Very good piece Cycle Free. I love your point 5 on Europe- clever and insightful and rings true.
But your point 3- Britain joined on a point of weakness- that is so true. We were the sick man of Europe as you say. I cannot help but think of the Jamie Vardy dilemma today- for Vardy to leave Leicester for Arsenal, there is so much that could go wrong for him.
I am trying to download a piece of music (topical for the referendum next week ) and i have downloaded it from the App store and cannot set it as a ringtone for my 5S can anyone help??
From what is being sometimes written, (seriously a picture of De Gaulle of all failed personalities), people would believe Europe is a political and economic success !! Having lived in two and worked in many European countries, also speaking a European language I can confirm that Europe is a seriously failing, poorly run, undemocratic organisation and an continuing economic disaster which only remains competetive by blocking out more competitive countries and products, including from poorer Africa and South America. I am afraid that is time to Leave for democratic, economic and political and future generational reasons. As someone phrased it, Europe is the Titanic and we should stay at the quay.
Yet Europe still has 18% of global GDP for only 7% of global population
As Mrs Merkel stated, the EU has 7% of the world's people, generates 18% of the world's wealth and contrives to spend half of the world's welfare. The UK proportion is 1% of the world's people, 4% of it's wealth and 7% of its welfare.
We're impossibly wealthy. Which is why I always wonder at the predictions of economic calamity. We're certainly going to decline in relative terms - last forecast I read had us at global #11 in 2050, just behind Germany.
In terms of wealth, all the EU9 are going to do well whatever happens. We're just squabbling over the gradient of the trend lines.
Of all the reasons to leave the EU, the economic argument is the weakest one. It's more about strategic interests. Perhaps, as Cyclefree puts it so eloquently, our leadership should be selling the vision of a true USE, instead of pretending it's not going to happen.
Wealth built on debt is not wealth at all.
Well, while I'll join you in quaking in my boots at the size of UK, European and even global debt levels, it's worth remembering that (according to the ONS) the UK has around £8 trillion in assets. We owe a lot, but we own a lot. That would satisfy Mr. Macawber I think.
Doesn't it depend how liquid those assets are - aren't quite a lot people's homes?
About half.
So - not very liquid at all.
I'm not taking your point. We're not a farm that the bank is foreclosing on. Further, one of London's problems is that new build property is being sold to a wealthy global audience rather than the locals.
While you can't easily ship properties overseas, and they're certainly not fungible, if push came to shove, we could always flog the Houses of Parliament to some foreign interest and put the proceeds towards the national debt .
In other news, my wife has been targeted by a "remain" leaflet, whereas I have had a Leave one!
The Leave one is 100% honest about the £350M per week, saying it's the bill, and that we get less than half back.
It also says that many people disagree on the whole issue, and we should all make up our own minds. Which is unarguable and a surprisingly calm, almost neutral comment in a pro-Leave leaflet.
Mr. Felix/Mr. Observer, be careful what you wish for.
Might have it incredibly close, legal challenges, massive political bickering etc etc.
Mr. Felix (2), Mr. 1000 had an intriguing suggestion for making immigrants pay a certain sum (to offset potential NHS usage and suchlike). It'd deter those coming over for low paid jobs whilst allowing the well-paid to come relatively easily.
Mr. Gin, a problem with using betting markets is that lots of wealthy chaps are betting with their hearts, skewing the markets (although that has created some great value in the past).
F1: pondering potential bets. Bit of an odd duck, this one. The street circuit is half-Monaco, half-Monza. May be rather more interesting than I'd initially thought.
Mr. Gin, a problem with using betting markets is that lots of wealthy chaps are betting with their hearts, skewing the markets (although that has created some great value in the past).
F1: pondering potential bets. Bit of an odd duck, this one. The street circuit is half-Monaco, half-Monza. May be rather more interesting than I'd initially thought.
So apparently we have an "ultra-liberal" Europe at the moment according to this French minister...
Extraordinary. We are surely better out of a future Europe if it's going to go more and more socialist.
And as for being "like Guernsey" he can f*ck right off.
Does he honestly think this intervention will help Remain?! Knob
Macron is playing to a French gallery. Look to see President Macron in the '20s.
A moment's googling will show that the French are, at best, ambivalent about the UK remaining in the EU. They see us as an American catspaw, polluting the union with neo-liberal Anglo-American cant.
So, don't think of it as an intervention for Remain. He's certainly not out to help Cameron.
F1: be a while before I've finished the pre-race piece but I'll be tipping fewer than 17.5 finishers (ie 6 plus retirements out of 22 cars) at 1.57 [Ladbrokes]. Shorter odds than I usually go for but only 10/22 GP cars finished. There are also reliability issues for some cars.
Edited extra bit: apologies, that's 5 plus retirements.
F1: be a while before I've finished the pre-race piece but I'll be tipping fewer than 17.5 finishers (ie 6 plus retirements out of 22 cars) at 1.57 [Ladbrokes]. Shorter odds than I usually go for but only 10/22 GP cars finished. There are also reliability issues for some cars.
Edited extra bit: apologies, that's 5 plus retirements.
Those who say Turkey is nowhere near joining should think back. Had somebody said to you in 1990 that within 10 to 15 years the Eastern European states would have joined the EU and had free movement to and from the United Kingdom you'd have laughed....
You've chosen the wrong year 0 to make that point. In 1990 the Berlin wall had already come down and one of the key Eastern Block states entered the EC immediately on reunification. It was taken as read that they would join the EU and if anything, people would have been surprised that it took that long.
The observations, comments and insights provided on this site by Alastair, Cyclefree, TSE, David, Roger and others are so far ahead and so much more insightful than the superficial rubbish in the mainstream media as to be embarrassing. Whatever your viewpoint OGH has managed to present articulate pieces (and of course TSE's terrible puns) setting out relevant points and an intelligent context.
Thanks OGH, I really appreciate it. The referendum would not have been the same without it.
Extraordinary. We are surely better out of a future Europe if it's going to go more and more socialist.
