One other situation should not be entirely discounted.
Theresa May becomes Prime Minister by Thursday or shortly after - First round region off :
May 210 .. Leadsome 50 .. Gove 30 .. Crabb 30 .. Fox 10
May become PM by acclamation.
I'm wondering if this contest will be over very quickly. I think there will be a second ballot though. I would like the historic irony of May getting 204
She should aim for 229, and command more support than Labour has in the HoC.
Of course she won't but she will have much more support than Corbyn
So they are written for 11-year-olds whose parents don't mind them reading about rape, rape, rape, and for teenagers and adults who are semi-literate.
The books describe more than 200 rapes. (Click that link for further categorisation of the rapes, anyone who wants to find out.)
I repeat, they have a reading age of 11 and they are full of rape, rape, rape. Often the victims end up enjoying the sex, mid-rape. Almost none of the victims are given their own viewpoint. Those extremely few who are, are villains themselves.
As for viewpoints, the books are known for having a very large number of viewpoint characters. The writing team (oops, did I give the game away?) then need to link the scenes together somehow, because they're books, right, rather than weekly porno-sheets. Then all the silly commentators repeat the marketing line that the books have ever so "intricate" plot-lines.
If commentators could think for themselves, rather than using words such as "fantasy" to help the publishers sell the line that this material is in the same genre as Lord of the Rings, they would notice that having many viewpoint characters (which Tolkien doesn't) is a characteristic of made-for-TV soap operas. The "intricate" plot-lines are necessary because having
Scene 1: A rapes B; Scene 2: C rapes D; Scene 3: E and ten of his mates and their dogs rape F and her children; Scene 4: G rapes H with a stick; Scene 5: I rapes J's corpse; Scene 6: K rapes L and makes M watch; Scene 7: N rapes his sister O; Scene 8: P mutilates Q and then he and his dog rape her; etc.
wouldn't in itself give commentators many buzzphrases to repeat to convey the impression that this is great literature.
This material is so very much a sign of the times in western culture.
"Put simply, there is no group in British politics offering a way forward that is both politically deliverable at a European level and not economically ruinous for Britain. That is too horrible to contemplate, let alone discuss with the electorate, so the focus, instead, is on the old internal battles: the left and the right of the Labour Party, the “anyone but Boris” caucus in the Conservative parliamentary party."
That is Stephen Bush, not John Gray, and he still seems to be in his pre-referendum silo, spouting end-of-the-world claims which may or may not be true.
Brexit seems to be all a drip drip drip of lies and propaganda swallowed by stupid people outside the metropolis bubble, conned into voting as they did by 20 years of the Sun and the Mail.
The full-fat Brexit option is one that promises an end to the uncontrolled immigration of the single market. That would result in, among other things, the demise of the City of London as a global financial centre, the reappearance of a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic and less easy holidays on the continent for British tourists.
The marginalisation of England’s poorest and the obsession with the Westminster game were the forces that powered the vote for Brexit. That triumph has sent the pound plummeting, forced the resignation of the Prime Minister and thrown Labour into crisis. It has emboldened the far right across Europe and has been followed by a series of attacks on Britain’s ethnic minorities. It may yet presage the break-up of the United Kingdom and unravel peace in Northern Ireland. The fruits of ignoring its consequences in favour of the parliamentary game may be bitterer still.
That man needs to engage with the world outside, rather than his mirrored certainty bubble.
The New Statesman has started putting multiple articles on a single page which is why I got mixed up.
Has there been anything that you didn't expect post Brexit?
In terms of real developments - no, not really. I slightly underestimated what a prat Juncker is, but he's marginal to the whole thing anyway
What has surprised me is the government's utter incompetence. They should have had contingency plans in place and ready to roll out for a Brexit vote, and then scenario plans for how to approach different options. They clearly hadn't done any work on this whatsoever (and I learnt after the event they hadn't done any on iScot either). I'd assumed that when Cameron(?) said before the event that there weren't any contingency plans he was lying...after all no government could be that useless, could they?
The other thing that has surprised and disappointed me is Cameron's invisibility since the vote. I wasn't surprised that he resigned - but post that he should have been out and in public maintaining confidence. He's deserted his post. Distinctly unimpressive.
Can't disagree with any of that. I guess the usual suspects will be along in a mo' to tell you that Gove and Johnson should have had a plan.......
I respectfully disagree. I expect the government, to well, err, govern. That has to include to prepare for any scenario- particularly one that involves giving the country a binary choice, that was known about well in advance. I fully agree that the Brexit politicians share the blame, but that doesn't mean that Cameron et al, can just shrug their shoulders and say they don't want to play anymore.
What more could Cameron have done, though? He could have involved Article 50, I guess. But that would have been hugely controversial and probably entirely counter-productive. Clearly the BoE had a Brexit strategy in place, so that planning had been done.
Cameron got us into this mess because he was scared of some right wing Tory MPs. He also spent six years bad mouthing the EU and talking tough on immigration. That came back to bite him on the bum very hard indeed. But having lost the argument he has done the right thing and stood down. There is no way on earth that the country would have allowed him to negotiate a Brexit deal. And Dave is not Jeremy Corbyn. He understands how these things work.
He could have undertaken some contingency planning in case the country didn't swallow his personal beliefs plus a "Hector's House" strategy.
Has there been anything that you didn't expect post Brexit?
In terms of real developments - no, not really. I slightly underestimated what a prat Juncker is, but he's marginal to the whole thing anyway
What has surprised me is the government's utter incompetence. They should have had contingency plans in place and ready to roll out for a Brexit vote, and then scenario plans for how to approach different options. They clearly hadn't done any work on this whatsoever (and I learnt after the event they hadn't done any on iScot either). I'd assumed that when Cameron(?) said before the event that there weren't any contingency plans he was lying...after all no government could be that useless, could they?
The other thing that has surprised and disappointed me is Cameron's invisibility since the vote. I wasn't surprised that he resigned - but post that he should have been out and in public maintaining confidence. He's deserted his post. Distinctly unimpressive.
Can't disagree with any of that. I guess the usual suspects will be along in a mo' to tell you that Gove and Johnson should have had a plan.......
The uncomfortable truth is that the public didn't think a plan was important. Otherwise they would never have voted Leave on that prospectus. Under normal circumstances you would expect the winners to run with whatever they were promoting. Instead it will be the Remainers, probably, that will sort something out, even though they thought it was a bad idea.
I respectfully disagree. I expect the government, to well, err, govern. That has to include to prepare for any scenario- particularly one that involves giving the country a binary choice, that was known about well in advance. I fully agree that the Brexit politicians share the blame, but that doesn't mean that Cameron et al, can just shrug their shoulders and say they don't want to play anymore.
Philip Collins @PCollinsTimes 31m31 minutes ago Philip Collins Retweeted Beth Rigby 44 people, all of them paid to do politics, think Andrea Leadsom should be PM. 44. So far. Incredible.
In terms of real developments - no, not really. I slightly underestimated what a prat Juncker is, but he's marginal to the whole thing anyway
What has surprised me is the government's utter incompetence. They should have had contingency plans in place and ready to roll out for a Brexit vote, and then scenario plans for how to approach different options. They clearly hadn't done any work on this whatsoever (and I learnt after the event they hadn't done any on iScot either). I'd assumed that when Cameron(?) said before the event that there weren't any contingency plans he was lying...after all no government could be that useless, could they?
The other thing that has surprised and disappointed me is Cameron's invisibility since the vote. I wasn't surprised that he resigned - but post that he should have been out and in public maintaining confidence. He's deserted his post. Distinctly unimpressive.
