Andrew Neil @afneil 37m37 minutes ago This summer there's at least a 30% chance the EU's attention will move from Brexit Britain to unfolding Italian banking crisis.
The Italian banking crisis has already unfolded! The only question is whether it will be resolved via bail-ins, government recapitalisation, or a bad bank
I think the Deutsche Bank bail out is going to be a much bigger issue. As you have said, the bail out required for the Italian banks is probably about €40bn, not a world ending sum. Deutsche could require vastly more money to fix.
Seems quite bizarre that after a referendum where Leave were demanding greater control in the hands of the UK Parliament that the first action of the post Brexit vote PM would be to deny that sovereign Parliament any say in the critical decision
Parliament has had its say.
Can you explain why Parliament didn't include an automacity clause in the EU referendum but did so for the AV referendum?
Nick Clegg.
So why were leavers less competent than Nick Clegg?
Not less competent, more trusting. Clegg didn't trust the government to implement the decision so the clause was put in to calm him down.
And also because Cameron didn't think he'd lose the EU referendum so didn't see any point thinking about what happened if he did, as we've seen.
So we're agreed parliament hasn't had its final say in the EU referendum. Glad we cleared that up.
No, we aren't agreed on that. Parliament washed its hands of the matter when it called the referendum, regardless of whether a particular clause was or was not inserted.
The actions of the losers here trying to frustrate democracy is hilarious. Keep on if you want to keep looking progressively sillier.
Who is using your family brain cell at the moment as it clearly isn't you.
I set my views out a few weeks ago on this.
In the real world, Parliament asked us to make a decision, we have, and now the government will implement it as we directed.
But if you want to advocate that Parliament overrides the referendum with a subsequent vote, you can. You're not the one who will lose his seat because of it.
Whoosh.
Yes, the idea of being outvoted in a democracy does seem to have gone straight over your head.
That's the wonderful thing about democracy: sometimes you lose. And when it does, it exposes your character.
Seems quite bizarre that after a referendum where Leave were demanding greater control in the hands of the UK Parliament that the first action of the post Brexit vote PM would be to deny that sovereign Parliament any say in the critical decision
Parliament has had its say.
Can you explain why Parliament didn't include an automacity clause in the EU referendum but did so for the AV referendum?
Nick Clegg.
So why were leavers less competent than Nick Clegg?
Not less competent, more trusting. Clegg didn't trust the government to implement the decision so the clause was put in to calm him down.
And also because Cameron didn't think he'd lose the EU referendum so didn't see any point thinking about what happened if he did, as we've seen.
So we're agreed parliament hasn't had its final say in the EU referendum. Glad we cleared that up.
No, we aren't agreed on that. Parliament washed its hands of the matter when it called the referendum, regardless of whether a particular clause was or was not inserted.
The actions of the losers here trying to frustrate democracy is hilarious. Keep on if you want to keep looking progressively sillier.
Who is using your family brain cell at the moment as it clearly isn't you.
I set my views out a few weeks ago on this.
In the real world, Parliament asked us to make a decision, we have, and now the government will implement it as we directed.
But if you want to advocate that Parliament overrides the referendum with a subsequent vote, you can. You're not the one who will lose his seat because of it.
But the Parliamentary vote won’t be next week or even, probably this year and might not even be until 2018, given the elections elsewhere. Events will have moved on by then.
If they wait until 2018, it'll be too late: the government will either have invoked article 50 or fallen by then.
Even in an age of ridiculousness there is something preposterous about the sight of so many prominent Leavers clutching their pearls in horror as they contemplate the possibility – the real possibility – that Andrea Leadsom could become the next leader of the Conservative party and, by golly, Prime Minister too.
I mean, where do they think she came from? Who created her? Mrs Leadsom’s credentials to occupy the highest political office in the land come down to one single fact: she is the most virulently eurosceptic candidate available. That’s a powerful thing, however, and those Leavers who think their creation can be safely kept in the laboratory may yet have cause to regret their complacency. Because it’s not as easy as that. Sometimes things escape.http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/brexit-encouraged-eruption-nasty-tawdry-nativism-anyone-surprised/
Even in the age of ridiculousness, this is a truly ridiculous article.
This whole campaign and post referendum is extraordinary in how it has peeled back the patina of rationality to expose raw emotions on both sides of the issue, regardless of political party.
Makes me wonder whether we were overdue such a political bloodletting.
It's by Alex Massie. His referendum coverage has hardly covered him in glory. His article post-Jo Cox was disgusting. I read him because we all need to avoid living in a bubble where we only read things we agree with. I do find him very hard to take.
As Raphael Behr said, the vote punctured the prevailing belief among both Conservative and Labour politicians that there is a natural centrist, liberal, majority among the electorate. Alex Massie still hasn't come to terms with that.
Didn't it expose the electorate as 26% socialist Eurosceptic, 48% liberal centrist Eurotolerant, and 26% libertarian Eurosceptic?
Robot remote controlled bombs have been around since WW2
I thought they meant the shooter's bomb. I presume they just fired at it.
I think some robots fire an overcharged shotgun shell at the suspected bomb. Others use high-pressure water jets to cut wiring. Either way, the purpose is to disrupt the bomb.
In this case, it sounds as though the robot was carrying an explosive charge. It's unclear what they were targeting with it: a bomb or the shooter himself. Unless someone's read more?
Looks like a recipe for political-legal limbo to me
Can the EU box be shut now it has been opened ?
I don't understand this excitement about having Parliament triggering Article 50. The PM decides when to trigger. Parliament votes on it with the democratic justification, arguably the democratic imperative, of the referendum. Then the countdown begins and we Brexit.
Am I missing something?
Err...Yes. The gorilla in the corner is that Parliament might not approve it. Now that WOULD be a constitutional crisis. A PM can trigger by sending a letter to Brussels on Royal Prerogative - with the referendum as mandate. That's what the Brexiters want (Gove etc) because they fear the 'empire strikes back' from the establishment. The Remainiacs all want a vote - because they're hoping Parliament will put the plebs back in their box. So...it's just a tad touchy whether we do or don't seek a vote on it.
Yes I can see parliament hypothetically could vote against Brexit despite being requested to do so in general by the referendum and on the particular by the government. That unlikely event would undoubtedly trigger a constitutional crisis, but I not I think a legal one.
Personally I think Leave was a dumb decision, but I believe strongly in a democracy that allows us to make dumb decisions. Barring a formal change of mind, which probably means at least an election on a manifesto where that change of mind was included, the referendum decision stands.
Andrew Neil @afneil 37m37 minutes ago This summer there's at least a 30% chance the EU's attention will move from Brexit Britain to unfolding Italian banking crisis.
The Italian banking crisis has already unfolded! The only question is whether it will be resolved via bail-ins, government recapitalisation, or a bad bank
I think the Deutsche Bank bail out is going to be a much bigger issue. As you have said, the bail out required for the Italian banks is probably about €40bn, not a world ending sum. Deutsche could require vastly more money to fix.
The scary bit about DB is nobody knows the scale of the problem. How many derivatives are marked to model? It all needs to be unwound, very slowly and very carefully, and with - yes - the German government doing the backstopping.
At least in Italy we know there EUR350bn of bad loans. We know recoveries will end up being EUR150bn, and that EUR150bn has been recognised. It's just arguing about who bears the residual cost.
Even in an age of ridiculousness there is something preposterous about the sight of so many prominent Leavers clutching their pearls in horror as they contemplate the possibility – the real possibility – that Andrea Leadsom could become the next leader of the Conservative party and, by golly, Prime Minister too.
I mean, where do they think she came from? Who created her? Mrs Leadsom’s credentials to occupy the highest political office in the land come down to one single fact: she is the most virulently eurosceptic candidate available. That’s a powerful thing, however, and those Leavers who think their creation can be safely kept in the laboratory may yet have cause to regret their complacency. Because it’s not as easy as that. Sometimes things escape.http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/brexit-encouraged-eruption-nasty-tawdry-nativism-anyone-surprised/
Even in the age of ridiculousness, this is a truly ridiculous article.
This whole campaign and post referendum is extraordinary in how it has peeled back the patina of rationality to expose raw emotions on both sides of the issue, regardless of political party.
Makes me wonder whether we were overdue such a political bloodletting.
It's by Alex Massie. His referendum coverage has hardly covered him in glory. His article post-Jo Cox was disgusting. I read him because we all need to avoid living in a bubble where we only read things we agree with. I do find him very hard to take.
I used to read his stuff quite often - like several others, he's gone off the deep end. I've no idea why Brexit has caused such idiotic tantrums by so many. If we'd lost the vote, I'd be a glum bunny for a couple of days and accept it.
Have one side become so used to getting their way, that this is their first big loss?
Even in an age of ridiculousness there is something preposterous about the sight of so many prominent Leavers clutching their pearls in horror as they contemplate the possibility – the real possibility – that Andrea Leadsom could become the next leader of the Conservative party and, by golly, Prime Minister too.
I mean, where do they think she came from? Who created her? Mrs Leadsom’s credentials to occupy the highest political office in the land come down to one single fact: she is the most virulently eurosceptic candidate available. That’s a powerful thing, however, and those Leavers who think their creation can be safely kept in the laboratory may yet have cause to regret their complacency. Because it’s not as easy as that. Sometimes things escape.http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/brexit-encouraged-eruption-nasty-tawdry-nativism-anyone-surprised/
Even in the age of ridiculousness, this is a truly ridiculous article.
This whole campaign and post referendum is extraordinary in how it has peeled back the patina of rationality to expose raw emotions on both sides of the issue, regardless of political party.
Makes me wonder whether we were overdue such a political bloodletting.
It's by Alex Massie. His referendum coverage has hardly covered him in glory. His article post-Jo Cox was disgusting. I read him because we all need to avoid living in a bubble where we only read things we agree with. I do find him very hard to take.
As Raphael Behr said, the vote punctured the prevailing belief among both Conservative and Labour politicians that there is a natural centrist, liberal, majority among the electorate. Alex Massie still hasn't come to terms with that.
Didn't it expose the electorate as 26% socialist Eurosceptic, 48% liberal centrist Eurotolerant, and 26% libertarian Eurosceptic?
Seems quite bizarre that after a referendum where Leave were demanding greater control in the hands of the UK Parliament that the first action of the post Brexit vote PM would be to deny that sovereign Parliament any say in the critical decision
Parliament has had its say.
Can you explain why Parliament didn't include an automacity clause in the EU referendum but did so for the AV referendum?
