Except the deal was so shit nobody on the remain side dared to mention it.
It was better than any other deal we will ever get now
So thanks...
I blame Cameron myself. He rushed talks & got basically nothing & of course the EU thought we wouldn't press the nuclear button, then we did.
If you think the Cameron deal was the best one we could ever have got or ever have with the eu, then the eu is totally unreformable.
Cameron announced the referendum, went to negotiate a deal, and got one (a good one).
Perhaps the EU is unreformable but his deal cemented our special status within, or perhaps call it alongside it.
Even if you think the deal is useless, do I think that Dave should have done anything differently? Not really. Why should he have played the cute games that the EU might have been playing? He went to negotiate a deal, negotiated a deal and we voted on it. If people say "well you should have played hardball, delayed, threatened, etc" well that is no way to conduct diplomacy.
As we now see, compared with what we are about to get, it was not only good, it was great.
The choice for Labour members is now clear: vote for Corbyn and kill the Labour party; or vote for someone else and have a chance of keeping it alive. This is not about Blairites versus the membership. It is about relevance v irrelevance.
The idea that Corbyn is going to be able to win a leadership election is for the birds.
Remember the electorate of £3ers though, anyone can sign up.
They'll be able to weed out anyone with a public profile (didn't they catch a Tory MP last time?) but the whole process is open to abuse and infiltration, as well as those youngsters who think the Corbyn is wonderful and the Evil Blairite Red Tories should be deselected!
Oh, and who is actually going to stand against him this time?
£3ers works both ways though. And the people doing the weeding out won't necessarily be pro-Corbyn (isn't it done on a local level?).
I did read Boris wants Ozzy to continue as Chancellor, because being Chancellor won't be fun and a career ender for Gove.
Apparently the cuts in our credit ratings means selling Government debt will be harder as some organisations only buy debt from top rated countries.
Most of those requirements were relaxed after the US lost its triple A rating. In any case it seems likely that the BoE will announce £50-75bn in QE to calm markets and to ensure there are no failures in debt auctions.
I think it is the two notch drop that is causing issues.
City bloke on sky said the credit rating "didn't really matter", and mattered more for corporations. Not sure if he was an "expert" though.........
Maybe. Many investment funds have investment criteria which means that their investments must have a minimum credit rating. An inability to hold UK government debt widely would have an unfortunate effect on pricing.
Let's see what happens to gilt prices. When the Americans were downgraded it made no difference as investors thought the US Treasury more reliable than the ratings agencies.
You also need to take account of the cost of insuring gilts
"The cost of insuring exposure to debt from the UK almost doubled after the vote, surging to the highest level in nearly four years."
The choice for Labour members is now clear: vote for Corbyn and kill the Labour party; or vote for someone else and have a chance of keeping it alive. This is not about Blairites versus the membership. It is about relevance v irrelevance.
The idea that Corbyn is going to be able to win a leadership election is for the birds.
Remember the electorate of £3ers though, anyone can sign up.
They'll be able to weed out anyone with a public profile (didn't they catch a Tory MP last time?) but the whole process is open to abuse and infiltration, as well as those youngsters who think the Corbyn is wonderful and the Evil Blairite Red Tories should be deselected!
Oh, and who is actually going to stand against him this time?
Many £3 members feel betrayed. And that is a very strong emotion.
Except the deal was so shit nobody on the remain side dared to mention it.
It was better than any other deal we will ever get now
So thanks...
You don't really care about Brexit or not Brexit either way. You just want to settle scores for Cameron and Osborne being destroyed...
Losing a Prime Minister who has won you an outright majority for the first time in 18 years isn't an optimal outcome is it.
Well I'm not especially bothered but then I'm not a Con member. Cameron was going anyway though so it's not like he'd have been around for 2020 in any case.
That's true but it does highlight some lack of judgement, at best, on the right of the Tory party.
The worst you can say about May is that she's cold. Maybe her soft Remain is worse than a soft Leave, but there's not too much in that.
Whilst I didn't expect to do so a few months ago, if it is her v Boris (or Fox) I will happily vote for her.
The PB 4 May faction is gathering strength!
IMHO May has more chance of reaching over (or around) to the leavers than Boris has to the remainers.
But. There are IMHO more hardened LEAVErs than hardened REMAINers amongst tory MPs (Step 1) There are 2 LEAVErs for every 1 REMAINer amongst the Tory party members (Step 2).
That way you have an election to confirm the type of Brexit
There's a problem with that.
So we have this election and we select Brexit option B, which we then take to the EU, who tell us to take a hike.
We wanted it, we voted for it, we can't have it...
For me the options are someone who will say "despite the vote we are not leaving", (democratic if they put that to a GE)
or Boris who has to try and salvage something, anything from his own wreckage (democratic and foolish)
I do thing - given the disparate views and the significance of the decision - it is important to get it ratified by the public. A general election is the wrong format for that.
It seems to me that whoever the next PM is should negotiate what they think is right and then put it to a vote:
(1) Accept the deal [presumably some kind of FTA with some form of compromise on FoM]
or
(2) Leave the EU with no deal
I am fairly sure that option (1) would win in such a vote.
Is option 1 remaining in the Single Market and if it is why should the EU grant the UK restrictions on FoM. If it isn't, why should they agree it all; that would represent a very poor deal for them, wouldn't it?
The compromise probably be the EEA emergency brake and eventually reciprocal welfare restrictions. Enough for the EU to say they aren't compromising the integrity of free movement within the EU since we won't be in it and enough for the British PM to sell it to the party and voters in 2020.
Who know...could be...but what's the benefit for the EU in somehow letting the UK slightly off the hook. Why can't they just offer normal EEA membership and say take it or leave it?
The pound up against the dollar and the stockmarket up today.
Doesn't fit the doom and gloom narrative of the BBC or Sky so probably will go unreported.
I wouldn't want to be the one calling the market as having bottomed out just yet. What happens if Patterson runs on an anti-immigration campaign and wins the leadership then moves us to a WTO style arrangement, there would be another 3-4 point drop in Sterling and up to a 10% drop in the All Share market and huge falls in European markets.
Why is Osborne on R4 saying we'll have tax rises and spending cuts when he's not going to be CoE in the new HMG set up?
He's stirring.
Some more taxes on the super rich and the likes of Starbucks and Google would not go amiss. The 1% owning more than the other 99% annoys not only left wingers. It's all got very skewed
No idea how to do this in practice, but a new Chancellor could contradict the old one and buy back some Tory support from the middle ground, which will be needed
That statement from Osborne should rule him out of the next Govt. He no longer sets the policy and should not be trying to. The new Chancellor needs to be more positive and avoid a panic budget with further cuts (except in the EU and overseas aid)
Why does anyone need to be positive - surely the very fact of Brexit should have sent the £ and the stock markets soaring. You're the one who is off message.
I never said or expected stock markets or the £ to soar and note that FTSE100 is up on Febuary.
The FTSE 100 is only up on February because the £ has fallen so far and the 75% of revenue FTSE 100 companies get from outside the UK is suddenly worth more. This is basic economics - come on.
The Corbyn movement within the Labour party is a reaction against Blair, the so-called "Blairites" and New Labour thought.
This is ironic.
Increasingly, they are personality cult and party-within-a-party more than Blair and New Labour ever was.
They are everything they object to.
Until that question is answered, I'm afraid that the challenge will falter. We have already answered the question last year: "Would you rather be led by an socialist who might possibly win or someone with few policies but a better chance of winning?"
Come on Nick!!
"A socialist who might possibly win" - that socialist is not Corbyn sadly.
Corbyn will take the Labour party to its worst defeat since WW2. That is as sure as night following day.
This is why we must act now to ensure working people and the vulnerable have a voice in Parliament. Corbyn must go - no ifs, no buts.
The idea that Corbyn might possibly win a general election is utterly ludicrous and shows just how divorced from reality Nick is. Last September the UK had not just voted to leave the EU, David Cameron had not resigned and the UK was not facing a general election within a year. The plan was to amble gently along to a meh kind of defeat at the 2020 general election - once again taking Labour heartlands for granted - and to see what kind of internal changes Corbyn and his mates could engineer in the meantime to seal the socialist deal internally. Well, look how things have changed. A serious political party would face up to that. Unfortunately, too many Labour members are not serious people.
Nick does not like me saying it, but it is clear that his support for Corbyn is more important to him than Labour being in power and preventing a right wing Tory government with a fresh mandate inflicting more misery on the people that Labour is supposed to represent. Unfortunately, I suspect his mindset still predominates inside the membership and that Corbyn will continue as leader. That will kill the Labour party.