Leaving Europe to escape socialism might not work out as planned. The main party of opposition is led by Marxists and as highlighted on the last thread, there are plenty of native Brits happy to chant about chucking the Tories in the sea.
Mr. Felix/Mr. Observer, be careful what you wish for.
Might have it incredibly close, legal challenges, massive political bickering etc etc.
Mr. Felix (2), Mr. 1000 had an intriguing suggestion for making immigrants pay a certain sum (to offset potential NHS usage and suchlike). It'd deter those coming over for low paid jobs whilst allowing the well-paid to come relatively easily.
A tax on immigrants is all very well but the hi-tech savvy well-off immigrant won't come here plus tax if he can go elsewhere for free. You're also assuming that post-Brexit the 'pull' to the UK will be as strong and forgetting that there could potentially be thousands of [ elderly and in poor health] ex-pats forced to return if the UK can't do bilateral deals on healthcare such as currently exist. I'm sorry but there is precious little in the post-Brexit UK to look forward to - that £350M we pay the UK or half after we cover the cost of what we get back - will be long gone before we've even formally left.
The observations, comments and insights provided on this site by Alastair, Cyclefree, TSE, David, Roger and others are so far ahead and so much more insightful than the superficial rubbish in the mainstream media as to be embarrassing. Whatever your viewpoint OGH has managed to present articulate pieces (and of course TSE's terrible puns) setting out relevant points and an intelligent context.
Thanks OGH, I really appreciate it. The referendum would not have been the same without it.
Extraordinary. We are surely better out of a future Europe if it's going to go more and more socialist.
Leaving Europe to escape socialism might not work out as planned. The main party of opposition is led by Marxists and as highlighted on the last thread, there are plenty of native Brits happy to chant about chucking the Tories in the sea.
Indeed - another of the post-Brexit fantasies on here is the perpetual right of centre government we're gonna get. I'd expect a Labour majority by 2020 once the Corbyn madness is gone and maybe even if it hasn't.
Mr. Gin, a problem with using betting markets is that lots of wealthy chaps are betting with their hearts, skewing the markets (although that has created some great value in the past).
Agreed people do seem to be betting with hearts over heads, however, we have seen a pattern during the campaign where ahead of polling being released either LEAVE or REMAIN strengthens in advance of the poll being released, depending on which side its good for.
In other news, my wife has been targeted by a "remain" leaflet, whereas I have had a Leave one!
The Leave one is 100% honest about the £350M per week, saying it's the bill, and that we get less than half back.
It also says that many people disagree on the whole issue, and we should all make up our own minds. Which is unarguable and a surprisingly calm, almost neutral comment in a pro-Leave leaflet.
TCTC still...
I had a targeted Remain leaflet this morning, have had them from both campaigns
Chin up. The next game is a dead rubber from an Italian point of view. The UEFA head to head rule means Italy win the group whatever happens. The Italians will play a second string who won't want to get injured or pick up yellow cards. They will be tough to break down but Ireland have done it before. I'm meeting mates in the pub and will be cheering you on. Good luck. #spiritof1994
Extraordinary. We are surely better out of a future Europe if it's going to go more and more socialist.
Leaving Europe to escape socialism might not work out as planned. The main party of opposition is led by Marxists and as highlighted on the last thread, there are plenty of native Brits happy to chant about chucking the Tories in the sea.
Indeed - another of the post-Brexit fantasies on here is the perpetual right of centre government we're gonna get. I'd expect a Labour majority by 2020 once the Corbyn madness is gone and maybe even if it hasn't.
You wouldn't have to work hard to persuade me to prohibit multi-term administrations. Based our experiences since the nineties, we might have done just as well to just swap 'em out every five years.
Just for the record, I do agree that the idea of a centre-right 1000 year reich is nonsense. After ten years any party is stale, out of touch and a shadow of its former self.
He wouldnt be able to under thebterms if the fixed term parliament act.
Did you read the article? There are ways round the FTPA.
Yes, by the Tories forcing through a vote of no confidence on themselves. Won't happen - it would turn them into a laughing stock and they'd be trounced at the polls.
Extraordinary. We are surely better out of a future Europe if it's going to go more and more socialist.
Leaving Europe to escape socialism might not work out as planned. The main party of opposition is led by Marxists and as highlighted on the last thread, there are plenty of native Brits happy to chant about chucking the Tories in the sea.
Indeed - another of the post-Brexit fantasies on here is the perpetual right of centre government we're gonna get. I'd expect a Labour majority by 2020 once the Corbyn madness is gone and maybe even if it hasn't.
Actually the point is not whether the government is right, left or centrist. The point is that we can elect it, hold it accountable and then get rid of it. Something we cannot do with our lawmakers in the EU.
Extraordinary. We are surely better out of a future Europe if it's going to go more and more socialist.
Leaving Europe to escape socialism might not work out as planned. The main party of opposition is led by Marxists and as highlighted on the last thread, there are plenty of native Brits happy to chant about chucking the Tories in the sea.
Indeed - another of the post-Brexit fantasies on here is the perpetual right of centre government we're gonna get. I'd expect a Labour majority by 2020 once the Corbyn madness is gone and maybe even if it hasn't.
We have to accept that one day, we'll have a left wing government.
Non EU citizens over here on work visas have to pay an annual 'NHS Surcharge' - even those working in the NHS. My Canadian girlfriend who works on the front line of the NHS has to pay it. Naturally, people in the diplomatic service or working for NATO are except, because obviously they're scrabbling around for money....
The observations, comments and insights provided on this site by Alastair, Cyclefree, TSE, David, Roger and others are so far ahead and so much more insightful than the superficial rubbish in the mainstream media as to be embarrassing. Whatever your viewpoint OGH has managed to present articulate pieces (and of course TSE's terrible puns) setting out relevant points and an intelligent context.
Thanks OGH, I really appreciate it. The referendum would not have been the same without it.
agreed PB gas really come into its own in a big way. Thank you to posters and thread writers alike
Extraordinary. We are surely better out of a future Europe if it's going to go more and more socialist.
Leaving Europe to escape socialism might not work out as planned. The main party of opposition is led by Marxists and as highlighted on the last thread, there are plenty of native Brits happy to chant about chucking the Tories in the sea.
