May has really surprised me - a massive recasting of government and a massive power shift away from the Cameroons. Surely they can't be happy?
They are a dwindling band of yesterdays men.....and Cameron will be personally loyal - so I doubt they'll get up to much mischief. Quite a skilful redeployment of the talents - if you BREXIT you own it.....
That's an amusing line, but wouldn't it have been seen as trying to negate the referendum outcome if Ms May had appointed Remain-leaning people?
Apparently as ex-EFTA members we can rejoin EFTA if we pay the £25 rejoining fee (used to be just £3) but we have to look sharp. EFTA rules state they have to receive the money between 18th and 20th July.
Is it truly egalitarian if there are hardly any former public schoolboys and schoolgirls there? You'd think if it was truly egalitarian, based on merit that there would be some. Penalising people for their parents choices is not egalitarian.
Fallon, Hunt, Johnson, Rudd all ex public school and a higher percentage of the Cabinet than the 7% nationally
I suspect the Commons let alone the Tory share of it is not 7% so that's not surely the right figure to use.
The Tory share ex public school is now about 50% and the Commons about 20 to 30%
So you'd expect roughly 10 ex public school not 4.
Some interesting choices and perhaps some questionable ones as well. She has the power and the right to choose who she wants and she is clearly stamping her authority in line with her vision for the future. Have to see how it plays out.
The Boris/Fox/Davis triumvirate for me has po just say well I gave your lot the power to sort it out. But on the other hand if it doesn't work out she could still take damage from it, people will question her judgement.
[Snipped]
If Brexit turns out to be a disaster, May will own this, regardless of whether the mess was created by the 3 Brexiteers. She's in charge now. So she had better make it clear to them what vision of Brexit she has and make sure they do their best to get it. And the Merkels of this world are going to want to deal with the organ grinder, not the monkeys - whatever their titles.
I think this is more about making sure that while the negotiations are going on the Brexiteers can't snipe at her and, if what is arrived at is not to the liking of some of them, of having the necessary cover.
What is more interesting to me is how Hammond will work them. He is the one who will want to ensure that any deal does not eff up the economy so badly. In the end if it does that will do for May and him and the Tories' chances at the next election. So he should want to make sure that he gets the right input into any deal. Whether he will or not is another matter.
Exactly right. Cyclefree is a shrewdie.
I'd go a step further.
The three Brexiteers will be all but irrelevant in the negotiations on Brexit. Their main significance will be the influence they have on their civil servants.
On the main issue of the day---Brexit---the PM does not have the luxury of being able to delegate the job. It is squarely in her lap, and she'll stand or fall on the results. She will have to do it herself.
I think this assumes anyone will know if Brexit is a success or failure.
Estimates (ok let's leave out Patrick Minford's) put the likely diminution of aggregate and per capita GDP by 2030 of anywhere between 1.5-6% and 0.8-1% respectively.
No one is going to be up in arms at the fact that the country is 4% poorer than it might otherwise have been, and by 2020 almost nothing will be known.
The damage Brexit will cause will be its opportunity cost. £100m not being invested here, £100m in extra costs for business there.
Nothing you can drop on your foot so I think May and the Gruesome Threesome are pretty much in the clear.
Michael Crick @MichaelLCrick 27m27 minutes ago Mike Foster's legal action against Labour NEC decision that Corbyn automatically on ballot paper will be heard High Court last week in July
The courts need to catch up, politics now moves way too fast for us to wait that long!
Does this hold the whole thing up, or will they plough on and hope that his Honour doesn't block the whole caboodle?
I honestly don't see Osborne, Gove, Letwin, Morgan et al causing any trouble on the backbenches. On what are they going to rebel if May continues with a broad based, inclusive one-nation govt, which I have little doubt she will?
"The three Brexiteers will be all but irrelevant in the negotiations on Brexit. Their main significance will be the influence they have on their civil servants."
Do not underestimate the importance of doing just that. A large number of civil servants, especially at the FCO, have just had the rug of their world pulled out from beneath them and will be struggling to cope with the new requirements. Those same civil servants will be doing a lot of the detail and writing the position papers.
To get a good deal for the UK those civil servants will need close guidance and support.
If she'd peeled off Osborne's lieutenants, he'd be not quite alone on the backbenches, but diminished. As it is, he and his followers (or ex-followers) far exceed the Conservative majority. It's possible she'll be fine. It's possible she's made the Morsi Mistake.
I think Osborne will support the government to which he'll eventually return - hopefully after a successful Brexit.