I am not sure Corbyn will win. Last time he got 59% on the first ballot with the £3ers, many of them Tories.
I am still not sure about the £3ers. Can they vote ?
As long as his first round vote is below 47%, he will lose.
I've always supported a directly elected president of the eu as a step in the right direction, and replacing the endless unelected ones, to addressing the undeniable democratic deficit in the EU. Of course it's unlikely to come to pass anytime soon because member state heads of governments wouldn't like the idea. Thoughts on here from leavers regarding that?
(Please, no one respond with "so you want President Blair"!)
We elect our MPs and yet one of the largest votes in modern history has shown even they are completely out of touch.
Sky finally seems to be moving towards the Acceptance stage of Brexit this morning. Some MPs made complete Charlies of themselves yesterday - Lammy being the most absurd.
I think all the EU Parly footage has made the vote flesh in the minds of Remainers and Brexiteers alike.
I'm very uncomfortable with any politician backing a future that doesn't stop EU FoM and getting our sovereignty back. Those were the two biggest issues for the Brexit win. Any backsliding on that will cause a revolt.
There's a lot of post-vote silliness going on all over. I'll wait to see what the contenders say re the Tory leadership election. I understand why Boris poured soothing words on Remainers yesterday - that doesn't concern me.
The more I think about May - the more uncomfortable I become. She's been spineless over Brexit, swapped sides and then hidden behind the sofa for the whole campaign. That's not leadership using any yardstick. At least Boris for whatever reason put himself on the line and won against the odds.
My mind is now much more open about who I'll vote for.
I'll put the scenario to you, if the PM had come back in February and backed leave, do you really think that Boris won't have backed remain? He is not a serious politician at a time when we need serious people to make big, tough decisions.
Off the top of my head, Boris has promised: * £350 million a week extra spending on the NHS. * A cut in VAT * No tax rises * No cuts in public services * Cheaper housing * Substantial cuts in immigration * All current EU subsidies and grants maintained in full by the UK government * Freedom to work, study and settle inside the EU for UK citizens * A plethora of beneficial trade deals If he becomes Prime Minister he will be expected to deliver on them. But he can't. And that's why the Tories would be mad to choose him. I really hope they do, though. He deserves it.
I did read Boris wants Ozzy to continue as Chancellor, because being Chancellor won't be fun and a career ender for Gove.
Apparently the cuts in our credit ratings means selling Government debt will be harder as some organisations only buy debt from top rated countries.
Most of those requirements were relaxed after the US lost its triple A rating. In any case it seems likely that the BoE will announce £50-75bn in QE to calm markets and to ensure there are no failures in debt auctions.
I think it is the two notch drop that is causing issues.
City bloke on sky said the credit rating "didn't really matter", and mattered more for corporations. Not sure if he was an "expert" though.........
Maybe. Many investment funds have investment criteria which means that their investments must have a minimum credit rating. An inability to hold UK government debt widely would have an unfortunate effect on pricing.
Let's see what happens to gilt prices. When the Americans were downgraded it made no difference as investors thought the US Treasury more reliable than the ratings agencies.
You also need to take account of the cost of insuring gilts
"The cost of insuring exposure to debt from the UK almost doubled after the vote, surging to the highest level in nearly four years."
And as matt said, plenty of funds only invest in AAA sovereign debt which we are now excluded from.
That last bit is interesting. I understand the French don't have an AAA. Nor Spain, Italy, Portugal, China, Japan, etc. It's an intriguing portfolio that is left: Germany, US and Australia, plus much smaller economies.
That way you have an election to confirm the type of Brexit
There's a problem with that.
So we have this election and we select Brexit option B, which we then take to the EU, who tell us to take a hike.
We wanted it, we voted for it, we can't have it...
For me the options are someone who will say "despite the vote we are not leaving", (democratic if they put that to a GE)
or Boris who has to try and salvage something, anything from his own wreckage (democratic and foolish)
I do thing - given the disparate views and the significance of the decision - it is important to get it ratified by the public. A general election is the wrong format for that.
It seems to me that whoever the next PM is should negotiate what they think is right and then put it to a vote:
(1) Accept the deal [presumably some kind of FTA with some form of compromise on FoM]
or
(2) Leave the EU with no deal
I am fairly sure that option (1) would win in such a vote.
Is option 1 remaining in the Single Market and if it is why should the EU grant the UK restrictions on FoM. If it isn't, why should they agree it all; that would represent a very poor deal for them, wouldn't it?
There is an important issue here. EEA membership is NOT the same as EU membership when it comes to freedom of movement. EU membership contains EU citizenship which means rights and no discrimination (e.g. so no ban on benefits). EEA membership allows free movement but there is no concept of citizenship and as far as I can tell both Lichtenstein and Switzerland (EFTA) have special exemptions already. There will need to be provisions for people with job offers to work in the UK but everything else is up for grabs. I think that EEA countries can withdrawal ALL benefits from EU citizens. If Cameron had gotten that deal he would have easily won the referendum.
I prefer a full withdrawal, even with no FTA. But I think the EEA may be a viable compromise as there is flexibility on what freedom of movement means.
I've always supported a directly elected president of the eu as a step in the right direction, and replacing the endless unelected ones, to addressing the undeniable democratic deficit in the EU. Of course it's unlikely to come to pass anytime soon because member state heads of governments wouldn't like the idea. Thoughts on here from leavers regarding that?
(Please, no one respond with "so you want President Blair"!)
We elect our MPs and yet one of the largest votes in modern history has shown even they are completely out of touch.
Sky finally seems to be moving towards the Acceptance stage of Brexit this morning. Some MPs made complete Charlies of themselves yesterday - Lammy being the most absurd.
I think all the EU Parly footage has made the vote flesh in the minds of Remainers and Brexiteers alike.
I'm very uncomfortable with any politician backing a future that doesn't stop EU FoM and getting our sovereignty back. Those were the two biggest issues for the Brexit win. Any backsliding on that will cause a revolt.
There's a lot of post-vote silliness going on all over. I'll wait to see what the contenders say re the Tory leadership election. I understand why Boris poured soothing words on Remainers yesterday - that doesn't concern me.
The more I think about May - the more uncomfortable I become. She's been spineless over Brexit, swapped sides and then hidden behind the sofa for the whole campaign. That's not leadership using any yardstick. At least Boris for whatever reason put himself on the line and won against the odds.
My mind is now much more open about who I'll vote for.
I'll put the scenario to you, if the PM had come back in February and backed leave, do you really think that Boris won't have backed remain? He is not a serious politician at a time when we need serious people to make big, tough decisions.
Off the top of my head, Boris has promised: * £350 million a week extra spending on the NHS. * A cut in VAT * No tax rises * No cuts in public services * Cheaper housing * Substantial cuts in immigration * All current EU subsidies and grants maintained in full by the UK government * Freedom to work, study and settle inside the EU for UK citizens * A plethora of beneficial trade deals If he becomes Prime Minister he will be expected to deliver on them. But he can't. And that's why the Tories would be mad to choose him. I really hope they do, though. He deserves it.
Why is Osborne on R4 saying we'll have tax rises and spending cuts when he's not going to be CoE in the new HMG set up?
He's stirring.
Some more taxes on the super rich and the likes of Starbucks and Google would not go amiss. The 1% owning more than the other 99% annoys not only left wingers. It's all got very skewed
No idea how to do this in practice, but a new Chancellor could contradict the old one and buy back some Tory support from the middle ground, which will be needed
That statement from Osborne should rule him out of the next Govt. He no longer sets the policy and should not be trying to. The new Chancellor needs to be more positive and avoid a panic budget with further cuts (except in the EU and overseas aid)
Why does anyone need to be positive - surely the very fact of Brexit should have sent the £ and the stock markets soaring. You're the one who is off message.
I never said or expected stock markets or the £ to soar and note that FTSE100 is up on Febuary.
Perhaps you should have made a statement to calm them. Since when is February a key date in the calendar or the FTSE 100 any guide to the real state of typical English companies? But again surely the very fact of Brexit is its own salesman for the glorioius strength of the almighty British economy - why oh why can't the markets see that - even Mervyn King the Brexpert thinks so.
I've always supported a directly elected president of the eu as a step in the right direction, and replacing the endless unelected ones, to addressing the undeniable democratic deficit in the EU. Of course it's unlikely to come to pass anytime soon because member state heads of governments wouldn't like the idea. Thoughts on here from leavers regarding that?
(Please, no one respond with "so you want President Blair"!)
We elect our MPs and yet one of the largest votes in modern history has shown even they are completely out of touch.