Indeed - another of the post-Brexit fantasies on here is the perpetual right of centre government we're gonna get. I'd expect a Labour majority by 2020 once the Corbyn madness is gone and maybe even if it hasn't.
I vividly recall Remainers telling me that a Corbyn government was an impossibility and that whatever happened we would have a Tory government in 2020.
I remember asking whether Cameron's opt-outs, emergency brakes and vetoes were worth the paper they weren't written on in the hands of a future Labour PM also.
Extraordinary. We are surely better out of a future Europe if it's going to go more and more socialist.
Leaving Europe to escape socialism might not work out as planned. The main party of opposition is led by Marxists and as highlighted on the last thread, there are plenty of native Brits happy to chant about chucking the Tories in the sea.
Indeed - another of the post-Brexit fantasies on here is the perpetual right of centre government we're gonna get. I'd expect a Labour majority by 2020 once the Corbyn madness is gone and maybe even if it hasn't.
Actually the point is not whether the government is right, left or centrist. The point is that we can elect it, hold it accountable and then get rid of it. Something we cannot do with our lawmakers in the EU.
I understand that is something which matters to you and respect it - whether it actually makes much practical difference to the lives of most ordinary people I rather doubt. I know you're expecting a very modest post-Brexit settlement - I'm much less sanguine perhaps because in my circumstances the changes are likely to be more significant and for many of my acquaintance - life-changing.
Extraordinary. We are surely better out of a future Europe if it's going to go more and more socialist.
Leaving Europe to escape socialism might not work out as planned. The main party of opposition is led by Marxists and as highlighted on the last thread, there are plenty of native Brits happy to chant about chucking the Tories in the sea.
Indeed - another of the post-Brexit fantasies on here is the perpetual right of centre government we're gonna get. I'd expect a Labour majority by 2020 once the Corbyn madness is gone and maybe even if it hasn't.
We have to accept that one day, we'll have a left wing government.
If we stay in the EU, we'll never be able to nationalise another industry.
I've not followed it in any detail, but I also vaguely recall some mutterings about a future regime for private provision of healthcare (I may be utterly wrong, in which case I apologise unreservedly).
He wouldnt be able to under thebterms if the fixed term parliament act.
Did you read the article? There are ways round the FTPA.
Yes, by the Tories forcing through a vote of no confidence on themselves. Won't happen - it would turn them into a laughing stock and they'd be trounced at the polls.
Or they could pass a one clause Bill to amend section 1 (2) of the FTPA.
But would the electorate really reject the idea that a post-Leave government needed a new mandate and give Corbyn a majority instead?
He wouldnt be able to under thebterms if the fixed term parliament act.
Did you read the article? There are ways round the FTPA.
Yes, by the Tories forcing through a vote of no confidence on themselves. Won't happen - it would turn them into a laughing stock and they'd be trounced at the polls.
Or they could pass a one clause Bill to amend section 1 (2) of the FTPA.
But would the electorate really reject the idea that a post-Leave government needed a new mandate and give Corbyn a majority instead?
People can be irrational. It could happen, even if it makes no sense in the event of a Leave vote.
He wouldnt be able to under thebterms if the fixed term parliament act.
Did you read the article? There are ways round the FTPA.
Yes, by the Tories forcing through a vote of no confidence on themselves. Won't happen - it would turn them into a laughing stock and they'd be trounced at the polls.
Or they could pass a one clause Bill to amend section 1 (2) of the FTPA.
But would the electorate really reject the idea that a post-Leave government needed a new mandate and give Corbyn a majority instead?
That would be up to the electorate. One of my beefs is that politicians can, and do, hide behind Europe's skirts.
I'd prefer a fully accountable Corbyn to Johnson. I do appreciate that I'm not the man on the Clapham omnibus .
A good header cyclefree. I've just read it twice and the simple message I hadn't really distilled from all the EU noise is that after 46 years it REALLY is the only show in town. Walking away isn't an option. We ARE the EU and the EU are us. We've got a 46 year history. We're far too set in our ways to think about divorce.
I was reminded when reading it of a card a friend showed me at their divorce party. It was a cartoon of a man walking into a supermarket and asking the shop assistant if she could direct him to the toast counter.
Extraordinary. We are surely better out of a future Europe if it's going to go more and more socialist.
Leaving Europe to escape socialism might not work out as planned. The main party of opposition is led by Marxists and as highlighted on the last thread, there are plenty of native Brits happy to chant about chucking the Tories in the sea.
Indeed - another of the post-Brexit fantasies on here is the perpetual right of centre government we're gonna get. I'd expect a Labour majority by 2020 once the Corbyn madness is gone and maybe even if it hasn't.
I vividly recall Remainers telling me that a Corbyn government was an impossibility and that whatever happened we would have a Tory government in 2020.
I remember asking whether Cameron's opt-outs, emergency brakes and vetoes were worth the paper they weren't written on in the hands of a future Labour PM also.
It tended to generate silence.
Of course a Labour govt would also have different views on immigration, free movement and many other things in a post-Brexit scenario - indeed they could campaign on reversing a Brexit referendum result - especially if it is as close as expected.
@HYUFD - how well did the EU do in Serbia, Croatia, Montenegro ? They let hundreds/thousands of people get massacred in their own backyard. What is the point of a European army that is never used ? In respect to Trade , it's easy when you hide behind tariffs and use our Consumer market against countries.
Since 25 out of 28 NATO members (& 13 out of 16 at the time of the Yugoslav break up) are European, how well did NATO do in its 'own' backyard?
The non European members of NATO had to come in and sort out the mess the Europeans had made.
So European NATO pretty ineffective then?
NATO was never supposed to work as separate bits. The whole point of NATO is that it works as a single military operation. That is put under a huge amount of strain because, with the exception of the UK and France, the other EU countries don't pull their weight on terms of defence spending.
What happened in Jugoslavia was that the European politicians decided to stick their noses into a civil war they were not militarily capable of dealing with and then had to get NATO involved to get them out if trouble.
Now they want a EU military establishment but are still unwilling to pay for it.
