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
The scenario was that we would vote to Leave the EU and there was clearly a plan in place for that which has been enacted.
If, as you say, nothing unexpected has happened, what reassurances are needed? Frankly, when I hear someone telling me there is nothing to worry about I start to worry.
Sir Malcolm Rifkind has been asked by the Press Association about those unguarded remarks on the Conservative leadership contest - and it seems he's happy to stand by them.
"My comments speak for themselves, and they appear to be shared by quite a high proportion of the human race," he replied.
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.
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.
I guess the "Establishment" is feeling well and truly kicked at present, given we have a vacancy for PM, LOTO hanging on to the small tree sticking out of the cliff edge, and newspaper columnists fulminating like Icelandic geysers celebrating another unlikely Euro 2016 result.
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.
Has there been anything that you didn't expect post Brexit?
In t.
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.
No, he should have - as someone else said - have demanded, as the price of a referendum, that the eurosceptics get together a commission and decide amongst themselves what was going on the ballot (WTO, Single Market) as an alternative to the EU. If necessary, have three options on the ballot.
Then both sides could have sent out detailed manifestos.
He fucked it up, from his perspective, quite royally.
Or they would have called his bluff and he would have lost enough votes to the kippers to have lost GE2015, which was the real object the exercise after all
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.
Was your vote in any way influenced by the Vote Leave campaign (bus, manifesto, announcements, Economists for Brexit, etc)?
The FBI announce that they are resigned to Charlie Falconer considering his resignation on US soil and will review the matter with the Justice Dept in great depth at some time in the future.
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.
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.
Well said. I'm sure all of us here have seen an "expert" interviewed at short notice to give an opinion on something we're individually familiar with - and spout absolute bollocks for ten minutes.
Has there been anything that you didn't expect post Brexit?
In t.
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.
No, he should have - as someone else said - have demanded, as the price of a referendum, that the eurosceptics get together a commission and decide amongst themselves what was going on the ballot (WTO, Single Market) as an alternative to the EU. If necessary, have three options on the ballot.
Then both sides could have sent out detailed manifestos.
He fucked it up, from his perspective, quite royally.
I'd have more sympathy with that view if it had been expressed prior to the referendum or the general election. It would have involved a lot of cabinet Brexiters breaking ran a whole lot earlier and would have made it much easier for the Remain side to win. Sounds an awful lot like buyer's remorse to me.
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.
Pretty sure the chat won't be about Brexit tomorrow..
Sir Malcolm Rifkind has been asked by the Press Association about those unguarded remarks on the Conservative leadership contest - and it seems he's happy to stand by them.
"My comments speak for themselves, and they appear to be shared by quite a high proportion of the human race," he replied.
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.
Pretty sure the chat won't be about Brexit tomorrow..
Sir Malcolm Rifkind has been asked by the Press Association about those unguarded remarks on the Conservative leadership contest - and it seems he's happy to stand by them.
"My comments speak for themselves, and they appear to be shared by quite a high proportion of the human race," he replied.
This was in reference to Gove. Ouch.
Sir Malcolm's squalid stunt fell flat. Hopefully his last media appearance.
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.
It's a bit more complicated than that, because having a plan means having a destination in mind. And if Cameron & Co had EFTA/EEA as the destination, then Leavers would have been up in arms.
"As delivered Introduction of draft UNMOVIC Work Programme, Security Council 19 March 2003 Executive Chairman Dr. Hans Blix 19 March - Mr. President
"UNMOVIC was established by the Security Council resolution 1284 (1999) and was enabled to enter Iraq and carry out its inspection work almost three years later.
"It might seem strange that we are presenting a draft work programme only after having already performed inspections for three and a half months. However, there were good reasons why the Council wanted to give us some time after the start of inspections to prepare this programme. During the months of the build up of our resources in Iraq, Larnaca and New York and of inspections in Iraq we have - as was indeed the purpose - learnt a great deal that has been useful to know for the drafting of our work programme and for the selection of key remaining disarmament tasks. It would have been difficult to draft it without this knowledge and this practical experience.
"The time lines established in resolution 1284 (1999) have been understood to mean that the work programme was to be presented for the approval of the Council at the latest on 27 March. In order to meet the wishes of members of the Council we made the Draft Work Programme available already on Monday this week. I note that on the very same day we were constrained together with other UN units to order the withdrawal of all our inspectors and other international staff from Iraq.