Sky finally seems to be moving towards the Acceptance stage of Brexit this morning. Some MPs made complete Charlies of themselves yesterday - Lammy being the most absurd.
I think all the EU Parly footage has made the vote flesh in the minds of Remainers and Brexiteers alike.
I'm very uncomfortable with any politician backing a future that doesn't stop EU FoM and getting our sovereignty back. Those were the two biggest issues for the Brexit win. Any backsliding on that will cause a revolt.
There's a lot of post-vote silliness going on all over. I'll wait to see what the contenders say re the Tory leadership election. I understand why Boris poured soothing words on Remainers yesterday - that doesn't concern me.
The more I think about May - the more uncomfortable I become. She's been spineless over Brexit, swapped sides and then hidden behind the sofa for the whole campaign. That's not leadership using any yardstick. At least Boris for whatever reason put himself on the line and won against the odds.
My mind is now much more open about who I'll vote for.
I'll put the scenario to you, if the PM had come back in February and backed leave, do you really think that Boris won't have backed remain? He is not a serious politician at a time when we need serious people to make big, tough decisions.
Off the top of my head, Boris has promised: * £350 million a week extra spending on the NHS. * A cut in VAT * No tax rises * No cuts in public services * Cheaper housing * Substantial cuts in immigration * All current EU subsidies and grants maintained in full by the UK government * Freedom to work, study and settle inside the EU for UK citizens * A plethora of beneficial trade deals If he becomes Prime Minister he will be expected to deliver on them. But he can't. And that's why the Tories would be mad to choose him. I really hope they do, though. He deserves it.
I am sure there has been over the past few days racist / xenophobic incidents, but unfortunately there are every week. The story you linked is the like the story in Crewe, that if it happened yesterday would have been front page news as example of post brexit hate crime. Rather than I'm harder than you, let's see about that, I'm getting my mates, well I'm getting my dad & his mates.
The same happens after terrorist attacks the media focus on stories of Muslim backlash, then when the incidents are investigated & number compiled at the end of the year they show that every week some knuckle dragged chucks rocks at a mosque but the number of incidents are small and happen on a regular basis, terrorist attack or not.
Nick does not like me saying it, but it is clear that his support for Corbyn is more important to him than Labour being in power and preventing a right wing Tory government with a fresh mandate inflicting more misery on the people that Labour is supposed to represent. Unfortunately, I suspect his mindset still predominates inside the membership and that Corbyn will continue as leader. That will kill the Labour party.
I agree that Corbyn should go, but the aim of "a Labour government" isn't enough. The reason that most of the country voted to leave is simple - millions and millions of people left behind by globalisation and neo-liberal economics. We in the Labour Party didn't do enough to materially improve people's life chances, we were too close to Tory economics and that has created a gulf between the haves and have nots.
Unless the next Labour government is going to actually listen to people and actually drive policies to make an actual difference we may as well not bother. That is why I voted for Jeremy because we needed a change of direction. But the plan was never that Jezza stay in place through to the election, he was going to go in 2018 (see Owen Jones piece this morning). Unfortunately whilst his politics are correct his execution is woeful - it has been since the start and it just isn't getting better. So he has to go.
If Continuity New Labour take over and impose Jarvis then Momentum will split away. If Corbyn digs in and refuses to accept he's done then Progress will split away. Both sub-parties have mass support and nationwide organisation, it WILL happen one way or another unless we can appoint a compromise candidate from the centre.
I always regretted many of the deputy leadership contenders not wanting the top job as the likes of Tom Watson and Angela Eagle always struck me as far better than the others. Corbyn should accept the inevitable, Tom takes over in the interim, and I hope he and Angela run.
Speaking personally I find May deeply uninspiring. Her low profile during the referendum campaign was pretty typical of her time in the Home Office. She is a bureaucrat with only a patina of personality. Her Desert Island Discs program was stunningly dull and I was left checking that she was not even older than I thought.
I think you would have to be very anti-Boris to choose her as leader. No doubt many people are but well meaning, earnest, moderately bright and ultra cautious is not enough for PM. The comparison with what has been lost in Cameron is just painful. This single factor came closer to changing my vote to remain than anything said in the whole campaign.
I've always supported a directly elected president of the eu as a step in the right direction, and replacing the endless unelected ones, to addressing the undeniable democratic deficit in the EU. Of course it's unlikely to come to pass anytime soon because member state heads of governments wouldn't like the idea. Thoughts on here from leavers regarding that?
(Please, no one respond with "so you want President Blair"!)
We elect our MPs and yet one of the largest votes in modern history has shown even they are completely out of touch.
Sky finally seems to be moving towards the Acceptance stage of Brexit this morning. Some MPs made complete Charlies of themselves yesterday - Lammy being the most absurd.
I think all the EU Parly footage has made the vote flesh in the minds of Remainers and Brexiteers alike.
I'm very uncomfortable with any politician backing a future that doesn't stop EU FoM and getting our sovereignty back. Those were the two biggest issues for the Brexit win. Any backsliding on that will cause a revolt.
There's a lot of post-vote silliness going on all over. I'll wait to see what the contenders say re the Tory leadership election. I understand why Boris poured soothing words on Remainers yesterday - that doesn't concern me.
The more I think about May - the more uncomfortable I become. She's been spineless over Brexit, swapped sides and then hidden behind the sofa for the whole campaign. That's not leadership using any yardstick. At least Boris for whatever reason put himself on the line and won against the odds.
My mind is now much more open about who I'll vote for.
I'll put the scenario to you, if the PM had come back in February and backed leave, do you really think that Boris won't have backed remain? He is not a serious politician at a time when we need serious people to make big, tough decisions.
Off the top of my head, Boris has promised: * £350 million a week extra spending on the NHS. * A cut in VAT * No tax rises * No cuts in public services * Cheaper housing * Substantial cuts in immigration * All current EU subsidies and grants maintained in full by the UK government * Freedom to work, study and settle inside the EU for UK citizens * A plethora of beneficial trade deals If he becomes Prime Minister he will be expected to deliver on them. But he can't. And that's why the Tories would be mad to choose him. I really hope they do, though. He deserves it.
I've always supported a directly elected president of the eu as a step in the right direction, and replacing the endless unelected ones, to addressing the undeniable democratic deficit in the EU. Of course it's unlikely to come to pass anytime soon because member state heads of governments wouldn't like the idea. Thoughts on here from leavers regarding that?
(Please, no one respond with "so you want President Blair"!)
We elect our MPs and yet one of the largest votes in modern history has shown even they are completely out of touch.
Sky finally seems to be moving towards the Acceptance stage of Brexit this morning. Some MPs made complete Charlies of themselves yesterday - Lammy being the most absurd.
I think all the EU Parly footage has made the vote flesh in the minds of Remainers and Brexiteers alike.
I'm very uncomfortable with any politician backing a future that doesn't stop EU FoM and getting our sovereignty back. Those were the two biggest issues for the Brexit win. Any backsliding on that will cause a revolt.
There's a lot of post-vote silliness going on all over. I'll wait to see what the contenders say re the Tory leadership election. I understand why Boris poured soothing words on Remainers yesterday - that doesn't concern me.
The more I think about May - the more uncomfortable I become. She's been spineless over Brexit, swapped sides and then hidden behind the sofa for the whole campaign. That's not leadership using any yardstick. At least Boris for whatever reason put himself on the line and won against the odds.
My mind is now much more open about who I'll vote for.
I'll put the scenario to you, if the PM had come back in February and backed leave, do you really think that Boris won't have backed remain? He is not a serious politician at a time when we need serious people to make big, tough decisions.
Off the top of my head, Boris has promised: * £350 million a week extra spending on the NHS. * A cut in VAT * No tax rises * No cuts in public services * Cheaper housing * Substantial cuts in immigration * All current EU subsidies and grants maintained in full by the UK government * Freedom to work, study and settle inside the EU for UK citizens * A plethora of beneficial trade deals If he becomes Prime Minister he will be expected to deliver on them. But he can't. And that's why the Tories would be mad to choose him. I really hope they do, though. He deserves it.
Whereas May has promised nothing
Exactly. There is nothing to pin on her. That makes her far more formidable in Brussels and at a GE.
That way you have an election to confirm the type of Brexit
There's a problem with that.
So we have this election and we select Brexit option B, which we then take to the EU, who tell us to take a hike.
We wanted it, we voted for it, we can't have it...
For me the options are someone who will say "despite the vote we are not leaving", (democratic if they put that to a GE)
or Boris who has to try and salvage something, anything from his own wreckage (democratic and foolish)
I do thing - given the disparate views and the significance of the decision - it is important to get it ratified by the public. A general election is the wrong format for that.