He wouldnt be able to under thebterms if the fixed term parliament act.
Did you read the article? There are ways round the FTPA.
Yes, by the Tories forcing through a vote of no confidence on themselves. Won't happen - it would turn them into a laughing stock and they'd be trounced at the polls.
Or they could pass a one clause Bill to amend section 1 (2) of the FTPA.
But would the electorate really reject the idea that a post-Leave government needed a new mandate and give Corbyn a majority instead?
A good header cyclefree. I've just read it twice and the simple message I hadn't really distilled from all the EU noise is that after 46 years it REALLY is the only show in town. Walking away isn't an option. We ARE the EU and the EU are us. We've got a 46 year history. We're far too set in our ways to think about divorce.
I was reminded when reading it of a card a friend showed me at their divorce party. It was a cartoon of a man walking into a supermarket and asking the shop assistant if she could direct him to the toast counter.
Extraordinary. We are surely better out of a future Europe if it's going to go more and more socialist.
Leaving Europe to escape socialism might not work out as planned. The main party of opposition is led by Marxists and as highlighted on the last thread, there are plenty of native Brits happy to chant about chucking the Tories in the sea.
Indeed - another of the post-Brexit fantasies on here is the perpetual right of centre government we're gonna get. I'd expect a Labour majority by 2020 once the Corbyn madness is gone and maybe even if it hasn't.
I vividly recall Remainers telling me that a Corbyn government was an impossibility and that whatever happened we would have a Tory government in 2020.
I remember asking whether Cameron's opt-outs, emergency brakes and vetoes were worth the paper they weren't written on in the hands of a future Labour PM also.
It tended to generate silence.
What Remainer would possibly have thought that? If Brexit turns into a nightmare, largely because of market forces, the country will be ripe for someone like Corbyn to step in as saviour. That's why we small-c Remainers are very wary of this revolution - you never know what it'll throw up.
A good header cyclefree. I've just read it twice and the simple message I hadn't really distilled from all the EU noise is that after 46 years it REALLY is the only show in town. Walking away isn't an option. We ARE the EU and the EU are us. We've got a 46 year history. We're far too set in our ways to think about divorce.
I was reminded when reading it of a card a friend showed me at their divorce party. It was a cartoon of a man walking into a supermarket and asking the shop assistant if she could direct him to the toast counter.
Extraordinary. We are surely better out of a future Europe if it's going to go more and more socialist.
Leaving Europe to escape socialism might not work out as planned. The main party of opposition is led by Marxists and as highlighted on the last thread, there are plenty of native Brits happy to chant about chucking the Tories in the sea.
Indeed - another of the post-Brexit fantasies on here is the perpetual right of centre government we're gonna get. I'd expect a Labour majority by 2020 once the Corbyn madness is gone and maybe even if it hasn't.
I vividly recall Remainers telling me that a Corbyn government was an impossibility and that whatever happened we would have a Tory government in 2020.
I remember asking whether Cameron's opt-outs, emergency brakes and vetoes were worth the paper they weren't written on in the hands of a future Labour PM also.
It tended to generate silence.
Of course a Labour govt would also have different views on immigration, free movement and many other things in a post-Brexit scenario - indeed they could campaign on reversing a Brexit referendum result - especially if it is as close as expected.
It would have them in a Remain scenario, which is why Cameron's deal is worthless.
If someone like Blair would give away rebates, opt-outs and fail to control the wholesale movement of cheap labour, there is no hope that a "Corbyn" Labour government would keep them.
And with the EU, it's seemingly impossible to get them to ever change track or hand power back.
Extraordinary. We are surely better out of a future Europe if it's going to go more and more socialist.
Leaving Europe to escape socialism might not work out as planned. The main party of opposition is led by Marxists and as highlighted on the last thread, there are plenty of native Brits happy to chant about chucking the Tories in the sea.
Indeed - another of the post-Brexit fantasies on here is the perpetual right of centre government we're gonna get. I'd expect a Labour majority by 2020 once the Corbyn madness is gone and maybe even if it hasn't.
I vividly recall Remainers telling me that a Corbyn government was an impossibility and that whatever happened we would have a Tory government in 2020.
I remember asking whether Cameron's opt-outs, emergency brakes and vetoes were worth the paper they weren't written on in the hands of a future Labour PM also.
It tended to generate silence.
What Remainer would possibly have thought that? If Brexit turns into a nightmare, largely because of market forces, the country will be ripe for someone like Corbyn to step in as saviour. That's why we small-c Remainers are very wary of this revolution - you never know what it'll throw up.
There are an alarming number of people who believe that no matter what happens Corbynite Labour cannot win. How much that informs their other political choices, who can say?
Extraordinary. We are surely better out of a future Europe if it's going to go more and more socialist.
Leaving Europe to escape socialism might not work out as planned. The main party of opposition is led by Marxists and as highlighted on the last thread, there are plenty of native Brits happy to chant about chucking the Tories in the sea.
Indeed - another of the post-Brexit fantasies on here is the perpetual right of centre government we're gonna get. I'd expect a Labour majority by 2020 once the Corbyn madness is gone and maybe even if it hasn't.
I vividly recall Remainers telling me that a Corbyn government was an impossibility and that whatever happened we would have a Tory government in 2020.
I remember asking whether Cameron's opt-outs, emergency brakes and vetoes were worth the paper they weren't written on in the hands of a future Labour PM also.
It tended to generate silence.
Of course a Labour govt would also have different views on immigration, free movement and many other things in a post-Brexit scenario - indeed they could campaign on reversing a Brexit referendum result - especially if it is as close as expected.
It would have them in a Remain scenario, which is why Cameron's deal is worthless.
If someone like Blair would give away rebates, opt-outs and fail to control the wholesale movement of cheap labour, there is no hope that a "Corbyn" led Labour government would.
So why on earth have all of the disruption - paying lots of our own civil servants to dismantle one version only to replace it with the same? No wonder people in my neck of the woods are perplexed.
Extraordinary. We are surely better out of a future Europe if it's going to go more and more socialist.