She's no fool. My guess is she's thought of that and she doesn't care. There are various reasons for this, but I'd guess the most likely is because she's already decided there will be another election before long.
I honestly don't see Osborne, Gove, Letwin, Morgan et al causing any trouble on the backbenches. On what are they going to rebel if May continues with a broad based, inclusive one-nation govt, which I have little doubt she will?
So, you're holding on for the next honours list now? LOL
I honestly don't see Osborne, Gove, Letwin, Morgan et al causing any trouble on the backbenches. On what are they going to rebel if May continues with a broad based, inclusive one-nation govt, which I have little doubt she will?
So, you're holding on for the next honours list now? LOL
I'd be the 21 Century Vicar of Bray (if I weren't a Papist).
I honestly don't see Osborne, Gove, Letwin, Morgan et al causing any trouble on the backbenches. On what are they going to rebel if May continues with a broad based, inclusive one-nation govt, which I have little doubt she will?
So, you're holding on for the next honours list now? LOL
Sensibly covering all the bases, or maybe he's hoping for two peerages....
Iain Martin published this 23 hours ago before the full extent of the changes were known:
Six months ago David Cameron was dominant. He had saved the Union and won an election, returning the Tory party to a majority position.
George Osborne readied himself for the succession. Meanwhile, Boris Johnson worked to overtake Osborne. The great reformer Michael Gove weighed his options ahead of the referendum. Other ministers, MPs, chums and advisers who had hitched their wagons to the Cameron/Osborne project bustled around enjoying power or proximity to power.
Underneath them, a whole social network – with its own manners, assumptions and habits – whirred away in London and nice parts of the home counties at weekends.
It is all turned to dust now....... The group that only recently dominated British politics is now history.
May has really surprised me - a massive recasting of government and a massive power shift away from the Cameroons. Surely they can't be happy?
They are a dwindling band of yesterdays men.....and Cameron will be personally loyal - so I doubt they'll get up to much mischief. Quite a skilful redeployment of the talents - if you BREXIT you own it.....
That's an amusing line, but wouldn't it have been seen as trying to negate the referendum outcome if Ms May had appointed Remain-leaning people?
Amusing? It doesn't even scan. People are still grieving I suppose.
I'm with @Topping in that the glam factor is reduced (modulo Boris). This is a cabinet full of experience. I don't really care who voted Remain/Leave. They all have a lot to do. Its execution that matters. I can't see May being as forgiving as Cameron, so hopefully that will concentrate minds.
I agree. I shall be very interested to see how the experience element works out.
It's not just experience of how politics works, it's the length of time they've had to watch effects, see things come round for the nth time, think through how they'd tackle things, and so on.
But more fun (and insights) for the second and third tier of junior Ministers. Could any of last year's intake get their first mits around the greasy pole? Or the overlooked from 2010?
From the 2015ers, Chris Philp, perhaps?
Imagine a member of the 2015 intake suddenly being given a government job.
PREPOSTEROUS.
Boris Johnson
MP 2001-2008 Mayor of London 2008-2016 Foreign Secretary 2016-
I'm with @Cyclefree. May cannot distance herself from Brexit via cabinet composition. That's not a valid firebreak. She will have to lead on it, she will have to own it.
If Brexit turns out to be a disaster, May will own this, regardless of whether the mess was created by the 3 Brexiteers. She's in charge now. So she had better make it clear to them what vision of Brexit she has and make sure they do their best to get it. And the Merkels of this world are going to want to deal with the organ grinder, not the monkeys - whatever their titles.
I think this is more about making sure that while the negotiations are going on the Brexiteers can't snipe at her and, if what is arrived at is not to the liking of some of them, of having the necessary cover.
What is more interesting to me is how Hammond will work them. He is the one who will want to ensure that any deal does not eff up the economy so badly. In the end if it does that will do for May and him and the Tories' chances at the next election. So he should want to make sure that he gets the right input into any deal. Whether he will or not is another matter.
[Snipped]
I think this assumes anyone will know if Brexit is a success or failure.
Estimates (ok let's leave out Patrick Minford's) put the likely diminution of aggregate and per capita GDP by 2030 of anywhere between 1.5-6% and 0.8-1% respectively.
No one is going to be up in arms at the fact that the country is 4% poorer than it might otherwise have been, and by 2020 almost nothing will be known.
The damage Brexit will cause will be its opportunity cost. £100m not being invested here, £100m in extra costs for business there.