It seems to me that whoever the next PM is should negotiate what they think is right and then put it to a vote:
(1) Accept the deal [presumably some kind of FTA with some form of compromise on FoM]
or
(2) Leave the EU with no deal
I am fairly sure that option (1) would win in such a vote.
Is option 1 remaining in the Single Market and if it is why should the EU grant the UK restrictions on FoM. If it isn't, why should they agree it all; that would represent a very poor deal for them, wouldn't it?
The compromise probably be the EEA emergency brake and eventually reciprocal welfare restrictions. Enough for the EU to say they aren't compromising the integrity of free movement within the EU since we won't be in it and enough for the British PM to sell it to the party and voters in 2020.
Who know...could be...but what's the benefit for the EU in somehow letting the UK slightly off the hook. Why can't they just offer normal EEA membership and say take it or leave it?
Looking at the debate in Brussels the EU is having a bit of a crisis
Currently Merkel is the only on that matters and she's leaving all her options open.
Except the deal was so shit nobody on the remain side dared to mention it.
It was better than any other deal we will ever get now
So thanks...
You don't really care about Brexit or not Brexit either way. You just want to settle scores for Cameron and Osborne being destroyed...
Losing a Prime Minister who has won you an outright majority for the first time in 18 years isn't an optimal outcome is it.
Well I'm not especially bothered but then I'm not a Con member. Cameron was going anyway though so it's not like he'd have been around for 2020 in any case.
That's true but it does highlight some lack of judgement, at best, on the right of the Tory party.
Well I think the calculation from Tory voters (don't know about the MP's) is that politicians come and go and as impressive as Cameron was/is we'll only get one chance to pull the plug...
The Corbyn movement within the Labour party is a reaction against Blair, the so-called "Blairites" and New Labour thought.
This is ironic.
Increasingly, they are personality cult and party-within-a-party more than Blair and New Labour ever was.
They are everything they object to.
Until that question is answered, I'm afraid that the challenge will falter. We have already answered the question last year: "Would you rather be led by an socialist who might possibly win or someone with few policies but a better chance of winning?"
Come on Nick!!
"A socialist who might possibly win" - that socialist is not Corbyn sadly.
Corbyn will take the Labour party to its worst defeat since WW2. That is as sure as night following day.
This is why we must act now to ensure working people and the vulnerable have a voice in Parliament. Corbyn must go - no ifs, no buts.
The idea that Corbyn might possibly win a general election is utterly ludicrous and shows just how divorced from reality Nick is. Last September the UK had not just voted to leave the EU, David Cameron had not resigned and the UK was not facing a general election within a year. The plan was to amble gently along to a meh kind of defeat at the 2020 general election - once again taking Labour heartlands for granted - and to see what kind of internal changes Corbyn and his mates could engineer in the meantime to seal the socialist deal internally. Well, look how things have changed. A serious political party would face up to that. Unfortunately, too many Labour members are not serious people.
Nick does not like me saying it, but it is clear that his support for Corbyn is more important to him than Labour being in power and preventing a right wing Tory government with a fresh mandate inflicting more misery on the people that Labour is supposed to represent. Unfortunately, I suspect his mindset still predominates inside the membership and that Corbyn will continue as leader. That will kill the Labour party.
I am not sure Corbyn will win. Last time he got 59% on the first ballot with the £3ers, many of them Tories.
I am still not sure about the £3ers. Can they vote ?
As long as his first round vote is below 47%, he will lose.
One thing that makes me think you might be right is Watson's involvement. He is nobody's fool and will have plotted a clear route to removing Corbyn, I should think.
Why is Osborne on R4 saying we'll have tax rises and spending cuts when he's not going to be CoE in the new HMG set up?
He's stirring.
Some more taxes on the super rich and the likes of Starbucks and Google would not go amiss. The 1% owning more than the other 99% annoys not only left wingers. It's all got very skewed
No idea how to do this in practice, but a new Chancellor could contradict the old one and buy back some Tory support from the middle ground, which will be needed
That statement from Osborne should rule him out of the next Govt. He no longer sets the policy and should not be trying to. The new Chancellor needs to be more positive and avoid a panic budget with further cuts (except in the EU and overseas aid)
Why does anyone need to be positive - surely the very fact of Brexit should have sent the £ and the stock markets soaring. You're the one who is off message.
I never said or expected stock markets or the £ to soar and note that FTSE100 is up on Febuary.
The FTSE 100 is only up on February because the £ has fallen so far and the 75% of revenue FTSE 100 companies get from outside the UK is suddenly worth more. This is basic economics - come on.
Its still Boris vs not Boris. I hope that the Tory party finds the choice as impossible and damaging as our Jezza vs not Jezza
Regarding Jexit. It seems that the whips will all resign when the no confidence motion is carried. Perhaps Corbyn needs to draft in Momentum activists to be whips as there won't be anyone left to be a whip nor will the whips be able to successfully whip the PLP
The choice for Labour members is now clear: vote for Corbyn and kill the Labour party; or vote for someone else and have a chance of keeping it alive. This is not about Blairites versus the membership. It is about relevance v irrelevance.
I wonder if it is worth it. Whether a centre/centre-left party, shorn of the baggage of both Labour and the LibDems, is now what is needed. Free of socialism, free of the Trade Union paymasters, free of Blair and tuition fees. Socially liberal, but without overbearing adherence to everything PC.
Fiscally sensible but looking out for the poorest in our society. A true safety net for those in need, without pandering to those who see a life on state hand-outs as a career choice.
Meeting our obligation to international aid - but not embarrassed to say that we have enough on our plate looking after the poorest of our country's 60 million without feeling an obligation to provide for all of the planet's 6 billion.
(These last two paras might sound very Tory, but they are things that REALLY get many Labour voters pissed off.)
Where politicians with experience of life outside the Westminster bubble is hugely valued over careerist SPADS or family name.
These basic tenets should be enough to open a can of whoop-ass over the Tories.
Just completed a YouGov poll with most of the questions on the Tories and the leadership. Just loving ticking the box expressing max dissatisfaction for Johnson and Gove. And for TSE, I 'voted' for May as next leader....a day is a long time in politics down 'Ersham way.
I did one all about Labour. It asked if I thought Corbyn was doing a great job as Labour leader - I *strongly agreed*
I did the same survey and also "strongly agreed"
I answered all of the questions about alternative leadership candidates with positives about the worst options. Screw 'em.
The choice for Labour members is now clear: vote for Corbyn and kill the Labour party; or vote for someone else and have a chance of keeping it alive. This is not about Blairites versus the membership. It is about relevance v irrelevance.
The idea that Corbyn is going to be able to win a leadership election is for the birds.
Remember the electorate of £3ers though, anyone can sign up.
They'll be able to weed out anyone with a public profile (didn't they catch a Tory MP last time?) but the whole process is open to abuse and infiltration, as well as those youngsters who think the Corbyn is wonderful and the Evil Blairite Red Tories should be deselected!
Oh, and who is actually going to stand against him this time?
£3ers works both ways though. And the people doing the weeding out won't necessarily be pro-Corbyn (isn't it done on a local level?).
From memory last time they registered the £3ers centrally, but sensibly used local resources for the weeding out process. The weeding out process itself wasn't planned though, and was hurredly arranged once media reports surfaced of people registering who clearly didn't have the best intentions of the Labour Party at heart.
They found members and former members of all the other parties, including councillors and the MP (Tim Loughton) as well as right-leaning journalists such as Harry Cole and one of Guido's juniors.
Speaking personally I find May deeply uninspiring. Her low profile during the referendum campaign was pretty typical of her time in the Home Office. She is a bureaucrat with only a patina of personality. Her Desert Island Discs program was stunningly dull and I was left checking that she was not even older than I thought.
I think you would have to be very anti-Boris to choose her as leader. No doubt many people are but well meaning, earnest, moderately bright and ultra cautious is not enough for PM. The comparison with what has been lost in Cameron is just painful. This single factor came closer to changing my vote to remain than anything said in the whole campaign.
If Cameron had backed Leave, he'd have carried all before him - his Party members, his MPs and most of his voters/plus all those other Leavers.
Talk about backing the wrong side. The subject of many future books.
The Telegraph: Neither Labour nor the Tories are fit for purpose in a post-Brexit world – we need some new political parties. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIw2rfw4iU
That I would agree with entirely. Except I would suggest neither were they fit for purpose before Brexit.