Leaving Europe to escape socialism might not work out as planned. The main party of opposition is led by Marxists and as highlighted on the last thread, there are plenty of native Brits happy to chant about chucking the Tories in the sea.
Indeed - another of the post-Brexit fantasies on here is the perpetual right of centre government we're gonna get. I'd expect a Labour majority by 2020 once the Corbyn madness is gone and maybe even if it hasn't.
I vividly recall Remainers telling me that a Corbyn government was an impossibility and that whatever happened we would have a Tory government in 2020.
I remember asking whether Cameron's opt-outs, emergency brakes and vetoes were worth the paper they weren't written on in the hands of a future Labour PM also.
It tended to generate silence.
What Remainer would possibly have thought that? If Brexit turns into a nightmare, largely because of market forces, the country will be ripe for someone like Corbyn to step in as saviour. That's why we small-c Remainers are very wary of this revolution - you never know what it'll throw up.
There are an alarming number of people who believe that no matter what happens Corbynite Labour cannot win. How much that informs their other political choices, who can say?
If everything is exploding around Boris's ears then Labour only need to look semi-competent.
Extraordinary. We are surely better out of a future Europe if it's going to go more and more socialist.
Leaving Europe to escape socialism might not work out as planned. The main party of opposition is led by Marxists and as highlighted on the last thread, there are plenty of native Brits happy to chant about chucking the Tories in the sea.
Indeed - another of the post-Brexit fantasies on here is the perpetual right of centre government we're gonna get. I'd expect a Labour majority by 2020 once the Corbyn madness is gone and maybe even if it hasn't.
I vividly recall Remainers telling me that a Corbyn government was an impossibility and that whatever happened we would have a Tory government in 2020.
I remember asking whether Cameron's opt-outs, emergency brakes and vetoes were worth the paper they weren't written on in the hands of a future Labour PM also.
It tended to generate silence.
Of course a Labour govt would also have different views on immigration, free movement and many other things in a post-Brexit scenario - indeed they could campaign on reversing a Brexit referendum result - especially if it is as close as expected.
It would have them in a Remain scenario, which is why Cameron's deal is worthless.
If someone like Blair would give away rebates, opt-outs and fail to control the wholesale movement of cheap labour, there is no hope that a "Corbyn" led Labour government would.
So why on earth have all of the disruption - paying lots of our own civil servants to dismantle one version only to replace it with the same? No wonder people in my neck of the woods are perplexed.
If we are out the someone like Corbyn would find it very difficult to get us back in. If we are in it is very easy for him to give away yet more powers and control to the EU.
Extraordinary. We are surely better out of a future Europe if it's going to go more and more socialist.
Leaving Europe to escape socialism might not work out as planned. The main party of opposition is led by Marxists and as highlighted on the last thread, there are plenty of native Brits happy to chant about chucking the Tories in the sea.
Indeed - another of the post-Brexit fantasies on here is the perpetual right of centre government we're gonna get. I'd expect a Labour majority by 2020 once the Corbyn madness is gone and maybe even if it hasn't.
I vividly recall Remainers telling me that a Corbyn government was an impossibility and that whatever happened we would have a Tory government in 2020.
I remember asking whether Cameron's opt-outs, emergency brakes and vetoes were worth the paper they weren't written on in the hands of a future Labour PM also.
It tended to generate silence.
Of course a Labour govt would also have different views on immigration, free movement and many other things in a post-Brexit scenario - indeed they could campaign on reversing a Brexit referendum result - especially if it is as close as expected.
It would have them in a Remain scenario, which is why Cameron's deal is worthless.
If someone like Blair would give away rebates, opt-outs and fail to control the wholesale movement of cheap labour, there is no hope that a "Corbyn" led Labour government would.
So why on earth have all of the disruption - paying lots of our own civil servants to dismantle one version only to replace it with the same? No wonder people in my neck of the woods are perplexed.
The budget to start with; the £13bn we spend plus the £5bn up for renegotiation in the next parliament. It is taken off the table.
Secondly, any opening of the borders would be reversible by sacking him - whereas it is irreversible within the EU.
Thirdly, there is no unbridled exposure to whatever expansion follows. People keep mentioning Turkey, but there are four other nations in wait. Are we going to block them all?
Fourth, we can be more open to other relationships, alliances and partnerships.
I have a view that reluctant remain is the worst position for not only us, but all our EU neighbours.
We are the person who has been dragged to the party who is sitting there with a face on, complaining about the food, the drink, the music. Everyone would be probably be better off if we had stayed at home if we won't embrace the situation.
A good header cyclefree. I've just read it twice and the simple message I hadn't really distilled from all the EU noise is that after 46 years it REALLY is the only show in town. Walking away isn't an option. We ARE the EU and the EU are us. We've got a 46 year history. We're far too set in our ways to think about divorce.
I was reminded when reading it of a card a friend showed me at their divorce party. It was a cartoon of a man walking into a supermarket and asking the shop assistant if she could direct him to the toast counter.
Not sure how on earth you draw that conclusion.
Quite - I came to the opposite conclusion. We should have joined when it was first formed in order to set it on a course that we would be more comfortable with, we then joined (and continue to remain) for economic reasons - even though that's not what it's actually about... not only is it not the only show in town... indeed it's a show that we really shouldn't pretend we like being at.
He wouldnt be able to under thebterms if the fixed term parliament act.
Did you read the article? There are ways round the FTPA.
Yes, by the Tories forcing through a vote of no confidence on themselves. Won't happen - it would turn them into a laughing stock and they'd be trounced at the polls.
Or they could pass a one clause Bill to amend section 1 (2) of the FTPA.
No chance of getting that through the Lords - certainly not quickly.
And if it can't be done quickly there's no point as it would defeat the object of the exercise.
He wouldnt be able to under thebterms if the fixed term parliament act.
Did you read the article? There are ways round the FTPA.
Yes, by the Tories forcing through a vote of no confidence on themselves. Won't happen - it would turn them into a laughing stock and they'd be trounced at the polls.
No it wouldn't it's a common mechanism in other nations with a fixed term Parliament. Eg in Germany was done by the government in 1983 and 2005.
