The only district council in the West Midlands likely to vote Remain convincingly is Warwick, which also includes Leamington Spa and Kenilworth. If it isn't an easy win for Remain (at least 55%) they'll probably be in trouble. (I spent most of yesterday there, incidentally). The Press Association gives an estimated declaration time of 2am.
@Tissue_Price I do not share your relative confidence. If the public is to be given a bait-and-switch, offered closed borders but given freedom of movement, the anger is going to be volcanic.
Agree. If it's LEAVE better Article 50 and get on with it than Boris "revised deal". Faith in democracy is more important than the EU.
As if anybody believes there will be further renegotiations / concessions if we stay. REMAIN = more EU integration.
If Cameron was going to get the EU to budge at all, he would have either got it during making "the deal" or with the polls so close they would have manage to get some sort of vow. The fact he can't even roll out a well the EU have agree to look again at x, y and z kinda of BS, shows there is no chance of any change to the course of direction.
Out is Out and Remain is full stream ahead. A vote for genuine status quo or even better a bit of reverse of powers would have won his hands down.
@Tissue_Price I do not share your relative confidence. If the public is to be given a bait-and-switch, offered closed borders but given freedom of movement, the anger is going to be volcanic.
I think there are different levels of "Freedom of Movement" which are not being discussed, but then this hasn't really been a very nuanced campaign.
The situation whereby someone can turn up in London with their family, register as a part time Big Issue seller and be provided with housing benefit, tax credits, free healthcare and schooling is unsustainable when extended to 500m people.
Allowing anyone from the EU to move here provided they can support themselves would restrict immigration to young singles and high earner families, this is probably what Leave will look like in practice.
@Richard Nabavi Just to fill you in with modern culture, Morrissey is someone who professes to sing and once headed up a band called the Smiths, unlike John Barnes who used to kick a football around for a living.
Thanks. I'd heard of Morrissey although not the Smiths. I take it that I needn't trouble myself to listen to his music, let alone his political views?
Richard, a summary: Morrissey is one of the greatest songwriters of the last 100 years. I personally love the Smiths (who only existed for four years – 1983 to 1987 – without really achieving major commercial success, but who subsequently sold more albums than anyone else for about ten years or so, and are still arguably the second most influential British band after the Beatles). He does, however, confuse the ability to turn a neat phrase – at which he is unquestionably very, very good – with the ability to think through an argument – at which he is pretty poor. He is a fascinating character. By most accounts, including his own, he is not exactly comfortable with other people; yet he is one of those personalities who people will latch onto and follow. His autobiography is also very interesting, both as a life history and a study in bitterness: he seems to bear a grudge against almost everyone, and devotes over 100 pages to the court case in the 90s over how the royalties from the Smiths should be divided. You should never fear finding yourself on the opposite side of an argument from Morrissey; he seems almost to go out of his way to disagree with people.
That Dagenham poll is roughly consistent with 100% UKIP, 60% Tory, 40% Labour voting leave or 50% Tory, 45% Labour.
But most recent polls have not been showing anywhere near 40℅ for leave amongst Labour voters. Dagenham is not representative. I believe the Dagenham constituency almost had a plurity voting for Zac!
Hello, all - has anyone spotted the run on LEAVE on Betfair...? Odds haven't moved (4.1) as so much staked at current position, but up until a few moments ago, c.£19k bet on Brexit in the last 30-odd minutes...Opinium leak before 4:30pm, or wishful thinking on my part...?!
@Tissue_Price I do not share your relative confidence. If the public is to be given a bait-and-switch, offered closed borders but given freedom of movement, the anger is going to be volcanic.
I think there are different levels of "Freedom of Movement" which are not being discussed, but then this hasn't really been a very nuanced campaign.
The situation whereby someone can turn up in London with their family, register as a part time Big Issue seller and be provided with housing benefit, tax credits, free healthcare and schooling is unsustainable when extended to 500m people.
Allowing anyone from the EU to move here provided they can support themselves would restrict immigration to young singles and high earner families, this is probably what Leave will look like in practice.
In principle this is dealt with by David Cameron's pre-referendum negotiations. Undoubtedly the devil is in the detail, but in practice the difference between Remain and Leave on your scenario may not be great.
Juncker rubbishing Dave's matey 'I'll sort the EU' gambit in the Sun yesterday.
No more negotiation. No more reform.
You need to add in 'if we leave' - he is not talking about a post remain position
If they won't budge when one of their biggest members is on the brink of leaving, they won't budge ever! Although I suspect it is all talk before the vote.