The worst you can say about May is that she's cold. Maybe her soft Remain is worse than a soft Leave, but there's not too much in that.
Whilst I didn't expect to do so a few months ago, if it is her v Boris (or Fox) I will happily vote for her.
The PB 4 May faction is gathering strength!
IMHO May has more chance of reaching over (or around) to the leavers than Boris has to the remainers.
But. There are IMHO more hardened LEAVErs than hardened REMAINers amongst tory MPs (Step 1) There are 2 LEAVErs for every 1 REMAINer amongst the Tory party members (Step 2).
She needs to convince twice as many as Boris does then - I think she can do that.
Speaking personally I find May deeply uninspiring. Her low profile during the referendum campaign was pretty typical of her time in the Home Office. She is a bureaucrat with only a patina of personality. Her Desert Island Discs program was stunningly dull and I was left checking that she was not even older than I thought.
I think you would have to be very anti-Boris to choose her as leader. No doubt many people are but well meaning, earnest, moderately bright and ultra cautious is not enough for PM. The comparison with what has been lost in Cameron is just painful. This single factor came closer to changing my vote to remain than anything said in the whole campaign.
What exactly was so interesting about Cameron? He just seemed like an empty shell who'd be sent to the Prime ministerial finishing school.
That way you have an election to confirm the type of Brexit
There's a problem with that.
So we have this election and we select Brexit option B, which we then take to the EU, who tell us to take a hike.
We wanted it, we voted for it, we can't have it...
For me the options are someone who will say "despite the vote we are not leaving", (democratic if they put that to a GE)
or Boris who has to try and salvage something, anything from his own wreckage (democratic and foolish)
I do thing - given the disparate views and the significance of the decision - it is important to get it ratified by the public. A general election is the wrong format for that.
It seems to me that whoever the next PM is should negotiate what they think is right and then put it to a vote:
(1) Accept the deal [presumably some kind of FTA with some form of compromise on FoM]
or
(2) Leave the EU with no deal
I am fairly sure that option (1) would win in such a vote.
Is option 1 remaining in the Single Market and if it is why should the EU grant the UK restrictions on FoM. If it isn't, why should they agree it all; that would represent a very poor deal for them, wouldn't it?
The compromise probably be the EEA emergency brake and eventually reciprocal welfare restrictions. Enough for the EU to say they aren't compromising the integrity of free movement within the EU since we won't be in it and enough for the British PM to sell it to the party and voters in 2020.
Who know...could be...but what's the benefit for the EU in somehow letting the UK slightly off the hook. Why can't they just offer normal EEA membership and say take it or leave it?
Looking at the debate in Brussels the EU is having a bit of a crisis
Currently Merkel is the only on that matters and she's leaving all her options open.
She's found some of the marbles she spilled last summer.
Miss Plato, there's another lesson to take. If Cameron had campaigned to convince and persuade rather than cajole, frighten and belittle, he wouldn't won.
It turns out 'Little England' isn't a clever catchphrase when the majority of the electorate are English.
Why is Osborne on R4 saying we'll have tax rises and spending cuts when he's not going to be CoE in the new HMG set up?
He's stirring.
Some more taxes on the super rich and the likes of Starbucks and Google would not go amiss. The 1% owning more than the other 99% annoys not only left wingers. It's all got very skewed
No idea how to do this in practice, but a new Chancellor could contradict the old one and buy back some Tory support from the middle ground, which will be needed
That statement from Osborne should rule him out of the next Govt. He no longer sets the policy and should not be trying to. The new Chancellor needs to be more positive and avoid a panic budget with further cuts (except in the EU and overseas aid)
Why does anyone need to be positive - surely the very fact of Brexit should have sent the £ and the stock markets soaring. You're the one who is off message.
I never said or expected stock markets or the £ to soar and note that FTSE100 is up on Febuary.
The FTSE 100 is only up on February because the £ has fallen so far and the 75% of revenue FTSE 100 companies get from outside the UK is suddenly worth more. This is basic economics - come on.
Just completed a YouGov poll with most of the questions on the Tories and the leadership. Just loving ticking the box expressing max dissatisfaction for Johnson and Gove. And for TSE, I 'voted' for May as next leader....a day is a long time in politics down 'Ersham way.
I did one all about Labour. It asked if I thought Corbyn was doing a great job as Labour leader - I *strongly agreed*
I did the same survey and also "strongly agreed"
I answered all of the questions about alternative leadership candidates with positives about the worst options. Screw 'em.
Why is Osborne on R4 saying we'll have tax rises and spending cuts when he's not going to be CoE in the new HMG set up?
He's stirring.
Some more taxes on the super rich and the likes of Starbucks and Google would not go amiss. The 1% owning more than the other 99% annoys not only left wingers. It's all got very skewed
No idea how to do this in practice, but a new Chancellor could contradict the old one and buy back some Tory support from the middle ground, which will be needed
That statement from Osborne should rule him out of the next Govt. He no longer sets the policy and should not be trying to. The new Chancellor needs to be more positive and avoid a panic budget with further cuts (except in the EU and overseas aid)
Why does anyone need to be positive - surely the very fact of Brexit should have sent the £ and the stock markets soaring. You're the one who is off message.
I never said or expected stock markets or the £ to soar and note that FTSE100 is up on Febuary.
The FTSE 100 is only up on February because the £ has fallen so far and the 75% of revenue FTSE 100 companies get from outside the UK is suddenly worth more. This is basic economics - come on.
That is sort of the point. The UK has a balance of payments deficit, so you WANT the pound to fall to make inflows more valuable and exports more competitive. The fall in the pound is great news for the UK economy and demonstrates why (as if it needed repeating) that being in the Euro would be such a disaster. The risk of depreciation is importing inflation which is a low concern right now. The main task should be to make sure the pound stays low where it needs to be to address the balance of payments problem.
Speaking personally I find May deeply uninspiring. Her low profile during the referendum campaign was pretty typical of her time in the Home Office. She is a bureaucrat with only a patina of personality. Her Desert Island Discs program was stunningly dull and I was left checking that she was not even older than I thought.
I think you would have to be very anti-Boris to choose her as leader. No doubt many people are but well meaning, earnest, moderately bright and ultra cautious is not enough for PM. The comparison with what has been lost in Cameron is just painful. This single factor came closer to changing my vote to remain than anything said in the whole campaign.
If Cameron had backed Leave, he'd have carried all before him - his Party members, his MPs and most of his voters/plus all those other Leavers.
Talk about backing the wrong side. The subject of many future books.
How could anyone back a side that they believed was so wrong for the country? Cameron has followed Clegg in paying a big price for doing what they thought was right. The question is will Boris do the same when the time comes.
Speaking personally I find May deeply uninspiring. Her low profile during the referendum campaign was pretty typical of her time in the Home Office. She is a bureaucrat with only a patina of personality. Her Desert Island Discs program was stunningly dull and I was left checking that she was not even older than I thought.
I think you would have to be very anti-Boris to choose her as leader. No doubt many people are but well meaning, earnest, moderately bright and ultra cautious is not enough for PM. The comparison with what has been lost in Cameron is just painful. This single factor came closer to changing my vote to remain than anything said in the whole campaign.
If Cameron had backed Leave, he'd have carried all before him - his Party members, his MPs and most of his voters/plus all those other Leavers.
Talk about backing the wrong side. The subject of many future books.
I agree. It is unfortunate. A 52:48 division of the country was really a worst case scenario too. A decisive win one way or the other would have been better.
10.40 Graham Allen, Labour’s MP from Nottingham North is reportedly boycotting today’s no confidence vote... says he will abstain from the vote to avoid legitimising any particular faction. He also voices discontent over a vote that has no procedural standing in the party.
10.31 Labour MPs expect a two-thirds vote of no confidence in Corbyn when the result is announced around 4:30pm. They then expect a mass resignation of whips (a leader's last line of defence) to follow.
I'm also told there is "growing pressure" on Tom Watson from all wings of the party to stand against Corbyn.
The choice for Labour members is now clear: vote for Corbyn and kill the Labour party; or vote for someone else and have a chance of keeping it alive. This is not about Blairites versus the membership. It is about relevance v irrelevance.
The idea that Corbyn is going to be able to win a leadership election is for the birds.
Remember the electorate of £3ers though, anyone can sign up.
They'll be able to weed out anyone with a public profile (didn't they catch a Tory MP last time?) but the whole process is open to abuse and infiltration, as well as those youngsters who think the Corbyn is wonderful and the Evil Blairite Red Tories should be deselected!
Oh, and who is actually going to stand against him this time?
Many £3 members feel betrayed. And that is a very strong emotion.