Extraordinary. We are surely better out of a future Europe if it's going to go more and more socialist.
Leaving Europe to escape socialism might not work out as planned. The main party of opposition is led by Marxists and as highlighted on the last thread, there are plenty of native Brits happy to chant about chucking the Tories in the sea.
Indeed - another of the post-Brexit fantasies on here is the perpetual right of centre government we're gonna get. I'd expect a Labour majority by 2020 once the Corbyn madness is gone and maybe even if it hasn't.
We have to accept that one day, we'll have a left wing government.
I would be over the moon if I thought this referendum would give the non-voters the push towards engaging in the political process.
I'd love to see all those people who disenfranchise themselves finding a voice that politicians would be obliged to listen to.
He wouldnt be able to under thebterms if the fixed term parliament act.
Did you read the article? There are ways round the FTPA.
Yes, by the Tories forcing through a vote of no confidence on themselves. Won't happen - it would turn them into a laughing stock and they'd be trounced at the polls.
No it wouldn't it's a common mechanism in other nations with a fixed term Parliament. Eg in Germany was done by the government in 1983 and 2005.
Nobody would care or indeed be aware of the technicalities. It'll just be 'Oh a bloody GE' and 'we've only just had that referendum thingy haven't we'.
He wouldnt be able to under thebterms if the fixed term parliament act.
Did you read the article? There are ways round the FTPA.
Yes, by the Tories forcing through a vote of no confidence on themselves. Won't happen - it would turn them into a laughing stock and they'd be trounced at the polls.
Or they could pass a one clause Bill to amend section 1 (2) of the FTPA.
No chance of getting that through the Lords - certainly not quickly.
You think Labour would resist having an election? That would be suicide. And the Crossbenchers could be relied on not to resist democracy.
He wouldnt be able to under thebterms if the fixed term parliament act.
Did you read the article? There are ways round the FTPA.
Yes, by the Tories forcing through a vote of no confidence on themselves. Won't happen - it would turn them into a laughing stock and they'd be trounced at the polls.
Or they could pass a one clause Bill to amend section 1 (2) of the FTPA.
No chance of getting that through the Lords - certainly not quickly.
You think Labour would resist having an election? That would be suicide. And the Crossbenchers could be relied on not to resist democracy.
Alternatively you put a one line statement that 'there should be an early general election' through the Commons which needs a 2/3rd majority. The idea either the Labour Party or SNP could realistically vote against that is absurd. They would effectively be voting that they want Johnson to serve three more years and would prefer that to a general election.
NATO was never supposed to work as separate bits. The whole point of NATO is that it works as a single military operation.
And having your military integrated into a single command and control structure has no implications for sovereignty?
Except that's not how NATO works, is it? Each member can use their armed forces (to the extent that it doesn't interfere with the defensive framework/allocated resources) as they wish.
The Eurocrats want their own army, ultimately to replace the member states' armies, in the same way the Euro replaced the currencies.
Extraordinary. We are surely better out of a future Europe if it's going to go more and more socialist.
Leaving Europe to escape socialism might not work out as planned. The main party of opposition is led by Marxists and as highlighted on the last thread, there are plenty of native Brits happy to chant about chucking the Tories in the sea.
Indeed - another of the post-Brexit fantasies on here is the perpetual right of centre government we're gonna get. I'd expect a Labour majority by 2020 once the Corbyn madness is gone and maybe even if it hasn't.
I vividly recall Remainers telling me that a Corbyn government was an impossibility and that whatever happened we would have a Tory government in 2020.
I remember asking whether Cameron's opt-outs, emergency brakes and vetoes were worth the paper they weren't written on in the hands of a future Labour PM also.
It tended to generate silence.
Of course a Labour govt would also have different views on immigration, free movement and many other things in a post-Brexit scenario - indeed they could campaign on reversing a Brexit referendum result - especially if it is as close as expected.
It would have them in a Remain scenario, which is why Cameron's deal is worthless.
If someone like Blair would give away rebates, opt-outs and fail to control the wholesale movement of cheap labour, there is no hope that a "Corbyn" led Labour government would.
So why on earth have all of the disruption - paying lots of our own civil servants to dismantle one version only to replace it with the same? No wonder people in my neck of the woods are perplexed.
If we are out the someone like Corbyn would find it very difficult to get us back in. If we are in it is very easy for him to give away yet more powers and control to the EU.
That is the difference.
If were were out, getting us back in would be the last thing on the mind of someone like Corbyn. He'd be too busy trying to implement 'socialism in one country'.
He wouldnt be able to under thebterms if the fixed term parliament act.
Did you read the article? There are ways round the FTPA.
Yes, by the Tories forcing through a vote of no confidence on themselves. Won't happen - it would turn them into a laughing stock and they'd be trounced at the polls.
Or they could pass a one clause Bill to amend section 1 (2) of the FTPA.
No chance of getting that through the Lords - certainly not quickly.
You think Labour would resist having an election? That would be suicide. And the Crossbenchers could be relied on not to resist democracy.
Labour would certainly resist any change to law, rightly emphasising that the British constitution shouldn't be f*cked about with merely to make it into a suitable vehicle for Boris's ambition.
NATO was never supposed to work as separate bits. The whole point of NATO is that it works as a single military operation.
And having your military integrated into a single command and control structure has no implications for sovereignty?
Except that's not how NATO works, is it? Each member can use their armed forces (to the extent that it doesn't interfere with the defensive framework/allocated resources) as they wish.
The Eurocrats want their own army, ultimately to replace the member states' armies, in the same way the Euro replaced the currencies.
Seems to me that, as the EU harmonises, public health care will be quite high on their To Do list.
Perhaps a single EU-wide health service might be modelled on our own? I've heard that it wouldn't necessarily be viewed as the model they'd choose.
He wouldnt be able to under thebterms if the fixed term parliament act.
Did you read the article? There are ways round the FTPA.
Yes, by the Tories forcing through a vote of no confidence on themselves. Won't happen - it would turn them into a laughing stock and they'd be trounced at the polls.
Or they could pass a one clause Bill to amend section 1 (2) of the FTPA.