Nick Clegg.
So why were leavers less competent than Nick Clegg?
Not less competent, more trusting. Clegg didn't trust the government to implement the decision so the clause was put in to calm him down.
And also because Cameron didn't think he'd lose the EU referendum so didn't see any point thinking about what happened if he did, as we've seen.
So we're agreed parliament hasn't had its final say in the EU referendum. Glad we cleared that up.
No, we aren't agreed on that. Parliament washed its hands of the matter when it called the referendum, regardless of whether a particular clause was or was not inserted.
The actions of the losers here trying to frustrate democracy is hilarious. Keep on if you want to keep looking progressively sillier.
Who is using your family brain cell at the moment as it clearly isn't you.
I set my views out a few weeks ago on this.
In the real world, Parliament asked us to make a decision, we have, and now the government will implement it as we directed.
But if you want to advocate that Parliament overrides the referendum with a subsequent vote, you can. You're not the one who will lose his seat because of it.
But the Parliamentary vote won’t be next week or even, probably this year and might not even be until 2018, given the elections elsewhere. Events will have moved on by then.
If they wait until 2018, it'll be too late: the government will either have invoked article 50 or fallen by then.
There are elections in German and France “soon”; I can’t see this Government falling without some other catastrophic event.
Even in an age of ridiculousness there is something preposterous about the sight of so many prominent Leavers clutching their pearls in horror as they contemplate the possibility – the real possibility – that Andrea Leadsom could become the next leader of the Conservative party and, by golly, Prime Minister too.
I mean, where do they think she came from? Who created her? Mrs Leadsom’s credentials to occupy the highest political office in the land come down to one single fact: she is the most virulently eurosceptic candidate available. That’s a powerful thing, however, and those Leavers who think their creation can be safely kept in the laboratory may yet have cause to regret their complacency. Because it’s not as easy as that. Sometimes things escape.http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/brexit-encouraged-eruption-nasty-tawdry-nativism-anyone-surprised/
Even in the age of ridiculousness, this is a truly ridiculous article.
This whole campaign and post referendum is extraordinary in how it has peeled back the patina of rationality to expose raw emotions on both sides of the issue, regardless of political party.
Makes me wonder whether we were overdue such a political bloodletting.
It's by Alex Massie. His referendum coverage has hardly covered him in glory. His article post-Jo Cox was disgusting. I read him because we all need to avoid living in a bubble where we only read things we agree with. I do find him very hard to take.
As Raphael Behr said, the vote punctured the prevailing belief among both Conservative and Labour politicians that there is a natural centrist, liberal, majority among the electorate. Alex Massie still hasn't come to terms with that.
Didn't it expose the electorate as 26% socialist Eurosceptic, 48% liberal centrist Eurotolerant, and 26% libertarian Eurosceptic?
The centre ground is the new wilderness I think ! Can feel it in my bones
Even in an age of ridiculousness there is something preposterous about the sight of so many prominent Leavers clutching their pearls in horror as they contemplate the possibility – the real possibility – that Andrea Leadsom could become the next leader of the Conservative party and, by golly, Prime Minister too.
I mean, where do they think she came from? Who created her? Mrs Leadsom’s credentials to occupy the highest political office in the land come down to one single fact: she is the most virulently eurosceptic candidate available. That’s a powerful thing, however, and those Leavers who think their creation can be safely kept in the laboratory may yet have cause to regret their complacency. Because it’s not as easy as that. Sometimes things escape.http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/brexit-encouraged-eruption-nasty-tawdry-nativism-anyone-surprised/
Even in the age of ridiculousness, this is a truly ridiculous article.
This whole campaign and post referendum is extraordinary in how it has peeled back the patina of rationality to expose raw emotions on both sides of the issue, regardless of political party.
Makes me wonder whether we were overdue such a political bloodletting.
It's by Alex Massie. His referendum coverage has hardly covered him in glory. His article post-Jo Cox was disgusting. I read him because we all need to avoid living in a bubble where we only read things we agree with. I do find him very hard to take.
I used to read his stuff quite often - like several others, he's gone off the deep end. I've no idea why Brexit has caused such idiotic tantrums by so many. If we'd lost the vote, I'd be a glum bunny for a couple of days and accept it.
Have one side become so used to getting their way, that this is their first big loss?
There are probably people in their 40s who have never been on the wrong side of a significant national decision: if they supported Major 92, Blair three times, Cameron twice, and were anti-Scottish independence and anti-AV.
Meanwhile in the REAL world Allsop Commercial property auction in London this week
"Our auction attracted more attention than usual with people watching closely for an indication of market sentiment following the EU referendum. Pleasingly it was very much business as usual, with confident and competitive bidding from the start. The motivations of our buyers does not appear to have changed, with properties that are well let, well located or offer potential to add value all continuing to attract strong interest. Encouragingly demand remains high with 78% of buyers expressing a desire to buy again at auction in the next 12 months."
But why allow the facts to interfere with all the doom and gloom.
Looks like a recipe for political-legal limbo to me
Can the EU box be shut now it has been opened ?
I don't understand this excitement about having Parliament triggering Article 50. The PM decides when to trigger. Parliament votes on it with the democratic justification, arguably the democratic imperative, of the referendum. Then the countdown begins and we Brexit.
Am I missing something?
Err...Yes. The gorilla in the corner is that Parliament might not approve it. Now that WOULD be a constitutional crisis. A PM can trigger by sending a letter to Brussels on Royal Prerogative - with the referendum as mandate. That's what the Brexiters want (Gove etc) because they fear the 'empire strikes back' from the establishment. The Remainiacs all want a vote - because they're hoping Parliament will put the plebs back in their box. So...it's just a tad touchy whether we do or don't seek a vote on it.
Yes I can see parliament hypothetically could vote against Brexit despite being requested to do so in general by the referendum and on the particular by the government. That unlikely event would undoubtedly trigger a constitutional crisis, but I not I think a legal one.
Personally I think Leave was a dumb decision, but I believe strongly in a democracy that allows us to make dumb decisions. Barring a formal change of mind, which probably means at least an election on a manifesto where that change of mind was included, the referendum decision stands.
Even in an election won by a party with a manifesto for remain, it would be problematic to remain unless that party won in excess of 50% of the popular vote, given the referendum result.
Even in an age of ridiculousness there is something preposterous about the sight of so many prominent Leavers clutching their pearls in horror as they contemplate the possibility – the real possibility – that Andrea Leadsom could become the next leader of the Conservative party and, by golly, Prime Minister too.
I mean, where do they think she came from? Who created her? Mrs Leadsom’s credentials to occupy the highest political office in the land come down to one single fact: she is the most virulently eurosceptic candidate available. That’s a powerful thing, however, and those Leavers who think their creation can be safely kept in the laboratory may yet have cause to regret their complacency. Because it’s not as easy as that. Sometimes things escape.http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/brexit-encouraged-eruption-nasty-tawdry-nativism-anyone-surprised/
Even in the age of ridiculousness, this is a truly ridiculous article.
This whole campaign and post referendum is extraordinary in how it has peeled back the patina of rationality to expose raw emotions on both sides of the issue, regardless of political party.
Makes me wonder whether we were overdue such a political bloodletting.
It's by Alex Massie. His referendum coverage has hardly covered him in glory. His article post-Jo Cox was disgusting. I read him because we all need to avoid living in a bubble where we only read things we agree with. I do find him very hard to take.
I used to read his stuff quite often - like several others, he's gone off the deep end. I've no idea why Brexit has caused such idiotic tantrums by so many. If we'd lost the vote, I'd be a glum bunny for a couple of days and accept it.
Have one side become so used to getting their way, that this is their first big loss?
There are probably people in their 40s who have never been on the wrong side of a significant national decision: if they've supported Major 92, Blair three times, Cameron twice, and were anti-Scottish independence and anti-AV.
I wish! I’m in my late 70’s and I’ve voted for a winner in a national election once I think; 1997. And I don’t think I’ve voted for a winner in a local election since about 1961!
Andrew Neil @afneil 37m37 minutes ago This summer there's at least a 30% chance the EU's attention will move from Brexit Britain to unfolding Italian banking crisis.
The Italian banking crisis has already unfolded! The only question is whether it will be resolved via bail-ins, government recapitalisation, or a bad bank
I think the Deutsche Bank bail out is going to be a much bigger issue. As you have said, the bail out required for the Italian banks is probably about €40bn, not a world ending sum. Deutsche could require vastly more money to fix.
The scary bit about DB is nobody knows the scale of the problem. How many derivatives are marked to model? It all needs to be unwound, very slowly and very carefully, and with - yes - the German government doing the backstopping.
At least in Italy we know there EUR350bn of bad loans. We know recoveries will end up being EUR150bn, and that EUR150bn has been recognised. It's just arguing about who bears the residual cost.
Indeed. Did you get the report from DB London about the EU economy being put at risk by the Eurozone banking sector? It was deliciously ironic. I could feel the tears of DB employees on the screen as I read through it. A bit of gallows humour...
Dumb indeed. She seems to have learned nothing from similarly crass proposals from her predecessor, David Cameron. Maybe it is a cunning ploy by CCHQ's dirty tricks department to prolong Labour's woes by making Jeremy Corbyn seem like Alan Turing.
Even in an age of ridiculousness there is something preposterous about the sight of so many prominent Leavers clutching their pearls in horror as they contemplate the possibility – the real possibility – that Andrea Leadsom could become the next leader of the Conservative party and, by golly, Prime Minister too.
I mean, where do they think she came from? Who created her? Mrs Leadsom’s credentials to occupy the highest political office in the land come down to one single fact: she is the most virulently eurosceptic candidate available. That’s a powerful thing, however, and those Leavers who think their creation can be safely kept in the laboratory may yet have cause to regret their complacency. Because it’s not as easy as that. Sometimes things escape.http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/brexit-encouraged-eruption-nasty-tawdry-nativism-anyone-surprised/
Even in the age of ridiculousness, this is a truly ridiculous article.
This whole campaign and post referendum is extraordinary in how it has peeled back the patina of rationality to expose raw emotions on both sides of the issue, regardless of political party.
Makes me wonder whether we were overdue such a political bloodletting.
It's by Alex Massie. His referendum coverage has hardly covered him in glory. His article post-Jo Cox was disgusting. I read him because we all need to avoid living in a bubble where we only read things we agree with. I do find him very hard to take.
