect Port Talbot.
There needs to be a fight, maybe a General Election, to decide which of these two visions will be the one that prevails.
Yes. Leave is a coalition of people who want the UK to become Singapore and people who wish the UK still ran Singapore. It begins to fracture the day after a Leave vote wins.
I also see that VoteLeave have belatedly started thinking about what Leave might look like. It's a curious suggestion they are making: they seem to be suggesting that the period of financial, market and business uncertainty should be extended, by not invoking Article 50 for a considerable time. This suggests that they don't understand what the problem will be - indeed some of them even make the ludicrous claim that 'in the event of a Leave result, nothing will change on June 24th because we'll stil be in the EU'. Well, yes, we will still be in the EU, and nothing will immediately change in terms of rules, regulations, customs procedures, and freedom of movement, but everything will change in terms of business confidence, investment, company behaviour, and even consumer behaviour.
Nonsense, the period of uncertainty is NOW. As soon as we get a result, everyone can start making plans again.
I think that's optimistic. Our camp contains two competing ideologies: one (mine) wishes to Leave the EU because we want to open our economy up to the world; the other (Sandy's, for example) wishes to Leave so we can close our economy. The former group wants to sign an FTA group with China, while the latter group sees Leave as an opportunity to impose tariffs on Chinese steel to protect Port Talbot.
There needs to be a fight, maybe a General Election, to decide which of these two visions will be the one that prevails.
Yes. Leave is a coalition of people who want the UK to become Singapore and people who wish the UK still ran Singapore. It begins to fracture the day after a Leave vote wins.
The UK will end up like Singapore in the days when the UK did run it.
Most of the other developed nations around the world are in the EU.
BOLLOCKS.
The IMF calls 39 economies 'advanced'.....25 of them are in the EU, and some of the others (Hong Kong, Singapore, San Marino, Macau are 'City States' and one (Puerto Rico) effectively part of another advanced economy, the US.....so 25 out of 34 ain't bad.....
It is a completely arbitrary statistic when no two organisations can even agree on a common definition of what developed means or where to draw the line, and it invariably takes a western and capitalist definition.
It was Casino_Royale who initially claimed that
"No, they mean the UK becoming a fully self-governing liberal democracy again, just like most other developed nations around the world."
Perhaps you'd better ask him which criteria for a developed nation he is using.
The World Bank lists 80 high income countries.
If that's the criterion you're using for a "developed nation", your contention that most developed countries aren't in the EU is trivial and meaningless, given that the EU has only 28 members.
I also see that VoteLeave have belatedly started thinking about what Leave might look like. It's a curious suggestion they are making: they seem to be suggesting that the period of financial, market and business uncertainty should be extended, by not invoking Article 50 for a considerable time. This suggests that they don't understand what the problem will be - indeed some of them even make the ludicrous claim that 'in the event of a Leave result, nothing will change on June 24th because we'll stil be in the EU'. Well, yes, we will still be in the EU, and nothing will immediately change in terms of rules, regulations, customs procedures, and freedom of movement, but everything will change in terms of business confidence, investment, company behaviour, and even consumer behaviour.
Nonsense, the period of uncertainty is NOW. As soon as we get a result, everyone can start making plans again.
I think that's optimistic. Our camp contains two competing ideologies: one (mine) wishes to Leave the EU because we want to open our economy up to the world; the other (Sandy's, for example) wishes to Leave so we can close our economy. The former group wants to sign an FTA group with China, while the latter group sees Leave as an opportunity to impose tariffs on Chinese steel to protect Port Talbot.
There needs to be a fight, maybe a General Election, to decide which of these two visions will be the one that prevails.
Yes. Leave is a coalition of people who want the UK to become Singapore and people who wish the UK still ran Singapore. It begins to fracture the day after a Leave vote wins.
The UK will end up like Singapore in the days when the UK did run it.
John McDonnell confirms Labour would vote against Osborne's budget. Osborne really is an idiot.