No chance of getting that through the Lords - certainly not quickly.
You think Labour would resist having an election? That would be suicide. And the Crossbenchers could be relied on not to resist democracy.
Labour would certainly resist any change to law, rightly emphasising that the British constitution shouldn't be f*cked about with merely to make it into a suitable vehicle for Boris's ambition.
They'd rather have a Tory PM than a general election?
A good header cyclefree. I've just read it twice and the simple message I hadn't really distilled from all the EU noise is that after 46 years it REALLY is the only show in town. Walking away isn't an option. We ARE the EU and the EU are us. We've got a 46 year history. We're far too set in our ways to think about divorce.
I was reminded when reading it of a card a friend showed me at their divorce party. It was a cartoon of a man walking into a supermarket and asking the shop assistant if she could direct him to the toast counter.
Not sure how on earth you draw that conclusion.
I drew that conclusion too Richard. We know where Cycle's leanings lie, but it strikes me she tried hard to write this article from an impartial perspective.
I suggested last time, her articles would be enhanced by starting from neutral assumptions- and if she did, her conclusions, however framed, would be more persuasive.
He wouldnt be able to under thebterms if the fixed term parliament act.
Did you read the article? There are ways round the FTPA.
Yes, by the Tories forcing through a vote of no confidence on themselves. Won't happen - it would turn them into a laughing stock and they'd be trounced at the polls.
No it wouldn't it's a common mechanism in other nations with a fixed term Parliament. Eg in Germany was done by the government in 1983 and 2005.
But that was to do with parliamentary arithmetic and the inability to govern effectively. Boris couldn't pull that off. It would look for all the world like him saying: my governments cr*p so please vote it in again. His enemies would have a field day.
He wouldnt be able to under thebterms if the fixed term parliament act.
Did you read the article? There are ways round the FTPA.
Yes, by the Tories forcing through a vote of no confidence on themselves. Won't happen - it would turn them into a laughing stock and they'd be trounced at the polls.
Or they could pass a one clause Bill to amend section 1 (2) of the FTPA.
No chance of getting that through the Lords - certainly not quickly.
You think Labour would resist having an election? That would be suicide. And the Crossbenchers could be relied on not to resist democracy.
Labour would certainly resist any change to law, rightly emphasising that the British constitution shouldn't be f*cked about with merely to make it into a suitable vehicle for Boris's ambition.
The Fixed-Term Parliament Act itself was an affront to the constitution imo.
Generally, British policy to European geo-politics has been to stop one particular country dominating the continent. Hence, stopping French expansion during Waterloo period, alliances running up to WW1 etc etc.
He wouldnt be able to under thebterms if the fixed term parliament act.
Did you read the article? There are ways round the FTPA.
Yes, by the Tories forcing through a vote of no confidence on themselves. Won't happen - it would turn them into a laughing stock and they'd be trounced at the polls.
Or they could pass a one clause Bill to amend section 1 (2) of the FTPA.
No chance of getting that through the Lords - certainly not quickly.
You think Labour would resist having an election? That would be suicide. And the Crossbenchers could be relied on not to resist democracy.
Labour would certainly resist any change to law, rightly emphasising that the British constitution shouldn't be f*cked about with merely to make it into a suitable vehicle for Boris's ambition.
They'd rather have a Tory PM than a general election?
Well, it's a view.
Erm, well if the consequence of a forced early election is a Labour win why would Boris do it in the first place?
He wouldnt be able to under thebterms if the fixed term parliament act.
Did you read the article? There are ways round the FTPA.
Yes, by the Tories forcing through a vote of no confidence on themselves. Won't happen - it would turn them into a laughing stock and they'd be trounced at the polls.
Or they could pass a one clause Bill to amend section 1 (2) of the FTPA.
No chance of getting that through the Lords - certainly not quickly.
You think Labour would resist having an election? That would be suicide. And the Crossbenchers could be relied on not to resist democracy.
Labour would certainly resist any change to law, rightly emphasising that the British constitution shouldn't be f*cked about with merely to make it into a suitable vehicle for Boris's ambition.
They'd rather have a Tory PM than a general election?
Well, it's a view.
Not actually an unusual one. At the time of initial Corbynmania the view was expressed by some that they wouldn't mind Labour not winning if they if one of the others won the leadership, meaning presumably for some people non-Corbynite Labour is worse than a Tory government.
Which isn't even an unreasonable view to hold I suppose, but it makes it weird when the same people might profess how evil Tories are at the same time, since one would think if you are that partisan you'd think an imperfect Labour PM would be better than a Tory one.
He wouldnt be able to under thebterms if the fixed term parliament act.
Did you read the article? There are ways round the FTPA.
Yes, by the Tories forcing through a vote of no confidence on themselves. Won't happen - it would turn them into a laughing stock and they'd be trounced at the polls.
No it wouldn't it's a common mechanism in other nations with a fixed term Parliament. Eg in Germany was done by the government in 1983 and 2005.
But that was to do with parliamentary arithmetic and the inability to govern effectively. Boris couldn't pull that off. It would look for all the world like him saying: my governments cr*p so please vote it in again. His enemies would have a field day.
No it wouldn't, it would look to the world like he wanted his own mandate, just as if Brown sought an early election in 2007 it would have done.
Again the FTPA has provision for an early election if two-thirds vote for it. There is no need for a vote of no confidence, he can put a motion to the House saying he wants an early election as he wants his own mandate - and either the opposition votes for an early election with the government (thus granting the early election) or the opposition votes against an early election with all the embarrassment that entails.
What do you think an SNP voter would think of the SNP voting against an early election and in favour of three more years of Boris?
Comments
But your point 3- Britain joined on a point of weakness- that is so true. We were the sick man of Europe as you say. I cannot help but think of the Jamie Vardy dilemma today- for Vardy to leave Leicester for Arsenal, there is so much that could go wrong for him.
I am trying to download a piece of music (topical for the referendum next week
can anyone help??
Even my teenage son cant work it out!!