At this stage he has no choice to say out is out. Whether we leave or remain the EU is going to change, the genie is out of the bottle. Leavers here who say that's it if we vote remain cannot afford to do anything else as it would weaken their case. If you follow this forum leave are home and dry, and they may well be, but it does seem that leave are taking to leave and convincing themselves
For the benefit of anyone that didn't see my request this morning - any tips for Kempton Park this evening? Am on a works evening out and would appreciate something more tangible to bet on than 'go with the most comedic name'... Cheers.
@Richard Nabavi Just to fill you in with modern culture, Morrissey is someone who professes to sing and once headed up a band called the Smiths, unlike John Barnes who used to kick a football around for a living.
Thanks. I'd heard of Morrissey although not the Smiths. I take it that I needn't trouble myself to listen to his music, let alone his political views?
“The often unspoken fear of many people – we should address it honestly and clearly and examine it--is that Europe might develop into a super-state, an overarching Government with no national veto, no control over our own borders, prescriptive decisions, a single currency imposed and the nation state retreating to a wholly subordinate role.
“That fear exists out there... and we should recognise the fact that it exists... I for one would find such a Europe wholly unacceptable for this country. I do not believe that it is remotely likely, but, if that were to be the future, it would not be a future that would be suitable for this country.”
[Hansard Official Report, 1 March 1995; Vol. 255, c. 1062.]
Just one awkward aspect to this idea of "freedom of movement lite" coupled with access to the single market: this would need to be negotiated with the rest of the EU, and there isn't anything other than wishful thinking to think that they would go for it as a deal.
“The often unspoken fear of many people – we should address it honestly and clearly and examine it--is that Europe might develop into a super-state, an overarching Government with no national veto, no control over our own borders, prescriptive decisions, a single currency imposed and the nation state retreating to a wholly subordinate role.
“That fear exists out there... and we should recognise the fact that it exists... I for one would find such a Europe wholly unacceptable for this country. I do not believe that it is remotely likely, but, if that were to be the future, it would not be a future that would be suitable for this country.”
[Hansard Official Report, 1 March 1995; Vol. 255, c. 1062.]
Oops..
Well that's just it, isn't it. If you think the EU is in that place, or heading inexorably towards it, you will back Leave. If not you will likely back Remain.
Comres is the only pollster predicting a higher than GE turnout. Surely if this is the election where young voters are going to participate then we should be expecting a higher than average turnout as I can't see why any of the groups that typically vote at a GE are suddenly going to have a slump in turnout.
You also have to think about the electors in safe seats (particularly Labour ones) who don't usually bother to vote because it won't affect the result. Will be see a higher turnout in those seats, and thus bumping up turnout even further?
@Richard Nabavi Just to fill you in with modern culture, Morrissey is someone who professes to sing and once headed up a band called the Smiths, unlike John Barnes who used to kick a football around for a living.
Thanks. I'd heard of Morrissey although not the Smiths. I take it that I needn't trouble myself to listen to his music, let alone his political views?
Richard, a summary: Morrissey is one of the greatest songwriters of the last 100 years. I personally love the Smiths (who only existed for four years – 1983 to 1987 – without really achieving major commercial success, but who subsequently sold more albums than anyone else for about ten years or so, and are still arguably the second most influential British band after the Beatles). He does, however, confuse the ability to turn a neat phrase – at which he is unquestionably very, very good – with the ability to think through an argument – at which he is pretty poor. He is a fascinating character. By most accounts, including his own, he is not exactly comfortable with other people; yet he is one of those personalities who people will latch onto and follow. His autobiography is also very interesting, both as a life history and a study in bitterness: he seems to bear a grudge against almost everyone, and devotes over 100 pages to the court case in the 90s over how the royalties from the Smiths should be divided. You should never fear finding yourself on the opposite side of an argument from Morrissey; he seems almost to go out of his way to disagree with people.
@brokenwheel If most of the pollsters are right, Sporting Index is a clear sell on turnout at 70.
Actually, I think turnout is going to be around the 70% mark, but it would be remiss of me not to note the betting opportunity for those who agree with the majority of the pollsters.
Verdict: narrow REMAIN win - but nobody is remotely sure. Hope that helps.
Well, at least they're not all obviously herding.
I think chrisoxon makes a good point re turnout. If the youngsters are going to swing this, turnout would probably be higher than GE, if that is not expected, well...
Hello, all - has anyone spotted the run on LEAVE on Betfair...? Odds haven't moved (4.1) as so much staked at current position, but up until a few moments ago, c.£19k bet on Brexit in the last 30-odd minutes...Opinium leak before 4:30pm, or wishful thinking on my part...?!