Was waiting for this and glad Labour have come out against it. Osborne hasnt thought this through.
He has. What he is essentially promising in the event of a Leave vote is a general election.
You really think that is within his powers from the backbenches?
Problem is, even if Boris or someone from the Tory hard-right seizes control, they'll still have to rely on the Tory moderates to get their emergency budget through. And Labour won't support it no matter what. The Tories will not want a general election. I suspect Cameron, Osborne, Boris and Gove will come to an agreement on the thrust of the emergency budget, around which both Tory Leavers and Remainers can unite.
You think the Tory moderates are going to rally to Osborne's backbench flag? I'm not seeing it...
Treasury saying that decline in public finance due to Brexit would be "largely structural" and could not be grown out of.
The Treasury try and tell us that a figure like GDP/Household based on 2030 GDP and 2015 households is a meaningful and valid figure to base a decision upon. A period of silence and reflection from the Treasury would benefit all.
The fact is that if it is vital to eliminate the deficit by 2020, and by God how many times have we been told that it is, government fiscal policy will have to be recalibrated after a Leave vote, especially if leaving does result in less government income. The only way for Tory Leavers to get round that is to admit that the deficit reduction targets they signed up to and vocally advocated were arbitrary and unnecessary.
So, which is it Leavers? Do we have to eliminate the deficit by 2020 or don't we?
I also see that VoteLeave have belatedly started thinking about what Leave might look like. It's a curious suggestion they are making: they seem to be suggesting that the period of financial, market and business uncertainty should be extended, by not invoking Article 50 for a considerable time. This suggests that they don't understand what the problem will be - indeed some of them even make the ludicrous claim that 'in the event of a Leave result, nothing will change on June 24th because we'll stil be in the EU'. Well, yes, we will still be in the EU, and nothing will immediately change in terms of rules, regulations, customs procedures, and freedom of movement, but everything will change in terms of business confidence, investment, company behaviour, and even consumer behaviour.
Nonsense, the period of uncertainty is NOW. As soon as we get a result, everyone can start making plans again.
I think that's optimistic. Our camp contains two competing ideologies: one (mine) wishes to Leave the EU because we want to open our economy up to the world; the other (Sandy's, for example) wishes to Leave so we can close our economy. The former group wants to sign an FTA group with China, while the latter group sees Leave as an opportunity to impose tariffs on Chinese steel to protect Port Talbot.
There needs to be a fight, maybe a General Election, to decide which of these two visions will be the one that prevails.
Your camp can only win that fight by teaming up with the Remain rump who will go for as little change as possible. Maybe an EEA compromise, designed to give nobody what they want - neither participation in the EU nor control over our own affairs.
This referendum is turning out to be a monster of a mess, regardless of the result.
I also see that VoteLeave have belatedly started thinking about what Leave might look like. It's a curious suggestion they are making: they seem to be suggesting that the period of financial, market and business uncertainty should be extended, by not invoking Article 50 for a considerable time. This suggests that they don't understand what the problem will be - indeed some of them even make the ludicrous claim that 'in the event of a Leave result, nothing will change on June 24th because we'll stil be in the EU'. Well, yes, we will still be in the EU, and nothing will immediately change in terms of rules, regulations, customs procedures, and freedom of movement, but everything will change in terms of business confidence, investment, company behaviour, and even consumer behaviour.
Nonsense, the period of uncertainty is NOW. As soon as we get a result, everyone can start making plans again.
I think that's optimistic. Our camp contains two competing ideologies: one (mine) wishes to Leave the EU because we want to open our economy up to the world; the other (Sandy's, for example) wishes to Leave so we can close our economy. The former group wants to sign an FTA group with China, while the latter group sees Leave as an opportunity to impose tariffs on Chinese steel to protect Port Talbot.
There needs to be a fight, maybe a General Election, to decide which of these two visions will be the one that prevails.