As Raphael Behr said, the vote punctured the prevailing belief among both Conservative and Labour politicians that there is a natural centrist, liberal, majority among the electorate. Alex Massie still hasn't come to terms with that.
Didn't it expose the electorate as 26% socialist Eurosceptic, 48% liberal centrist Eurotolerant, and 26% libertarian Eurosceptic?
The centre ground is the new wilderness I think ! Can feel it in my bones
The post-War liberal ascendancy is crumbling. UKIP, Trump and this referendum to get rid of the EU are all testament to that. It makes me sad as someone who thinks liberalism is better than all other political ideas. We haven't done a good job of selling the benefits of liberalism and we have made a bad job of protecting people from the downsides of globalisation.
Looks like a recipe for political-legal limbo to me
Can the EU box be shut now it has been opened ?
I don't understand this excitement about having Parliament triggering Article 50. The PM decides when to trigger. Parliament votes on it with the democratic justification, arguably the democratic imperative, of the referendum. Then the countdown begins and we Brexit.
Am I missing something?
Err...Yes. The gorilla in the corner is that Parliament might not approve it. Now that WOULD be a constitutional crisis. A PM can trigger by sending a letter to Brussels on Royal Prerogative - with the referendum as mandate. That's what the Brexiters want (Gove etc) because they fear the 'empire strikes back' from the establishment. The Remainiacs all want a vote - because they're hoping Parliament will put the plebs back in their box. So...it's just a tad touchy whether we do or don't seek a vote on it.
Yes I can see parliament hypothetically could vote against Brexit despite being requested to do so in general by the referendum and on the particular by the government. That unlikely event would undoubtedly trigger a constitutional crisis, but I not I think a legal one.
Personally I think Leave was a dumb decision, but I believe strongly in a democracy that allows us to make dumb decisions. Barring a formal change of mind, which probably means at least an election on a manifesto where that change of mind was included, the referendum decision stands.
Even in an election won by a party with a manifesto for remain, it would be problematic to remain unless that party won in excess of 50% of the popular vote, given the referendum result.
Hmm I don't think this is the case. A parliamentary majority for the Lib Dems would be good enough, it's looking odds against, mind.
Seems quite bizarre that after a referendum where Leave were demanding greater control in the hands of the UK Parliament that the first action of the post Brexit vote PM would be to deny that sovereign Parliament any say in the critical decision
Parliament has had its say.
Can you explain why Parliament didn't include an automacity clause in the EU referendum but did so for the AV referendum?
Nick Clegg.
So why were leavers less competent than Nick Clegg?
Not less competent, more trusting. Clegg didn't trust the government to implement the decision so the clause was put in to calm him down.
And also because Cameron didn't think he'd lose the EU referendum so didn't see any point thinking about what happened if he did, as we've seen.
So we're agreed parliament hasn't had its final say in the EU referendum. Glad we cleared that up.
No, we aren't agreed on that. Parliament washed its hands of the matter when it called the referendum, regardless of whether a particular clause was or was not inserted.
The actions of the losers here trying to frustrate democracy is hilarious. Keep on if you want to keep looking progressively sillier.
Who is using your family brain cell at the moment as it clearly isn't you.
I set my views out a few weeks ago on this.
In the real world, Parliament asked us to make a decision, we have, and now the government will implement it as we directed.
But if you want to advocate that Parliament overrides the referendum with a subsequent vote, you can. You're not the one who will lose his seat because of it.
But the Parliamentary vote won’t be next week or even, probably this year and might not even be until 2018, given the elections elsewhere. Events will have moved on by then.
If they wait until 2018, it'll be too late: the government will either have invoked article 50 or fallen by then.
There are elections in German and France “soon”; I can’t see this Government falling without some other catastrophic event.
I don't think the economy could stand several years of parliament sitting on its hands. If you offered me a choice between article 50 invocation in 2018 and just surrendering to the EU, I'd take the latter.
Looks like a recipe for political-legal limbo to me
Can the EU box be shut now it has been opened ?
I don't understand this excitement about having Parliament triggering Article 50. The PM decides when to trigger. Parliament votes on it with the democratic justification, arguably the democratic imperative, of the referendum. Then the countdown begins and we Brexit.
Am I missing something?
Err...Yes. The gorilla in the corner is that Parliament might not approve it. Now that WOULD be a constitutional crisis. A PM can trigger by sending a letter to Brussels on Royal Prerogative - with the referendum as mandate. That's what the Brexiters want (Gove etc) because they fear the 'empire strikes back' from the establishment. The Remainiacs all want a vote - because they're hoping Parliament will put the plebs back in their box. So...it's just a tad touchy whether we do or don't seek a vote on it.
Yes I can see parliament hypothetically could vote against Brexit despite being requested to do so in general by the referendum and on the particular by the government. That unlikely event would undoubtedly trigger a constitutional crisis, but I not I think a legal one.
Personally I think Leave was a dumb decision, but I believe strongly in a democracy that allows us to make dumb decisions. Barring a formal change of mind, which probably means at least an election on a manifesto where that change of mind was included, the referendum decision stands.
Even in an election won by a party with a manifesto for remain, it would be problematic to remain unless that party won in excess of 50% of the popular vote, given the referendum result.
Hmm I don't think this is the case. A parliamentary majority for the Lib Dems would be good enough, it's looking odds against, mind.
Parliament is the voice of the people. As the people have spoken on this specific issue, there is no need for parliament to revisit the question. The Remain campaign made most of the predictions regarding Brexit that are now being worried about and the electorate voted for Leave in the knowledge of that. "But I didn't think they meant it" isn't a good enough excuse.
I just knew all along that sooner or later the Tories would come up with this kind of nonsense.
Very sorry, Mr Herdson, but the people have not spoken on this specific issue. They were presented with a question couched in the vaguest of terms, with no indication within the question aout the practical implications or consequences.
The glosses put on the question during the course of the campaign were exaggerated, contradictory and completely impractical, and all dreamed up by unscrupulous leading Conservative politicians.
If I remember rightly, we were asked to vote for an extra 35 millino pounds to be spend each week (or was it each day?) on the NHS. That was what people voted for. When are Cameron, Osborn, Leadsom and May going to deliver on that?
I think the question on the paper was to leave the EU or remain in the EU. That was what they voted on and that is what is to be delivered. It's not "couched in the vaguest of terms"; it's a very specific point.
In any case, it is the height of brass neck for a Lib Dem to complain about campaigning on one thing and then doing another. 'Keep the Tories out', 'Tuition fees' - ring any bells? And that was in a general election when parties' manifestoes were the basis for government should they end up in office; 'Leave' was not a party and is not in government. Their ideas of what could be done with the EU membership money cannot be regarded as anything more than suggestions.
Andrew Neil @afneil 37m37 minutes ago This summer there's at least a 30% chance the EU's attention will move from Brexit Britain to unfolding Italian banking crisis.
The Italian banking crisis has already unfolded! The only question is whether it will be resolved via bail-ins, government recapitalisation, or a bad bank
I think the Deutsche Bank bail out is going to be a much bigger issue. As you have said, the bail out required for the Italian banks is probably about €40bn, not a world ending sum. Deutsche could require vastly more money to fix.
The scary bit about DB is nobody knows the scale of the problem. How many derivatives are marked to model? It all needs to be unwound, very slowly and very carefully, and with - yes - the German government doing the backstopping.
At least in Italy we know there EUR350bn of bad loans. We know recoveries will end up being EUR150bn, and that EUR150bn has been recognised. It's just arguing about who bears the residual cost.
Indeed. Did you get the report from DB London about the EU economy being put at risk by the Eurozone banking sector? It was deliciously ironic.
I haven't... I will dig it out over the weekend. I'm writing a big thought piece called The Discontented about the ultimate (rather than proximate) causes behind the rises of Trump and the like.
Looks like a recipe for political-legal limbo to me
Can the EU box be shut now it has been opened ?
I don't understand this excitement about having Parliament triggering Article 50. The PM decides when to trigger. Parliament votes on it with the democratic justification, arguably the democratic imperative, of the referendum. Then the countdown begins and we Brexit.
Am I missing something?
Err...Yes. The gorilla in the corner is that Parliament might not approve it. Now that WOULD be a constitutional crisis. A PM can trigger by sending a letter to Brussels on Royal Prerogative - with the referendum as mandate. That's what the Brexiters want (Gove etc) because they fear the 'empire strikes back' from the establishment. The Remainiacs all want a vote - because they're hoping Parliament will put the plebs back in their box. So...it's just a tad touchy whether we do or don't seek a vote on it.
Yes I can see parliament hypothetically could vote against Brexit despite being requested to do so in general by the referendum and on the particular by the government. That unlikely event would undoubtedly trigger a constitutional crisis, but I not I think a legal one.
Personally I think Leave was a dumb decision, but I believe strongly in a democracy that allows us to make dumb decisions. Barring a formal change of mind, which probably means at least an election on a manifesto where that change of mind was included, the referendum decision stands.
Even in an election won by a party with a manifesto for remain, it would be problematic to remain unless that party won in excess of 50% of the popular vote, given the referendum result.
Hmm I don't think this is the case. A parliamentary majority for the Lib Dems would be good enough, it's looking odds against, mind.
Labour (Mark2) plus the LibDems?
Corbyn's Labour ?
Or SDP2 lead by Chuka (Or Jarvis ?) ? He needs to get it off the ground 1st !
Even in an age of ridiculousness there is something preposterous about the sight of so many prominent Leavers clutching their pearls in horror as they contemplate the possibility – the real possibility – that Andrea Leadsom could become the next leader of the Conservative party and, by golly, Prime Minister too.
I mean, where do they think she came from? Who created her? Mrs Leadsom’s credentials to occupy the highest political office in the land come down to one single fact: she is the most virulently eurosceptic candidate available. That’s a powerful thing, however, and those Leavers who think their creation can be safely kept in the laboratory may yet have cause to regret their complacency. Because it’s not as easy as that. Sometimes things escape.http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/brexit-encouraged-eruption-nasty-tawdry-nativism-anyone-surprised/
Even in the age of ridiculousness, this is a truly ridiculous article.
This whole campaign and post referendum is extraordinary in how it has peeled back the patina of rationality to expose raw emotions on both sides of the issue, regardless of political party.
Makes me wonder whether we were overdue such a political bloodletting.
It's by Alex Massie. His referendum coverage has hardly covered him in glory. His article post-Jo Cox was disgusting. I read him because we all need to avoid living in a bubble where we only read things we agree with. I do find him very hard to take.