"I naturally feel sadness that three and a half months of work carried out in Iraq have not brought the assurances needed about the absence of weapons of mass destruction or other proscribed items in Iraq, that no more time is available for our inspections and that armed action now seems imminent."
Was I the only person who was shocked and surprised when Hans Blix made this speech at the UN on 19 March? This was the eve of the war and there I was confronted with a fact that no-one seemed to have mentioned, which was that Unmovic was only now due to submit its work programme. Thus it's very clear to me that the US and UK jumped the gun in invading Iraq. It's also clear that the US had decided - independently of any work Unmovic might undertake - that it was going to invade Iraq, and that mid-March was the last possible date the invasion could begin, unless it was postponed till the autumn. And postponement till the autumn was out of the question because of the cost of keeping troops and equipment so long in the Middle East, and because it's likely the pro-war movement would run out of steam. Other excuses for the rush to war were just spin.
Sir Malcolm Rifkind has been asked by the Press Association about those unguarded remarks on the Conservative leadership contest - and it seems he's happy to stand by them.
"My comments speak for themselves, and they appear to be shared by quite a high proportion of the human race," he replied.
No, he should have - as someone else said - have demanded, as the price of a referendum, that the eurosceptics get together a commission and decide amongst themselves what was going on the ballot (WTO, Single Market) as an alternative to the EU. If necessary, have three options on the ballot.
Then both sides could have sent out detailed manifestos.
He fucked it up, from his perspective, quite royally.
I'd have more sympathy with that view if it had been expressed prior to the referendum or the general election. It would have involved a lot of cabinet Brexiters breaking ran a whole lot earlier and would have made it much easier for the Remain side to win. Sounds an awful lot like buyer's remorse to me.
No, I think @SeanT is right here actually. Giving the option to just "leave" was I think... irresponsible by Dave. Anyway "Completely out" vs "EFTA" should definitely be a decision taken by the government and not the good people of Wigan - let's not compound the error
Sir Malcolm Rifkind has been asked by the Press Association about those unguarded remarks on the Conservative leadership contest - and it seems he's happy to stand by them.
"My comments speak for themselves, and they appear to be shared by quite a high proportion of the human race," he replied.
This was in reference to Gove. Ouch.
Sir Malcolm's squalid stunt fell flat. Hopefully his last media appearance.
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.
It's a bit more complicated than that, because having a plan means having a destination in mind. And if Cameron & Co had EFTA/EEA as the destination, then Leavers would have been up in arms.
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.
The FBI announce that they are resigned to Charlie Falconer considering his resignation on US soil and will review the matter with the Justice Dept in great depth at some time in the future.
A development the prescient among us have long anticipated Jack.
"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.
Very true. We had Carney last year worrying about too much lending to BTL and now after Osborne's tax increases start to impact BTL we have wailing about the fact that BTL lending and BTL viability is not looking as good and nothing is said about Osborne's tax changes....
Sir Malcolm Rifkind has been asked by the Press Association about those unguarded remarks on the Conservative leadership contest - and it seems he's happy to stand by them.
"My comments speak for themselves, and they appear to be shared by quite a high proportion of the human race," he replied.
@IanDunt: Colleague's take on Leadsom: "Dimmer than Grayling dim." Damning.
Ouch
Consecutive posts showing that the Conservative party leadership contest is being conducted in its usual spirit of harmony and respect.
At least there is a proper election with 5 candidates.
The sane in labour must be looking on with great envy
At about this point in the Labour contest, everyone was rushing around trying to make sure the crazy candidate got offered to the members. The contrast is instructive.
'Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information. ... With respect to potential computer intrusion by hostile actors, we did not find direct evidence that Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail domain, in its various configurations since 2009, was successfully hacked. But, given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence. We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial e-mail accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account' https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2016/jul/05/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-obama-campaign-trail-live https://twitter.com/ShawnaNBCNews/status/750348822686019584
The FBI announce that they are resigned to Charlie Falconer considering his resignation on US soil and will review the matter with the Justice Dept in great depth at some time in the future.
Genuine question - did Charlie Falconer actually resign from the front bench in the end?
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.
In theory, a weaker Sterling makes our exports cheaper, and makes imports more expensive. Therefore helping with our imbalances.
Unfortunately, demand for a lot of the things we import (such as oil, and natural gas) is very price inelastic. If Sterling halved, then our energy import bill would almost double.