Yes. Leave is a coalition of people who want the UK to become Singapore and people who wish the UK still ran Singapore. It begins to fracture the day after a Leave vote wins.
The UK will end up like Singapore in the days when the UK did run it.
Perhaps you'd better ask him which criteria for a developed nation he is using.
The World Bank lists 80 high income countries.
You must be having a laugh!
Here they are:
Andorra Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Aruba Australia Austria Bahamas, The Bahrain Barbados Belgium Bermuda Brunei Darussalam Canada Cayman Islands Channel Islands Chile Croatia Curaçao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Equatorial Guinea Estonia Faroe Islands Finland France French Polynesia Germany Greece Greenland Guam Hong Kong SAR, China Hungary Iceland Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Japan Korea, Rep. Kuwait Latvia Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao SAR, China Malta Monaco Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Russian Federation San Marino Saudi Arabia Seychelles Singapore Sint Maarten (Dutch part) Slovak Republic Slovenia Spain St. Kitts and Nevis St. Martin (French part) Sweden Switzerland Taiwan, China Trinidad and Tobago Turks and Caicos Islands United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Venezuela Virgin Islands (U.S.)
So, which is it Leavers? Do we have to eliminate the deficit by 2020 or don't we?
It won't be eliminated even if we Remain, Osbrown's plan is based on savings he wont get through parliament, and on the fanciful idea that there won't be any sort of economic downturn in the next three and a half years.
The politics of the aftermath is this. Whoever loses will be vindicated. Mass immigration will continue if we Remain. They'll be some sort of short and medium term economic shock if we Leave.
Mass immigration will continue if we Leave also.
and economic shocks if we Remain also, like when Greece or Italy goes t*ts up
Leavers don't care about the economy. They care about sovereignty and immigration.
That isn't true. Don't be silly.
He's actually correct to an extent.
61% of all voters are prepared to tolerate an economic slowdown to sort the migrant situation out.
The people who appear least willing are based in the south, are ABs, university educated and they want to protect their incomes and pensions.
The fact is that if it is vital to eliminate the deficit by 2020, and by God how many times have we been told that it is, government fiscal policy will have to be recalibrated after a Leave vote, especially if leaving does result in less government income. The only way for Tory Leavers to get round that is to admit that the deficit reduction targets they signed up to and vocally advocated were arbitrary and unnecessary.
So, which is it Leavers? Do we have to eliminate the deficit by 2020 or don't we?
Osborne has said eliminating the deficit by 2015 was vital, then 2017, then 2018 and now 2020. I think it is important to balance the budget, clearly the chancellor doesn't, this is why people can see through this hollow attempt at making people fear tax rises or cuts.
I see two people about to receive their historical fate....
The odd thing is, despite them both being for Remain, and despite me being a Tory voter for 30 years and sometime Tory member, the one of those that feels most in need of a good punch isn't the Labour man.
John McDonnell confirms Labour would vote against Osborne's budget. Osborne really is an idiot.
Was waiting for this and glad Labour have come out against it. Osborne hasnt thought this through.
He has. What he is essentially promising in the event of a Leave vote is a general election.
You really think that is within his powers from the backbenches?
Problem is, even if Boris or someone from the Tory hard-right seizes control, they'll still have to rely on the Tory moderates to get their emergency budget through. And Labour won't support it no matter what. The Tories will not want a general election. I suspect Cameron, Osborne, Boris and Gove will come to an agreement on the thrust of the emergency budget, around which both Tory Leavers and Remainers can unite.
Why would there be an emergency budget. You just schedule things for the Autumn statement...
Because the entirety of the government's economic policy is currently predicated on EU membership. I suppose the government could wait six months before addressing the new circumstances, but that might look a touch casual. After Brexit, everything changes.
But Brexit occurs within 2 years of Article 50 being invoked. It would be highly irresponsible to overreact immediately. A properly thought through Autumn Statement would make sense.