As Raphael Behr said, the vote punctured the prevailing belief among both Conservative and Labour politicians that there is a natural centrist, liberal, majority among the electorate. Alex Massie still hasn't come to terms with that.
Didn't it expose the electorate as 26% socialist Eurosceptic, 48% liberal centrist Eurotolerant, and 26% libertarian Eurosceptic?
</blockquot 26% are not pro immigraion libertarians in Britain.
Even in an age of ridiculousness there is something preposterous about the sight of so many prominent Leavers clutching their pearls in horror as they contemplate the possibility – the real possibility – that Andrea Leadsom could become the next leader of the Conservative party and, by golly, Prime Minister too.
I mean, where do they think she came from? Who created her? Mrs Leadsom’s credentials to occupy the highest political office in the land come down to one single fact: she is the most virulently eurosceptic candidate available. That’s a powerful thing, however, and those Leavers who think their creation can be safely kept in the laboratory may yet have cause to regret their complacency. Because it’s not as easy as that. Sometimes things escape.http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/brexit-encouraged-eruption-nasty-tawdry-nativism-anyone-surprised/
Even in the age of ridiculousness, this is a truly ridiculous article.
This whole campaign and post referendum is extraordinary in how it has peeled back the patina of rationality to expose raw emotions on both sides of the issue, regardless of political party.
Makes me wonder whether we were overdue such a political bloodletting.
It's by Alex Massie. His referendum coverage has hardly covered him in glory. His article post-Jo Cox was disgusting. I read him because we all need to avoid living in a bubble where we only read things we agree with. I do find him very hard to take.
I used to read his stuff quite often - like several others, he's gone off the deep end. I've no idea why Brexit has caused such idiotic tantrums by so many. If we'd lost the vote, I'd be a glum bunny for a couple of days and accept it.
Have one side become so used to getting their way, that this is their first big loss?
There are probably people in their 40s who have never been on the wrong side of a significant national decision: if they supported Major 92, Blair three times, Cameron twice, and were anti-Scottish independence and anti-AV.
I think it's rather more existential than that for people like Alex Massie. All their adult lives they've believed that we're moving to world without borders, where there are no restrictions on the movement of people and capital, and things that matter are determined by intelligent international bureaucracies, rather than by stupid national electorates.
And then, quite suddenly, the future turns out not be like that.
Even in an age of ridiculousness there is something preposterous about the sight of so many prominent Leavers clutching their pearls in horror as they contemplate the possibility – the real possibility – that Andrea Leadsom could become the next leader of the Conservative party and, by golly, Prime Minister too.
I mean, where do they think she came from? Who created her? Mrs Leadsom’s credentials to occupy the highest political office in the land come down to one single fact: she is the most virulently eurosceptic candidate available. That’s a powerful thing, however, and those Leavers who think their creation can be safely kept in the laboratory may yet have cause to regret their complacency. Because it’s not as easy as that. Sometimes things escape.http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/brexit-encouraged-eruption-nasty-tawdry-nativism-anyone-surprised/
Even in the age of ridiculousness, this is a truly ridiculous article.
This whole campaign and post referendum is extraordinary in how it has peeled back the patina of rationality to expose raw emotions on both sides of the issue, regardless of political party.
Makes me wonder whether we were overdue such a political bloodletting.
It's by Alex Massie. His referendum coverage has hardly covered him in glory. His article post-Jo Cox was disgusting. I read him because we all need to avoid living in a bubble where we only read things we agree with. I do find him very hard to take.
I used to read his stuff quite often - like several others, he's gone off the deep end. I've no idea why Brexit has caused such idiotic tantrums by so many. If we'd lost the vote, I'd be a glum bunny for a couple of days and accept it.
Have one side become so used to getting their way, that this is their first big loss?
In fairness, its easy to accept the status quo. I'd have been gutted - we'd never get another referendum. However, it wouldn't have affected my finances.
To paraphrase the great Donald, we have taken a leap into the known unknown. The people who voted for stability are understandably going to be more upset than if it had been vice versa.
Would I be right in assuming the winner of the prediction competition is proving impossible to track down? That would explain why it hasn't been announced.
Parliament is the voice of the people. As the people have spoken on this specific issue, there is no need for parliament to revisit the question. The Remain campaign made most of the predictions regarding Brexit that are now being worried about and the electorate voted for Leave in the knowledge of that. "But I didn't think they meant it" isn't a good enough excuse.
I just knew all along that sooner or later the Tories would come up with this kind of nonsense.
Very sorry, Mr Herdson, but the people have not spoken on this specific issue. They were presented with a question couched in the vaguest of terms, with no indication within the question aout the practical implications or consequences.
The glosses put on the question during the course of the campaign were exaggerated, contradictory and completely impractical, and all dreamed up by unscrupulous leading Conservative politicians.
If I remember rightly, we were asked to vote for an extra 35 millino pounds to be spend each week (or was it each day?) on the NHS. That was what people voted for. When are Cameron, Osborn, Leadsom and May going to deliver on that?
I think the question on the paper was to leave the EU or remain in the EU. That was what they voted on and that is what is to be delivered. It's not "couched in the vaguest of terms"; it's a very specific point.
In any case, it is the height of brass neck for a Lib Dem to complain about campaigning on one thing and then doing another. 'Keep the Tories out', 'Tuition fees' - ring any bells? And that was in a general election when parties' manifestoes were the basis for government should they end up in office; 'Leave' was not a party and is not in government. Their ideas of what could be done with the EU membership money cannot be regarded as anything more than suggestions.
While I agree about tuition fees (although so far I gather that may turn out less badly than feared) the last 15 months or so have surely proved tjat to some extent at lesat they did keep the Tories on a leash, if not out!
Andrew Neil @afneil 37m37 minutes ago This summer there's at least a 30% chance the EU's attention will move from Brexit Britain to unfolding Italian banking crisis.
The Italian banking crisis has already unfolded! The only question is whether it will be resolved via bail-ins, government recapitalisation, or a bad bank
I think the Deutsche Bank bail out is going to be a much bigger issue. As you have said, the bail out required for the Italian banks is probably about €40bn, not a world ending sum. Deutsche could require vastly more money to fix.
The scary bit about DB is nobody knows the scale of the problem. How many derivatives are marked to model? It all needs to be unwound, very slowly and very carefully, and with - yes - the German government doing the backstopping.
At least in Italy we know there EUR350bn of bad loans. We know recoveries will end up being EUR150bn, and that EUR150bn has been recognised. It's just arguing about who bears the residual cost.
Indeed. Did you get the report from DB London about the EU economy being put at risk by the Eurozone banking sector? It was deliciously ironic.
I haven't... I will dig it out over the weekend. I'm writing a big thought piece called The Discontented about the ultimate (rather than proximate) causes behind the rises of Trump and the like.
I'd be very interested in that, Robert. I've said it many times on here, but it is worth reading up on Kahan's stuff at the Cultural Cognition Project to see how non-rational processes, and decision-heuristics, shape our political choices.
I know the feeling. That comes with switching from Labour to LD in 1997. The LDs never win anything. I gave up on them last time and abstained by voting Ukip. We held the labour majority to 20,000 but everyone around here voted Leave in the referendum.
At last. Become a Leaver, it does create a warm feeling and you can smile at the more extreme Remain reactions. Ah, diddums.
Would I be right in assuming the winner of the prediction competition is proving impossible to track down? That would explain why it hasn't been announced.
Nope. It's because so much has happened in the last fortnight, we've not had time to publish it.
Seems quite bizarre that after a referendum where Leave were demanding greater control in the hands of the UK Parliament that the first action of the post Brexit vote PM would be to deny that sovereign Parliament any say in the critical decision
Parliament has had its say.
Can you explain why Parliament didn't include an automacity clause in the EU referendum but did so for the AV referendum?
Nick Clegg.
So why were leavers less competent than Nick Clegg?
Not less competent, more trusting. Clegg didn't trust the government to implement the decision so the clause was put in to calm him down.
And also because Cameron didn't think he'd lose the EU referendum so didn't see any point thinking about what happened if he did, as we've seen.
So we're agreed parliament hasn't had its final say in the EU referendum. Glad we cleared that up.
No, we aren't agreed on that. Parliament washed its hands of the matter when it called the referendum, regardless of whether a particular clause was or was not inserted.
The actions of the losers here trying to frustrate democracy is hilarious. Keep on if you want to keep looking progressively sillier.
Who is using your family brain cell at the moment as it clearly isn't you.
I set my views out a few weeks ago on this.
In the real world, Parliament asked us to make a decision, we have, and now the government will implement it as we directed.
But if you want to advocate that Parliament overrides the referendum with a subsequent vote, you can. You're not the one who will lose his seat because of it.
In the real world Parliament could now vote to leave the EU but retain all existing relationships with the EU - including accepting ECJ decisions, paying into the EU budget and ensuring that the UK is a full part of the single market. Would that be what people voted for?
Have one side become so used to getting their way, that this is their first big loss?
It's quite a big loss. Unlike General Elections it's pretty much unreverseable and brings with it financial loss in the short to medium term at least.
Chuck into that the casual xenophobia of the leave campaign and the political mess of the aftermath and you can see why many are upset.
Indeed this loss is a threat to the identity of many people; for those who identify with what they consider the values of being part of Europe, losing this times means their values and their outlook on the world have been forcibly stripped away.
In politics as usual your side losing doesn't threaten your identity - you hold on to your identity and try and win next time. That need to hold on to your identity can sometimes lead to electing strange leaders....
And that's an argument why Leadsom won't win. In power, Tories don't feel the need to bolster their identity by electing a parody of a Tory.
''The scary bit about DB is nobody knows the scale of the problem. How many derivatives are marked to model? It all needs to be unwound, very slowly and very carefully, and with - yes - the German government doing the backstopping.''
Quite frankly, I find that completely astonishing. How many compliance and risk management staff do DB have? Presumably most of the derivatives are in liquid markets ie swaps, caps, floors etc.
Andrew Neil @afneil 37m37 minutes ago This summer there's at least a 30% chance the EU's attention will move from Brexit Britain to unfolding Italian banking crisis.
The Italian banking crisis has already unfolded! The only question is whether it will be resolved via bail-ins, government recapitalisation, or a bad bank
I think the Deutsche Bank bail out is going to be a much bigger issue. As you have said, the bail out required for the Italian banks is probably about €40bn, not a world ending sum. Deutsche could require vastly more money to fix.