Have to say I completely agree. Even the local Government contacts with whom I work have told me unanimously their finance departments have been reviewing spending numbers in the light of a post-LEAVE Budget and another round of reduced public expenditure.
If local Councils, which usually get pilloried for not being prepared, are prepared, why isn't central Government ? We can't rely on Carney being wheeled out every day with another few billion of financial methadone to keep the markets running.
As for Cameron, he looked emotionally detached on June 24th - I've seen colleagues like that in their last couple of weeks. They have mentally already left - to be fair Cameron follows an honourable tradition of neutrality in the contest to find his successor (which of course Thatcher and Howard didn't).
The government has reviewed its entire economic and fiscal policy, and abandoned it.
If everything that has happened since the Brexit vote has been entirely as expected, what should Cameron have been doing that he has not been doing?
If Gove thinks May is going to win he knows his career is over. I half expect him to announce he is withdrawing from the front line once his fate is sealed and step down at the next election as a sort of Hague figure.
He will be leaving a poisoned legacy, which is a shame as he was an achiever at ministerial level. Changed education forever (whatever your view) and was shaping up as an excellent reforming and liberal Lord Chancellor.
Got caught up in the sixth form debating society and lost his head I think- Tories of his generation still have dreams of avenging Maggie. How ironic that it is Ken Clarke who has been around to throw flowers on the coffin.
Has there been anything that you didn't expect post Brexit?
In terms of real developments - no, not really. I slightly underestimated what a prat Juncker is, but he's marginal to the whole thing anyway
What has surprised me is the government's utter incompetence. They should have had contingency plans in place and ready to roll out for a Brexit vote, and then scenario plans for how to approach different options. They clearly hadn't done any work on this whatsoever (and I learnt after the event they hadn't done any on iScot either). I'd assumed that when Cameron(?) said before the event that there weren't any contingency plans he was lying...after all no government could be that useless, could they?
The other thing that has surprised and disappointed me is Cameron's invisibility since the vote. I wasn't surprised that he resigned - but post that he should have been out and in public maintaining confidence. He's deserted his post. Distinctly unimpressive.
Can't disagree with any of that. I guess the usual suspects will be along in a mo' to tell you that Gove and Johnson should have had a plan.......
The uncomfortable truth is that the public didn't think a plan was important. Otherwise they would never have voted Leave on that prospectus. Under normal circumstances you would expect the winners to run with whatever they were promoting. Instead it will be the Remainers, probably, that will sort something out, even though they thought it was a bad idea.
I respectfully disagree. I expect the government, to well, err, govern. That has to include to prepare for any scenario- particularly one that involves giving the country a binary choice, that was known about well in advance. I fully agree that the Brexit politicians share the blame, but that doesn't mean that Cameron et al, can just shrug their shoulders and say they don't want to play anymore.
To be fair to Cameron, he is only there for just long enough for May or Leadsom to take over. He's the lamest of ducks.
I do agree with you about the binary choice. The problem is with the referendum itself, not in the preparation for the consequences of it. Referendums should always be between two clear and valid outcomes. If one of the choices is impracticable, obviously poor or it is not clear what it means, it shouldn't be offered. Generally I think referendums should be restricted to validation by the public for major constitutional change. In other words, the government has decided on a change and done detailed planning for it and then puts it to the public where the choices are the change as stated or the status quo.
Mr. Stopper, agree with you and Mr. Charles entirely. The seeming lack of basic contingency planning is rancidly incompetent by Cameron and Osborne. The EU vote wasn't a black swan, it was in the diary for months, and the polls were tight for months.
The BoE had a plan. The Treasury had a plan (albeit not the instant emergency budget announced). The civil service will have had dozens of contingency plans. Brexit will have been wargamed, scenario analysed, you name it. All concerning possible final states of play, none of which of course would have been known prior to June 23rd, or A50, or A50+2 our final leaving date.
They were dealing with a classic known unknown.
What else would you have had David Cameron do? What would you have liked him to announce on the morning of June 24th?
Has there been anything that you didn't expect post Brexit?
In terms of real developments - no, not really. I slightly underestimated what a prat Juncker is, but he's marginal to the whole thing anyway
The other thing that has surprised and disappointed me is Cameron's invisibility since the vote. I wasn't surprised that he resigned - but post that he should have been out and in public maintaining confidence. He's deserted his post. Distinctly unimpressive.
Can't disagree with any of that. I guess the usual suspects will be along in a mo' to tell you that Gove and Johnson should have had a plan.......
The uncomfortable truth is that the public didn't think a plan was important. Otherwise they would never have voted Leave on that prospectus. Under normal circumstances you would expect the winners to run with whatever they were promoting. Instead it will be the Remainers, probably, that will sort something out, even though they thought it was a bad idea.
I respectfully disagree. I expect the government, to well, err, govern. That has to include to prepare for any scenario- particularly one that involves giving the country a binary choice, that was known about well in advance. I fully agree that the Brexit politicians share the blame, but that doesn't mean that Cameron et al, can just shrug their shoulders and say they don't want to play anymore.
What more could Cameron have done, though? He could have involved Article 50, I guess. But that would have been hugely controversial and probably entirely counter-productive. Clearly the BoE had a Brexit strategy in place, so that planning had been done.
Cameron got us into this mess because he was scared of some right wing Tory MPs. He also spent six years bad mouthing the EU and talking tough on immigration. That came back to bite him on the bum very hard indeed. But having lost the argument he has done the right thing and stood down. There is no way on earth that the country would have allowed him to negotiate a Brexit deal. And Dave is not Jeremy Corbyn. He understands how these things work.
Rafael Behr has done a very long Brexit piece in The Guardian. The thing that really struck me was the decision to have Stuart Rose as Chairman of Stronger In. It was deemed necessary to have someone from the 'liberal right' chairing the campaign. Why? I have no idea. It might even suggest they were going for a core vote strategy.
The problem with Heathrow is that it will take a long time to complete , say 2030 at the earliest. Gatwick is cheaper and quicker to build, ready 2025, so the benefits would accrue earlier.
Given Brexit speed is important so that factor in favour of Gatwick becomes more relevant.
The more general point being that Brexit is going to occur in geological time relative to the 24-hr news cycle and the public's attention span (and even, sadly for some, lives).
No one will notice. Most of the forecasts put our GDP lower (including per capita) at less than it would otherwise have been had we stayed in the EU. But as many on here said pre-vote, what's the difference between actual GDP growth of X vs potential GDP growth of 1.2x X to the man on the street? Not much.
Just a shame that we would otherwise have been better off. But as Leavers have also assured us, for the working people of this country, especially those less well-off, there's more to life than economic growth.
Splendid post. I'd only take issue with your last paragraph. There are plenty of people across the entire spectrum of the press examining some of the realities of life in C2DEland. I don't think all of them can be accused of making partisan points.
The average & median disposable income in this country has been flat since the mid-noughties.
I agree with that. There was an arrogance about the Remain camp. We know what what is good for you, when actually it wasn't good for a lot of people.
And so the poor are going to get a LOT poorer. Inflation with the £ falling means fuel prices rising with all the inflation effects, imported goods rise and a lowering of growth means less employment and lower profits and wages.
Has there been anything that you didn't expect post Brexit?
In terms of real developments - no, not really. I slightly underestimated what a prat Juncker is, but he's marginal to the whole thing anyway
What has surprised me is the government's utter incompetence. They should have had contingency plans in place and ready to roll out for a Brexit vote, and then scenario plans for how to approach different options. They clearly hadn't done any work on this whatsoever (and I learnt after the event they hadn't done any on iScot either). I'd assumed that when Cameron(?) said before the event that there weren't any contingency plans he was lying...after all no government could be that useless, could they?