Our exports are largely price inelastic too. Hence the fact that Sterling has fallen from $2.10 in 2007 to $1.30, and our exports have only increased 20% or so in that time.
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.
In theory, a weaker Sterling makes our exports cheaper, and makes imports more expensive. Therefore helping with our imbalances.
Unfortunately, demand for a lot of the things we import (such as oil, and natural gas) is very price inelastic. If Sterling halved, then our energy import bill would almost double.
Our exports are largely price inelastic too. Hence the fact that Sterling has fallen from $2.10 in 2007 to $1.30, and our exports have only increased 20% or so in that time.
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.
In theory, a weaker Sterling makes our exports cheaper, and makes imports more expensive. Therefore helping with our imbalances.
Unfortunately, demand for a lot of the things we import (such as oil, and natural gas) is very price inelastic. If Sterling halved, then our energy import bill would almost double.
Our exports are largely price inelastic too. Hence the fact that Sterling has fallen from $2.10 in 2007 to $1.30, and our exports have only increased 20% or so in that time.
$2.10 How was the dollar ever that weak ?
It was more than $2 to the £ for the whole of 2006-07 period while I was living in California as a student. Happy days.
A Referendum is a binary vote. Do we do (a) or (b)? It's not a manifesto for Government put out by a political part seeking election. Do we allow fracking? is an example? It's not "Oh, if we don't do that, what else do we do instead? Full details, please."
The question was asked and answered. The Government that asked the question deals with the upshot. If it cuts and runs, that's down to them. The CS will do what it always does, and probably were stopped from doing by Dave the Sulk. It will analyse and produce options, albeit six months later than it should have been done.
The poor and ignorant and despised and racist (insert as necessary to make you feel better - not you, SO, but some of your fellow sneerers who believe that the unter-menschen should be disenfranchised) have spoken and they have one vote, the same as the Guardian readers.
I suspect the EU has run it's course and will soon begin to disintegrate. But I may be wrong.
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.
In theory, a weaker Sterling makes our exports cheaper, and makes imports more expensive. Therefore helping with our imbalances.
Unfortunately, demand for a lot of the things we import (such as oil, and natural gas) is very price inelastic. If Sterling halved, then our energy import bill would almost double.
Our exports are largely price inelastic too. Hence the fact that Sterling has fallen from $2.10 in 2007 to $1.30, and our exports have only increased 20% or so in that time.
$2.10 How was the dollar ever that weak ?
I know people are excited about the currency swings we're experiencing at the moment, but if you look at longer term graphs, you'll see that we've been all over the place over the last few decades. Speaking as someone from the £1 = $2.50 days.
The FBI announce that they are resigned to Charlie Falconer considering his resignation on US soil and will review the matter with the Justice Dept in great depth at some time in the future.
Genuine question - did Charlie Falconer actually resign from the front bench in the end?
Genuine answer - Yes on the 26th June ....
Finchley Road answer - There a many Charlie Falconer's among the lizard people and the one who resigned on 26th June is actually a lizard people doppelganger.
No, he should have - as someone else said - have demanded, as the price of a referendum, that the eurosceptics get together a commission and decide amongst themselves what was going on the ballot (WTO, Single Market) as an alternative to the EU. If necessary, have three options on the ballot.
Then both sides could have sent out detailed manifestos.
He fucked it up, from his perspective, quite royally.
I'd have more sympathy with that view if it had been expressed prior to the referendum or the general election. It would have involved a lot of cabinet Brexiters breaking ran a whole lot earlier and would have made it much easier for the Remain side to win. Sounds an awful lot like buyer's remorse to me.
No, I think @SeanT is right here actually. Giving the option to just "leave" was I think... irresponsible by Dave. Anyway "Completely out" vs "EFTA" should definitely be a decision taken by the government and not the good people of Wigan - let's not compound the error
I don't buy a Leaver line that says Dave should have made it much harder for us to win.
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.
In theory, a weaker Sterling makes our exports cheaper, and makes imports more expensive. Therefore helping with our imbalances.
Unfortunately, demand for a lot of the things we import (such as oil, and natural gas) is very price inelastic. If Sterling halved, then our energy import bill would almost double.
Our exports are largely price inelastic too. Hence the fact that Sterling has fallen from $2.10 in 2007 to $1.30, and our exports have only increased 20% or so in that time.
I wonder how much is price inelasticity and how much is structural in that we have given up on entire industries.
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.