Nothing you can drop on your foot so I think May and the Gruesome Threesome are pretty much in the clear.
The political risks come when demands or predictions made are very publicly not met. There is absolutely no doubt there will be a deal.
But if a politician says, as David Davis has just done, "Of course Germany et al will be rational and sign up to full access to the SM with no FOM because they want to sell us lots of cars" and then Merkel turns round and says, "No way!". It subsequently turns out completely different from what was said, so the government loses a lot of credibility. Ditto if a high profile employers says, "We are off to Holland because they are in the EU, but Britain isn't" Ditto, a high profile FTA gets canned because the other country decides to concentrate on its relations with the EU instead.
I'm with @Cyclefree. May cannot distance herself from Brexit via cabinet composition. That's not a valid firebreak. She will have to lead on it, she will have to own it.
I agree - but she's bought herself a degree of insurance from back bench sniping in the HoC.
If BREXIT is a disaster the whole government goes down....what will Mrs Bone say?
If Brexit turns out to be a disaster, May will own this, regardless of whether the mess was created by the 3 Brexiteers. She's in charge now. So she had better make it clear to them what vision of Brexit she has and make sure they do their best to get it. And the Merkels of this world are going to want to deal with the organ grinder, not the monkeys - whatever their titles.
I think this is more about making sure that while the negotiations are going on the Brexiteers can't snipe at her and, if what is arrived at is not to the liking of some of them, of having the necessary cover.
What is more interesting to me is how Hammond will work them. He is the one who will want to ensure that any deal does not eff up the economy so badly. In the end if it does that will do for May and him and the Tories' chances at the next election. So he should want to make sure that he gets the right input into any deal. Whether he will or not is another matter.
[Snipped]
I think this assumes anyone will know if Brexit is a success or failure.
Estimates (ok let's leave out Patrick Minford's) put the likely diminution of aggregate and per capita GDP by 2030 of anywhere between 1.5-6% and 0.8-1% respectively.
Nothing you can drop on your foot so I think May and the Gruesome Threesome are pretty much in the clear.
The political risks come when demands or predictions made are very publicly not met. There is absolutely no doubt there will be a deal.
But if a politician says, as David Davis has just done, "Of course Germany et al will be rational and sign up to full access to the SM with no FOM because they want to sell us lots of cars" and then Merkel turns round and says, "No way!". It subsequently turns out completely different from what was said, so the government loses a lot of credibility. Ditto if a high profile employers says, "We are off to Holland because they are in the EU, but Britain isn't" Ditto, a high profile FTA gets canned because the other country decides to concentrate on its relations with the EU instead.
I completely agree with all but your last point.
The EU is notoriously sclerotic (which should surprise precisely no one). CETA was agreed in September 2014. It has yet to be put before EU national parliaments. The SIngapore FTA was agreed in October 2014. It's not even scheduled for ratification yet.
Brexit isn't going to be kittens and rainbows, but it's undeniably a hell of a lot easier to negotiate a bilateral FTA versus dealing with the EU en bloc
Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
They won't vote CDU.
THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
I honestly don't see Osborne, Gove, Letwin, Morgan et al causing any trouble on the backbenches. On what are they going to rebel if May continues with a broad based, inclusive one-nation govt, which I have little doubt she will?
So, you're holding on for the next honours list now? LOL
I'd be the 21 Century Vicar of Bray (if I weren't a Papist).
No bar:
When Royal James possest the crown, And popery grew in fashion; The Penal Law I shouted down, And read the Declaration: The Church of Rome I found would fit Full well my Constitution, And I had been a Jesuit But for the Revolution.
"The three Brexiteers will be all but irrelevant in the negotiations on Brexit. Their main significance will be the influence they have on their civil servants."
Do not underestimate the importance of doing just that. A large number of civil servants, especially at the FCO, have just had the rug of their world pulled out from beneath them and will be struggling to cope with the new requirements. Those same civil servants will be doing a lot of the detail and writing the position papers.
To get a good deal for the UK those civil servants will need close guidance and support.
If Brexit turns out to be a disaster, May will own I think this is more about making sure that while the negotiations are going on the Brexiteers can't snipe at her and, if what is arrived at is not to the liking of some of them, of having the necessary cover.
What is more interesting to me is how Hammond will work them. He is the one who will want to ensure that any deal does not eff up the economy so badly. In the end if it does that will do for May and him and the Tories' chances at the next election. So he should want to make sure that he gets the right input into any deal. Whether he will or not is another matter.