The other thing that has surprised and disappointed me is Cameron's invisibility since the vote. I wasn't surprised that he resigned - but post that he should have been out and in public maintaining confidence. He's deserted his post. Distinctly unimpressive.
Can't disagree with any of that. I guess the usual suspects will be along in a mo' to tell you that Gove and Johnson should have had a plan.......
The uncomfortable truth is that the public didn't think a plan was important. Otherwise they would never have voted Leave on that prospectus. Under normal circumstances you would expect the winners to run with whatever they were promoting. Instead it will be the Remainers, probably, that will sort something out, even though they thought it was a bad idea.
I respectfully disagree. I expect the government, to well, err, govern. That has to include to prepare for any scenario- particularly one that involves giving the country a binary choice, that was known about well in advance. I fully agree that the Brexit politicians share the blame, but that doesn't mean that Cameron et al, can just shrug their shoulders and say they don't want to play anymore.
Spot on
They did have a contingency plan. The BoE was ready to go the morning after the vote. The government's economic and fiscal strategy was abandoned, Article 50 was not invoked and Cameron stood down. What else should have happened?
"He could have undertaken some contingency planning in case the country didn't swallow his personal beliefs."
I believe that he must have directly ordered the CS to NOT do that. They would have done it automatically otherwise. Dereliction of duty is the phrase I suspect. A sacking offence for anyone other than a politician.
So treason from Dave and Blair, and Brown only escapes under the diminished responsibility plea.
May 138 .. Leadsom 44 .. Gove 27 .. Crabb 25 .. Fox 8
If it finished up May 150, Leadsom 80, Gove 45, Crabb 35 and Fox 20, with Fox being dropped, Crabb would probably throw in the towel as will because he would be unlikely to pick up many from Fox.
I think Gove will quit if he gets clearly beaten by Leadsom in the first round. He'll know the Boris thing has backfired.
Meanwhile, GBP continues to fall. Sub $1.30 looks inevitable. How low will it go? $1.20? $1.10? $1.00?
#bregret #bridiot
Great innit? I'm rubbing my hands with glee urging it lower. But there again I make things and export them which has been very unfashionable for yonks. Euro 1.42 to the £ early last year hurt big time and took months of hard work and negotiation to make the best of bad job of. Hopefully it'll sink so bloody low they'll actually raise interest rates to defend it (oh how old fashioned), mind you that would start to solve the pensions crisis (remember Tata and BHS?) which is largely caused by insanely low interest rates. Should we survive the current spike down in gilt yields and they do rise, because of circumstances outlined I shall burst with delight, seeing as I've been roundly screwed over for years anyway by an overvalued £ and low interest rates designed to prop up an overheated property market,.
Very worthwhile analysis from Matt Singh for Bloomberg about referendum voting patterns, specifically that 10% more people voted in the referendum than the general election, and against expectations they were very disproportionately Leave voters.
Brexit reactions in my social circle are completely unpredictable.
I've got friends who are panicking, who I expected to be blithely unconcerned; others, who I thought were badly exposed, have barely blinked.
Similarly I've got lefty REMAINER friends who now wonder if LEAVE was the right choice after all. And rightwing LEAVERS who are showing signs of Bremorse.
Peculiar.
The most notable Bremorse or Bregret that I've detected is amongst Scots who are ashamed of the majority Scottish Remain vote.
Has there been anything that you didn't expect post Brexit?
In terms of real developments - no, not really. I slightly underestimated what a prat Juncker is, but he's marginal to the whole thing anyway
What has surprised me is the government's utter incompetence. They should have had contingency plans in place and ready to roll out for a Brexit vote, and then scenario plans for how to approach different options. They clearly hadn't done any work on this whatsoever (and I learnt after the event they hadn't done any on iScot either). I'd assumed that when Cameron(?) said before the event that there weren't any contingency plans he was lying...after all no government could be that useless, could they?
The other thing that has surprised and disappointed me is Cameron's invisibility since the vote. I wasn't surprised that he resigned - but post that he should have been out and in public maintaining confidence. He's deserted his post. Distinctly unimpressive.
Can't disagree with any of that. I guess the usual suspects will be along in a mo' to tell you that Gove and Johnson should have had a plan.......
The uncomfortable truth is that the public didn't think a plan was important. Otherwise they would never have voted Leave on that prospectus. Under normal circumstances you would expect the winners to run with whatever they were promoting. Instead it will be the Remainers, probably, that will sort something out, even though they thought it was a bad idea.
Indeed - I think Cameron was right to ensure that the Brexit future will lie entirely at the door of those who were so keen to have it. and that certainly will be the verdict of History.
Has there been anything that you didn't expect post Brexit?
In terms of real developments - no, not really. I slightly underestimated what a prat Juncker is, but he's marginal to the whole thing anyway
What has surprised me is the government's utter incompetence. They should have had contingency plans in place and ready to roll out for a Brexit vote, and then scenario plans for how to approach different options. They clearly hadn't done any work on this whatsoever (and I learnt after the event they hadn't done any on iScot either). I'd assumed that when Cameron(?) said before the event that there weren't any contingency plans he was lying...after all no government could be that useless, could they?
The other thing that has surprised and disappointed me is Cameron's invisibility since the vote. I wasn't surprised that he resigned - but post that he should have been out and in public maintaining confidence. He's deserted his post. Distinctly unimpressive.
Can't disagree with any of that. I guess the usual suspects will be along in a mo' to tell you that Gove and Johnson should have had a plan.......
The uncomfortable truth is that the public didn't think a plan was important. Otherwise they would never have voted Leave on that prospectus. Under normal circumstances you would expect the winners to run with whatever they were promoting. Instead it will be the Remainers, probably, that will sort something out, even though they thought it was a bad idea.
I respectfully disagree. I expect the government, to well, err, govern. That has to include to prepare for any scenario- particularly one that involves giving the country a binary choice, that was known about well in advance. I fully agree that the Brexit politicians share the blame, but that doesn't mean that Cameron et al, can just shrug their shoulders and say they don't want to play anymore.
Spot on
They did have a contingency plan. The BoE was ready to go the morning after the vote. The government's economic and fiscal strategy was abandoned, Article 50 was not invoked and Cameron stood down. What else should have happened?
As someone else said, what Cameron should have done was Firstly, asked his eurosceptic opponents to come up with a coherent alternative BEFORE the vote. On the basis that the voters can't be asked an opinion on something they cannot know.
Yeah but we don't know what "Remain" will look like in 5 years except it was never the status quo ante June 23rd as that was unsustainable.
Has there been anything that you didn't expect post Brexit?
In terms of real developments - no, not really. I slightly underestimated what a prat Juncker is, but he's marginal to the whole thing anyway
What has surprised me is the government's utter incompetence. They should have had contingency plans in place and ready to roll out for a Brexit vote, and then scenario plans for how to approach different options. They clearly hadn't done any work on this whatsoever (and I learnt after the event they hadn't done any on iScot either). I'd assumed that when Cameron(?) said before the event that there weren't any contingency plans he was lying...after all no government could be that useless, could they?
The other thing that has surprised and disappointed me is Cameron's invisibility since the vote. I wasn't surprised that he resigned - but post that he should have been out and in public maintaining confidence. He's deserted his post. Distinctly unimpressive.