It's a bit more complicated than that, because having a plan means having a destination in mind. And if Cameron & Co had EFTA/EEA as the destination, then Leavers would have been up in arms.
If he can't take a joke, he shouldn't have called a referendum! He called the referendum to fend off the kippers, to do that he had to at least imply it was going to do something about immigration. If he had said it was EEA/EFTA he would have lost those votes to the kippers and subsequently the general election. He can't have it both ways.
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.
The FBI announce that they are resigned to Charlie Falconer considering his resignation on US soil and will review the matter with the Justice Dept in great depth at some time in the future.
Genuine question - did Charlie Falconer actually resign from the front bench in the end?
Genuine answer - Yes on the 26th June ....
Finchley Road answer - There a many Charlie Falconer's among the lizard people and the one who resigned on 26th June is actually a lizard people doppelganger.
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.
Tokyo??? Narita is a 'mare.
Seoul is nice, but a long way away from the City.
Singapore and Hong Kong are, as you say, excellent.
Anyway, for me, the Brexit issue is decisive. I am getting increasingly nervous about the wobbling and the suggestions that Article 50 might not be activated for months, or years, or ever. We need a PM who can be trusted to enact Brexit and get on with it a.s.a.p. That means Leadsom. Trouble is, questions about her experience.
Previous thread: Leadsom is the "stop Gove" candidate ( as far as the top two are concerned), not the other way round. I would prefer Gove, but he is now seen as tainted so it will probably have to be Leadsom
@GuardianAnushka: Ken Clarke's office have been urging him strongly to complain about his comments being broadcast. His response: nah, its what I think anyway
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.
In theory, a weaker Sterling makes our exports cheaper, and makes imports more expensive. Therefore helping with our imbalances.
Unfortunately, demand for a lot of the things we import (such as oil, and natural gas) is very price inelastic. If Sterling halved, then our energy import bill would almost double.
Our exports are largely price inelastic too. Hence the fact that Sterling has fallen from $2.10 in 2007 to $1.30, and our exports have only increased 20% or so in that time.
$2.10 How was the dollar ever that weak ?
It was more than $2 to the £ for the whole of 2006-07 period while I was living in California as a student. Happy days.
In was in the 1.90s when I bought my house in California (at 40% off the asking price - that's what a bear market in property looks like)
@GuardianAnushka: Ken Clarke's office have been urging him strongly to complain about his comments being broadcast. His response: nah, its what I think anyway
@GuardianAnushka: Ken Clarke's office have been urging him strongly to complain about his comments being broadcast. His response: nah, its what I think anyway
The man's a star - what’s the point of aging if you can’t do it disgracefully…
@GuardianAnushka: Ken Clarke's office have been urging him strongly to complain about his comments being broadcast. His response: nah, its what I think anyway
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.
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.
Oh, I misread your original post. I thought you said mid-90s. I apologise.
It's OK, you gave me a nasty moment, I thought I'd dropped a clanger .
That report has even more devastating graph showing how the boomers have beaten the workers over recent years. Unfortunately it's in some client side display bullshit format which means I can't link it as a piccie.
*Addendum* People who wonder why oldies look back on the 80s & 90s as a golden age, despite spectacular base rates and inflation...wonder no more.
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.
Tokyo??? Narita is a 'mare.
Seoul is nice, but a long way away from the City.
Singapore and Hong Kong are, as you say, excellent.
Mr. Observer, be fair. Even in the heat of the campaign, those leaning towards Leave were stating quite clearly that lines like 'little England' would harm Remain.
Singapore and Hong Kong are, as you say, excellent.
Being given a tiny boiled sweet by passport control does not make an airport excellent.
I don't think I've ever had a more stressful travel experience than trying to change planes at Singapore. A connecting flight with the same carrier required a walk of OVER A MILE and two airside passes through security.
With only a 45 minute turnaround.
Immediately after the initial 15 hour flight to Singapore.
And then there's the stupid metro system out of Changi airport which requires you to change trains after about two stops - basically everybody and their luggage unless they're going to an airport hotel at the intermediate stop, or the conference centre thingy.
Awful. Absolutely awful. At least in the big US airports you can usually get some half-decent beer these days.
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.
Tokyo??? Narita is a 'mare.
Seoul is nice, but a long way away from the City.
Singapore and Hong Kong are, as you say, excellent.
I must have been there on quiet days. April/May 2015.