They were expecting a lot for £3. For many couples the betrayal cost thousands.
Why is Osborne on R4 saying we'll have tax rises and spending cuts when he's not going to be CoE in the new HMG set up?
He's stirring.
Some more taxes on the super rich and the likes of Starbucks and Google would not go amiss. The 1% owning more than the other 99% annoys not only left wingers. It's all got very skewed
No idea how to do this in practice, but a new Chancellor could contradict the old one and buy back some Tory support from the middle ground, which will be needed
That statement from Osborne should rule him out of the next Govt. He no longer sets the policy and should not be trying to. The new Chancellor needs to be more positive and avoid a panic budget with further cuts (except in the EU and overseas aid)
Why does anyone need to be positive - surely the very fact of Brexit should have sent the £ and the stock markets soaring. You're the one who is off message.
I never said or expected stock markets or the £ to soar and note that FTSE100 is up on Febuary.
The FTSE 100 is only up on February because the £ has fallen so far and the 75% of revenue FTSE 100 companies get from outside the UK is suddenly worth more. This is basic economics - come on.
250 is currently up close to 3%
Don't confuse the poor boy with facts.
FTSE 250 revenue is just over 50% from outside UK, so again, drop in value of the £ is beneficial in the short term.
That way you have an election to confirm the type of Brexit
There's a problem with that.
So we have this election and we select Brexit option B, which we then take to the EU, who tell us to take a hike.
We wanted it, we voted for it, we can't have it...
For me the options are someone who will say "despite the vote we are not leaving", (democratic if they put that to a GE)
or Boris who has to try and salvage something, anything from his own wreckage (democratic and foolish)
I do thing - given the disparate views and the significance of the decision - it is important to get it ratified by the public. A general election is the wrong format for that.
It seems to me that whoever the next PM is should negotiate what they think is right and then put it to a vote:
(1) Accept the deal [presumably some kind of FTA with some form of compromise on FoM]
or
(2) Leave the EU with no deal
I am fairly sure that option (1) would win in such a vote.
Is option 1 remaining in the Single Market and if it is why should the EU grant the UK restrictions on FoM. If it isn't, why should they agree it all; that would represent a very poor deal for them, wouldn't it?
The compromise probably be the EEA emergency brake and eventually reciprocal welfare restrictions. Enough for the EU to say they aren't compromising the integrity of free movement within the EU since we won't be in it and enough for the British PM to sell it to the party and voters in 2020.
Who know...could be...but what's the benefit for the EU in somehow letting the UK slightly off the hook. Why can't they just offer normal EEA membership and say take it or leave it?
They have a lot to lose if we walk out of the exit door, last year we imported €360bn worth of goods and services from the EU, around 3.5% of EUexUK GDP, much of it localised in northern EU power broker nations. They won't want to put that at risk. The risk of giving us concessions is that others will want the same, of course, but I think the concessions will work both ways because it will be reciprocal, our people in the EU would also lose welfare rights. Many other nations might not be happy with that solution.
If Cameron had backed Leave, he'd have carried all before him - his Party members, his MPs and most of his voters/plus all those other Leavers.
Talk about backing the wrong side. The subject of many future books.
He did what he thought was right. Indeed, he'll probably be proved right by history. Either way, it's a bit rich of those who accuse him of 'not having principles' to complain that he didn't cynically decide to campaign for Leave, against his better judgement, to save his career.
'Speaking personally I find May deeply uninspiring.'
My reason for choosing Boris is he comes with Gove. The latter is the only person I really trust to deliver a lasting settlement.
Gove did the thinking for the referendum, and he should do the thinking now. He's been very quiet since the vote - I don;t know why.
I agree. But Gove is surely going to have an important role in the new Cabinet no matter who wins. He was one of very few to come out of the referendum with his reputation enhanced.
Why is Osborne on R4 saying we'll have tax rises and spending cuts when he's not going to be CoE in the new HMG set up?
He's stirring.
Some more taxes on the super rich and the likes of Starbucks and Google would not go amiss. The 1% owning more than the other 99% annoys not only left wingers. It's all got very skewed
No idea how to do this in practice, but a new Chancellor could contradict the old one and buy back some Tory support from the middle ground, which will be needed
That statement from Osborne should rule him out of the next Govt. He no longer sets the policy and should not be trying to. The new Chancellor needs to be more positive and avoid a panic budget with further cuts (except in the EU and overseas aid)
Why does anyone need to be positive - surely the very fact of Brexit should have sent the £ and the stock markets soaring. You're the one who is off message.
I never said or expected stock markets or the £ to soar and note that FTSE100 is up on Febuary.
The FTSE 100 is only up on February because the £ has fallen so far and the 75% of revenue FTSE 100 companies get from outside the UK is suddenly worth more. This is basic economics - come on.
250 is currently up close to 3%
Don't confuse the poor boy with facts.
FTSE 250 revenue is just over 50% from outside UK, so again, drop in value of the £ is beneficial in the short term.
Pound up today against the dollar.
Markets have taken a hit, but it's hardly the collapse of western civilisation.
Its still Boris vs not Boris. I hope that the Tory party finds the choice as impossible and damaging as our Jezza vs not Jezza
Regarding Jexit. It seems that the whips will all resign when the no confidence motion is carried. Perhaps Corbyn needs to draft in Momentum activists to be whips as there won't be anyone left to be a whip nor will the whips be able to successfully whip the PLP
The choice for Labour members is now clear: vote for Corbyn and kill the Labour party; or vote for someone else and have a chance of keeping it alive. This is not about Blairites versus the membership. It is about relevance v irrelevance.
I wonder if it is worth it. Whether a centre/centre-left party, shorn of the baggage of both Labour and the LibDems, is now what is needed. Free of socialism, free of the Trade Union paymasters, free of Blair and tuition fees. Socially liberal, but without overbearing adherence to everything PC.
Fiscally sensible but looking out for the poorest in our society. A true safety net for those in need, without pandering to those who see a life on state hand-outs as a career choice.
Meeting our obligation to international aid - but not embarrassed to say that we have enough on our plate looking after the poorest of our country's 60 million without feeling an obligation to provide for all of the planet's 6 billion.
(These last two paras might sound very Tory, but they are things that REALLY get many Labour voters pissed off.)
Where politicians with experience of life outside the Westminster bubble is hugely valued over careerist SPADS or family name.
These basic tenets should be enough to open a can of whoop-ass over the Tories.
Right now, we need an opposition that can scrutinise the government's approach to Brexit. One that can ask hard questions, raise alternative scenarios and look credible enough to be seen as a replacement. And when I say "we" I mean the country as a whole. We all have a stake in making sure the Brexit terns are the best they can be and for that to happen it cannot just be an internal Tory debate. Realignment can wait until everything is settled.
10.40 Graham Allen, Labour’s MP from Nottingham North is reportedly boycotting today’s no confidence vote... says he will abstain from the vote to avoid legitimising any particular faction. He also voices discontent over a vote that has no procedural standing in the party.
If Cameron had backed Leave, he'd have carried all before him - his Party members, his MPs and most of his voters/plus all those other Leavers. Talk about backing the wrong side. The subject of many future books.
Not all those who voted Leave would have backed Cameron, Ms Plato. I was in two minds, until the very end.
If Cameron and Osborne had been on the Leave side, with their dirty tricks, threats and bullying, I would have found it very easy to go for Remain, who would presumably have had a much more respectful campaign.
Miss Plato, there's another lesson to take. If Cameron had campaigned to convince and persuade rather than cajole, frighten and belittle, he wouldn't won.
It turns out 'Little England' isn't a clever catchphrase when the majority of the electorate are English.
Isn't it time Brexiters moved on from the campaign and the corpse kicking. why on earth aren't you more celebratory about the glorious victory and finalising where you're going to spend all the Brexibonus money we heard so much about.
Why is Osborne on R4 saying we'll have tax rises and spending cuts when he's not going to be CoE in the new HMG set up?
He's stirring.
Some more taxes on the super rich and the likes of Starbucks and Google would not go amiss. The 1% owning more than the other 99% annoys not only left wingers. It's all got very skewed
No idea how to do this in practice, but a new Chancellor could contradict the old one and buy back some Tory support from the middle ground, which will be needed
That statement from Osborne should rule him out of the next Govt. He no longer sets the policy and should not be trying to. The new Chancellor needs to be more positive and avoid a panic budget with further cuts (except in the EU and overseas aid)
Why does anyone need to be positive - surely the very fact of Brexit should have sent the £ and the stock markets soaring. You're the one who is off message.