Why is anyone surprised by Osborne's point on the public finances? If the economy is smaller as a result of Brexit, which pretty much every informed observer (including most of those who think Brexit would be good in the long term) agrees will be the case for at least a couple of years, then the public finances will be hit. I suppose you could accuse him of stating the obvious.
No, he's more like the commander of a retreating army who wants to destroy everything, rather than giving his opponents the satisfaction of taking it intact.
Why is anyone surprised by Osborne's point on the public finances? If the economy is smaller as a result of Brexit, which pretty much every informed observer (including most of those who think Brexit would be good in the long term) agrees will be the case for at least a couple of years, then the public finances will be hit. I suppose you could accuse him of stating the obvious.
Well this is it. Yet for some reason Leave don't want to talk about it.
Richard – you missed yesterday's fun on here, where we witnessed Leavers actively wishing negative equity on millions of people, as a price worth paying. It really was quite something.
The fact is that if it is vital to eliminate the deficit by 2020, and by God how many times have we been told that it is, government fiscal policy will have to be recalibrated after a Leave vote, especially if leaving does result in less government income. The only way for Tory Leavers to get round that is to admit that the deficit reduction targets they signed up to and vocally advocated were arbitrary and unnecessary.
So, which is it Leavers? Do we have to eliminate the deficit by 2020 or don't we?
We do. Structurally the finances will be better if we Leave as we will eliminate our net payments to the EU. So it all comes down to growth from there.
The politics of the aftermath is this. Whoever loses will be vindicated. Mass immigration will continue if we Remain. They'll be some sort of short and medium term economic shock if we Leave.
Mass immigration will continue if we Leave also.
and economic shocks if we Remain also, like when Greece or Italy goes t*ts up
Leavers don't care about the economy. They care about sovereignty and immigration.
That isn't true. Don't be silly.
He's actually correct to an extent.
61% of all voters are prepared to tolerate an economic slowdown to sort the migrant situation out.
The people who appear least willing are based in the south, are ABs, university educated and they want to protect their incomes and pensions.
They are the 'I'm alright, Jacques' voters.
"61% of all voters are prepared to tolerate an economic slowdown to sort the migrant situation out."
I just don't believe this. In the abstract yes, maybe, as a hypothetical question. But when the shutters start coming down and people start getting the redundancy notices, and being told their pension scheme has gone into administration, then they'll be singing a different tune.
Richard – you missed yesterday's fun on here, where we witnessed Leavers actively wishing negative equity on millions of people, as a price worth paying. It really was quite something.
Not that you would have been able to see those alleged posts for all the squawking from Remainers about the latest polling.
The fact is that if it is vital to eliminate the deficit by 2020, and by God how many times have we been told that it is, government fiscal policy will have to be recalibrated after a Leave vote, especially if leaving does result in less government income. The only way for Tory Leavers to get round that is to admit that the deficit reduction targets they signed up to and vocally advocated were arbitrary and unnecessary.
So, which is it Leavers? Do we have to eliminate the deficit by 2020 or don't we?
We do. Structurally the finances will be better if we Leave as we will eliminate our net payments to the EU. So it all comes down to growth from there.
The stuff of sheer fantasy. This is what we are dealing with.
So, which is it Leavers? Do we have to eliminate the deficit by 2020 or don't we?
It won't be eliminated even if we Remain, Osbrown's plan is based on savings he wont get through parliament, and on the fanciful idea that there won't be any sort of economic downturn in the next three and a half years.
So,. that's a No then and an admission that the Tories were not forced into the strategy they all supported out of economic necessity, but instead chose to impose the levels of austerity they have for ideological reasons. And Tory Leavers claim to care about ordinary working people who have borne the brunt of that austerity. :-D
The politics of the aftermath is this. Whoever loses will be vindicated. Mass immigration will continue if we Remain. They'll be some sort of short and medium term economic shock if we Leave.
Mass immigration will continue if we Leave also.
and economic shocks if we Remain also, like when Greece or Italy goes t*ts up
Leavers don't care about the economy. They care about sovereignty and immigration.