"Introduction of draft UNMOVIC Work Programme, Security Council 19 March 2003 Executive Chairman Dr. Hans Blix 19 March - Mr. President
"UNMOVIC was established by the Security Council resolution 1284 (1999) and was enabled to enter Iraq and carry out its inspection work almost three years later.
"It might seem strange that we are presenting a draft work programme only after having already performed inspections for three and a half months. ...
"The time lines established in resolution 1284 (1999) have been understood to mean that the work programme was to be presented for the approval of the Council at the latest on 27 March. In order to meet the wishes of members of the Council we made the Draft Work Programme available already on Monday this week. I note that on the very same day we were constrained together with other UN units to order the withdrawal of all our inspectors and other international staff from Iraq.
"I naturally feel sadness that three and a half months of work carried out in Iraq have not brought the assurances needed about the absence of weapons of mass destruction or other proscribed items in Iraq, that no more time is available for our inspections and that armed action now seems imminent."
Was I the only person who was shocked and surprised when Hans Blix made this speech at the UN on 19 March? This was the eve of the war and there I was confronted with a fact that no-one seemed to have mentioned, which was that Unmovic was only now due to submit its work programme.
Perhaps a misreading of what Hans was stating.
UNMOVIC was set up in 1999 as the successor to UNSCOM which had operated for 7 years and 4 months already (ironically the same duration to the month as the Versailles Treaty disarmament commission in Germany), so UNMOVIC had been up and running over 3 years when this statement was made. Much of that time they had not had access to Iraq, but a huge amount of work was done on the knowledge base and identifying outstanding issues and how (and where) these should be addressed with the Iraqis.
UNMOVIC had been working to its already well-established programme of work from the moment that its inspectors regained access to Iraq. What Hans was talking about here wasn't UNMOVIC just having worked out what it should be doing, but more filing a mandated document within the prescribed timeframe.
The principal purpose of this statement you have quoted was CYA.
Singapore and Hong Kong are, as you say, excellent.
Being given a tiny boiled sweet by passport control does not make an airport excellent.
I don't think I've ever had a more stressful travel experience than trying to change planes at Singapore. A connecting flight with the same carrier required a walk of OVER A MILE and two airside passes through security.
With only a 45 minute turnaround.
Immediately after the initial 15 hour flight to Singapore.
And then there's the stupid metro system out of Changi airport which requires you to change trains after about two stops - basically everybody and their luggage unless they're going to an airport hotel at the intermediate stop, or the conference centre thingy.
Awful. Absolutely awful. At least in the big US airports you can usually get some half-decent beer these days.
Denver is the worst plane change I've come across recently. Nearly missed a connecting flight because they require changing passengers to go through the same security as everyone coming in from the outside.
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.
No-one would be so silly as to suggest you could ever live in 10 Downing street - we can agree on that - I was really thinking of people like Gove/Leadsom/Johnson/Fox who all have ambitions of a more realistic nature albeit postponed in the case of Johnson. They really should have had some well-prepared ideas as they couldn't have been so stupid as to think Cameron was going to do it for them.
Interestingly, I think David Malone is the same guy as the documentary maker who does science related stuff and made the truly brilliant 'Dangerous Knowledge' about understanding infinity.
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.
In theory, a weaker Sterling makes our exports cheaper, and makes imports more expensive. Therefore helping with our imbalances.
Unfortunately, demand for a lot of the things we import (such as oil, and natural gas) is very price inelastic. If Sterling halved, then our energy import bill would almost double.
Our exports are largely price inelastic too. Hence the fact that Sterling has fallen from $2.10 in 2007 to $1.30, and our exports have only increased 20% or so in that time.
$2.10 How was the dollar ever that weak ?
I know people are excited about the currency swings we're experiencing at the moment, but if you look at longer term graphs, you'll see that we've been all over the place over the last few decades. Speaking as someone from the £1 = $2.50 days.
We almost hit parity with the Euro in 2008.
And have you seen what has been happening to day length since the brexit vote? God knows where it'll be by Christmas, at this rate. It could literally halve from here.
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.
In theory, a weaker Sterling makes our exports cheaper, and makes imports more expensive. Therefore helping with our imbalances.
Unfortunately, demand for a lot of the things we import (such as oil, and natural gas) is very price inelastic. If Sterling halved, then our energy import bill would almost double.
Our exports are largely price inelastic too. Hence the fact that Sterling has fallen from $2.10 in 2007 to $1.30, and our exports have only increased 20% or so in that time.