The only district council in the West Midlands likely to vote Remain convincingly is Warwick, which also includes Leamington Spa and Kenilworth. If it isn't an easy win for Remain (at least 55%) they'll probably be in trouble. (I spent most of yesterday there, incidentally). The Press Association gives an estimated declaration time of 2am.
That's my home turf. Very little activity throughout the campaign. Very few posters, very few leaflets. Most of the students have gone home. I'd expect a tight Remain win, thanks to Leamington and Kenilworth. I'd expect Warwick itself to be Leave.
Since Richard N is on the board at the moment I am after some help. (anyone else do feel free to jump in as well)
I know that you and I agree on the basic position that freedom of movement in the EEA and in the EU is the same. I understand there are some differences in terms of access to benefits but otherwise I thought the rules were identical.
Over the last couple of weeks I have seen a series of references to something I had never heard of before - ma specific brake on freedom of movement that can be invoked by EFTA members. I have never heard of this before the last couple of weeks and can find no documentary evidence to support it. (I have tried)
I am assuming this is a different process to the emergency brake which was proposed as part of Cameron's negotiations since that would not apply after we left the EU anyway even if we joined EFTA.
DO you have any idea at all where this has come from?
Comres is the only pollster predicting a higher than GE turnout. Surely if this is the election where young voters are going to participate then we should be expecting a higher than average turnout as I can't see why any of the groups that typically vote at a GE are suddenly going to have a slump in turnout.
You also have to think about the electors in safe seats (particularly Labour ones) who don't usually bother to vote because it won't affect the result. Will be see a higher turnout in those seats, and thus bumping up turnout even further?
Young voter turnout was low in the Scottish referendum. (excluding 16-17 year olds).
Just one awkward aspect to this idea of "freedom of movement lite" coupled with access to the single market: this would need to be negotiated with the rest of the EU, and there isn't anything other than wishful thinking to think that they would go for it as a deal.
We'd have to negotiate a free trade deal (or move towards one in steps, if they're too worried about contagion to give us that straight away).
I'd imagine both sides would determine their rules for working visas / waivers etc. independently, based on their own self-interest.
Comres is the only pollster predicting a higher than GE turnout. Surely if this is the election where young voters are going to participate then we should be expecting a higher than average turnout as I can't see why any of the groups that typically vote at a GE are suddenly going to have a slump in turnout.
You also have to think about the electors in safe seats (particularly Labour ones) who don't usually bother to vote because it won't affect the result. Will be see a higher turnout in those seats, and thus bumping up turnout even further?
Are the young going to participate any more than a GE? I can honestly say I've seen zero evidence of that from the conversations I've had.
Since Richard N is on the board at the moment I am after some help. (anyone else do feel free to jump in as well)
I know that you and I agree on the basic position that freedom of movement in the EEA and in the EU is the same. I understand there are some differences in terms of access to benefits but otherwise I thought the rules were identical.
Over the last couple of weeks I have seen a series of references to something I had never heard of before - ma specific brake on freedom of movement that can be invoked by EFTA members. I have never heard of this before the last couple of weeks and can find no documentary evidence to support it. (I have tried)
I am assuming this is a different process to the emergency brake which was proposed as part of Cameron's negotiations since that would not apply after we left the EU anyway even if we joined EFTA.
DO you have any idea at all where this has come from?
@Tissue_Price I do not share your relative confidence. If the public is to be given a bait-and-switch, offered closed borders but given freedom of movement, the anger is going to be volcanic.
I think there are different levels of "Freedom of Movement" which are not being discussed, but then this hasn't really been a very nuanced campaign.
The situation whereby someone can turn up in London with their family, register as a part time Big Issue seller and be provided with housing benefit, tax credits, free healthcare and schooling is unsustainable when extended to 500m people.
Allowing anyone from the EU to move here provided they can support themselves would restrict immigration to young singles and high earner families, this is probably what Leave will look like in practice.
In principle this is dealt with by David Cameron's pre-referendum negotiations. Undoubtedly the devil is in the detail, but in practice the difference between Remain and Leave on your scenario may not be great.
My scenario is pretty much the EEA default, with freedom of movement in theory but not bound by the non-discrimination conditions of the EU. It's probably one of those compromises that pleases no-one in theory but in practice does the job it's designed to do.