I never said or expected stock markets or the £ to soar and note that FTSE100 is up on Febuary.
The FTSE 100 is only up on February because the £ has fallen so far and the 75% of revenue FTSE 100 companies get from outside the UK is suddenly worth more. This is basic economics - come on.
That is sort of the point. The UK has a balance of payments deficit, so you WANT the pound to fall to make inflows more valuable and exports more competitive. The fall in the pound is great news for the UK economy and demonstrates why (as if it needed repeating) that being in the Euro would be such a disaster. The risk of depreciation is importing inflation which is a low concern right now. The main task should be to make sure the pound stays low where it needs to be to address the balance of payments problem.
Whilst I'm totally not advocating devaluation as an economic tool, has this also not reduced our national debt, because that's denominated in sterling? I don't know this to be a fact, happy to be corrected.
'Speaking personally I find May deeply uninspiring.'
My reason for choosing Boris is he comes with Gove. The latter is the only person I really trust to deliver a lasting settlement.
Gove did the thinking for the referendum, and he should do the thinking now. He's been very quiet since the vote - I don;t know why.
I think they're letting Osborne and Cameron do their swan songs, whilst they beaver away in the background. It's a contrast with Nicola immense grandstanding.
I agree. But Gove is surely going to have an important role in the new Cabinet no matter who wins. He was one of very few to come out of the referendum with his reputation enhanced.
Are you sure ? He looked as guilty as Boris on Friday morning !
Provided Boris gets in the MPs vote for top two finalists in the contest then acvtivists will surely vote at least 60/40 for Boris?
I can't see how the Conservative establishment and the Whips can block Boris from second place amongst MPs even if more vote for May.
I'll be doing soundings and report back (OK from leafy Esher and Walton that voted Remain), but, at a guess, May will comfortably beat Johnson. We oldies know a rum one when we see 'em.
@andrewcopson: Warm words in EU Parliament - one MEP saying that at last they will be able to cut the worst waste in the EU budget: Nigel Farage's salary.
If Cameron had backed Leave, he'd have carried all before him - his Party members, his MPs and most of his voters/plus all those other Leavers.
Talk about backing the wrong side. The subject of many future books.
He did what he thought was right. Indeed, he'll probably be proved right by history. Either way, it's a bit rich of those who accuse him of 'not having principles' to complain that he didn't cynically decide to campaign for Leave, against his better judgement, to save his career.
I agree Cameron did what he thought was right. I also think that deep down he is a Eurosceptic.
But he will be judged harshly by history, probably unfairly, in the same way that Nick Clegg will be dealt poorly.
@edwest: would it be morally acceptable to overturn the people's will, even extra-legally, to stop the economy collapsing?
Win in a landslide, leadership and GE
The answer to the question is "Well, duh."
You can bet your bottom Euro that if we join in six years' time after going through hell, and the final consensus is that it wasn't even worth it, a large number of voters will say it was the politicians' responsibility. Staying the Brexit course to appease voters is a fool's errand.
Why is Osborne on R4 saying we'll have tax rises and spending cuts when he's not going to be CoE in the new HMG set up?
He's stirring.
Some more taxes on the super rich and the likes of Starbucks and Google would not go amiss. The 1% owning more than the other 99% annoys not only left wingers. It's all got very skewed
No idea how to do this in practice, but a new Chancellor could contradict the old one and buy back some Tory support from the middle ground, which will be needed
That statement from Osborne should rule him out of the next Govt. He no longer sets the policy and should not be trying to. The new Chancellor needs to be more positive and avoid a panic budget with further cuts (except in the EU and overseas aid)
Why does anyone need to be positive - surely the very fact of Brexit should have sent the £ and the stock markets soaring. You're the one who is off message.
I never said or expected stock markets or the £ to soar and note that FTSE100 is up on Febuary.
The FTSE 100 is only up on February because the £ has fallen so far and the 75% of revenue FTSE 100 companies get from outside the UK is suddenly worth more. This is basic economics - come on.
That is sort of the point. The UK has a balance of payments deficit, so you WANT the pound to fall to make inflows more valuable and exports more competitive. The fall in the pound is great news for the UK economy and demonstrates why (as if it needed repeating) that being in the Euro would be such a disaster. The risk of depreciation is importing inflation which is a low concern right now. The main task should be to make sure the pound stays low where it needs to be to address the balance of payments problem.
Whilst I'm totally not advocating devaluation as an economic tool, has this also not reduced our national debt, because that's denominated in sterling? I don't know this to be a fact, happy to be corrected.
Some of that is true but it also reduces the willingness of the RoW to finance any of that debt so we are still ever so much f*****. Of course the solution is to raise taxes and cut spending - given the high leave vote among the pensioners I can see some options.
Why is Osborne on R4 saying we'll have tax rises and spending cuts when he's not going to be CoE in the new HMG set up?
He's stirring.
Some more taxes on the super rich and the likes of Starbucks and Google would not go amiss. The 1% owning more than the other 99% annoys not only left wingers. It's all got very skewed
No idea how to do this in practice, but a new Chancellor could contradict the old one and buy back some Tory support from the middle ground, which will be needed
That statement from Osborne should rule him out of the next Govt. He no longer sets the policy and should not be trying to. The new Chancellor needs to be more positive and avoid a panic budget with further cuts (except in the EU and overseas aid)
Why does anyone need to be positive - surely the very fact of Brexit should have sent the £ and the stock markets soaring. You're the one who is off message.
I never said or expected stock markets or the £ to soar and note that FTSE100 is up on Febuary.
The FTSE 100 is only up on February because the £ has fallen so far and the 75% of revenue FTSE 100 companies get from outside the UK is suddenly worth more. This is basic economics - come on.
That is sort of the point. The UK has a balance of payments deficit, so you WANT the pound to fall to make inflows more valuable and exports more competitive. The fall in the pound is great news for the UK economy and demonstrates why (as if it needed repeating) that being in the Euro would be such a disaster. The risk of depreciation is importing inflation which is a low concern right now. The main task should be to make sure the pound stays low where it needs to be to address the balance of payments problem.
Whilst I'm totally not advocating devaluation as an economic tool, has this also not reduced our national debt, because that's denominated in sterling? I don't know this to be a fact, happy to be corrected.
Some government debt is in dollars so the fall in sterling automatically increases the national debt.
Why is Osborne on R4 saying we'll have tax rises and spending cuts when he's not going to be CoE in the new HMG set up?
He's stirring.
Some more taxes on the super rich and the likes of Starbucks and Google would not go amiss. The 1% owning more than the other 99% annoys not only left wingers. It's all got very skewed
No idea how to do this in practice, but a new Chancellor could contradict the old one and buy back some Tory support from the middle ground, which will be needed
That statement from Osborne should rule him out of the next Govt. He no longer sets the policy and should not be trying to. The new Chancellor needs to be more positive and avoid a panic budget with further cuts (except in the EU and overseas aid)
Why does anyone need to be positive - surely the very fact of Brexit should have sent the £ and the stock markets soaring. You're the one who is off message.
I never said or expected stock markets or the £ to soar and note that FTSE100 is up on Febuary.
The FTSE 100 is only up on February because the £ has fallen so far and the 75% of revenue FTSE 100 companies get from outside the UK is suddenly worth more. This is basic economics - come on.
250 is currently up close to 3%
Don't confuse the poor boy with facts.
FTSE 250 revenue is just over 50% from outside UK, so again, drop in value of the £ is beneficial in the short term.
Pound up today against the dollar.
Markets have taken a hit, but it's hardly the collapse of western civilisation.
It was never going to be the end of western civilization but as predicted before, we are going to experience a recession or near static growth for a couple of years and will be poorer over the short, medium and long term than we would have been. We'll also have to deal with the break up of the UK and the loss of a large part of our international influence as we dance to the tune of China and whatever international conglomerates wants a low tax, low regulation base.
Its still Boris vs not Boris. I hope that the Tory party finds the choice as impossible and damaging as our Jezza vs not Jezza
Regarding Jexit. It seems that the whips will all resign when the no confidence motion is carried. Perhaps Corbyn needs to draft in Momentum activists to be whips as there won't be anyone left to be a whip nor will the whips be able to successfully whip the PLP
The choice for Labour members is now clear: vote for Corbyn and kill the Labour party; or vote for someone else and have a chance of keeping it alive. This is not about Blairites versus the membership. It is about relevance v irrelevance.
I wonder if it is worth it. Whether a centre/centre-left party, shorn of the baggage of both Labour and the LibDems, is now what is needed. Free of socialism, free of the Trade Union paymasters, free of Blair and tuition fees. Socially liberal, but without overbearing adherence to everything PC.