$2.10 How was the dollar ever that weak ?
It was more than $2 to the £ for the whole of 2006-07 period while I was living in California as a student. Happy days.
In was in the 1.90s when I bought my house in California (at 40% off the asking price - that's what a bear market in property looks like)
Your experience in that may well soon prove invaluable here!
@IanDunt: Colleague's take on Leadsom: "Dimmer than Grayling dim." Damning.
Ouch
Since when has Grayling been conspicuously thick ? Sounds like Remainer May's on the rocks.
Grayling is that breed of person who is intelligent but not clever.
David "two brains" Willets is another of that breed.
Two Brains' biggest realisation was to notice that most of the new university places over the last few decades have gone to middle-class women, something that was pretty obvious to everyone else.
Brian Bartlett Comey's reasoning boils down to "extremely careless ≠ grossly negligent" under the statute. Tough argument to make. https://t.co/t9pAfIgmmv
It's a bit more complicated than that, because having a plan means having a destination in mind. And if Cameron & Co had EFTA/EEA as the destination, then Leavers would have been up in arms.
I think not. If Cameron had come back from his negotiations and offered a choice between remain in the EU or EFTA or Fully Out WTO, he could have ensured that the full facts, as far they are known, were given to the electorate and then sat back above the fray.
My guess is that the EFTA version would have won easily, Cameron would still be PM and a great deal of unpleasantness could have been avoided.
Cameron instead, I think had started to believe his own spin doctors' spin and thought that the majority of the electorate would believe him regardless of what old bollocks he came out with. He may also have been encouraged by the early polls back at the start of the year which showed Remain winning at a canter. He was not the only one to get it wrong, our own JackW (on whose forecasts some of us have won money) also had Remain down as an easy win.
But it wasn't a FPTP GE style election, every vote counted. So those C2DEs I saw at the polling station actually, for the first time in their lives, had a real vote and sufficient numbers of them used it. It didn't matter that the Constituency they live in voted to remain, just like it always votes conservative, their vote still mattered.
Overall, the referendum was a massive Cameron/Osborne feck up. Cameron has now gone and hopefully his side kick will be consigned to the outer darkness by the new PM.
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.
Tokyo??? Narita is a 'mare.
Seoul is nice, but a long way away from the City.
Singapore and Hong Kong are, as you say, excellent.
Hong Kong is OK. No better than T5 at Heathrow in my experience. All the Asian airports I go to these days are fine if you are travelling business, less so if you are not. It always seems ot take an age for luggage to arrive at HK.
The FBI announce that they are resigned to Charlie Falconer considering his resignation on US soil and will review the matter with the Justice Dept in great depth at some time in the future.
Genuine question - did Charlie Falconer actually resign from the front bench in the end?
Genuine answer - Yes on the 26th June ....
Finchley Road answer - There a many Charlie Falconer's among the lizard people and the one who resigned on 26th June is actually a lizard people doppelganger.
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.
No-one would be so silly as to suggest you could ever live in 10 Downing street - we can agree on that - I was really thinking of people like Gove/Leadsom/Johnson/Fox who all have ambitions of a more realistic nature albeit postponed in the case of Johnson. They really should have had some well-prepared ideas as they couldn't have been so stupid as to think Cameron was going to do it for them.
No, he should have - as someone else said - have demanded, as the price of a referendum, that the eurosceptics get together a commission and decide amongst themselves what was going on the ballot (WTO, Single Market) as an alternative to the EU. If necessary, have three options on the ballot.
Then both sides could have sent out detailed manifestos.
He fucked it up, from his perspective, quite royally.
I'd have more sympathy with that view if it had been expressed prior to the referendum or the general election. It would have involved a lot of cabinet Brexiters breaking ran a whole lot earlier and would have made it much easier for the Remain side to win. Sounds an awful lot like buyer's remorse to me.
No, I think @SeanT is right here actually. Giving the option to just "leave" was I think... irresponsible by Dave. Anyway "Completely out" vs "EFTA" should definitely be a decision taken by the government and not the good people of Wigan - let's not compound the error
I don't buy a Leaver line that says Dave should have made it much harder for us to win.
Agreed and it's most amusing that all the Leavers with all their grand ideas about 'sunlit uphills' and 'crocks of gold at the end of the rainbow' are totally clueless about the great Brexit idea they've been ranting on about for decades. They run for the hills rather than accept any responsibility.