Can't disagree with any of that. I guess the usual suspects will be along in a mo' to tell you that Gove and Johnson should have had a plan.......
The uncomfortable truth is that the public didn't think a plan was important. Otherwise they would never have voted Leave on that prospectus. Under normal circumstances you would expect the winners to run with whatever they were promoting. Instead it will be the Remainers, probably, that will sort something out, even though they thought it was a bad idea.
I respectfully disagree. I expect the government, to well, err, govern. That has to include to prepare for any scenario- particularly one that involves giving the country a binary choice, that was known about well in advance. I fully agree that the Brexit politicians share the blame, but that doesn't mean that Cameron et al, can just shrug their shoulders and say they don't want to play anymore.
Spot on
They did have a contingency plan. The BoE was ready to go the morning after the vote. The government's economic and fiscal strategy was abandoned, Article 50 was not invoked and Cameron stood down. What else should have happened?
As someone else said, what Cameron should have done was Firstly, asked his eurosceptic opponents to come up with a coherent alternative BEFORE the vote. On the basis that the voters can't be asked an opinion on something they cannot know.
Do you not think the Official Leave Campaign's Official Leave Manifesto and Official Leave Mini-Manifesto in any way qualified as a coherent alternative?
Mr. Topping, Cameron is in a position to try and do early negotiations on a reciprocal agreement for EU citizens currently in the UK and Britons currently in the EU getting confirmed residency rights (subject to the new PM agreeing, of course).
He could also be making reassuring noises* about the economy and the prospects for the future.
The suggestion he's tried to lengthen the proceedings of the leadership contest so he can toddle off to the G20 one last time is not an edifying decision. Collaborating with the leadership contenders on a Brexit negotiating team (lawyers etc not politicians) so they're ready to go for the new PM would be a good thing too.
*I realise that's not exactly hard and fast stuff, but with multiple leadership elections and the PM not being seen [excepting at a remembrance event] since he resigned it would help reduce the feeling of being rudderless.
Edited extra bit: advance work on the major options (fully out, EEA/EFTA, and a bespoke approach) should have been done, reducing the time it'll take the new PM to work through that.
The problem with Heathrow is that it will take a long time to complete , say 2030 at the earliest. Gatwick is cheaper and quicker to build, ready 2025, so the benefits would accrue earlier.
Given Brexit speed is important so that factor in favour of Gatwick becomes more relevant.
The more general point being that Brexit is going to occur in geological time relative to the 24-hr news cycle and the public's attention span (and even, sadly for some, lives).
No one will notice. Most of the forecasts put our GDP lower (including per capita) at less than it would otherwise have been had we stayed in the EU. But as many on here said pre-vote, what's the difference between actual GDP growth of X vs potential GDP growth of 1.2x X to the man on the street? Not much.
Just a shame that we would otherwise have been better off. But as Leavers have also assured us, for the working people of this country, especially those less well-off, there's more to life than economic growth.
Splendid post. I'd only take issue with your last paragraph. There are plenty of people across the entire spectrum of the press examining some of the realities of life in C2DEland. I don't think all of them can be accused of making partisan points.
The average & median disposable income in this country has been flat since the mid-noughties.
I agree with that. There was an arrogance about the Remain camp. We know what what is good for you, when actually it wasn't good for a lot of people.
And so the poor are going to get a LOT poorer. Inflation with the £ falling means fuel prices rising with all the inflation effects, imported goods rise and a lowering of growth means less employment and lower profits and wages.
Yep. But hey the things you are talking about are written in textbooks, which are artefacts developed by 'experts' who know nothing and anyway the British are sick of experts; they want to spend their days listening to amateurs.
Has there been anything that you didn't expect post Brexit?
In terms of real developments - no, not really. I slightly underestimated what a prat Juncker is, but he's marginal to the whole thing anyway
What has surprised me is the government's utter incompetence. They should have had contingency plans in place and ready to roll out for a Brexit vote, and then scenario plans for how to approach different options. They clearly hadn't done any work on this whatsoever (and I learnt after the event they hadn't done any on iScot either). I'd assumed that when Cameron(?) said before the event that there weren't any contingency plans he was lying...after all no government could be that useless, could they?
The other thing that has surprised and disappointed me is Cameron's invisibility since the vote. I wasn't surprised that he resigned - but post that he should have been out and in public maintaining confidence. He's deserted his post. Distinctly unimpressive.
Can't disagree with any of that. I guess the usual suspects will be along in a mo' to tell you that Gove and Johnson should have had a plan.......
The uncomfortable truth is that the public didn't think a plan was important. Otherwise they would never have voted Leave on that prospectus. Under normal circumstances you would expect the winners to run with whatever they were promoting. Instead it will be the Remainers, probably, that will sort something out, even though they thought it was a bad idea.
I respectfully disagree. I expect the government, to well, err, govern. That has to include to prepare for any scenario- particularly one that involves giving the country a binary choice, that was known about well in advance. I fully agree that the Brexit politicians share the blame, but that doesn't mean that Cameron et al, can just shrug their shoulders and say they don't want to play anymore.
Meanwhile, GBP continues to fall. Sub $1.30 looks inevitable. How low will it go? $1.20? $1.10? $1.00?
#bregret #bridiot
Great innit? I'm rubbing my hands with glee urging it lower. But there again I make things and export them which has been very unfashionable for yonks. Euro 1.42 to the £ early last year hurt big time and took months of hard work and negotiation to make the best of bad job of. Hopefully it'll sink so bloody low they'll actually raise interest rates to defend it (oh how old fashioned), mind you that would start to solve the pensions crisis (remember Tata and BHS?) which is largely caused by insanely low interest rates. Should we survive the current spike down in gilt yields and they do rise, because of circumstances outlined I shall burst with delight, seeing as I've been roundly screwed over for years anyway by an overvalued £ and low interest rates designed to prop up an overheated property market,.
1.42 to the € was indeed a killer and one of my worries over voting remain.
Has there been anything that you didn't expect post Brexit?
In terms of real developments - no, not really. I slightly underestimated what a prat Juncker is, but he's marginal to the whole thing anyway
What has surprised me is the government's utter incompetence. They should have had contingency plans in place and ready to roll out for a Brexit vote, and then scenario plans for how to approach different options. They clearly hadn't done any work on this whatsoever (and I learnt after the event they hadn't done any on iScot either). I'd assumed that when Cameron(?) said before the event that there weren't any contingency plans he was lying...after all no government could be that useless, could they?
The other thing that has surprised and disappointed me is Cameron's invisibility since the vote. I wasn't surprised that he resigned - but post that he should have been out and in public maintaining confidence. He's deserted his post. Distinctly unimpressive.
Can't disagree with any of that. I guess the usual suspects will be along in a mo' to tell you that Gove and Johnson should have had a plan.......
The uncomfortable truth is that the public didn't think a plan was important. Otherwise they it was a bad idea.
I respectfully disagree. I expect the government, to well, err, govern. That has to include to ean that Cameron et al, can just shrug their shoulders and say they don't want to play anymore.
Spot on
They did have a contingency plan. The BoE was ready to go the morning after the vote. The government's economic and fiscal strategy was abandoned, Article 50 was not invoked and Cameron stood down. What else should have happened?
As someone else said, what Cameron should have done was Firstly, asked his eurosceptic opponents to come up with a coherent alternative BEFORE the vote. On the basis that the voters can't be asked an opinion on something they cannot know.
He did ask a number of times. They refused to spell it out. There were constant arguments on here about that. Leave was a vote to leave the EU, not a plan of how to do it or what it would look like was the leave line from what I remember. Cameron did not want to leave. He could not possibly have lost the vote and then dictated what would happen next. He has put us into a holding pattern. Someone else has to handle the landing.