Many thanks
While you can't easily ship properties overseas, and they're certainly not fungible, if push came to shove, we could always flog the Houses of Parliament to some foreign interest and put the proceeds towards the national debt
Well quite...
In other news, my wife has been targeted by a "remain" leaflet, whereas I have had a Leave one!
The Leave one is 100% honest about the £350M per week, saying it's the bill, and that we get less than half back.
It also says that many people disagree on the whole issue, and we should all make up our own minds. Which is unarguable and a surprisingly calm, almost neutral comment in a pro-Leave leaflet.
TCTC still...
Might have it incredibly close, legal challenges, massive political bickering etc etc.
Mr. Felix (2), Mr. 1000 had an intriguing suggestion for making immigrants pay a certain sum (to offset potential NHS usage and suchlike). It'd deter those coming over for low paid jobs whilst allowing the well-paid to come relatively easily.
So apparently we have an "ultra-liberal" Europe at the moment according to this French minister...
Extraordinary. We are surely better out of a future Europe if it's going to go more and more socialist.
And as for being "like Guernsey" he can f*ck right off.
Does he honestly think this intervention will help Remain?! Knob
F1: pondering potential bets. Bit of an odd duck, this one. The street circuit is half-Monaco, half-Monza. May be rather more interesting than I'd initially thought.
Reminds me of Clegg's claim we'd be a pygmy without the EU.
Edited extra bit: Mr. P, that's eminently possible (and one of the things I'll be checking).
A moment's googling will show that the French are, at best, ambivalent about the UK remaining in the EU. They see us as an American catspaw, polluting the union with neo-liberal Anglo-American cant.
So, don't think of it as an intervention for Remain. He's certainly not out to help Cameron.
Betting PostF1: be a while before I've finished the pre-race piece but I'll be tipping fewer than 17.5 finishers (ie 6 plus retirements out of 22 cars) at 1.57 [Ladbrokes]. Shorter odds than I usually go for but only 10/22 GP cars finished. There are also reliability issues for some cars.
Edited extra bit: apologies, that's 5 plus retirements.
That's the sort of bet I might make had I an account there. Defined, small exposure, potential for a hefty gain.
It is very difficult to say whether there is any value in Remain or Leave.
There's no comparison with Turkey.
Thanks OGH, I really appreciate it. The referendum would not have been the same without it.
If I had to guess finishers, I think 14-16 probably most likely.
Which makes me wonder about whether the Manors might scrape a point. Hmm. Or the Renaults (though the Manors are faster).
Chin up. The next game is a dead rubber from an Italian point of view. The UEFA head to head rule means Italy win the group whatever happens. The Italians will play a second string who won't want to get injured or pick up yellow cards. They will be tough to break down but Ireland have done it before. I'm meeting mates in the pub and will be cheering you on. Good luck. #spiritof1994
Just for the record, I do agree that the idea of a centre-right 1000 year reich is nonsense. After ten years any party is stale, out of touch and a shadow of its former self.
http://reaction.life/contempt-court-contempt-twitter/
PB gas really come into its own in a big way.
Thank you to posters and thread writers alike
I remember asking whether Cameron's opt-outs, emergency brakes and vetoes were worth the paper they weren't written on in the hands of a future Labour PM also.
It tended to generate silence.
I've not followed it in any detail, but I also vaguely recall some mutterings about a future regime for private provision of healthcare (I may be utterly wrong, in which case I apologise unreservedly).
But would the electorate really reject the idea that a post-Leave government needed a new mandate and give Corbyn a majority instead?
I'd prefer a fully accountable Corbyn to Johnson. I do appreciate that I'm not the man on the Clapham omnibus
I was reminded when reading it of a card a friend showed me at their divorce party. It was a cartoon of a man walking into a supermarket and asking the shop assistant if she could direct him to the toast counter.
What happened in Jugoslavia was that the European politicians decided to stick their noses into a civil war they were not militarily capable of dealing with and then had to get NATO involved to get them out if trouble.
Now they want a EU military establishment but are still unwilling to pay for it.
If someone like Blair would give away rebates, opt-outs and fail to control the wholesale movement of cheap labour, there is no hope that a "Corbyn" Labour government would keep them.
And with the EU, it's seemingly impossible to get them to ever change track or hand power back.
That is the difference.
https://twitter.com/afneil/status/744110998521544704
Secondly, any opening of the borders would be reversible by sacking him - whereas it is irreversible within the EU.
Thirdly, there is no unbridled exposure to whatever expansion follows. People keep mentioning Turkey, but there are four other nations in wait. Are we going to block them all?
Fourth, we can be more open to other relationships, alliances and partnerships.
I have a view that reluctant remain is the worst position for not only us, but all our EU neighbours.
We are the person who has been dragged to the party who is sitting there with a face on, complaining about the food, the drink, the music. Everyone would be probably be better off if we had stayed at home if we won't embrace the situation.
And if it can't be done quickly there's no point as it would defeat the object of the exercise.
I'd love to see all those people who disenfranchise themselves finding a voice that politicians would be obliged to listen to.
The Eurocrats want their own army, ultimately to replace the member states' armies, in the same way the Euro replaced the currencies.
Perhaps a single EU-wide health service might be modelled on our own? I've heard that it wouldn't necessarily be viewed as the model they'd choose.
Well, it's a view.
I suggested last time, her articles would be enhanced by starting from neutral assumptions- and if she did, her conclusions, however framed, would be more persuasive.
Generally, British policy to European geo-politics has been to stop one particular country dominating the continent. Hence, stopping French expansion during Waterloo period, alliances running up to WW1 etc etc.
Which isn't even an unreasonable view to hold I suppose, but it makes it weird when the same people might profess how evil Tories are at the same time, since one would think if you are that partisan you'd think an imperfect Labour PM would be better than a Tory one.
Again the FTPA has provision for an early election if two-thirds vote for it. There is no need for a vote of no confidence, he can put a motion to the House saying he wants an early election as he wants his own mandate - and either the opposition votes for an early election with the government (thus granting the early election) or the opposition votes against an early election with all the embarrassment that entails.
What do you think an SNP voter would think of the SNP voting against an early election and in favour of three more years of Boris?