That isn't true. Don't be silly.
He's actually correct to an extent.
61% of all voters are prepared to tolerate an economic slowdown to sort the migrant situation out.
The people who appear least willing are based in the south, are ABs, university educated and they want to protect their incomes and pensions.
They are the 'I'm alright, Jacques' voters.
"61% of all voters are prepared to tolerate an economic slowdown to sort the migrant situation out."
I just don't believe this. In the abstract yes, maybe, as a hypothetical question. But when the shutters start coming down and people start getting the redundancy notices, and being told their pension scheme has gone into administration, then they'll be singing a different tune.
The politics of the aftermath is this. Whoever loses will be vindicated. Mass immigration will continue if we Remain. They'll be some sort of short and medium term economic shock if we Leave.
Mass immigration will continue if we Leave also.
and economic shocks if we Remain also, like when Greece or Italy goes t*ts up
Leavers don't care about the economy. They care about sovereignty and immigration.
That isn't true. Don't be silly.
He's actually correct to an extent.
61% of all voters are prepared to tolerate an economic slowdown to sort the migrant situation out.
The people who appear least willing are based in the south, are ABs, university educated and they want to protect their incomes and pensions.
They are the 'I'm alright, Jacques' voters.
It is different to think the short-term economic risks justify the long-term economic and democratic gains than it is to say the Leavers 'don't care' about the economy.
I don't know a single Leaver who doesn't care about the economy.
The fact is that if it is vital to eliminate the deficit by 2020, and by God how many times have we been told that it is, government fiscal policy will have to be recalibrated after a Leave vote, especially if leaving does result in less government income. The only way for Tory Leavers to get round that is to admit that the deficit reduction targets they signed up to and vocally advocated were arbitrary and unnecessary.
So, which is it Leavers? Do we have to eliminate the deficit by 2020 or don't we?
We do. Structurally the finances will be better if we Leave as we will eliminate our net payments to the EU. So it all comes down to growth from there.
The stuff of sheer fantasy. This is what we are dealing with.
The politics of the aftermath is this. Whoever loses will be vindicated. Mass immigration will continue if we Remain. They'll be some sort of short and medium term economic shock if we Leave.
Mass immigration will continue if we Leave also.
and economic shocks if we Remain also, like when Greece or Italy goes t*ts up
Leavers don't care about the economy. They care about sovereignty and immigration.
That isn't true. Don't be silly.
He's actually correct to an extent.
61% of all voters are prepared to tolerate an economic slowdown to sort the migrant situation out.
The people who appear least willing are based in the south, are ABs, university educated and they want to protect their incomes and pensions.
They are the 'I'm alright, Jacques' voters.
"61% of all voters are prepared to tolerate an economic slowdown to sort the migrant situation out."
I just don't believe this. In the abstract yes, maybe, as a hypothetical question. But when the shutters start coming down and people start getting the redundancy notices, and being told their pension scheme has gone into administration, then they'll be singing a different tune.
Selective quoting of the polling going on.
In a contradictory finding, three in five Brits – 61% – say that they would be willing to accept a short term economic slowdown in order to see EU immigration controls tightened, which Brexit would allow.
But a significant majority of more than two thirds – 68% – at the same time insist they are not willing to lose any cash at all personally to reduce the number of migrants coming in from Europe.
I also see that VoteLeave have belatedly started thinking about what Leave might look like.
Is that why LEAVE have overtaken REMAIN in the polls because they have not been doing what you want?
No, Leave are doing better than was expected a few months ago for three reasons: 1. A late switch to exploitation of immigration as the core issue (which I've always said was Leave's strongest argument) 2. General anti-Establishment ranting (cf Donald Trump) 3. The ambivalence of Labour under Corbyn on the issue. None of that alters the fact that, in the event of a Leave result, there's no coherent plan for what to do next.
How about a decline in the number of voters that trust what Cameron and Osborne say to them - along with the rest of the "elite", that they have paraded before us and even some of these "elite" such as Obama threatened us?