Mr. Topping, Cameron is in a position to try and do early negotiations on a reciprocal agreement for EU citizens currently in the UK and Britons currently in the EU getting confirmed residency rights (subject to the new PM agreeing, of course).
He could also be making reassuring noises* about the economy and the prospects for the future.
The suggestion he's tried to lengthen the proceedings of the leadership contest so he can toddle off to the G20 one last time is not an edifying decision. Collaborating with the leadership contenders on a Brexit negotiating team (lawyers etc not politicians) so they're ready to go for the new PM would be a good thing too.
*I realise that's not exactly hard and fast stuff, but with multiple leadership elections and the PM not being seen [excepting at a remembrance event] since he resigned it would help reduce the feeling of being rudderless.
Edited extra bit: advance work on the major options (fully out, EEA/EFTA, and a bespoke approach) should have been done, reducing the time it'll take the new PM to work through that.
Nah sorry Monsieur Morris. You are suggesting he began negotiations before the vote as though the vote had already been cast (and as though Leave had won).
And he couldn't make reassuring noises about the economy because, you know, all the experts told him otherwise.
So I ask again, what concrete measures could he have taken?
Meanwhile, GBP continues to fall. Sub $1.30 looks inevitable. How low will it go? $1.20? $1.10? $1.00?
#bregret #bridiot
Great innit? I'm rubbing my hands with glee urging it lower. But there again I make things and export them which has been very unfashionable for yonks. Euro 1.42 to the £ early last year hurt big time and took months of hard work and negotiation to make the best of bad job of. Hopefully it'll sink so bloody low they'll actually raise interest rates to defend it (oh how old fashioned), mind you that would start to solve the pensions crisis (remember Tata and BHS?) which is largely caused by insanely low interest rates. Should we survive the current spike down in gilt yields and they do rise, because of circumstances outlined I shall burst with delight, seeing as I've been roundly screwed over for years anyway by an overvalued £ and low interest rates designed to prop up an overheated property market,.
1.42 to the € was indeed a killer and one of my worries over voting remain.
If it's so great having the pound low against other currencies why don't we do that anyway, it only takes a little QE. Of course, it's possible that it's not really so great.
The uncomfortable truth is that the public didn't think a plan was important. Otherwise they would never have voted Leave on that prospectus. Under normal circumstances you would expect the winners to run with whatever they were promoting. Instead it will be the Remainers, probably, that will sort something out, even though they thought it was a bad idea.
Who is this "Leave" and "Remain" of which you speak ? Campaign groups are not the government.
It is the job of the elected government to have contingency plans for eventualities, particularly entirely foreseeable eventuality owing to them having created the referendum in the first place.
It seems entirely possible that none of the key "leavers" will be in office shortly.
The problem with Heathrow is that it will take a long time to complete , say 2030 at the earliest. Gatwick is cheaper and quicker to build, ready 2025, so the benefits would accrue earlier.
Given Brexit speed is important so that factor in favour of Gatwick becomes more relevant.
LHR3 would be a statement of intent more than anything else.
Better to have a statement of intent pissing out than.... oh, hang on, something not quite right there.
For the record, I oppose HS2, LHR Runway 3 and Hinckley Point C.
Well, I suspect you'll get two of your three wishes then. Hinckley involves the French: got to be completely off the table now. HS2 will die in the Brexit budget cuts unless someone in the Treasury is bright enough to realise capital spending using borrowing at near negative rates is a good idea.
Only if the project has a positive business case - the money has to be repaid as well as the interest.
Airports in the Far East are the best by a long shot. Tokyo, Singapore, Seoul, Shanghai, Hong Kong. And the people who work there aren't in a foul mood, unlike most other places.
Mr. Topping, Cameron is in a position to try and do early negotiations on a reciprocal agreement for EU citizens currently in the UK and Britons currently in the EU getting confirmed residency rights (subject to the new PM agreeing, of course).
He could also be making reassuring noises* about the economy and the prospects for the future.
The suggestion he's tried to lengthen the proceedings of the leadership contest so he can toddle off to the G20 one last time is not an edifying decision. Collaborating with the leadership contenders on a Brexit negotiating team (lawyers etc not politicians) so they're ready to go for the new PM would be a good thing too.
*I realise that's not exactly hard and fast stuff, but with multiple leadership elections and the PM not being seen [excepting at a remembrance event] since he resigned it would help reduce the feeling of being rudderless.
Edited extra bit: advance work on the major options (fully out, EEA/EFTA, and a bespoke approach) should have been done, reducing the time it'll take the new PM to work through that.
Nah sorry Monsieur Morris. You are suggesting he began negotiations before the vote as though the vote had already been cast (and as though Leave had won).
And he couldn't make reassuring noises about the economy because, you know, all the experts told him otherwise.
So I ask again, what concrete measures could he have taken?
It is quite bizarre that all the Leavers on here were adamant before and now that they have no plan for the wonderful post-Brexit world they campaigned and voted for. The greatest example of political vandalism and nihilism probably in our history. Let's take an axe to the EU folks and afterwards... that's for government to sort out. They keep on saying it and sound dafter every time.
Mr. Topping, no, a reciprocal arrangement on residency could be undertaken now, if the PM candidates agree with the basic premise.
Also, the Treasury made up some worst case scenario forecasts. If they'd instead investigated potential options more seriously, there'd be some preparatory work done, ready for the new PM to build on ahead of exit negotiations with the EU.
However, Cameron was right not to invoke Article 50. I suspect he was motivated by wanting someone else to have the hassle, but it was still the right call.
Hasn't the Bank Of England wanted a weaker Sterling for some time? Might a weaker pound help with regard to the global imbalances? Though not if it strengthens the dollar of course.
If you peruse the statements being made by the likes of Michael Heseltine back in 2002/2003 you will find him claiming that we should join the euro because sterling was too strong and making UK industry non-competitive.
In other news, it looks like the black boxes of the EgyptAir plane that crashed into the Mediterranean shows that the crew were trying to tackle a fire.
Looks like they didn't get past the first of aviate, navigate, communicate.
Meanwhile, GBP continues to fall. Sub $1.30 looks inevitable. How low will it go? $1.20? $1.10? $1.00?
#bregret #bridiot
Great innit? I'm rubbing my hands with glee urging it lower. But there again I make things and export them which has been very unfashionable for yonks. Euro 1.42 to the £ early last year hurt big time and took months of hard work and negotiation to make the best of bad job of. Hopefully it'll sink so bloody low they'll actually raise interest rates to defend it (oh how old fashioned), mind you that would start to solve the pensions crisis (remember Tata and BHS?) which is largely caused by insanely low interest rates. Should we survive the current spike down in gilt yields and they do rise, because of circumstances outlined I shall burst with delight, seeing as I've been roundly screwed over for years anyway by an overvalued £ and low interest rates designed to prop up an overheated property market,.
1.42 to the € was indeed a killer and one of my worries over voting remain.
If it's so great having the pound low against other currencies why don't we do that anyway, it only takes a little QE. Of course, it's possible that it's not really so great.
1.42 was murderous for exporters. Anyway 1.18 isn't ideal either, like baby bear's porridge 1.28 odd was just right.
FBI recommend "no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case". "No charges appropriate"
Nevertheless this is a very bad day for Clinton.
Why? Game over, she rolls on.
Probably, but it genuinely doesn't paint her in a very good light. Gives Trump a lot of ammo. The states seem to have the same piss poor political options as us!