The detail of the PM's negotiations appear to be that he can apply for a four-year exemption from non-discrimination, at the behest of one of the EU entities, which in year 5 would revert back to the status quo ante. Very different from saying that for the first four years someone is here, they have no recourse to state funds, and the power is in the gift of others in Brussles rather than with Parliament.
Above all, the politicians need to be honest with the electorate on issues such as immigration. The reason this referendum is so close, is that millions of people think that no-one represents them - the terrible negative campaign has no doubt only reinforced those views.
Just a thought but what happens if the EU comes out with a 'vow' early tomorrow morning? How will that be reported?
Once the polls are open they can't say anything political on the TV or radio. It'll be "Look at Dave and the lovely Samantha going to the polling station in Witney" etc.
... I am assuming this is a different process to the emergency brake which was proposed as part of Cameron's negotiations since that would not apply after we left the EU anyway even if we joined EFTA.
DO you have any idea at all where this has come from?
I imagine it's based on Articles 112-3 of the EEA Agreement, which in principle does provide a mechanism, but I suspect it's an over-enthusiastic interpretation. I don't know of any other mechanism.
There is a 50 deep queue at the currency exchange on Fleet Street. The City is already panicing re the result! Makes me wonder if the people know already that leave have won. BTW, going on the experts on this site, from Paul, Plato, MarqueeMark, SouthamObserver, chesnut et al it is going to be a huge leave win.
Just a thought but what happens if the EU comes out with a 'vow' early tomorrow morning? How will that be reported?
Once the polls are open they can't say anything political on the TV or radio. It'll be "Look at Dave and the lovely Samantha going to the polling station in Witney" etc.
Any "Vow" needs to be today.
Having discussed this with M Macron last week, there won't be a vow, because the EU is more concerned with their own problems!
Just a thought but what happens if the EU comes out with a 'vow' early tomorrow morning? How will that be reported?
Once the polls are open they can't say anything political on the TV or radio. It'll be "Look at Dave and the lovely Samantha going to the polling station in Witney" etc.
Any "Vow" needs to be today.
We've had it and basically it is 'if you vote out you are out' - Juncker's today
Since Richard N is on the board at the moment I am after some help. (anyone else do feel free to jump in as well)
I know that you and I agree on the basic position that freedom of movement in the EEA and in the EU is the same. I understand there are some differences in terms of access to benefits but otherwise I thought the rules were identical.
Over the last couple of weeks I have seen a series of references to something I had never heard of before - ma specific brake on freedom of movement that can be invoked by EFTA members. I have never heard of this before the last couple of weeks and can find no documentary evidence to support it. (I have tried)
I am assuming this is a different process to the emergency brake which was proposed as part of Cameron's negotiations since that would not apply after we left the EU anyway even if we joined EFTA.
DO you have any idea at all where this has come from?
They are talking about articles 112 and 113 of the EEA agreement which allow safeguards. They think these can be triggered at will and haven't read the rest of the agreement eg article 111 which explains the measures will be put into dispute if they are not agreed by the parties.
... I am assuming this is a different process to the emergency brake which was proposed as part of Cameron's negotiations since that would not apply after we left the EU anyway even if we joined EFTA.
DO you have any idea at all where this has come from?
I imagine it's based on Articles 112-3 of the EEA Agreement, which in principle does provide a mechanism, but I suspect it's an over-enthusiastic interpretation. I don't know of any other mechanism.
Ta. I never read it in that way. I always assumed it was something to do with a serious event where all sides agreed it was necessary for security or health.
Since Richard N is on the board at the moment I am after some help. (anyone else do feel free to jump in as well)
I know that you and I agree on the basic position that freedom of movement in the EEA and in the EU is the same. I understand there are some differences in terms of access to benefits but otherwise I thought the rules were identical.
Over the last couple of weeks I have seen a series of references to something I had never heard of before - ma specific brake on freedom of movement that can be invoked by EFTA members. I have never heard of this before the last couple of weeks and can find no documentary evidence to support it. (I have tried)
I am assuming this is a different process to the emergency brake which was proposed as part of Cameron's negotiations since that would not apply after we left the EU anyway even if we joined EFTA.
DO you have any idea at all where this has come from?
They are talking about articles 112 and 113 of the EEA agreement which allow safeguards. They think these can be triggered at will and haven't read the rest of the agreement eg article 111 which explains the measures will be put into dispute if they are not agreed by the parties.
There is a 50 deep queue at the currency exchange on Fleet Street. The City is already panicing re the result! Makes me wonder if the people know already that leave have won. BTW, going on the experts on this site, from Paul, Plato, MarqueeMark, SouthamObserver, chesnut et al it is going to be a huge leave win.