That Mr Nabavi is the single biggest reason why REMAIN has been declining and is now getting a deaf ear turned to whatever it says.
After all is said, who on earth at REMAIN puts in front of the voters a person rated as a Leader by 2 PERCENT of the voters?
PS If you had acknowledged this major mistake by REMAIN in the past, I apologise in advance for having a go at you. I must have just overlooked it.
The fact is that if it is vital to eliminate the deficit by 2020, and by God how many times have we been told that it is, government fiscal policy will have to be recalibrated after a Leave vote, especially if leaving does result in less government income. The only way for Tory Leavers to get round that is to admit that the deficit reduction targets they signed up to and vocally advocated were arbitrary and unnecessary.
So, which is it Leavers? Do we have to eliminate the deficit by 2020 or don't we?
We do. Structurally the finances will be better if we Leave as we will eliminate our net payments to the EU. So it all comes down to growth from there.
Additionally we wouldn't be importing low wage immigration which lowers the per capita GDP. The reason the welfare bill hasn't come down as quickly as expected (it has in fact increased) is because of low paid migrants receiving tax credits and housing benefit.
The politics of the aftermath is this. Whoever loses will be vindicated. Mass immigration will continue if we Remain. They'll be some sort of short and medium term economic shock if we Leave.
Mass immigration will continue if we Leave also.
and economic shocks if we Remain also, like when Greece or Italy goes t*ts up
Leavers don't care about the economy. They care about sovereignty and immigration.
That isn't true. Don't be silly.
Err - the thrust of their campaign is to downgrade the importance of the economy compared to 'sovereingty' - several prominent posters have said as much on here often.
The politics of the aftermath is this. Whoever loses will be vindicated. Mass immigration will continue if we Remain. They'll be some sort of short and medium term economic shock if we Leave.
Mass immigration will continue if we Leave also.
and economic shocks if we Remain also, like when Greece or Italy goes t*ts up
Leavers don't care about the economy. They care about sovereignty and immigration.
That isn't true. Don't be silly.
They have also mentioned, some explicitly, the price worth paying of an economic shock to achieve sovereignty. So in the scheme of things it is not so important.
Those rebel Cons MPs had better get a move on because Dave has told us that he will invoke pretty quickly.
Plus not sure how some of the more strident Leavers (perhaps some on here?) would react to a Leave vote followed by what many would suspect would be some kind of backroom deal to keep us in.
My money is on a prompt invocation.
If he intends to resign then it would be utterly inappropriate for him to do so, and I don't believe he would. That is properly a decision of the incoming PM.
If he intends to stay and fight (no comment on how feasible that is) then he can make the decision.
I doubt he will invoke Article 50 immediately. But of course he is saying today that he will, because it increases the perceived risk. Basically he's lying to the people.
John McDonnell confirms Labour would vote against Osborne's budget. Osborne really is an idiot.
Was waiting for this and glad Labour have come out against it. Osborne hasnt thought this through.
He has. What he is essentially promising in the event of a Leave vote is a general election.
You really think that is within his powers from the backbenches?
Problem is, even if Boris or someone from the Tory hard-right seizes control, they'll still have to rely on the Tory moderates to get their emergency budget through. And Labour won't support it no matter what. The Tories will not want a general election. I suspect Cameron, Osborne, Boris and Gove will come to an agreement on the thrust of the emergency budget, around which both Tory Leavers and Remainers can unite.
Why would there be an emergency budget. You just schedule things for the Autumn statement...
Because the entirety of the government's economic policy is currently predicated on EU membership. I suppose the government could wait six months before addressing the new circumstances, but that might look a touch casual. After Brexit, everything changes.
Given that's its a budget for 2019-20. That stuff should be announced in the April 2018 budget - so nothing to see here...
It's actually a shame I'm not at that other office today. Osbourne would have some interesting questions to answer....