Meanwhile, GBP continues to fall. Sub $1.30 looks inevitable. How low will it go? $1.20? $1.10? $1.00?
#bregret #bridiot
Great innit? I'm rubbing my hands with glee urging it lower. But there again I make things and export them which has been very unfashionable for yonks. Euro 1.42 to the £ early last year hurt big time and took months of hard work and negotiation to make the best of bad job of. Hopefully it'll sink so bloody low they'll actually raise interest rates to defend it (oh how old fashioned), mind you that would start to solve the pensions crisis (remember Tata and BHS?) which is largely caused by insanely low interest rates. Should we survive the current spike down in gilt yields and they do rise, because of circumstances outlined I shall burst with delight, seeing as I've been roundly screwed over for years anyway by an overvalued £ and low interest rates designed to prop up an overheated property market,.
1.42 to the € was indeed a killer and one of my worries over voting remain.
If it's so great having the pound low against other currencies why don't we do that anyway, it only takes a little QE. Of course, it's possible that it's not really so great.
The greater concern is that this is just the initial symptom of a deeper sickness, like the sneezing that heralded a dose of the Black Death.
It's being so cheerful wot makes me so popular.
The Black Death would solve the pensions crisis for many of course, so it's not all bad.
''If you peruse the statements being made by the likes of Michael Heseltine back in 2002/2003 you will find him claiming that we should join the euro because sterling was too strong and making UK industry non-competitive.''
Italy are looking at us and going 'you luckeeee, Luckeeee, b8st8rds'
The problem with Heathrow is that it will take a long time to complete , say 2030 at the earliest. Gatwick is cheaper and quicker to build, ready 2025, so the benefits would accrue earlier.
Given Brexit speed is important so that factor in favour of Gatwick becomes more relevant.
The more general point being that Brexit is going to occur in geological time relative to the 24-hr news cycle and the public's attention span (and even, sadly for some, lives).
No one will notice. Most of the forecasts put our GDP lower (including per capita) at less than it would otherwise have been had we stayed in the EU. But as many on here said pre-vote, what's the difference between actual GDP growth of X vs potential GDP growth of 1.2x X to the man on the street? Not much.
Just a shame that we would otherwise have been better off. But as Leavers have also assured us, for the working people of this country, especially those less well-off, there's more to life than economic growth.
Splendid post. I'd only take issue with your last paragraph. There are plenty of people across the entire spectrum of the press examining some of the realities of life in C2DEland. I don't think all of them can be accused of making partisan points.
The average & median disposable income in this country has been flat since the mid-noughties.
I agree with that. There was an arrogance about the Remain camp. We know what what is good for you, when actually it wasn't good for a lot of people.
And so the poor are going to get a LOT poorer. Inflation with the £ falling means fuel prices rising with all the inflation effects, imported goods rise and a lowering of growth means less employment and lower profits and wages.
This would be the "poor" that comprised the bulk of the leave vote ?
@beckymbarrow: And that makes 3: Standard Life, Aviva and now "M&G Investments announces a temporary suspension of trading of the M&G Property Portfolio"
It's astonishing to note that on one of the biggest betting markets, the US presidential elections, we (rightly) haven't had a thread header in weeks and we won't have one today after such an important announcement because the first Tory leadership round will be out in a couple of hours.
What more could Cameron have done, though? He could have involved Article 50, I guess. But that would have been hugely controversial and probably entirely counter-productive. Clearly the BoE had a Brexit strategy in place, so that planning had been done.
Cameron got us into this mess because he was scared of some right wing Tory MPs. He also spent six years bad mouthing the EU and talking tough on immigration. That came back to bite him on the bum very hard indeed. But having lost the argument he has done the right thing and stood down. There is no way on earth that the country would have allowed him to negotiate a Brexit deal. And Dave is not Jeremy Corbyn. He understands how these things work.
He should have had scenario planning in place
And he should have been out there at the moment reassuring people
"He could have undertaken some contingency planning in case the country didn't swallow his personal beliefs."
I believe that he must have directly ordered the CS to NOT do that. They would have done it automatically otherwise. Dereliction of duty is the phrase I suspect. A sacking offence for anyone other than a politician.
So treason from Dave and Blair, and Brown only escapes under the diminished responsibility plea.
Edited for typo.
My information from old friends who are still in contact with the Service, is that is exactly what Cameron did; "No need to waste time, more urgent and important things to be getting on with" or some such nonsense. However, quite a lot of informal work and thinking still went on especially at the very senior level. So it would seem that at least some of the work in developing options will have been done and it won't take too long to start cutting paper.
The Civil Service sometimes, rightly, gets a lot of stick. But it is not uniformly awful and some departments are very much better than others. It can also still be very good.
@beckymbarrow: And that makes 3: Standard Life, Aviva and now "M&G Investments announces a temporary suspension of trading of the M&G Property Portfolio"
Once one property fund announced restriction on withdrawals everyone else was going to do it within hours....
The problem with Heathrow is that it will take a long time to complete , say 2030 at the earliest. Gatwick is cheaper and quicker to build, ready 2025, so the benefits would accrue earlier.
Given Brexit speed is important so that factor in favour of Gatwick becomes more relevant.
The more general point being that Brexit is going to occur in geological time relative to the 24-hr news cycle and the public's attention span (and even, sadly for some, lives).
No one will notice. Most of the forecasts put our GDP lower (including per capita) at less than it would otherwise have been had we stayed in the EU. But as many on here said pre-vote, what's the difference between actual GDP growth of X vs potential GDP growth of 1.2x X to the man on the street? Not much.
Just a shame that we would otherwise have been better off. But as Leavers have also assured us, for the working people of this country, especially those less well-off, there's more to life than economic growth.
Splendid post. I'd only take issue with your last paragraph. There are plenty of people across the entire spectrum of the press examining some of the realities of life in C2DEland. I don't think all of them can be accused of making partisan points.
The average & median disposable income in this country has been flat since the mid-noughties.
I agree with that. There was an arrogance about the Remain camp. We know what what is good for you, when actually it wasn't good for a lot of people.
And so the poor are going to get a LOT poorer. Inflation with the £ falling means fuel prices rising with all the inflation effects, imported goods rise and a lowering of growth means less employment and lower profits and wages.
Yep. But hey the things you are talking about are written in textbooks, which are artefacts developed by 'experts' who know nothing and anyway the British are sick of experts; they want to spend their days listening to amateurs.
There is a general problem with experts in a 24/7 rolling news world, most of them aren't experts, they are just talking heads, and so are frequently wrong. The media don't make the distinction between the "expert" that is an acknowledged international practitioner of many years standing, and the "expert" that is the third-rate university researcher talking about an area out of his key subject that they roped in because no one else wanted to come, so why should the public make that distinction.
Mr. Topping, Cameron is in a position to try and do early negotiations on a reciprocal agreement for EU citizens currently in the UK and Britons currently in the EU getting confirmed residency rights (subject to the new PM agreeing, of course).
He could also be making reassuring noises* about the economy and the prospects for the future.
The suggestion he's tried to lengthen the proceedings of the leadership contest so he can toddle off to the G20 one last time is not an edifying decision. Collaborating with the leadership contenders on a Brexit negotiating team (lawyers etc not politicians) so they're ready to go for the new PM would be a good thing too.
*I realise that's not exactly hard and fast stuff, but with multiple leadership elections and the PM not being seen [excepting at a remembrance event] since he resigned it would help reduce the feeling of being rudderless.