It could be a huge Leave win.
Or it could be a big Remain win.
Nobody really knows.
My anecdote is that at least 85% of the people I know and work with are for Remain. Where I live (NW3) I see lots of Remain campaigners and posters.
But I know that Hampstead is utterly unrepresentative (not least because it's so full of American investment bankers that there are practically no Brits allowed to vote in the referendum).
The only district council in the West Midlands likely to vote Remain convincingly is Warwick, which also includes Leamington Spa and Kenilworth. If it isn't an easy win for Remain (at least 55%) they'll probably be in trouble. (I spent most of yesterday there, incidentally). The Press Association gives an estimated declaration time of 2am.
That's my home turf. Very little activity throughout the campaign. Very few posters, very few leaflets. Most of the students have gone home. I'd expect a tight Remain win, thanks to Leamington and Kenilworth. I'd expect Warwick itself to be Leave.
It does emphasise how much the Remain camp is relying on voters in the big cities to turn out when their best district council area in one of the regions like Warwick is likely to be close. Take the South West for example: where are Remain confident of winning apart from Bristol, Bath and Exeter?
The only district council in the West Midlands likely to vote Remain convincingly is Warwick, which also includes Leamington Spa and Kenilworth. If it isn't an easy win for Remain (at least 55%) they'll probably be in trouble. (I spent most of yesterday there, incidentally). The Press Association gives an estimated declaration time of 2am.
That's my home turf. Very little activity throughout the campaign. Very few posters, very few leaflets. Most of the students have gone home. I'd expect a tight Remain win, thanks to Leamington and Kenilworth. I'd expect Warwick itself to be Leave.
Remain 57.6%, Leave 42.4% for a 50-50 result nationwide in the Warwick, Leam, Kenilworth area.
Ta. I never read it in that way. I always assumed it was something to do with a serious event where all sides agreed it was necessary for security or health.
There is a 50 deep queue at the currency exchange on Fleet Street. The City is already panicing re the result! Makes me wonder if the people know already that leave have won. BTW, going on the experts on this site, from Paul, Plato, MarqueeMark, SouthamObserver, chesnut et al it is going to be a huge leave win.
I am no expert but as I have said I am the eternal pessimist so am expecting Remain to win. Even though I have been out campaigning and leafletting for weeks it has been in an area which is known to be strongly Leave so I have no handle at all on what the real battlefields are like.
There is a 50 deep queue at the currency exchange on Fleet Street. The City is already panicing re the result! Makes me wonder if the people know already that leave have won. BTW, going on the experts on this site, from Paul, Plato, MarqueeMark, SouthamObserver, chesnut et al it is going to be a huge leave win.
They can get currency at very reasonable rates close to there.
Comres is the only pollster predicting a higher than GE turnout. Surely if this is the election where young voters are going to participate then we should be expecting a higher than average turnout as I can't see why any of the groups that typically vote at a GE are suddenly going to have a slump in turnout.
You also have to think about the electors in safe seats (particularly Labour ones) who don't usually bother to vote because it won't affect the result. Will be see a higher turnout in those seats, and thus bumping up turnout even further?
Are the young going to participate any more than a GE? I can honestly say I've seen zero evidence of that from the conversations I've had.
I agree. This is why I think leave are going to win - remain need the youth vote enmasse in order to get over the line.
@Tissue_Price I don't see how you can do this in steps. Can you describe to me the intermediate steps you imagine?
The free trade deal? Via progressively lower tariffs and sectors being made tariff-free, I guess - an ongoing display of good faith. But I'd honestly expect us to be able to negotiate free trade straight up given the size of our market.
Since Richard N is on the board at the moment I am after some help. (anyone else do feel free to jump in as well)
I know that you and I agree on the basic position that freedom of movement in the EEA and in the EU is the same. I understand there are some differences in terms of access to benefits but otherwise I thought the rules were identical.
Over the last couple of weeks I have seen a series of references to something I had never heard of before - ma specific brake on freedom of movement that can be invoked by EFTA members. I have never heard of this before the last couple of weeks and can find no documentary evidence to support it. (I have tried)
I am assuming this is a different process to the emergency brake which was proposed as part of Cameron's negotiations since that would not apply after we left the EU anyway even if we joined EFTA.
DO you have any idea at all where this has come from?
They are talking about articles 112 and 113 of the EEA agreement which allow safeguards. They think these can be triggered at will and haven't read the rest of the agreement eg article 111 which explains the measures will be put into dispute if they are not agreed by the parties.
I can't see how the wording of Article 112 could apply to a migrating worker type issue.