The scary bit about DB is nobody knows the scale of the problem. How many derivatives are marked to model? It all needs to be unwound, very slowly and very carefully, and with - yes - the German government doing the backstopping.
At least in Italy we know there EUR350bn of bad loans. We know recoveries will end up being EUR150bn, and that EUR150bn has been recognised. It's just arguing about who bears the residual cost.
Indeed. Did you get the report from DB London about the EU economy being put at risk by the Eurozone banking sector? It was deliciously ironic.
I haven't... I will dig it out over the weekend. I'm writing a big thought piece called The Discontented about the ultimate (rather than proximate) causes behind the rises of Trump and the like.
I'd be very interested in reading that when you're done.
I know the feeling. That comes with switching from Labour to LD in 1997. The LDs never win anything. I gave up on them last time and abstained by voting Ukip. We held the labour majority to 20,000 but everyone around here voted Leave in the referendum.
At last. Become a Leaver, it does create a warm feeling and you can smile at the more extreme Remain reactions. Ah, diddums.
I don’t think I know anyone under 40 who voted Leave, and I know many of them are are distraught at the prospect of bringing back borders.
''The scary bit about DB is nobody knows the scale of the problem. How many derivatives are marked to model? It all needs to be unwound, very slowly and very carefully, and with - yes - the German government doing the backstopping.''
Quite frankly, I find that completely astonishing. How many compliance and risk management staff do DB have? Presumably most of the derivatives are in liquid markets ie swaps, caps, floors etc.
They must have some idea, surely.
AIUI they haven't even come to an approximation of an approximation yet.
Parliament is the voice of the people. As the people have spoken on this specific issue, there is no need for parliament to revisit the question. The Remain campaign made most of the predictions regarding Brexit that are now being worried about and the electorate voted for Leave in the knowledge of that. "But I didn't think they meant it" isn't a good enough excuse.
I just knew all along that sooner or later the Tories would come up with this kind of nonsense.
Very sorry, Mr Herdson, but the people have not spoken on this specific issue. They were presented with a question couched in the vaguest of terms, with no indication within the question aout the practical implications or consequences.
The glosses put on the question during the course of the campaign were exaggerated, contradictory and completely impractical, and all dreamed up by unscrupulous leading Conservative politicians.
If I remember rightly, we were asked to vote for an extra 35 millino pounds to be spend each week (or was it each day?) on the NHS. That was what people voted for. When are Cameron, Osborn, Leadsom and May going to deliver on that?
It was £350 million extra (not more). A week. We were also promised tax cuts, public spending increases, higher wages, lower housing costs and the maintenance of all grants and subsidies currently paid to UK bodies and regions by the EU. Then there were the brilliantly advantageous trade deals, the substantially reduced levels of immigration, and the preservation of the right of Brits to live, work and study freely across the EU. Ms Leadsom told us that there would be absolutely no downsides to leaving.
My guess is that these pledges - solemnly made - will soon be seen as lies.
I know the feeling. That comes with switching from Labour to LD in 1997. The LDs never win anything. I gave up on them last time and abstained by voting Ukip. We held the labour majority to 20,000 but everyone around here voted Leave in the referendum.
At last. Become a Leaver, it does create a warm feeling and you can smile at the more extreme Remain reactions. Ah, diddums.
I don’t think I know anyone under 40 who voted Leave, and I know many of them are are distraught at the prospect of bringing back borders.
It's clear that many people in their thirties did vote Leave (though still outnumbered by those who voted Remain). 41/42 seems to be the tipping point at which a majority of people switched to Leave.
The only really big outliers seem to have been 18-24 year olds, and those aged 65+.
Would I be right in assuming the winner of the prediction competition is proving impossible to track down? That would explain why it hasn't been announced.
Nope. It's because so much has happened in the last fortnight, we've not had time to publish it.
I am expecting to be pretty close to the top of the table ;-)
Parliament is the voice of the people. As the people have spoken on this specific issue, there is no need for parliament to revisit the question. The Remain campaign made most of the predictions regarding Brexit that are now being worried about and the electorate voted for Leave in the knowledge of that. "But I didn't think they meant it" isn't a good enough excuse.
I just knew all along that sooner or later the Tories would come up with this kind of nonsense.
Very sorry, Mr Herdson, but the people have not spoken on this specific issue. They were presented with a question couched in the vaguest of terms, with no indication within the question aout the practical implications or consequences.
The glosses put on the question during the course of the campaign were exaggerated, contradictory and completely impractical, and all dreamed up by unscrupulous leading Conservative politicians.
If I remember rightly, we were asked to vote for an extra 35 millino pounds to be spend each week (or was it each day?) on the NHS. That was what people voted for. When are Cameron, Osborn, Leadsom and May going to deliver on that?
It was £350 million extra (not more). A week. We were also promised tax cuts, public spending increases, higher wages, lower housing costs and the maintenance of all grants and subsidies currently paid to UK bodies and regions by the EU. Then there were the brilliantly advantageous trade deals, the substantially reduced levels of immigration, and the preservation of the right of Brits to live, work and study freely across the EU. Ms Leadsom told us that there would be absolutely no downsides to leaving.
My guess is that these pledges - solemnly made - will soon be seen as lies.
Have the French decided what to do about the border control at Calais yet?
Parliament is the voice of the people. As the people have spoken on this specific issue, there is no need for parliament to revisit the question. The Remain campaign made most of the predictions regarding Brexit that are now being worried about and the electorate voted for Leave in the knowledge of that. "But I didn't think they meant it" isn't a good enough excuse.
I just knew all along that sooner or later the Tories would come up with this kind of nonsense.
Very sorry, Mr Herdson, but the people have not spoken on this specific issue. They were presented with a question couched in the vaguest of terms, with no indication within the question aout the practical implications or consequences.
The glosses put on the question during the course of the campaign were exaggerated, contradictory and completely impractical, and all dreamed up by unscrupulous leading Conservative politicians.
If I remember rightly, we were asked to vote for an extra 35 millino pounds to be spend each week (or was it each day?) on the NHS. That was what people voted for. When are Cameron, Osborn, Leadsom and May going to deliver on that?
It was £350 million extra (not more). A week. We were also promised tax cuts, public spending increases, higher wages, lower housing costs and the maintenance of all grants and subsidies currently paid to UK bodies and regions by the EU. Then there were the brilliantly advantageous trade deals, the substantially reduced levels of immigration, and the preservation of the right of Brits to live, work and study freely across the EU. Ms Leadsom told us that there would be absolutely no downsides to leaving.
My guess is that these pledges - solemnly made - will soon be seen as lies.
Have the French decided what to do about the border control at Calais yet?
I know the feeling. That comes with switching from Labour to LD in 1997. The LDs never win anything. I gave up on them last time and abstained by voting Ukip. We held the labour majority to 20,000 but everyone around here voted Leave in the referendum.
At last. Become a Leaver, it does create a warm feeling and you can smile at the more extreme Remain reactions. Ah, diddums.
I don’t think I know anyone under 40 who voted Leave
Would I be right in assuming the winner of the prediction competition is proving impossible to track down? That would explain why it hasn't been announced.
Nope. It's because so much has happened in the last fortnight, we've not had time to publish it.
I am expecting to be pretty close to the top of the table ;-)
I know the feeling. That comes with switching from Labour to LD in 1997. The LDs never win anything. I gave up on them last time and abstained by voting Ukip. We held the labour majority to 20,000 but everyone around here voted Leave in the referendum.
At last. Become a Leaver, it does create a warm feeling and you can smile at the more extreme Remain reactions. Ah, diddums.
I don’t think I know anyone under 40 who voted Leave
Hi.
One is one and all alone and ever more shall be so!
Parliament is the voice of the people. As the people have spoken on this specific issue, there is no need for parliament to revisit the question. The Remain campaign made most of the predictions regarding Brexit that are now being worried about and the electorate voted for Leave in the knowledge of that. "But I didn't think they meant it" isn't a good enough excuse.
I just knew all along that sooner or later the Tories would come up with this kind of nonsense.
Very sorry, Mr Herdson, but the people have not spoken on this specific issue. They were presented with a question couched in the vaguest of terms, with no indication within the question aout the practical implications or consequences.
The glosses put on the question during the course of the campaign were exaggerated, contradictory and completely impractical, and all dreamed up by unscrupulous leading Conservative politicians.
If I remember rightly, we were asked to vote for an extra 35 millino pounds to be spend each week (or was it each day?) on the NHS. That was what people voted for. When are Cameron, Osborn, Leadsom and May going to deliver on that?
It was £350 million extra (not more). A week. We were also promised tax cuts, public spending increases, higher wages, lower housing costs and the maintenance of all grants and subsidies currently paid to UK bodies and regions by the EU. Then there were the brilliantly advantageous trade deals, the substantially reduced levels of immigration, and the preservation of the right of Brits to live, work and study freely across the EU. Ms Leadsom told us that there would be absolutely no downsides to leaving.
My guess is that these pledges - solemnly made - will soon be seen as lies.
Have the French decided what to do about the border control at Calais yet?
Hollande says Le Toquet will continue. However, as he's going to lose, that's a worthless commitment. Juppe says he'll give notice to terminate it. However, he's not home and dry yet - but I haven't heard Sarkozy's view.
Seems quite bizarre that after a referendum where Leave were demanding greater control in the hands of the UK Parliament that the first action of the post Brexit vote PM would be to deny that sovereign Parliament any say in the critical decision and issue the article 50 letter as an order in council. is there anything in the Leave campaign that has not been proven totally false in the last few days? It seems to me that Bremorse is now so total that any referendum rerun would see Remain win by a landslide. So it would be a very foolhardy PM who takes the disastrous referendum result as the last word on the subject...
''The scary bit about DB is nobody knows the scale of the problem. How many derivatives are marked to model? It all needs to be unwound, very slowly and very carefully, and with - yes - the German government doing the backstopping.''
Quite frankly, I find that completely astonishing. How many compliance and risk management staff do DB have? Presumably most of the derivatives are in liquid markets ie swaps, caps, floors etc.
They must have some idea, surely.
AIUI they haven't even come to an approximation of an approximation yet.
In the early 2000s, Berkshire Hathaway bought General Re, a big reinsurance business with an even bigger derivatives book.
Would I be right in assuming the winner of the prediction competition is proving impossible to track down? That would explain why it hasn't been announced.
Nope. It's because so much has happened in the last fortnight, we've not had time to publish it.