Comments
If, as you say, nothing unexpected has happened, what reassurances are needed? Frankly, when I hear someone telling me there is nothing to worry about I start to worry.
Ouch
"My comments speak for themselves, and they appear to be shared by quite a high proportion of the human race," he replied.
This was in reference to Gove. Ouch.
I don't think that's true.
The FBI announce that they are resigned to Charlie Falconer considering his resignation on US soil and will review the matter with the Justice Dept in great depth at some time in the future.
"As delivered
Introduction of draft UNMOVIC Work Programme, Security Council 19 March 2003
Executive Chairman Dr. Hans Blix
19 March - Mr. President
"UNMOVIC was established by the Security Council resolution 1284 (1999) and was enabled to enter Iraq and carry out its inspection work almost three years later.
"It might seem strange that we are presenting a draft work programme only after having already performed inspections for three and a half months. However, there were good reasons why the Council wanted to give us some time after the start of inspections to prepare this programme. During the months of the build up of our resources in Iraq, Larnaca and New York and of inspections in Iraq we have - as was indeed the purpose - learnt a great deal that has been useful to know for the drafting of our work programme and for the selection of key remaining disarmament tasks. It would have been difficult to draft it without this knowledge and this practical experience.
"The time lines established in resolution 1284 (1999) have been understood to mean that the work programme was to be presented for the approval of the Council at the latest on 27 March. In order to meet the wishes of members of the Council we made the Draft Work Programme available already on Monday this week. I note that on the very same day we were constrained together with other UN units to order the withdrawal of all our inspectors and other international staff from Iraq.
"I naturally feel sadness that three and a half months of work carried out in Iraq have not brought the assurances needed about the absence of weapons of mass destruction or other proscribed items in Iraq, that no more time is available for our inspections and that armed action now seems imminent."
Full text at: http://www.cafe-uni.co.uk/peace/iraq/blix19march.htm
Was I the only person who was shocked and surprised when Hans Blix made this speech at the UN on 19 March? This was the eve of the war and there I was confronted with a fact that no-one seemed to have mentioned, which was that Unmovic was only now due to submit its work programme. Thus it's very clear to me that the US and UK jumped the gun in invading Iraq. It's also clear that the US had decided - independently of any work Unmovic might
undertake - that it was going to invade Iraq, and that mid-March was the last possible date the invasion could begin, unless it was postponed till the autumn. And postponement till the autumn was out of the question because of the cost of keeping troops and equipment so long in the Middle East, and because it's likely the pro-war movement would run out of steam. Other excuses for the rush to war were just spin.
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!search/hans$20blix$20dadge/uk.politics.misc/oFeVcpv5TeU/DPQfQYDXRlsJ
The sane in labour must be looking on with great envy
We could be heading for a repeat of the 2002 Wimbledon final, Serena v Venus.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2016/07/04/0507-MATT-GALLERY-WEB-P1-large_trans++qVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwfSVWeZ_vEN7c6bHu2jJnT8.png
Source:
http://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/bulletins/nowcastinghouseholdincomeintheuk/2015-10-28#trends-in-household-incomes
Are they invested in debt or equity ? Commercial, residential or industrial - or a mix ?
Commercial equity probably not a great place to be right now.
Of course, that's nothing compared with Mark Reckless's CV, where he claimed to be the top ranked City economist at 23.
Reality: he was the most junior member of a six person economics team. And that team had been rated as the top UK economics team.
...
With respect to potential computer intrusion by hostile actors, we did not find direct evidence that Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail domain, in its various configurations since 2009, was successfully hacked. But, given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence. We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial e-mail accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account'
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2016/jul/05/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-obama-campaign-trail-live
https://twitter.com/ShawnaNBCNews/status/750348822686019584
Unfortunately, demand for a lot of the things we import (such as oil, and natural gas) is very price inelastic. If Sterling halved, then our energy import bill would almost double.
Our exports are largely price inelastic too. Hence the fact that Sterling has fallen from $2.10 in 2007 to $1.30, and our exports have only increased 20% or so in that time.
A Referendum is a binary vote. Do we do (a) or (b)? It's not a manifesto for Government put out by a political part seeking election. Do we allow fracking? is an example? It's not "Oh, if we don't do that, what else do we do instead? Full details, please."