[Snipped]
I think this assumes anyone will know if Brexit is a success or failure.
Estimates (ok let's leave out Patrick Minford's) put the likely diminution of aggregate and per capita GDP by 2030 of anywhere between 1.5-6% and 0.8-1% respectively.
No one is going to be up in arms at the fact that the country is 4% poorer than it might otherwise have been, and by 2020 almost nothing will be known.
The damage Brexit will cause will be its opportunity cost. £100m not being invested here, £100m in extra costs for business there.
Nothing you can drop on your foot so I think May and the Gruesome Threesome are pretty much in the clear.
The political risks come when demands or predictions made are very publicly not met. There is absolutely no doubt there will be a deal.
But if a politician says, as David Davis has just done, "Of course Germany et al will be rational and sign up to full access to the SM with no FOM because they want to sell us lots of cars" and then Merkel turns round and says, "No way!". It subsequently turns out completely different from what was said, so the government loses a lot of credibility. Ditto if a high profile employers says, "We are off to Holland because they are in the EU, but Britain isn't" Ditto, a high profile FTA gets canned because the other country decides to concentrate on its relations with the EU instead.
Yes perhaps. But if it is WTO (more likely with Davis in charge and Brexiteers abundant in cabinet) then the line will be "you see - we do have access to the SM" and no one apart from a few will know or care about the differences between "access" and "part of". No one cared for sure during the campaign.
So I am still of the opinion that the country will be poorer than it otherwise would have been but imperceptibly so.
Then again, I am certainly looking forward to the zero-rating of VAT on home energy supplies.
Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
They won't vote CDU.
THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
Lol, not at all. Its because East African Asians are business owners and wanr lower taxes.
Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
They won't vote CDU.
THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).
When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
Iain Martin published this 23 hours ago before the full extent of the changes were known:
Six months ago David Cameron was dominant. He had saved the Union and won an election, returning the Tory party to a majority position.
George Osborne readied himself for the succession. Meanwhile, Boris Johnson worked to overtake Osborne. The great reformer Michael Gove weighed his options ahead of the referendum. Other ministers, MPs, chums and advisers who had hitched their wagons to the Cameron/Osborne project bustled around enjoying power or proximity to power.
Underneath them, a whole social network – with its own manners, assumptions and habits – whirred away in London and nice parts of the home counties at weekends.
It is all turned to dust now....... The group that only recently dominated British politics is now history.
On the whole, I think that the Cameroons did well in government, esp in the Coalition. But somehow the tears just won't come. They brought it on themselves, believing their own propaganda.
Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
They won't vote CDU.
THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).
When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
Surbiton is just clueless because he is a Labourite identity politics type.
Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
They won't vote CDU.
THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).
When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
Surbiton is just clueless because he is a Labourite identity politics type.
Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
They won't vote CDU.
THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).
When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
Iain Martin published this 23 hours ago before the full extent of the changes were known:
Six months ago David Cameron was dominant. He had saved the Union and won an election, returning the Tory party to a majority position.
George Osborne readied himself for the succession. Meanwhile, Boris Johnson worked to overtake Osborne. The great reformer Michael Gove weighed his options ahead of the referendum. Other ministers, MPs, chums and advisers who had hitched their wagons to the Cameron/Osborne project bustled around enjoying power or proximity to power.
Underneath them, a whole social network – with its own manners, assumptions and habits – whirred away in London and nice parts of the home counties at weekends.
It is all turned to dust now....... The group that only recently dominated British politics is now history.
On the whole, I think that the Cameroons did well in government, esp in the Coalition. But somehow the tears just won't come. They brought it on themselves, believing their own propaganda.
Cameron's finest hour was undoubtedly forming the coalition government then running it smoothly for 5 years - no mean feat. He's been sloppy, slapdash & lazy since winning the majority - three adjectives no one has ever applied to May......
I think this assumes anyone will know if Brexit is a success or failure.
Estimates (ok let's leave out Patrick Minford's) put the likely diminution of aggregate and per capita GDP by 2030 of anywhere between 1.5-6% and 0.8-1% respectively.
Nothing you can drop on your foot so I think May and the Gruesome Threesome are pretty much in the clear.
The political risks come when demands or predictions made are very publicly not met. There is absolutely no doubt there will be a deal.