And because TSE's forecast was nowhere near the result.
Seems quite bizarre that after a referendum where Leave were demanding greater control in the hands of the UK Parliament that the first action of the post Brexit vote PM would be to deny that sovereign Parliament any say in the critical decision and issue the article 50 letter as an order in council. is there anything in the Leave campaign that has not been proven totally false in the last few days? It seems to me that Bremorse is now so total that any referendum rerun would see Remain win by a landslide. So it would be a very foolhardy PM who takes the disastrous referendum result as the last word on the subject...
You live in Islington don't you.
No, he lives in Tallinn, I believe. Wonderful city, my wife's hometown, but I wouldn't place too high a value on its residents' view of British politics.
Many Leavers want to turn the UK into the political equivalent of ITV3.
I have no idea what that means. Presumably, something bad.
Just had a brief look at the website. Reminds me, if if not of my youth, of the time when my children were small. (They’re all grown up now, in one case with adult children of their own.)
Anyway, back to the whole What's the best champagne to pour over your girlfriend's nipples question....
Avoid verve cliquot (known as the widow). And probably Mumms as well!
The was a very funny story (not at the time) that happened to a friend of mine.
He was head over in heels with a lovely girl who finally threw him over for another man Naturally he was heartbroken and didn't attend the wedding but shortly afterwards saw sense so ordered a crate of champagne for her - and knowing she wanted children really badly requesrlted Mumms with a nice note saying "I hope you soon become one"
Unfortunately the shop ran out of Mumms so decided to substitute...
My sister works for LVMH and we get a very steady supply of Dom, I find other champagne undrinkable.
Dom's not my thing
I do love Giesler but since they stopped shipping it I can't really be bothered to organise a van to epernee. Ruinart is good, as is Salon, but I usually stick to Verve or Tat for everyday drinking.
To be honest, though, I'd rather have a nice white
Parliament is the voice of the people. As the people have spoken on this specific issue, there is no need for parliament to revisit the question. The Remain campaign made most of the predictions regarding Brexit that are now being worried about and the electorate voted for Leave in the knowledge of that. "But I didn't think they meant it" isn't a good enough excuse.
I just knew all along that sooner or later the Tories would come up with this kind of nonsense.
Very sorry, Mr Herdson, but the people have not spoken on this specific issue. They were presented with a question couched in the vaguest of terms, with no indication within the question aout the practical implications or consequences.
The glosses put on the question during the course of the campaign were exaggerated, contradictory and completely impractical, and all dreamed up by unscrupulous leading Conservative politicians.
If I remember rightly, we were asked to vote for an extra 35 millino pounds to be spend each week (or was it each day?) on the NHS. That was what people voted for. When are Cameron, Osborn, Leadsom and May going to deliver on that?
I think the question on the paper was to leave the EU or remain in the EU. That was what they voted on and that is what is to be delivered. It's not "couched in the vaguest of terms"; it's a very specific point.
In any case, it is the height of brass neck for a Lib Dem to complain about campaigning on one thing and then doing another. 'Keep the Tories out', 'Tuition fees' - ring any bells? And that was in a general election when parties' manifestoes were the basis for government should they end up in office; 'Leave' was not a party and is not in government. Their ideas of what could be done with the EU membership money cannot be regarded as anything more than suggestions.
While I agree about tuition fees (although so far I gather that may turn out less badly than feared) the last 15 months or so have surely proved tjat to some extent at lesat they did keep the Tories on a leash, if not out!
The point was that the Lib Dems in many constituencies campaigned for tactical votes from Labour in order to 'keep the Tories out', and then promptly after the election promptly put the Tories in. The circle between local tactics and national strategy was never squared, with the inevitable result last year.
I think it's rather more existential than that for people like Alex Massie. All their adult lives they've believed that we're moving to world without borders, where there are no restrictions on the movement of people and capital, and things that matter are determined by intelligent international bureaucracies, rather than by stupid national electorates.
And then, quite suddenly, the future turns out not be like that.
You're ignoring the people on the Brexit side who saw the EU as an inhibitor to the free movement of people and capital on a global basis. Some of them now preposterously try to argue that this is what the people want.
Sadly the EU referendum was seen as a proxy to vote about globalisation in all its forms. European integration is not the same thing at all.
Parliament is the voice of the people. As the people have spoken on this specific issue, there is no need for parliament to revisit the question. The Remain campaign made most of the predictions regarding Brexit that are now being worried about and the electorate voted for Leave in the knowledge of that. "But I didn't think they meant it" isn't a good enough excuse.
I just knew all along that sooner or later the Tories would come up with this kind of nonsense.
Very sorry, Mr Herdson, but the people have not spoken on this specific issue. They were presented with a question couched in the vaguest of terms, with no indication within the question aout the practical implications or consequences.
The glosses put on the question during the course of the campaign were exaggerated, contradictory and completely impractical, and all dreamed up by unscrupulous leading Conservative politicians.
If I remember rightly, we were asked to vote for an extra 35 millino pounds to be spend each week (or was it each day?) on the NHS. That was what people voted for. When are Cameron, Osborn, Leadsom and May going to deliver on that?
It was £350 million extra (not more). A week. We were also promised tax cuts, public spending increases, higher wages, lower housing costs and the maintenance of all grants and subsidies currently paid to UK bodies and regions by the EU. Then there were the brilliantly advantageous trade deals, the substantially reduced levels of immigration, and the preservation of the right of Brits to live, work and study freely across the EU. Ms Leadsom told us that there would be absolutely no downsides to leaving.
My guess is that these pledges - solemnly made - will soon be seen as lies.
Have the French decided what to do about the border control at Calais yet?
Hollande says Le Toquet will continue. However, as he's going to lose, that's a worthless commitment. Juppe says he'll give notice to terminate it. However, he's not home and dry yet - but I haven't heard Sarkozy's view.
Amd Mme Le Pen says she'll concrete in the tunnel?
Good afternoon all. To show how much I think of Ms May I've put £100 on Andrea, the peoples hope.
God bless people like you. They make informed punters' lives a joy.
And it's people like you that get it wrong on the big important things in life, and seeing the world through Westminster colours specs. Oh and by the way, if you remember I won £600 on Palin being chosen VP. I've got those same vibes for Leadsome.
Anyway, back to the whole What's the best champagne to pour over your girlfriend's nipples question....
Avoid verve cliquot (known as the widow). And probably Mumms as well!
The was a very funny story (not at the time) that happened to a friend of mine.
He was head over in heels with a lovely girl who finally threw him over for another man Naturally he was heartbroken and didn't attend the wedding but shortly afterwards saw sense so ordered a crate of champagne for her - and knowing she wanted children really badly requesrlted Mumms with a nice note saying "I hope you soon become one"
Unfortunately the shop ran out of Mumms so decided to substitute...
My sister works for LVMH and we get a very steady supply of Dom, I find other champagne undrinkable.
Dom's not my thing
I do love Giesler but since they stopped shipping it I can't really be bothered to organise a van to epernee. Ruinart is good, as is Salon, but I usually stick to Verve or Tat for everyday drinking.
To be honest, though, I'd rather have a nice white
Many Leavers want to turn the UK into the political equivalent of ITV3.
What is ITV3? Never seen it.
It's a cynical and carefully mixed blend of the best (worst) ITV from the 70s, 80s & 90s. All 372 episodes of Heartbeat back to back, only interrupted with funeral insurance advertising.
It's the sort of place that the retired can while away their twilight years in the comfort that they don't have to think about anything or talk to anyone. It's how TV used to be in the good old days, before all that modern nonsense and political correctness.
Parliament is the voice of the people. As the people have spoken on this specific issue, there is no need for parliament to revisit the question. The Remain campaign made most of the predictions regarding Brexit that are now being worried about and the electorate voted for Leave in the knowledge of that. "But I didn't think they meant it" isn't a good enough excuse.
I just knew all along that sooner or later the Tories would come up with this kind of nonsense.
Very sorry, Mr Herdson, but the people have not spoken on this specific issue. They were presented with a question couched in the vaguest of terms, with no indication within the question aout the practical implications or consequences.
The glosses put on the question during the course of the campaign were exaggerated, contradictory and completely impractical, and all dreamed up by unscrupulous leading Conservative politicians.
If I remember rightly, we were asked to vote for an extra 35 millino pounds to be spend each week (or was it each day?) on the NHS. That was what people voted for. When are Cameron, Osborn, Leadsom and May going to deliver on that?
It was £350 million extra (not more). A week. We were also promised tax cuts, public spending increases, higher wages, lower housing costs and the maintenance of all grants and subsidies currently paid to UK bodies and regions by the EU. Then there were the brilliantly advantageous trade deals, the substantially reduced levels of immigration, and the preservation of the right of Brits to live, work and study freely across the EU. Ms Leadsom told us that there would be absolutely no downsides to leaving.
My guess is that these pledges - solemnly made - will soon be seen as lies.
Have the French decided what to do about the border control at Calais yet?
Hollande says Le Toquet will continue. However, as he's going to lose, that's a worthless commitment. Juppe says he'll give notice to terminate it. However, he's not home and dry yet - but I haven't heard Sarkozy's view.
Amd Mme Le Pen says she'll concrete in the tunnel?
I have no idea what she thinks. I've discounted her chances. Perhaps that was over-hasty. Given how cuckoo the world is at the moment, she might win in a landslide.
Parliament is the voice of the people. As the people have spoken on this specific issue, there is no need for parliament to revisit the question. The Remain campaign made most of the predictions regarding Brexit that are now being worried about and the electorate voted for Leave in the knowledge of that. "But I didn't think they meant it" isn't a good enough excuse.
I just knew all along that sooner or later the Tories would come up with this kind of nonsense.
Very sorry, Mr Herdson, but the people have not spoken on this specific issue. They were presented with a question couched in the vaguest of terms, with no indication within the question aout the practical implications or consequences.
The glosses put on the question during the course of the campaign were exaggerated, contradictory and completely impractical, and all dreamed up by unscrupulous leading Conservative politicians.
If I remember rightly, we were asked to vote for an extra 35 millino pounds to be spend each week (or was it each day?) on the NHS. That was what people voted for. When are Cameron, Osborn, Leadsom and May going to deliver on that?
It was £350 million extra (not more). A week. We were also promised tax cuts, public spending increases, higher wages, lower housing costs and the maintenance of all grants and subsidies currently paid to UK bodies and regions by the EU. Then there were the brilliantly advantageous trade deals, the substantially reduced levels of immigration, and the preservation of the right of Brits to live, work and study freely across the EU. Ms Leadsom told us that there would be absolutely no downsides to leaving.