Edited extra bit: advance work on the major options (fully out, EEA/EFTA, and a bespoke approach) should have been done, reducing the time it'll take the new PM to work through that.
Nah sorry Monsieur Morris. You are suggesting he began negotiations before the vote as though the vote had already been cast (and as though Leave had won).
And he couldn't make reassuring noises about the economy because, you know, all the experts told him otherwise.
So I ask again, what concrete measures could he have taken?
It is quite bizarre that all the Leavers on here were adamant before and now that they have no plan for the wonderful post-Brexit world they campaigned and voted for. The greatest example of political vandalism and nihilism probably in our history. Let's take an axe to the EU folks and afterwards... that's for government to sort out. They keep on saying it and sound dafter every time.
My goodness, that's a significant amount of retconning, and the language is somewhat dramatic and perjorative.
As @Topping pointed out earlier, it will take some time to disentangle ourselves from the EU. It's a highly detailed, very complex process that will take some years to accomplish. There have been plenty of suggestions on here as to next steps. Ultimately, it's just a regional trade bloc. We're not casting ourselves out from Heaven.
However, none of us are in a position to execute or even select a plan. Last time I checked, I was not actually in government.
We should also note that several Remainers are insistent that we please everyone. Retain the single market, but as immigration was SO important, end freedom of movement. This seems ambitious. There are dire warnings about how disappointed voters will be if immigration doesn't plummet immediately. I happen to disagree, but GE 2020 will show whether I'm correct.
The problem with Heathrow is that it will take a long time to complete , say 2030 at the earliest. Gatwick is cheaper and quicker to build, ready 2025, so the benefits would accrue earlier.
Given Brexit speed is important so that factor in favour of Gatwick becomes more relevant.
The more general point being that Brexit is going to occur in geological time relative to the 24-hr news cycle and the public's attention span (and even, sadly for some, lives).
Just a shame that we would otherwise have been better off. But as Leavers have also assured us, for the working people of this country, especially those less well-off, there's more to life than economic growth.
Splendid post. I'd only take issue with your last paragraph. There are plenty of people across the entire spectrum of the press examining some of the realities of life in C2DEland. I don't think all of them can be accused of making partisan points.
The average & median disposable income in this country has been flat since the mid-noughties.
I agree with that. There was an arrogance about the Remain camp. We know what what is good for you, when actually it wasn't good for a lot of people.
And so the poor are going to get a LOT poorer. Inflation with the £ falling means fuel prices rising with all the inflation effects, imported goods rise and a lowering of growth means less employment and lower profits and wages.
This would be the "poor" that comprised the bulk of the leave vote ?
Yes. Lied to and mislead by the Leave campaign in the mistaken belief they were giving the establishment a kicking.
FBI recommend "no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case". "No charges appropriate"
Nevertheless this is a very bad day for Clinton.
Why? Game over, she rolls on.
Probably, but it genuinely doesn't paint her in a very good light. Gives Trump a lot of ammo. The states seem to have the same piss poor political options as us!
Overheard at a 4th July party last night: "How come there's 330 million of us, yet the choice for our leader comes down to those two?"
Ken Clarke is too experienced not to know he was on live Sky TV. He looked straight at the camera and gave a consummate display, benefiting from his years in politics.
The most notable comments he made was when he referenced Theresa May in a direct comparison with Margaret Thatcher and that will be the headline in the press in the morning, unless something spectacular happens in tonight's vote.
You do have to admire his style even if you are not a remainer
Mr. Topping, Cameron is in a position to try and do early negotiations on a reciprocal agreement for EU citizens currently in the UK and Britons currently in the EU getting confirmed residency rights (subject to the new PM agreeing, of course).
He could also be making reassuring noises* about the economy and the prospects for the future.
The suggestion he's tried to lengthen the proceedings of the leadership contest so he can toddle off to the G20 one last time is not an edifying decision. Collaborating with the leadership contenders on a Brexit negotiating team (lawyers etc not politicians) so they're ready to go for the new PM would be a good thing too.
*I realise that's not exactly hard and fast stuff, but with multiple leadership elections and the PM not being seen [excepting at a remembrance event] since he resigned it would help reduce the feeling of being rudderless.
Edited extra bit: advance work on the major options (fully out, EEA/EFTA, and a bespoke approach) should have been done, reducing the time it'll take the new PM to work through that.
Nah sorry Monsieur Morris. You are suggesting he began negotiations before the vote as though the vote had already been cast (and as though Leave had won).
And he couldn't make reassuring noises about the economy because, you know, all the experts told him otherwise.
So I ask again, what concrete measures could he have taken?
It is quite bizarre that all the Leavers on here were adamant before and now that they have no plan for the wonderful post-Brexit world they campaigned and voted for. The greatest example of political vandalism and nihilism probably in our history. Let's take an axe to the EU folks and afterwards... that's for government to sort out. They keep on saying it and sound dafter every time.
Last time I checked, I wasn't living in 10 Downing Street. It ain't my job to make those decisions, make those plans. I vote in a government to do that politics stuff. They gave me a choice and positively encouraged me to participate in the vote. I made a choice-over to them to try some of that government shit that they all claim to be so good at.
"Put simply, there is no group in British politics offering a way forward that is both politically deliverable at a European level and not economically ruinous for Britain. That is too horrible to contemplate, let alone discuss with the electorate, so the focus, instead, is on the old internal battles: the left and the right of the Labour Party, the “anyone but Boris” caucus in the Conservative parliamentary party."
That is Stephen Bush, not John Gray, and he still seems to be in his pre-referendum silo, spouting end-of-the-world claims which may or may not be true.
Brexit seems to be all a drip drip drip of lies and propaganda swallowed by stupid people outside the metropolis bubble, conned into voting as they did by 20 years of the Sun and the Mail.
The full-fat Brexit option is one that promises an end to the uncontrolled immigration of the single market. That would result in, among other things, the demise of the City of London as a global financial centre, the reappearance of a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic and less easy holidays on the continent for British tourists.
The marginalisation of England’s poorest and the obsession with the Westminster game were the forces that powered the vote for Brexit. That triumph has sent the pound plummeting, forced the resignation of the Prime Minister and thrown Labour into crisis. It has emboldened the far right across Europe and has been followed by a series of attacks on Britain’s ethnic minorities. It may yet presage the break-up of the United Kingdom and unravel peace in Northern Ireland. The fruits of ignoring its consequences in favour of the parliamentary game may be bitterer still.
That man needs to engage with the world outside, rather than his mirrored certainty bubble.
The New Statesman has started putting multiple articles on a single page which is why I got mixed up.
Fair enough ! btw Should I have heard of John Gray ? :-)
I just got diverted by a mischevious sh*tstirring piece on the same page about Buy to Let by Julia Rampen, with an OMIGOD!!! argument built on Q1 BTL vs FTB figures without mentioning that BTL in Q1 was driven by Mr O's 3% extra stamp duty coming in, and that BTL lending fell off a cliff in April.
What more could Cameron have done, though? He could have involved Article 50, I guess. But that would have been hugely controversial and probably entirely counter-productive. Clearly the BoE had a Brexit strategy in place, so that planning had been done.
Cameron got us into this mess because he was scared of some right wing Tory MPs. He also spent six years bad mouthing the EU and talking tough on immigration. That came back to bite him on the bum very hard indeed. But having lost the argument he has done the right thing and stood down. There is no way on earth that the country would have allowed him to negotiate a Brexit deal. And Dave is not Jeremy Corbyn. He understands how these things work.