The question was asked and answered. The Government that asked the question deals with the upshot. If it cuts and runs, that's down to them. The CS will do what it always does, and probably were stopped from doing by Dave the Sulk. It will analyse and produce options, albeit six months later than it should have been done.
The poor and ignorant and despised and racist (insert as necessary to make you feel better - not you, SO, but some of your fellow sneerers who believe that the unter-menschen should be disenfranchised) have spoken and they have one vote, the same as the Guardian readers.
I suspect the EU has run it's course and will soon begin to disintegrate. But I may be wrong.
We almost hit parity with the Euro in 2008.
Finchley Road answer - There a many Charlie Falconer's among the lizard people and the one who resigned on 26th June is actually a lizard people doppelganger.
You must decide which of the above is true ....
Edited ... by person or persons unknown ....
Seoul is nice, but a long way away from the City.
Singapore and Hong Kong are, as you say, excellent.
Anyway, for me, the Brexit issue is decisive. I am getting increasingly nervous about the wobbling and the suggestions that Article 50 might not be activated for months, or years, or ever. We need a PM who can be trusted to enact Brexit and get on with it a.s.a.p. That means Leadsom. Trouble is, questions about her experience.
Previous thread: Leadsom is the "stop Gove" candidate ( as far as the top two are concerned), not the other way round. I would prefer Gove, but he is now seen as tainted so it will probably have to be Leadsom
Let's just say it might be too much, too soon...
Let's just say it might be too much, too soon...
OK, a long while ago.
That report has even more devastating graph showing how the boomers have beaten the workers over recent years. Unfortunately it's in some client side display bullshit format which means I can't link it as a piccie.
*Addendum* People who wonder why oldies look back on the 80s & 90s as a golden age, despite spectacular base rates and inflation...wonder no more.
Going into and out of the old HK Kai Tak used to be a bit hairy...
Being given a tiny boiled sweet by passport control does not make an airport excellent.
I don't think I've ever had a more stressful travel experience than trying to change planes at Singapore. A connecting flight with the same carrier required a walk of OVER A MILE and two airside passes through security.
With only a 45 minute turnaround.
Immediately after the initial 15 hour flight to Singapore.
And then there's the stupid metro system out of Changi airport which requires you to change trains after about two stops - basically everybody and their luggage unless they're going to an airport hotel at the intermediate stop, or the conference centre thingy.
Awful. Absolutely awful. At least in the big US airports you can usually get some half-decent beer these days.
UNMOVIC was set up in 1999 as the successor to UNSCOM which had operated for 7 years and 4 months already (ironically the same duration to the month as the Versailles Treaty disarmament commission in Germany), so UNMOVIC had been up and running over 3 years when this statement was made. Much of that time they had not had access to Iraq, but a huge amount of work was done on the knowledge base and identifying outstanding issues and how (and where) these should be addressed with the Iraqis.
UNMOVIC had been working to its already well-established programme of work from the moment that its inspectors regained access to Iraq. What Hans was talking about here wasn't UNMOVIC just having worked out what it should be doing, but more filing a mandated document within the prescribed timeframe.
The principal purpose of this statement you have quoted was CYA.
ABDW.
What will he say if he wins?
Jonathan Bartley and Caroline Lucas (job share)
Clive Lord
David Malone
Martie Warin
David Williams
Interestingly, I think David Malone is the same guy as the documentary maker who does science related stuff and made the truly brilliant 'Dangerous Knowledge' about understanding infinity.
Comey's reasoning boils down to "extremely careless ≠ grossly negligent" under the statute. Tough argument to make. https://t.co/t9pAfIgmmv
My guess is that the EFTA version would have won easily, Cameron would still be PM and a great deal of unpleasantness could have been avoided.
Cameron instead, I think had started to believe his own spin doctors' spin and thought that the majority of the electorate would believe him regardless of what old bollocks he came out with. He may also have been encouraged by the early polls back at the start of the year which showed Remain winning at a canter. He was not the only one to get it wrong, our own JackW (on whose forecasts some of us have won money) also had Remain down as an easy win.
But it wasn't a FPTP GE style election, every vote counted. So those C2DEs I saw at the polling station actually, for the first time in their lives, had a real vote and sufficient numbers of them used it. It didn't matter that the Constituency they live in voted to remain, just like it always votes conservative, their vote still mattered.
Overall, the referendum was a massive Cameron/Osborne feck up. Cameron has now gone and hopefully his side kick will be consigned to the outer darkness by the new PM.