But if a politician says, as David Davis has just done, "Of course Germany et al will be rational and sign up to full access to the SM with no FOM because they want to sell us lots of cars" and then Merkel turns round and says, "No way!". It subsequently turns out completely different from what was said, so the government loses a lot of credibility. Ditto if a high profile employers says, "We are off to Holland because they are in the EU, but Britain isn't" Ditto, a high profile FTA gets canned because the other country decides to concentrate on its relations with the EU instead.
I completely agree with all but your last point.
The EU is notoriously sclerotic (which should surprise precisely no one). CETA was agreed in September 2014. It has yet to be put before EU national parliaments. The SIngapore FTA was agreed in October 2014. It's not even scheduled for ratification yet.
Brexit isn't going to be kittens and rainbows, but it's undeniably a hell of a lot easier to negotiate a bilateral FTA versus dealing with the EU en bloc
I was thinking about this. Getting the UK to agree an FTA is definitely easier than herding the EU cats. However there is the other side to think about. They are not going to be more amenable to the UK than to the EU. Globalisation is out of fashion and that's putting dampers on free trade agreements. Britain is coming late to the party, while the EU has a number of FTAs in place or in the works. This is not co-incidental. Brexit is itself a manifestation of that anti-globalisation mood.
On Obama's back of the queue comment. It was tendentious, maybe aggressive, but seems to be correct on the substance. US trade negotiators said since Brexit they have no current interest in doing an FTA with the UK. It makes no sense to do so until the UK sorts out its arrangement with the EU and until the US fixes its own agreement with the EU.
Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
They won't vote CDU.
THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).
When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
I think this assumes anyone will know if Brexit is a success or failure.
Estimates (ok let's leave out Patrick Minford's) put the likely diminution of aggregate and per capita GDP by 2030 of anywhere between 1.5-6% and 0.8-1% respectively.
Nothing you can drop on your foot so I think May and the Gruesome Threesome are pretty much in the clear.
The political risks come when demands or predictions made are very publicly not met. There is absolutely no doubt there will be a deal.
But if a politician says, as David Davis has just done, "Of course Germany et al will be rational and sign up to full access to the SM with no FOM because they want to sell us lots of cars" and then Merkel turns round and says, "No way!". It subsequently turns out completely different from what was said, so the government loses a lot of credibility. Ditto if a high profile employers says, "We are off to Holland because they are in the EU, but Britain isn't" Ditto, a high profile FTA gets canned because the other country decides to concentrate on its relations with the EU instead.
I completely agree with all but your last point.
The EU is notoriously sclerotic (which should surprise precisely no one). CETA was agreed in September 2014. It has yet to be put before EU national parliaments. The SIngapore FTA was agreed in October 2014. It's not even scheduled for ratification yet.
Brexit isn't going to be kittens and rainbows, but it's undeniably a hell of a lot easier to negotiate a bilateral FTA versus dealing with the EU en bloc
I was thinking about this. Getting the UK to agree an FTA is definitely easier than herding the EU cats. However there is the other side to think about. They are not going to be more amenable to the UK than to the EU. Globalisation is out of fashion and that's putting dampers on free trade agreements. Britain is coming late to the party, while the EU has a number of FTAs in place or in the works. This is not co-incidental. Brexit is itself a manifestation of that anti-globalisation mood.
On Obama's back of the queue comment. It was tendentious, maybe aggressive, but seems to be correct on the substance. US trade negotiators said since Brexit they have no current interest in doing an FTA with the UK. It makes no sense to do so until the UK sorts out its arrangement with the EU and until the US fixes its own agreement with the EU.
Do you have a (post referendum) link for your last assertion?
Iain Martin published this 23 hours ago before the full extent of the changes were known:
Six months ago David Cameron was dominant. He had saved the Union and won an election, returning the Tory party to a majority position.
George Osborne readied himself for the succession. Meanwhile, Boris Johnson worked to overtake Osborne. The great reformer Michael Gove weighed his options ahead of the referendum. Other ministers, MPs, chums and advisers who had hitched their wagons to the Cameron/Osborne project bustled around enjoying power or proximity to power.
Underneath them, a whole social network – with its own manners, assumptions and habits – whirred away in London and nice parts of the home counties at weekends.
It is all turned to dust now....... The group that only recently dominated British politics is now history.
On the whole, I think that the Cameroons did well in government, esp in the Coalition. But somehow the tears just won't come. They brought it on themselves, believing their own propaganda.