Why is anyone surprised by Osborne's point on the public finances? If the economy is smaller as a result of Brexit, which pretty much every informed observer (including most of those who think Brexit would be good in the long term) agrees will be the case for at least a couple of years, then the public finances will be hit. I suppose you could accuse him of stating the obvious.
Irrespective of if you are a remainer or leaver, he is throwing the Tory party under the bus with this action. Labour would be fools to not recite for ever more that as soon as the going got tough the first instinct of a Tory Chancellor was to cut the NHS and Education and raise taxes on working people. He threw away your detox efforts in one idiotic statement, and for nothing, because he would never get that budget through the commons anyway.
No, Leave are doing better than was expected a few months ago for three reasons:
1. A late switch to exploitation of immigration as the core issue (which I've always said was Leave's strongest argument)
2. General anti-Establishment ranting (cf Donald Trump)
3. The ambivalence of Labour under Corbyn on the issue.
None of that alters the fact that, in the event of a Leave result, there's no coherent plan for what to do next.
Before a British general election, senior civil servants meet with leading figures in non-governmental parties to discuss certain aspects of implementing their policies if they form the next government.
Have the Treasury and other civil servants, and bods from the Bank of England, met with bods from the Commission, the European Central Bank, etc., to discuss frameworks - and even contingencies - following a vote for Brexit?
Forgive this southern jessie but why would Sunderland vote leave? I thought that city's lifeblood was Nissan. Why will they back Leave when the car industry almost went down the pan in this country in the not so distant past. Could someone please do a voxpox on the factory floor as the skilled workers will swing this result.
6700 people work at Nissan Sunderland. Sunderland has about 150,000 voters.
All will have extended family/friend networks - with thousands more in retail and other related jobs - nissan is really big in that part of the world.
Comments
All that, though, is nothing compared with the complete political (and therefore economic) chaos which a Leave result would provoke on June 24th. Fasten your seatbelts.
For many people, the ideal result would be Remain 50.01%, Leave 49.99%.
There needs to be a fight, maybe a General Election, to decide which of these two visions will be the one that prevails.
But Nissan doesn't employ everyone and for others it probably wouldn't impact their decision...
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/06/brexit-facts-not-fear/
Yesterday we witnessed their willing negative equity on millions, unemployment for further millions, Xpts off GDP, dwindling pension funds and market chaos.
Today we see that a £30bn budgetary black hole should be allowed to fester, as a price worth paying so they can ride their sovereignty hobby horse.
At least we now have it clear.
As mentioned, opponents are likely not to be known until Wednesday night, due to qualifying third places not being decided until all results are in. Games to be played Saturday unless stated:
ENGLAND:
15% - None / England fail to qualify from group
9% - Romania, Portugal (Mon)
8% - Turkey, Czech Republic, Iceland (Mon), Hungary (Mon)
7% - Germany (almost certainly Sun)
6% - Switzerland, Albania
5% - Austria (Mon)
4% - Croatia
3% - Poland (Sat/Sun)
2% - Spain (Sat/Sun)
1% - Ukraine, Northern Ireland
(Bar)
WALES (DAYS SAME AS ENGLAND):
19% - Germany
17% - None / Wales fails to qualify
8% - Portugal, Iceland
7% - Hungary
6% - Romania
5% - Turkey, Czech Republic, Austria, Poland
4% - Switzerland, Croatia
3% - Albania
2% - Spain
1% - Ukraine, Northern Ireland
(Bar)
NORTHERN IRELAND:
84% - Fail to qualify
10% - France (Sun)
3% - Switzerland (Sun)
1% - Romania (Sun), England, Wales
(Bar) Russia
Expecting the likely options to somewhat narrow after the second game, so will update again Sunday / Monday.
How you can have the front to say that on the day that Dave and George have thrown their party under a bus in a last ditch attempt to the a remain result, demonstrating that they dont care about anything else than remaining. The same Dave that told us last November that there would be no real problem if we left.