Fiscally sensible but looking out for the poorest in our society. A true safety net for those in need, without pandering to those who see a life on state hand-outs as a career choice.
Meeting our obligation to international aid - but not embarrassed to say that we have enough on our plate looking after the poorest of our country's 60 million without feeling an obligation to provide for all of the planet's 6 billion.
(These last two paras might sound very Tory, but they are things that REALLY get many Labour voters pissed off.)
Where politicians with experience of life outside the Westminster bubble is hugely valued over careerist SPADS or family name.
These basic tenets should be enough to open a can of whoop-ass over the Tories.
Why is Osborne on R4 saying we'll have tax rises and spending cuts when he's not going to be CoE in the new HMG set up?
He's stirring.
Some more taxes on the super rich and the likes of Starbucks and Google would not go amiss. The 1% owning more than the other 99% annoys not only left wingers. It's all got very skewed
No idea how to do this in practice, but a new Chancellor could contradict the old one and buy back some Tory support from the middle ground, which will be needed
That statement from Osborne should rule him out of the next Govt. He no longer sets the policy and should not be trying to. The new Chancellor needs to be more positive and avoid a panic budget with further cuts (except in the EU and overseas aid)
Why does anyone need to be positive - surely the very fact of Brexit should have sent the £ and the stock markets soaring. You're the one who is off message.
I never said or expected stock markets or the £ to soar and note that FTSE100 is up on Febuary.
The FTSE 100 is only up on February because the £ has fallen so far and the 75% of revenue FTSE 100 companies get from outside the UK is suddenly worth more. This is basic economics - come on.
The worst you can say about May is that she's cold. Maybe her soft Remain is worse than a soft Leave, but there's not too much in that.
Whilst I didn't expect to do so a few months ago, if it is her v Boris (or Fox) I will happily vote for her.
The PB 4 May faction is gathering strength!
IMHO May has more chance of reaching over (or around) to the leavers than Boris has to the remainers.
But. There are IMHO more hardened LEAVErs than hardened REMAINers amongst tory MPs (Step 1) There are 2 LEAVErs for every 1 REMAINer amongst the Tory party members (Step 2).
She needs to convince twice as many as Boris does then - I think she can do that.
Do please take into account that whilst Boris's relations with fellow MPs are not strong, Mrs May has not been cultivating them and regarded by many female tory MPs as unhelpful (as reported by female hacks).
Comments
Perhaps the EU is unreformable but his deal cemented our special status within, or perhaps call it alongside it.
Even if you think the deal is useless, do I think that Dave should have done anything differently? Not really. Why should he have played the cute games that the EU might have been playing? He went to negotiate a deal, negotiated a deal and we voted on it. If people say "well you should have played hardball, delayed, threatened, etc" well that is no way to conduct diplomacy.
As we now see, compared with what we are about to get, it was not only good, it was great.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1353757/suspected-post-brexit-attack-on-polish-migrants-is-now-being-treated-as-drunken-punch-up/
"The cost of insuring exposure to debt from the UK almost doubled after the vote, surging to the highest level in nearly four years."
https://news.markets/bonds/uk-credit-ratings-three-agencies-cut-20549/
And as matt said, plenty of funds only invest in AAA sovereign debt which we are now excluded from.
There are IMHO more hardened LEAVErs than hardened REMAINers amongst tory MPs (Step 1)
There are 2 LEAVErs for every 1 REMAINer amongst the Tory party members (Step 2).
I am still not sure about the £3ers. Can they vote ?
As long as his first round vote is below 47%, he will lose.
* £350 million a week extra spending on the NHS.
* A cut in VAT
* No tax rises
* No cuts in public services
* Cheaper housing
* Substantial cuts in immigration
* All current EU subsidies and grants maintained in full by the UK government
* Freedom to work, study and settle inside the EU for UK citizens
* A plethora of beneficial trade deals
If he becomes Prime Minister he will be expected to deliver on them. But he can't. And that's why the Tories would be mad to choose him. I really hope they do, though. He deserves it.
I prefer a full withdrawal, even with no FTA. But I think the EEA may be a viable compromise as there is flexibility on what freedom of movement means.
Great link here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/06/27/can-the-uk-curb-immigration-and-keep-access-to-the-single-market/
But again surely the very fact of Brexit is its own salesman for the glorioius strength of the almighty British economy - why oh why can't the markets see that - even Mervyn King the Brexpert thinks so.
The same happens after terrorist attacks the media focus on stories of Muslim backlash, then when the incidents are investigated & number compiled at the end of the year they show that every week some knuckle dragged chucks rocks at a mosque but the number of incidents are small and happen on a regular basis, terrorist attack or not.
Unless the next Labour government is going to actually listen to people and actually drive policies to make an actual difference we may as well not bother. That is why I voted for Jeremy because we needed a change of direction. But the plan was never that Jezza stay in place through to the election, he was going to go in 2018 (see Owen Jones piece this morning). Unfortunately whilst his politics are correct his execution is woeful - it has been since the start and it just isn't getting better. So he has to go.
If Continuity New Labour take over and impose Jarvis then Momentum will split away. If Corbyn digs in and refuses to accept he's done then Progress will split away. Both sub-parties have mass support and nationwide organisation, it WILL happen one way or another unless we can appoint a compromise candidate from the centre.
I always regretted many of the deputy leadership contenders not wanting the top job as the likes of Tom Watson and Angela Eagle always struck me as far better than the others. Corbyn should accept the inevitable, Tom takes over in the interim, and I hope he and Angela run.
I think you would have to be very anti-Boris to choose her as leader. No doubt many people are but well meaning, earnest, moderately bright and ultra cautious is not enough for PM. The comparison with what has been lost in Cameron is just painful. This single factor came closer to changing my vote to remain than anything said in the whole campaign.
The most beautiful man in the world won't be in the next series of Strictly.
Come back Gleb.
No Gleb, Aliona, Kristinia, or Ola, is there any point in watching ?
Luckily, some on the Leave side are beginning to accept their responsibility for all this.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/28/a-vote-to-leave-the-european-union-wasnt-a-vote-to-repatriate-im/
Currently Merkel is the only on that matters and she's leaving all her options open.
Fiscally sensible but looking out for the poorest in our society. A true safety net for those in need, without pandering to those who see a life on state hand-outs as a career choice.
Meeting our obligation to international aid - but not embarrassed to say that we have enough on our plate looking after the poorest of our country's 60 million without feeling an obligation to provide for all of the planet's 6 billion.
(These last two paras might sound very Tory, but they are things that REALLY get many Labour voters pissed off.)
Where politicians with experience of life outside the Westminster bubble is hugely valued over careerist SPADS or family name.
These basic tenets should be enough to open a can of whoop-ass over the Tories.
I answered all of the questions about alternative leadership candidates with positives about the worst options. Screw 'em.
They found members and former members of all the other parties, including councillors and the MP (Tim Loughton) as well as right-leaning journalists such as Harry Cole and one of Guido's juniors.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/05/conservative-tim-loughton-signs-up-labour-supporter-leadership-contest
Talk about backing the wrong side. The subject of many future books.
My reason for choosing Boris is he comes with Gove. The latter is the only person I really trust to deliver a lasting settlement.
Gove did the thinking for the referendum, and he should do the thinking now. He's been very quiet since the vote - I don;t know why.
It turns out 'Little England' isn't a clever catchphrase when the majority of the electorate are English.
I got mine there (wife, that is!)
I can't see how the Conservative establishment and the Whips can block Boris from second place amongst MPs even if more vote for May.
10.31 Labour MPs expect a two-thirds vote of no confidence in Corbyn when the result is announced around 4:30pm. They then expect a mass resignation of whips (a leader's last line of defence) to follow.
I'm also told there is "growing pressure" on Tom Watson from all wings of the party to stand against Corbyn.
What drives the show is the frissons between the celebs and the dancers. Are they/aren't they?
Fresh meat is therefore always good.
Markets have taken a hit, but it's hardly the collapse of western civilisation.
If Cameron and Osborne had been on the Leave side, with their dirty tricks, threats and bullying, I would have found it very easy to go for Remain, who would presumably have had a much more respectful campaign.
But he will be judged harshly by history, probably unfairly, in the same way that Nick Clegg will be dealt poorly.
You can bet your bottom Euro that if we join in six years' time after going through hell, and the final consensus is that it wasn't even worth it, a large number of voters will say it was the politicians' responsibility. Staying the Brexit course to appease voters is a fool's errand.
Are the facts.