I keep seeing this and it still makes no sense to me. What brought them down was they weren't strong enough to not hold a referendum, then were inadequate to the task of winning it for their side. Even if they thought they would win, it wasn't believing that , believing propaganda, which brought them down, they clearly fought as hard as possible with no complacency, they just weren't up to the task of getting a better deal then selling the deal they did get. That's inadequacy, on this issue, not arrogance. Even if that was there, it wasn't why they lost, since it didn't manifest in not trying hard enough.
Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
They won't vote CDU.
THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).
When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
They won't vote CDU.
THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).
When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
They won't vote CDU.
THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).
When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
I was thinking about this. Getting the UK to agree an FTA is definitely easier than herding the EU cats. However there is the other side to think about. They are not going to be more amenable to the UK than to the EU. Globalisation is out of fashion and that's putting dampers on free trade agreements. Britain is coming late to the party, while the EU has a number of FTAs in place or in the works. This is not co-incidental. Brexit is itself a manifestation of that anti-globalisation mood.
On Obama's back of the queue comment. It was tendentious, maybe aggressive, but seems to be correct on the substance. US trade negotiators said since Brexit they have no current interest in doing an FTA with the UK. It makes no sense to do so until the UK sorts out its arrangement with the EU and until the US fixes its own agreement with the EU.
The word from the US is that they want the UK to be involved with the TTIP because it's dead without our involvement. It won't pass without the UK, at which point we'll be first in the queue, but the US want to have their cake and eat it so are trying to get a way for the UK into the TTIP either as an additional contracting party or as an EU associate signatory.
Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
They won't vote CDU.
THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).
When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
Punjabis vote Labour. See Ealing Southall.
Tamils in Kingston & Surbiton vote Con or Libdem.
Hmm. even more racist stereo-typing!
Which is what I was trying to highlight about surbiton's post.
"The three Brexiteers will be all but irrelevant in the negotiations on Brexit. Their main significance will be the influence they have on their civil servants."
Do not underestimate the importance of doing just that. A large number of civil servants, especially at the FCO, have just had the rug of their world pulled out from beneath them and will be struggling to cope with the new requirements. Those same civil servants will be doing a lot of the detail and writing the position papers.
To get a good deal for the UK those civil servants will need close guidance and support.
They need, in general, to be removed from the process entirely until the implementation stage.
Cameron's finest hour was undoubtedly forming the coalition government then running it smoothly for 5 years - no mean feat. He's been sloppy, slapdash & lazy since winning the majority - three adjectives no one has ever applied to May......
The irony is that Cameron's majority on the back of LibDem gains ensured that the referendum went ahead whereas a continuing Coalition would have blocked it and he'd still be PM et al.
I think this assumes anyone will know if Brexit is a success or failure.
Estimates (ok let's leave out Patrick Minford's) put the likely diminution of aggregate and per capita GDP by 2030 of anywhere between 1.5-6% and 0.8-1% respectively.
Nothing you can drop on your foot so I think May and the Gruesome Threesome are pretty much in the clear.
The political risks come when demands or predictions made are very publicly not met. There is absolutely no doubt there will be a deal.
Brexit isn't going to be kittens and rainbows, but it's undeniably a hell of a lot easier to negotiate a bilateral FTA versus dealing with the EU en bloc
I was thinking about this. Getting the UK to agree an FTA is definitely easier than herding the EU cats. However there is the other side to think about. They are not going to be more amenable to the UK than to the EU. Globalisation is out of fashion and that's putting dampers on free trade agreements. Britain is coming late to the party, while the EU has a number of FTAs in place or in the works. This is not co-incidental. Brexit is itself a manifestation of that anti-globalisation mood.
On Obama's back of the queue comment. It was tendentious, maybe aggressive, but seems to be correct on the substance. US trade negotiators said since Brexit they have no current interest in doing an FTA with the UK. It makes no sense to do so until the UK sorts out its arrangement with the EU and until the US fixes its own agreement with the EU.
I think we all get a little carried away with FTAs. The EU has FTAs (or similar) with two out of its top ten trade partners. The WTO has been quite effective at reducing tariffs globally. It is now increasingly concerned with non-tariff barriers (per the G20 trade ministers communique last week)
Iain Martin published this 23 hours ago before the full extent of the changes were known:
Six months ago David Cameron was dominant. He had saved the Union and won an election, returning the Tory party to a majority position.
George Osborne readied himself for the succession. Meanwhile, Boris Johnson worked to overtake Osborne. The great reformer Michael Gove weighed his options ahead of the referendum. Other ministers, MPs, chums and advisers who had hitched their wagons to the Cameron/Osborne project bustled around enjoying power or proximity to power.