"If serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties of a sectorial or regional nature liable to persist are arising, a Contracting Party may unilaterally take appropriate measures under the conditions and procedures laid down in Article 113. 2. Such safeguard measures shall be restricted with regard to their scope and duration to what is strictly necessary in order to remedy the situation. Priority shall be given to such measures as will least disturb the functioning of this Agreement."
There is a 50 deep queue at the currency exchange on Fleet Street. The City is already panicing re the result! Makes me wonder if the people know already that leave have won. BTW, going on the experts on this site, from Paul, Plato, MarqueeMark, SouthamObserver, chesnut et al it is going to be a huge leave win.
It'll be 52:48 in favour of Leave. But, Jaysus, I am no expert!!
"We've run a campaign, which if you wanted to destroy and break the Labour party, you couldn't have devised a better one. We know that 14% - maybe more of our vote - will vote to leave. It's crucial they felt that they are proper Labour voters, that they are not renegades and have failed some test and are therefore not members of the Labour party. Because if they felt that, then woe betide what's going to happen to us at the next election in 2020."
Does he mean 14% from the 30% who voted Labour in 2015?
As for the extra time vow tomorrow...more chance of an announcement that Lord Lucan, Elvis and Shergar have all been found alive and well and are announcing a back from the grave tour.
The only district council in the West Midlands likely to vote Remain convincingly is Warwick, which also includes Leamington Spa and Kenilworth. If it isn't an easy win for Remain (at least 55%) they'll probably be in trouble. (I spent most of yesterday there, incidentally). The Press Association gives an estimated declaration time of 2am.
That's my home turf. Very little activity throughout the campaign. Very few posters, very few leaflets. Most of the students have gone home. I'd expect a tight Remain win, thanks to Leamington and Kenilworth. I'd expect Warwick itself to be Leave.
Remain 57.6%, Leave 42.4% for a 50-50 result nationwide in the Warwick, Leam, Kenilworth area.
I still have a Yes poster up in my window. Also I will be a whole £3.52 richer regardless of the result on Friday due to my astute high value trading.
How much per hour does you GBP 3.52 work out at? Isn't there a minimum wage?
I have left the referendum well alone. I stuck £50 on after that blitz of leave leads and the price was ludicrously long and then cashed out when the price rebounded. About 1 minutes work all in so £200 an hour!
Just a thought but what happens if the EU comes out with a 'vow' early tomorrow morning? How will that be reported?
Once the polls are open they can't say anything political on the TV or radio. It'll be "Look at Dave and the lovely Samantha going to the polling station in Witney" etc.
Any "Vow" needs to be today.
We've had it and basically it is 'if you vote out you are out' - Juncker's today
Legally I believe our vote is "advisory" although I'm not suggesting that any UK politician would ever fail to meet a promise.
Ta. I never read it in that way. I always assumed it was something to do with a serious event where all sides agreed it was necessary for security or health.
Yes, I think your interpretation is correct.
I think Iceland did trigger article 112 on freedom of movement along with capital controls following their 2008 meltdown. In that case the restrictions were agreed.
The purpose of the mechanism is to allow you to take quick action in response to emergency situations and justify it afterwards. It's not designed as a convenient opt out to basic principles in the agreement that you would prefer not to have to keep to.
There is a 50 deep queue at the currency exchange on Fleet Street. The City is already panicing re the result! Makes me wonder if the people know already that leave have won. BTW, going on the experts on this site, from Paul, Plato, MarqueeMark, SouthamObserver, chesnut et al it is going to be a huge leave win.
It could be a huge Leave win.
Or it could be a big Remain win.
Nobody really knows.
My anecdote is that at least 85% of the people I know and work with are for Remain. Where I live (NW3) I see lots of Remain campaigners and posters.
But I know that Hampstead is utterly unrepresentative (not least because it's so full of American investment bankers that there are practically no Brits allowed to vote in the referendum).
The pound euro has done well this week and all my family have bought our holiday euros this week at between 1.25 and 1.27 as a hedge against a 15-20% fall on Friday. As the polls are close why would you risk a large fall when you are probably going on holiday within a month or so and can hedge against it
There is a 50 deep queue at the currency exchange on Fleet Street. The City is already panicing re the result! Makes me wonder if the people know already that leave have won. BTW, going on the experts on this site, from Paul, Plato, MarqueeMark, SouthamObserver, chesnut et al it is going to be a huge leave win.
It could be a huge Leave win.
Or it could be a big Remain win.
Nobody really knows.