My guess is that these pledges - solemnly made - will soon be seen as lies.
Have the French decided what to do about the border control at Calais yet?
Hollande says Le Toquet will continue. However, as he's going to lose, that's a worthless commitment. Juppe says he'll give notice to terminate it. However, he's not home and dry yet - but I haven't heard Sarkozy's view.
Amd Mme Le Pen says she'll concrete in the tunnel?
She'll be reduced to manual labour after losing the election?
Even in an age of ridiculousness there is something preposterous about the sight of so many prominent Leavers clutching their pearls in horror as they contemplate the possibility – the real possibility – that Andrea Leadsom could become the next leader of the Conservative party and, by golly, Prime Minister too.
I mean, where do they think she came from? Who created her? Mrs Leadsom’s credentials to occupy the highest political office in the land come down to one single fact: she is the most virulently eurosceptic candidate available. That’s a powerful thing, however, and those Leavers who think their creation can be safely kept in the laboratory may yet have cause to regret their complacency. Because it’s not as easy as that. Sometimes things escape.http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/brexit-encouraged-eruption-nasty-tawdry-nativism-anyone-surprised/
Even in the age of ridiculousness, this is a truly ridiculous article.
This whole campaign and post referendum is extraordinary in how it has peeled back the patina of rationality to expose raw emotions on both sides of the issue, regardless of political party.
Makes me wonder whether we were overdue such a political bloodletting.
It's by Alex Massie. His referendum coverage has hardly covered him in glory. His article post-Jo Cox was disgusting. I read him because we all need to avoid living in a bubble where we only read things we agree with. I do find him very hard to take.
I used to read his stuff quite often - like several others, he's gone off the deep end. I've no idea why Brexit has caused such idiotic tantrums by so many. If we'd lost the vote, I'd be a glum bunny for a couple of days and accept it.
Have one side become so used to getting their way, that this is their first big loss?
There are probably people in their 40s who have never been on the wrong side of a significant national decision: if they supported Major 92, Blair three times, Cameron twice, and were anti-Scottish independence and anti-AV.
I think it's rather more existential than that for people like Alex Massie. All their adult lives they've believed that we're moving to world without borders, where there are no restrictions on the movement of people and capital, and things that matter are determined by intelligent international bureaucracies, rather than by stupid national electorates.
And then, quite suddenly, the future turns out not be like that.
I wouldn't give him too much credit. He got into a huge sulk over the success of 50 Shades of Grey, he may just never have forgiven the general public since.
I know the feeling. That comes with switching from Labour to LD in 1997. The LDs never win anything. I gave up on them last time and abstained by voting Ukip. We held the labour majority to 20,000 but everyone around here voted Leave in the referendum.
At last. Become a Leaver, it does create a warm feeling and you can smile at the more extreme Remain reactions. Ah, diddums.
I don’t think I know anyone under 40 who voted Leave, and I know many of them are are distraught at the prospect of bringing back borders.
It's clear that many people in their thirties did vote Leave (though still outnumbered by those who voted Remain). 41/42 seems to be the tipping point at which a majority of people switched to Leave.
The only really big outliers seem to have been 18-24 year olds, and those aged 65+.
Those few 18-24 year olds who got off their arses and voted, that is. Unlike the arthritic army, waiting on new hips and knees, who crawled to the polling station anyway.
(OK, so they may have had postal votes. But my point stands....they could be arsed to wield the pencil.)
Anyway, back to the whole What's the best champagne to pour over your girlfriend's nipples question....
Avoid verve cliquot (known as the widow). And probably Mumms as well!
The was a very funny story (not at the time) that happened to a friend of mine.
He was head over in heels with a lovely girl who finally threw him over for another man Naturally he was heartbroken and didn't attend the wedding but shortly afterwards saw sense so ordered a crate of champagne for her - and knowing she wanted children really badly requesrlted Mumms with a nice note saying "I hope you soon become one"
Unfortunately the shop ran out of Mumms so decided to substitute...
My sister works for LVMH and we get a very steady supply of Dom, I find other champagne undrinkable.
Dom's not my thing
I do love Giesler but since they stopped shipping it I can't really be bothered to organise a van to epernee. Ruinart is good, as is Salon, but I usually stick to Verve or Tat for everyday drinking.
To be honest, though, I'd rather have a nice white
Agreed; I've never really understood the appeal of champagne.
Which right minded individual would choose a glass of champagne over a nice glass of Puligny Montrachet?
I know the feeling. That comes with switching from Labour to LD in 1997. The LDs never win anything. I gave up on them last time and abstained by voting Ukip. We held the labour majority to 20,000 but everyone around here voted Leave in the referendum.
At last. Become a Leaver, it does create a warm feeling and you can smile at the more extreme Remain reactions. Ah, diddums.
I don’t think I know anyone under 40 who voted Leave
I know the feeling. That comes with switching from Labour to LD in 1997. The LDs never win anything. I gave up on them last time and abstained by voting Ukip. We held the labour majority to 20,000 but everyone around here voted Leave in the referendum.
At last. Become a Leaver, it does create a warm feeling and you can smile at the more extreme Remain reactions. Ah, diddums.
I don’t think I know anyone under 40 who voted Leave
Hi.
Hey me too.
Two, two the lilywhite boys/Covered all in green Oh!
Even in an age of ridiculousness there is something preposterous about the sight of so many prominent Leavers clutching their pearls in horror as they contemplate the possibility – the real possibility – that Andrea Leadsom could become the next leader of the Conservative party and, by golly, Prime Minister too.
I mean, where do they think she came from? Who created her? Mrs Leadsom’s credentials to occupy the highest political office in the land come down to one single fact: she is the most virulently eurosceptic candidate available. That’s a powerful thing, however, and those Leavers who think their creation can be safely kept in the laboratory may yet have cause to regret their complacency. Because it’s not as easy as that. Sometimes things escape.http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/brexit-encouraged-eruption-nasty-tawdry-nativism-anyone-surprised/
Even in the age of ridiculousness, this is a truly ridiculous article.
This whole campaign and post referendum is extraordinary in how it has peeled back the patina of rationality to expose raw emotions on both sides of the issue, regardless of political party.
Makes me wonder whether we were overdue such a political bloodletting.
It's by Alex Massie. His referendum coverage has hardly covered him in glory. His article post-Jo Cox was disgusting. I read him because we all need to avoid living in a bubble where we only read things we agree with. I do find him very hard to take.
As Raphael Behr said, the vote punctured the prevailing belief among both Conservative and Labour politicians that there is a natural centrist, liberal, majority among the electorate. Alex Massie still hasn't come to terms with that.
I'm not sure that the centre has shifted so very far - too early to tell. The referendum certainly gave the voters a chance to kick the establishment very hard. I find it hard to understand because living in Spain my perspective is very skewed. Viewed from afar Britain since 2008 has done extraordinarily well - I accept there are areas of deprivation where some have done less well, but the British standard of living is so much better than most people enjoy here - it is difficult not to say the British should be counting their blessings.
Just caught up with the international news to find America heading towards civil war.
yes, thats what I thought... Trump now can't win surely?
Why not? If the situation is so bad after 8 years of Obama, why would people vote for continuity?
I've always seen the black demographic black vote for Hillary as one of her main weak spots. When she's forced to justify why she deserves those votes, what can she say?
I mean, where do they think she came from? Who created her? Mrs Leadsom’s credentials to occupy the highest political office in the land come down to one single fact: she is the most virulently eurosceptic candidate available. That’s a powerful thing, however, and those Leavers who think their creation can be safely kept in the laboratory may yet have cause to regret their complacency. Because it’s not as easy as that. Sometimes things escape.http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/brexit-encouraged-eruption-nasty-tawdry-nativism-anyone-surprised/
Even in the age of ridiculousness, this is a truly ridiculous article.
This whole campaign and post referendum is extraordinary in how it has peeled back the patina of rationality to expose raw emotions on both sides of the issue, regardless of political party.
Makes me wonder whether we were overdue such a political bloodletting.
It's by Alex Massie. His referendum coverage has hardly covered him in glory. His article post-Jo Cox was disgusting. I read him because we all need to avoid living in a bubble where we only read things we agree with. I do find him very hard to take.
I used to read his stuff quite often - like several others, he's gone off the deep end. I've no idea why Brexit has caused such idiotic tantrums by so many. If we'd lost the vote, I'd be a glum bunny for a couple of days and accept it.
Have one side become so used to getting their way, that this is their first big loss?
There are probably people in their 40s who have never been on the wrong side of a significant national decision: if they supported Major 92, Blair three times, Cameron twice, and were anti-Scottish independence and anti-AV.
I think it's rather more existential than that for people like Alex Massie. All their adult lives they've believed that we're moving to world without borders, where there are no restrictions on the movement of people and capital, and things that matter are determined by intelligent international bureaucracies, rather than by stupid national electorates.
And then, quite suddenly, the future turns out not be like that.
I wouldn't give him too much credit. He got into a huge sulk over the success of 50 Shades of Grey, he may just never have forgiven the general public since.
WTF? Why? It sounded like Mills & Boon with a R rating.
Would I be right in assuming the winner of the prediction competition is proving impossible to track down? That would explain why it hasn't been announced.
Nope. It's because so much has happened in the last fortnight, we've not had time to publish it.
Can I substitute my forecast on the 22nd that was right to 0.1%?
Meanwhile in the REAL world Allsop Commercial property auction in London this week
"Our auction attracted more attention than usual with people watching closely for an indication of market sentiment following the EU referendum. Pleasingly it was very much business as usual, with confident and competitive bidding from the start. The motivations of our buyers does not appear to have changed, with properties that are well let, well located or offer potential to add value all continuing to attract strong interest. Encouragingly demand remains high with 78% of buyers expressing a desire to buy again at auction in the next 12 months."
But why allow the facts to interfere with all the doom and gloom.
23 out 100 of the first 100 properties were unsold (either withdrawn or didn't make reserve) this week, as opposed to 15 on the previous auction.
Not sold prior to auction is usually when the paperwork either isnt in place (many of a Allsop properties are through their Receivership work-and a number of the withdrawn lots look like they formpart of the same packeage) or a bid comes in from an interested party who is keen to not see the property become part of a bidding war
Looks like a recipe for political-legal limbo to me
Can the EU box be shut now it has been opened ?