Underneath them, a whole social network – with its own manners, assumptions and habits – whirred away in London and nice parts of the home counties at weekends.
It is all turned to dust now....... The group that only recently dominated British politics is now history.
On the whole, I think that the Cameroons did well in government, esp in the Coalition. But somehow the tears just won't come. They brought it on themselves, believing their own propaganda.
I keep seeing this and it still makes no sense to me. What brought them down was they weren't strong enough to not hold a referendum, then were inadequate to the task of winning it for their side. Even if they thought they would win, it wasn't believing that , believing propaganda, which brought them down, they clearly fought as hard as possible with no complacency, they just weren't up to the task of getting a better deal then selling the deal they did get. That's inadequacy, on this issue, not arrogance. Even if that was there, it wasn't why they lost, since it didn't manifest in not trying hard enough.
I don't think for a minute that they thought there was any realistic chance of losing it. Classic hubris to nemesis. They only ever beat Brown, Salmond and Milliband. That doesn't make you a political genius. Their luck just ran out.
Breaking news in Germany that the EU commission knew about the emissions scandal in 2010 and did nothing about it.
Who still wants to pretend that the Commission isn't just an outpost of German industry?
Plenty of clowns on here I imagine
What I still do not understand is why Volkswagen are no up their arse in lawsuits and prosecutions. They deliberately and with malice aforethought set out to deceive the regulators and their customers and have admitted as much. They must have broken all sorts of laws. Why are they not be hounded through the courts?
The political risks come when demands or predictions made are very publicly not met. There is absolutely no doubt there will be a deal.
But if a politician says, as David Davis has just done, "Of course Germany et al will be rational and sign up to full access to the SM with no FOM because they want to sell us lots of cars" and then Merkel turns round and says, "No way!". It subsequently turns out completely different from what was said, so the government loses a lot of credibility. Ditto if a high profile employers says, "We are off to Holland because they are in the EU, but Britain isn't" Ditto, a high profile FTA gets canned because the other country decides to concentrate on its relations with the EU instead.
I completely agree with all but your last point.
The EU is notoriously sclerotic (which should surprise precisely no one). CETA was agreed in September 2014. It has yet to be put before EU national parliaments. The SIngapore FTA was agreed in October 2014. It's not even scheduled for ratification yet.
Brexit isn't going to be kittens and rainbows, but it's undeniably a hell of a lot easier to negotiate a bilateral FTA versus dealing with the EU en bloc
I was thinking about this. Getting the UK to agree an FTA is definitely easier than herding the EU cats. However there is the other side to think about. They are not going to be more amenable to the UK than to the EU. Globalisation is out of fashion and that's putting dampers on free trade agreements. Britain is coming late to the party, while the EU has a number of FTAs in place or in the works. This is not co-incidental. Brexit is itself a manifestation of that anti-globalisation mood.
On Obama's back of the queue comment. It was tendentious, maybe aggressive, but seems to be correct on the substance. US trade negotiators said since Brexit they have no current interest in doing an FTA with the UK. It makes no sense to do so until the UK sorts out its arrangement with the EU and until the US fixes its own agreement with the EU.
Do you have a (post referendum) link for your last assertion?
Breaking news in Germany that the EU commission knew about the emissions scandal in 2010 and did nothing about it.
Who still wants to pretend that the Commission isn't just an outpost of German industry?
Plenty of clowns on here I imagine
What I still do not understand is why Volkswagen are no up their arse in lawsuits and prosecutions. They deliberately and with malice aforethought set out to deceive the regulators and their customers and have admitted as much. They must have broken all sorts of laws. Why are they not be hounded through the courts?
Because their customers couldn't give a flying f8ck.
Brexit isn't going to be kittens and rainbows, but it's undeniably a hell of a lot easier to negotiate a bilateral FTA versus dealing with the EU en bloc
I was thinking about this. Getting the UK to agree an FTA is definitely easier than herding the EU cats. However there is the other side to think about. They are not going to be more amenable to the UK than to the EU. Globalisation is out of fashion and that's putting dampers on free trade agreements. Britain is coming late to the party, while the EU has a number of FTAs in place or in the works. This is not co-incidental. Brexit is itself a manifestation of that anti-globalisation mood.
On Obama's back of the queue comment. It was tendentious, maybe aggressive, but seems to be correct on the substance. US trade negotiators said since Brexit they have no current interest in doing an FTA with the UK. It makes no sense to do so until the UK sorts out its arrangement with the EU and until the US fixes its own agreement with the EU.