He should have had scenario planning in place
And he should have been out there at the moment reassuring people
Of course he had scenario planning in place. BoE, Treasury, the rest of the civil service. Statement following morning by Carney, who said they had had, er, planned for this scenario.
When should he have been reassuring people and what form would that reassurance have taken?
"I come before you today to dispel some rumours. You may have heard the IFS, World Bank, Bank of England, The Treasury, the NIESR all saying how Brexit would be bad for us economically. However....."
Comments
Of course she won't but she will have much more support than Corbyn
The books have a reading age of 11 as defined by the SMOG readability formula.
So they are written for 11-year-olds whose parents don't mind them reading about rape, rape, rape, and for teenagers and adults who are semi-literate.
The books describe more than 200 rapes. (Click that link for further categorisation of the rapes, anyone who wants to find out.)
I repeat, they have a reading age of 11 and they are full of rape, rape, rape. Often the victims end up enjoying the sex, mid-rape. Almost none of the victims are given their own viewpoint. Those extremely few who are, are villains themselves.
As for viewpoints, the books are known for having a very large number of viewpoint characters. The writing team (oops, did I give the game away?) then need to link the scenes together somehow, because they're books, right, rather than weekly porno-sheets. Then all the silly commentators repeat the marketing line that the books have ever so "intricate" plot-lines.
If commentators could think for themselves, rather than using words such as "fantasy" to help the publishers sell the line that this material is in the same genre as Lord of the Rings, they would notice that having many viewpoint characters (which Tolkien doesn't) is a characteristic of made-for-TV soap operas. The "intricate" plot-lines are necessary because having
Scene 1: A rapes B;
Scene 2: C rapes D;
Scene 3: E and ten of his mates and their dogs rape F and her children;
Scene 4: G rapes H with a stick;
Scene 5: I rapes J's corpse;
Scene 6: K rapes L and makes M watch;
Scene 7: N rapes his sister O;
Scene 8: P mutilates Q and then he and his dog rape her;
etc.
wouldn't in itself give commentators many buzzphrases to repeat to convey the impression that this is great literature.
This material is so very much a sign of the times in western culture.
Naughty old Cameron.
Philip Collins Retweeted Beth Rigby
44 people, all of them paid to do politics, think Andrea Leadsom should be PM. 44. So far. Incredible.
If everything that has happened since the Brexit vote has been entirely as expected, what should Cameron have been doing that he has not been doing?
He will be leaving a poisoned legacy, which is a shame as he was an achiever at ministerial level. Changed education forever (whatever your view) and was shaping up as an excellent reforming and liberal Lord Chancellor.
Got caught up in the sixth form debating society and lost his head I think- Tories of his generation still have dreams of avenging Maggie. How ironic that it is Ken Clarke who has been around to throw flowers on the coffin.
I do agree with you about the binary choice. The problem is with the referendum itself, not in the preparation for the consequences of it. Referendums should always be between two clear and valid outcomes. If one of the choices is impracticable, obviously poor or it is not clear what it means, it shouldn't be offered. Generally I think referendums should be restricted to validation by the public for major constitutional change. In other words, the government has decided on a change and done detailed planning for it and then puts it to the public where the choices are the change as stated or the status quo.
They were dealing with a classic known unknown.
What else would you have had David Cameron do? What would you have liked him to announce on the morning of June 24th?
Genuine question, as they say.
Frightening Tatterdemalion Fondles You?
"He could have undertaken some contingency planning in case the country didn't swallow his personal beliefs."
I believe that he must have directly ordered the CS to NOT do that. They would have done it automatically otherwise. Dereliction of duty is the phrase I suspect. A sacking offence for anyone other than a politician.
So treason from Dave and Blair, and Brown only escapes under the diminished responsibility plea.
Edited for typo.
They do publish good stuff
http://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-07-04/the-2-8-million-non-voters-who-delivered-brexit
http://www.nytimes.com/1998/07/09/news/09iht-hong.t_6.html
He could also be making reassuring noises* about the economy and the prospects for the future.
The suggestion he's tried to lengthen the proceedings of the leadership contest so he can toddle off to the G20 one last time is not an edifying decision. Collaborating with the leadership contenders on a Brexit negotiating team (lawyers etc not politicians) so they're ready to go for the new PM would be a good thing too.
*I realise that's not exactly hard and fast stuff, but with multiple leadership elections and the PM not being seen [excepting at a remembrance event] since he resigned it would help reduce the feeling of being rudderless.
Edited extra bit: advance work on the major options (fully out, EEA/EFTA, and a bespoke approach) should have been done, reducing the time it'll take the new PM to work through that.
And if he backs a Remain candidate he burns more bridges with the membership.
Sounds BAD for her....
But no prosecution...
http://localfocus.blogspot.co.uk/2016/07/steve-webb-decides-not-to-stand-again.html
Not that it was going to be easy anyway.
And he couldn't make reassuring noises about the economy because, you know, all the experts told him otherwise.
So I ask again, what concrete measures could he have taken?
Nevertheless this is a very bad day for Clinton.
It is the job of the elected government to have contingency plans for eventualities, particularly entirely foreseeable eventuality owing to them having created the referendum in the first place.
It seems entirely possible that none of the key "leavers" will be in office shortly.
As forecast.
Emailers are the new birthers.
LOL.
Only if the project has a positive business case - the money has to be repaid as well as the interest.
Why? Game over, she rolls on.
Also, the Treasury made up some worst case scenario forecasts. If they'd instead investigated potential options more seriously, there'd be some preparatory work done, ready for the new PM to build on ahead of exit negotiations with the EU.
However, Cameron was right not to invoke Article 50. I suspect he was motivated by wanting someone else to have the hassle, but it was still the right call.
Plenty of chunky quotes for Trump to chew on.
Looks like they didn't get past the first of aviate, navigate, communicate.
Bit of a worry over the direct and implied Bernie red for a second there.
Italy are looking at us and going 'you luckeeee, Luckeeee, b8st8rds'
And he should have been out there at the moment reassuring people
The Civil Service sometimes, rightly, gets a lot of stick. But it is not uniformly awful and some departments are very much better than others. It can also still be very good.
As @Topping pointed out earlier, it will take some time to disentangle ourselves from the EU. It's a highly detailed, very complex process that will take some years to accomplish. There have been plenty of suggestions on here as to next steps. Ultimately, it's just a regional trade bloc. We're not casting ourselves out from Heaven.
However, none of us are in a position to execute or even select a plan. Last time I checked, I was not actually in government.
We should also note that several Remainers are insistent that we please everyone. Retain the single market, but as immigration was SO important, end freedom of movement. This seems ambitious. There are dire warnings about how disappointed voters will be if immigration doesn't plummet immediately. I happen to disagree, but GE 2020 will show whether I'm correct.
"How come there's 330 million of us, yet the choice for our leader comes down to those two?"
The most notable comments he made was when he referenced Theresa May in a direct comparison with Margaret Thatcher and that will be the headline in the press in the morning, unless something spectacular happens in tonight's vote.
You do have to admire his style even if you are not a remainer
I just got diverted by a mischevious sh*tstirring piece on the same page about Buy to Let by Julia Rampen, with an OMIGOD!!! argument built on Q1 BTL vs FTB figures without mentioning that BTL in Q1 was driven by Mr O's 3% extra stamp duty coming in, and that BTL lending fell off a cliff in April.
When should he have been reassuring people and what form would that reassurance have taken?
"I come before you today to dispel some rumours. You may have heard the IFS, World Bank, Bank of England, The Treasury, the NIESR all saying how Brexit would be bad for us economically. However....."
Go on, finish that sentence.