My anecdote is that at least 85% of the people I know and work with are for Remain. Where I live (NW3) I see lots of Remain campaigners and posters.
But I know that Hampstead is utterly unrepresentative (not least because it's so full of American investment bankers that there are practically no Brits allowed to vote in the referendum).
"We've run a campaign, which if you wanted to destroy and break the Labour party, you couldn't have devised a better one. We know that 14% - maybe more of our vote - will vote to leave. It's crucial they felt that they are proper Labour voters, that they are not renegades and have failed some test and are therefore not members of the Labour party. Because if they felt that, then woe betide what's going to happen to us at the next election in 2020."
Does he mean 14% from the 30% who voted Labour in 2015?
Presumably he means 14pp, not 14pc?
i.e. the 30 will split 14-16, not (30*0.14) - (30*0.86)
There is a 50 deep queue at the currency exchange on Fleet Street. The City is already panicing re the result! Makes me wonder if the people know already that leave have won. BTW, going on the experts on this site, from Paul, Plato, MarqueeMark, SouthamObserver, chesnut et al it is going to be a huge leave win.
It could be a huge Leave win.
Or it could be a big Remain win.
Nobody really knows.
My anecdote is that at least 85% of the people I know and work with are for Remain. Where I live (NW3) I see lots of Remain campaigners and posters.
But I know that Hampstead is utterly unrepresentative (not least because it's so full of American investment bankers that there are practically no Brits allowed to vote in the referendum).
Remain par score of 68% for Camden.
Where are you getting your 'Leave/Remain' par scores from and do you have them for the whole country?
"We've run a campaign, which if you wanted to destroy and break the Labour party, you couldn't have devised a better one. We know that 14% - maybe more of our vote - will vote to leave. It's crucial they felt that they are proper Labour voters, that they are not renegades and have failed some test and are therefore not members of the Labour party. Because if they felt that, then woe betide what's going to happen to us at the next election in 2020."
Does he mean 14% from the 30% who voted Labour in 2015?
Forty and fourteen sound very similar when spoken verbally.
Hit "quote" to this comment then look at the reply from @rcs1000 above. Copy and paste his link then edit the bit between the " " quotes with your link and replace the words "img tag" with your description. Hope that makes sense.
There is a 50 deep queue at the currency exchange on Fleet Street. The City is already panicing re the result! Makes me wonder if the people know already that leave have won. BTW, going on the experts on this site, from Paul, Plato, MarqueeMark, SouthamObserver, chesnut et al it is going to be a huge leave win.
It'll be 52:48 in favour of Leave. But, Jaysus, I am no expert!!
That list of names brings new colour to the word, "expert".
"We've run a campaign, which if you wanted to destroy and break the Labour party, you couldn't have devised a better one. We know that 14% - maybe more of our vote - will vote to leave. It's crucial they felt that they are proper Labour voters, that they are not renegades and have failed some test and are therefore not members of the Labour party. Because if they felt that, then woe betide what's going to happen to us at the next election in 2020."
Does he mean 14% from the 30% who voted Labour in 2015?
Presumably he means 14pp, not 14pc?
i.e. the 30 will split 14-16, not (30*0.14) - (30*0.86)
If half of Labour voters vote Leave, surely it is all over?
Comments
If Cameron was going to get the EU to budge at all, he would have either got it during making "the deal" or with the polls so close they would have manage to get some sort of vow. The fact he can't even roll out a well the EU have agree to look again at x, y and z kinda of BS, shows there is no chance of any change to the course of direction.
Out is Out and Remain is full stream ahead. A vote for genuine status quo or even better a bit of reverse of powers would have won his hands down.
The situation whereby someone can turn up in London with their family, register as a part time Big Issue seller and be provided with housing benefit, tax credits, free healthcare and schooling is unsustainable when extended to 500m people.
Allowing anyone from the EU to move here provided they can support themselves would restrict immigration to young singles and high earner families, this is probably what Leave will look like in practice.
He is a fascinating character. By most accounts, including his own, he is not exactly comfortable with other people; yet he is one of those personalities who people will latch onto and follow.
His autobiography is also very interesting, both as a life history and a study in bitterness: he seems to bear a grudge against almost everyone, and devotes over 100 pages to the court case in the 90s over how the royalties from the Smiths should be divided.
You should never fear finding yourself on the opposite side of an argument from Morrissey; he seems almost to go out of his way to disagree with people.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWJve954n2c
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2016/06/22/ReferendumMajorCameron-large_trans++eo_i_u9APj8RuoebjoAHt0k9u7HhRJvuo-ZLenGRumA.jpg
Dave&Harriet hear John's views..