I don't understand this excitement about having Parliament triggering Article 50. The PM decides when to trigger. Parliament votes on it with the democratic justification, arguably the democratic imperative, of the referendum. Then the countdown begins and we Brexit.
Am I missing something?
Err...Yes. The gorilla in the corner is that Parliament might not approve it. Now that WOULD be a constitutional crisis. A PM can trigger by sending a letter to Brussels on Royal Prerogative - with the referendum as mandate. That's what the Brexiters want (Gove etc) because they fear the 'empire strikes back' from the establishment. The Remainiacs all want a vote - because they're hoping Parliament will put the plebs back in their box. So...it's just a tad touchy whether we do or don't seek a vote on it.
Yes I can see parliament hypothetically could vote against Brexit despite being requested to do so in general by the referendum and on the particular by the government. That unlikely event would undoubtedly trigger a constitutional crisis, but I not I think a legal one.
Personally I think Leave was a dumb decision, but I believe strongly in a democracy that allows us to make dumb decisions. Barring a formal change of mind, which probably means at least an election on a manifesto where that change of mind was included, the referendum decision stands.
Yes indeed. I also don't understand the problem with parliament triggering article 50, if indeed that is the legal requirement, since while it is theoretically possible for them not to vote for it, without a formal change of mind from the public to counter the democratic mandate of the referendum, there is no possibility, none, of parliament not taking us down the Brexit route in some form. And the only possibility of them going for that kind of option would a) require massive change which shifts public opinion in an indisputable way, both of which are improbable, and b) having the political will and ability to go for, which even the polish foreign minister yesterday could tell would not be the case.
Good afternoon all. To show how much I think of Ms May I've put £100 on Andrea, the peoples hope.
God bless people like you. They make informed punters' lives a joy.
And it's people like you that get it wrong on the big important things in life, and seeing the world through Westminster colours specs. Oh and by the way, if you remember I won £600 on Palin being chosen VP. I've got those same vibes for Leadsome.
There's plenty of good reasons they would not want to be punitive toward us, but equally reasons they do not want to in actuality or perception be too generous on us
Savvy negotiations will be needed from us to secure a good deal.
Seems quite bizarre that after a referendum where Leave were demanding greater control in the hands of the UK Parliament that the first action of the post Brexit vote PM would be to deny that sovereign Parliament any say in the critical decision and issue the article 50 letter as an order in council. is there anything in the Leave campaign that has not been proven totally false in the last few days? It seems to me that Bremorse is now so total that any referendum rerun would see Remain win by a landslide. So it would be a very foolhardy PM who takes the disastrous referendum result as the last word on the subject...
You live in Islington don't you.
No, he lives in Tallinn, I believe. Wonderful city, my wife's hometown, but I wouldn't place too high a value on its residents' view of British politics.
Good afternoon all. To show how much I think of Ms May I've put £100 on Andrea, the peoples hope.
It's amazing how quickly she's become the peoples' hope when she's still largely unknown in her views and abilities. Can she not wait to be the peoples' hope after a week or two of the this 1 on 1 campaign at least?
Would I be right in assuming the winner of the prediction competition is proving impossible to track down? That would explain why it hasn't been announced.
Nope. It's because so much has happened in the last fortnight, we've not had time to publish it.
Can I substitute my forecast on the 22nd that was right to 0.1%?
Thought not.
Can I substitute my forecast of 8 July 2016 when I was right to 0.00001% ?!
I mean, where do they think she came from? Who created her? Mrs Leadsom’s credentials to occupy the highest political office in the land come down to one single fact: she is the most virulently eurosceptic candidate available. That’s a powerful thing, however, and those Leavers who think their creation can be safely kept in the laboratory may yet have cause to regret their complacency. Because it’s not as easy as that. Sometimes things escape.http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/brexit-encouraged-eruption-nasty-tawdry-nativism-anyone-surprised/
Even in the age of ridiculousness, this is a truly ridiculous article.
This whole campaign and post referendum is extraordinary in how it has peeled back the patina of rationality to expose raw emotions on both sides of the issue, regardless of political party.
Makes me wonder whether we were overdue such a political bloodletting.
It's by Alex Massie. His referendum coverage has hardly covered him in glory. His article post-Jo Cox was disgusting. I read him because we all need to avoid living in a bubble where we only read things we agree with. I do find him very hard to take.
I used to read his stuff quite often - like several others, he's gone off the deep end. I've no idea why Brexit has caused such idiotic tantrums by so many. If we'd lost the vote, I'd be a glum bunny for a couple of days and accept it.
Have one side become so used to getting their way, that this is their first big loss?
There are probably people in their 40s who have never been on the wrong side of a significant national decision: if they supported Major 92, Blair three times, Cameron twice, and were anti-Scottish independence and anti-AV.
I think it's rather more existential than that for people like Alex Massie. All their adult lives they've believed that we're moving to world without borders, where there are no restrictions on the movement of people and capital, and things that matter are determined by intelligent international bureaucracies, rather than by stupid national electorates.
And then, quite suddenly, the future turns out not be like that.
I wouldn't give him too much credit. He got into a huge sulk over the success of 50 Shades of Grey, he may just never have forgiven the general public since.
WTF? Why? It sounded like Mills & Boon with a R rating.
I suspect the contrast with his own sales numbers was too humbling > the public are at fault.
The problem of the political centre are hinted at by its name. The definition of the centre depends on what other are doing
Whilst the Labour party heads off in a Corbynite direction of it's own, perpendicular to the direction of travel of UKIP and the Tories, who are occupied by Europe, it is impossible to define a coherent and meaningful position between the two.
Comments
That's the wonderful thing about democracy: sometimes you lose. And when it does, it exposes your character.
In this case, it sounds as though the robot was carrying an explosive charge. It's unclear what they were targeting with it: a bomb or the shooter himself. Unless someone's read more?
Personally I think Leave was a dumb decision, but I believe strongly in a democracy that allows us to make dumb decisions. Barring a formal change of mind, which probably means at least an election on a manifesto where that change of mind was included, the referendum decision stands.
At least in Italy we know there EUR350bn of bad loans. We know recoveries will end up being EUR150bn, and that EUR150bn has been recognised. It's just arguing about who bears the residual cost.
Have one side become so used to getting their way, that this is their first big loss?
Popping those figures in here:
http://vassarstats.net/propdiff_ind.html
The difference between 15/100 and 23/100 isn't statistically significant.
(Suspect if you looked at a couple of hundred then you'd find something more interesting, though.)
Even in an election won by a party with a manifesto for remain, it would be problematic to remain unless that party won in excess of 50% of the popular vote, given the referendum result.
In any case, it is the height of brass neck for a Lib Dem to complain about campaigning on one thing and then doing another. 'Keep the Tories out', 'Tuition fees' - ring any bells? And that was in a general election when parties' manifestoes were the basis for government should they end up in office; 'Leave' was not a party and is not in government. Their ideas of what could be done with the EU membership money cannot be regarded as anything more than suggestions.
Or SDP2 lead by Chuka (Or Jarvis ?) ? He needs to get it off the ground 1st !
Chuck into that the casual xenophobia of the leave campaign and the political mess of the aftermath and you can see why many are upset.
And then, quite suddenly, the future turns out not be like that.
To paraphrase the great Donald, we have taken a leap into the known unknown. The people who voted for stability are understandably going to be more upset than if it had been vice versa.
I know the feeling. That comes with switching from Labour to LD in 1997. The LDs never win anything. I gave up on them last time and abstained by voting Ukip. We held the labour majority to 20,000 but everyone around here voted Leave in the referendum.
At last. Become a Leaver, it does create a warm feeling and you can smile at the more extreme Remain reactions. Ah, diddums.
In politics as usual your side losing doesn't threaten your identity - you hold on to your identity and try and win next time. That need to hold on to your identity can sometimes lead to electing strange leaders....
And that's an argument why Leadsom won't win. In power, Tories don't feel the need to bolster their identity by electing a parody of a Tory.
Quite frankly, I find that completely astonishing. How many compliance and risk management staff do DB have? Presumably most of the derivatives are in liquid markets ie swaps, caps, floors etc.
They must have some idea, surely.
My guess is that these pledges - solemnly made - will soon be seen as lies.
The only really big outliers seem to have been 18-24 year olds, and those aged 65+.
To show how much I think of Ms May I've put £100 on Andrea, the peoples hope.
This is what Warren Buffett said about what he'd bought: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/2817995.stm
DB could be substantially worse.
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/751420686732763136
I do love Giesler but since they stopped shipping it I can't really be bothered to organise a van to epernee. Ruinart is good, as is Salon, but I usually stick to Verve or Tat for everyday drinking.
To be honest, though, I'd rather have a nice white
Sadly the EU referendum was seen as a proxy to vote about globalisation in all its forms. European integration is not the same thing at all.
It's the sort of place that the retired can while away their twilight years in the comfort that they don't have to think about anything or talk to anyone. It's how TV used to be in the good old days, before all that modern nonsense and political correctness.
It's UKIPs perfect dystopia.
people dont want to give money away and this surprises you ?
From their point of view, I'd probably think the same.
Still, I'm sure they'll blame the government's poor negotiating when Britain comes away with a dismal deal.
(OK, so they may have had postal votes. But my point stands....they could be arsed to wield the pencil.)
Which right minded individual would choose a glass of champagne over a nice glass of Puligny Montrachet?
Ever closer union is a price worth paying to keep the UK economy tickety boo and the U.K. united
One gets the impression the black and white communities have simply lost patience with one another.
Awful shame.
Clinton 48 .. Trump 37
http://www.democracycorps.com/National-Surveys/
I've always seen the black demographic black vote for Hillary as one of her main weak spots. When she's forced to justify why she deserves those votes, what can she say?
Thought not.
Savvy negotiations will be needed from us to secure a good deal.
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Tallinn&client=firefox-b-ab&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj-gLeYj-TNAhWDBsAKHe4CAVQQ_AUICSgC&biw=1408&bih=672#tbm=isch&q=tallinn+nightlife&imgrc=CxLoN3Xry4NcTM:
"I don’t think I know anyone under 40 who voted Leave, and I know many of them are distraught at the prospect of bringing back borders."
Kids, eh? They know less than John Snow.
Whilst the Labour party heads off in a Corbynite direction of it's own, perpendicular to the direction of travel of UKIP and the Tories, who are occupied by Europe, it is impossible to define a coherent and meaningful position between the two.
In short, there is no centre.