I've largely supported Osborne's decisions over the years apart from 1 or 2 U-turns but can you honestly say today's miscalculation fills you with much confidence in the man who is tasked with running the economy?
Worth recalling Osborne's first Budget was an 'emergency' one in 2010.
Osborne says no change in free movement beyond what is already announced.
Some senior Labour people saying that yes there should be.
http://order-order.com/2016/06/15/can-osborne-reform-free-movement-the-short-answer-is-no/
1. A late switch to exploitation of immigration as the core issue (which I've always said was Leave's strongest argument)
2. General anti-Establishment ranting (cf Donald Trump)
3. The ambivalence of Labour under Corbyn on the issue.
None of that alters the fact that, in the event of a Leave result, there's no coherent plan for what to do next.
It's been a year and a month since the General Election, and the knives are being sharpened.
So, which is it Leavers? Do we have to eliminate the deficit by 2020 or don't we?
Here they are:
Andorra
Antigua and Barbuda
Argentina
Aruba
Australia
Austria
Bahamas, The
Bahrain
Barbados
Belgium
Bermuda
Brunei Darussalam
Canada
Cayman Islands
Channel Islands
Chile
Croatia
Curaçao
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Equatorial Guinea
Estonia
Faroe Islands
Finland
France
French Polynesia
Germany
Greece
Greenland
Guam
Hong Kong SAR, China
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Isle of Man
Israel
Italy
Japan
Korea, Rep.
Kuwait
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Macao SAR, China
Malta
Monaco
Netherlands
New Caledonia
New Zealand
Northern Mariana Islands
Norway
Oman
Poland
Portugal
Puerto Rico
Qatar
Russian Federation
San Marino
Saudi Arabia
Seychelles
Singapore
Sint Maarten (Dutch part)
Slovak Republic
Slovenia
Spain
St. Kitts and Nevis
St. Martin (French part)
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan, China
Trinidad and Tobago
Turks and Caicos Islands
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
United States
Uruguay
Venezuela
Virgin Islands (U.S.)
Someone's rattled.
61% of all voters are prepared to tolerate an economic slowdown to sort the migrant situation out.
The people who appear least willing are based in the south, are ABs, university educated and they want to protect their incomes and pensions.
They are the 'I'm alright, Jacques' voters.
Richard – you missed yesterday's fun on here, where we witnessed Leavers actively wishing negative equity on millions of people, as a price worth paying. It really was quite something.
Boris is Caligula, only with more shagging
I just don't believe this. In the abstract yes, maybe, as a hypothetical question. But when the shutters start coming down and people start getting the redundancy notices, and being told their pension scheme has gone into administration, then they'll be singing a different tune.
I don't know a single Leaver who doesn't care about the economy.
In a contradictory finding, three in five Brits – 61% – say that they would be willing to accept a short term economic slowdown in order to see EU immigration controls tightened, which Brexit would allow.
But a significant majority of more than two thirds – 68% – at the same time insist they are not willing to lose any cash at all personally to reduce the number of migrants coming in from Europe.
That Mr Nabavi is the single biggest reason why REMAIN has been declining and is now getting a deaf ear turned to whatever it says.
After all is said, who on earth at REMAIN puts in front of the voters a person rated as a Leader by 2 PERCENT of the voters?
PS If you had acknowledged this major mistake by REMAIN in the past, I apologise in advance for having a go at you. I must have just overlooked it.
If he intends to stay and fight (no comment on how feasible that is) then he can make the decision.
I doubt he will invoke Article 50 immediately. But of course he is saying today that he will, because it increases the perceived risk. Basically he's lying to the people.
It's actually a shame I'm not at that other office today. Osbourne would have some interesting questions to answer....
Have the Treasury and other civil servants, and bods from the Bank of England, met with bods from the Commission, the European Central Bank, etc., to discuss frameworks - and even contingencies - following a vote for Brexit?
Surely they must have?
A lot of money's there to be made.