“The often unspoken fear of many people – we should address it honestly and clearly and examine it--is that Europe might develop into a super-state, an overarching Government with no national veto, no control over our own borders, prescriptive decisions, a single currency imposed and the nation state retreating to a wholly subordinate role.
“That fear exists out there... and we should recognise the fact that it exists... I for one would find such a Europe wholly unacceptable for this country. I do not believe that it is remotely likely, but, if that were to be the future, it would not be a future that would be suitable for this country.”
[Hansard Official Report, 1 March 1995; Vol. 255, c. 1062.]
Oops..
Nearly half of David Cameron's closest business advisers decline to sign letter backing UK's EU membership https://t.co/05ihSWkl1z
You also have to think about the electors in safe seats (particularly Labour ones) who don't usually bother to vote because it won't affect the result. Will be see a higher turnout in those seats, and thus bumping up turnout even further?
Actually, I think turnout is going to be around the 70% mark, but it would be remiss of me not to note the betting opportunity for those who agree with the majority of the pollsters.
I think chrisoxon makes a good point re turnout. If the youngsters are going to swing this, turnout would probably be higher than GE, if that is not expected, well...
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/#/politics/market/1.123293871
I know that you and I agree on the basic position that freedom of movement in the EEA and in the EU is the same. I understand there are some differences in terms of access to benefits but otherwise I thought the rules were identical.
Over the last couple of weeks I have seen a series of references to something I had never heard of before - ma specific brake on freedom of movement that can be invoked by EFTA members. I have never heard of this before the last couple of weeks and can find no documentary evidence to support it. (I have tried)
I am assuming this is a different process to the emergency brake which was proposed as part of Cameron's negotiations since that would not apply after we left the EU anyway even if we joined EFTA.
DO you have any idea at all where this has come from?
I'd imagine both sides would determine their rules for working visas / waivers etc. independently, based on their own self-interest.
http://www.efta.int/media/documents/legal-texts/eea/the-eea-agreement/Main Text of the Agreement/EEAagreement.pdf
The detail of the PM's negotiations appear to be that he can apply for a four-year exemption from non-discrimination, at the behest of one of the EU entities, which in year 5 would revert back to the status quo ante. Very different from saying that for the first four years someone is here, they have no recourse to state funds, and the power is in the gift of others in Brussles rather than with Parliament.
Above all, the politicians need to be honest with the electorate on issues such as immigration. The reason this referendum is so close, is that millions of people think that no-one represents them - the terrible negative campaign has no doubt only reinforced those views.
Any "Vow" needs to be today.
Possibly!
"The English Football team won't be voting in the Referendum...
...They can't find the box, let alone put a cross into it"
Or it could be a big Remain win.
Nobody really knows.
My anecdote is that at least 85% of the people I know and work with are for Remain. Where I live (NW3) I see lots of Remain campaigners and posters.
But I know that Hampstead is utterly unrepresentative (not least because it's so full of American investment bankers that there are practically no Brits allowed to vote in the referendum).
"If serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties of a sectorial or regional nature liable to persist are arising, a Contracting Party may unilaterally take appropriate measures under the conditions and procedures laid down in Article 113.
2. Such safeguard measures shall be restricted with regard to their scope and duration to what is strictly necessary in order to remedy the situation. Priority shall be given to such measures as will least disturb the functioning of this Agreement."
"We've run a campaign, which if you wanted to destroy and break the Labour party, you couldn't have devised a better one. We know that 14% - maybe more of our vote - will vote to leave. It's crucial they felt that they are proper Labour voters, that they are not renegades and have failed some test and are therefore not members of the Labour party. Because if they felt that, then woe betide what's going to happen to us at the next election in 2020."
Does he mean 14% from the 30% who voted Labour in 2015?
[url=https://postimg.org/image/c4zxpfee9/][img]https://s32.postimg.org/c4zxpfee9/hqdefault.jpg[/img][/url]
The purpose of the mechanism is to allow you to take quick action in response to emergency situations and justify it afterwards. It's not designed as a convenient opt out to basic principles in the agreement that you would prefer not to have to keep to.
i.e. the 30 will split 14-16, not (30*0.14) - (30*0.86)
"Don't you think he looks tired"
Vive les grenouilles!
"All you've got to do
Is take these lies and make them true somehow"
She say's what made up her mind was all the experts warning about disaster after Brexit were the same experts that said we'd got to join the Euro.
And she thought "Boris was marvelous" last night!