I think we all get a little carried away with FTAs. The EU has FTAs (or similar) with two out of its top ten trade partners. The WTO has been quite effective at reducing tariffs globally. It is now increasingly concerned with non-tariff barriers (per the G20 trade ministers communique last week)
In terms of the US, I quite understand their position - with TTIP struggling, the UK is hardly a priority.
IIRC the EU has 33 FTAs, EFTA has 26. Presented purely for information, rather than to make any particular point .
We are drifting away from the original subject of the political risk of Brexit. Are you suggesting Free Trade Agreements don't matter that much? If so, I agree, except for the one with the EU.
[EDIT] They can make a significant difference to trade but we are talking about the collective quality of the FTA set under one scenario rather than under another. I don't think there is likely to be a big difference - except for the EU Treaty because that's our most important one and we are killing it.
Breaking news in Germany that the EU commission knew about the emissions scandal in 2010 and did nothing about it.
Who still wants to pretend that the Commission isn't just an outpost of German industry?
Plenty of clowns on here I imagine
What I still do not understand is why Volkswagen are no up their arse in lawsuits and prosecutions. They deliberately and with malice aforethought set out to deceive the regulators and their customers and have admitted as much. They must have broken all sorts of laws. Why are they not be hounded through the courts?
Because the Commission who overlooked their illegal antics are also in charge of the EU response because they set the air quality standards. The German government also seems to be giving them protection because they know all the German car makers have been at it, as proved by the new UK tests.
The political risks come when demands or predictions made are very publicly not met. There is absolutely no doubt there will be a deal.
But if a politician says, as David Davis has just done, "Of course Germany et al will be rational and sign up to full access to the SM with no FOM because they want to sell us lots of cars" and then Merkel turns round and says, "No way!". It subsequently turns out completely different from what was said, so the government loses a lot of credibility. Ditto if a high profile employers says, "We are off to Holland because they are in the EU, but Britain isn't" Ditto, a high profile FTA gets canned because the other country decides to concentrate on its relations with the EU instead.
I completely agree with all but your last point.
The EU is notoriously sclerotic (which should surprise precisely no one). CETA was agreed in September 2014. It has yet to be put before EU national parliaments. The SIngapore FTA was agreed in October 2014. It's not even scheduled for ratification yet.
Brexit isn't going to be kittens and rainbows, but it's undeniably a hell of a lot easier to negotiate a bilateral FTA versus dealing with the EU en bloc
I was thinking about this. Getting the UK to agree an FTA is definitely easier than herding the EU cats. However there is the other side to think about. They are not going to be more amenable to the UK than to the EU. Globalisation is out of fashion and that's putting dampers on free trade agreements. Britain is coming late to the party, while the EU has a number of FTAs in place or in the works. This is not co-incidental. Brexit is itself a manifestation of that anti-globalisation mood.
On Obama's back of the queue comment. It was tendentious, maybe aggressive, but seems to be correct on the substance. US trade negotiators said since Brexit they have no current interest in doing an FTA with the UK. It makes no sense to do so until the UK sorts out its arrangement with the EU and until the US fixes its own agreement with the EU.
Do you have a (post referendum) link for your last assertion?
Breaking news in Germany that the EU commission knew about the emissions scandal in 2010 and did nothing about it.
Who still wants to pretend that the Commission isn't just an outpost of German industry?
Plenty of clowns on here I imagine
What I still do not understand is why Volkswagen are no up their arse in lawsuits and prosecutions. They deliberately and with malice aforethought set out to deceive the regulators and their customers and have admitted as much. They must have broken all sorts of laws. Why are they not be hounded through the courts?
Because their customers couldn't give a flying f8ck.
Not really. It's the Commission that are holding back national responses as they want an EU wide settlement.
Breaking news in Germany that the EU commission knew about the emissions scandal in 2010 and did nothing about it.
Who still wants to pretend that the Commission isn't just an outpost of German industry?
Plenty of clowns on here I imagine
What I still do not understand is why Volkswagen are no up their arse in lawsuits and prosecutions. They deliberately and with malice aforethought set out to deceive the regulators and their customers and have admitted as much. They must have broken all sorts of laws. Why are they not be hounded through the courts?
Because the Commission who overlooked their illegal antics are also in charge of the EU response because they set the air quality standards. The German government also seems to be giving them protection because they know all the German car makers have been at it, as proved by the new UK tests.
All car manufacturers would be using the same OEM suppliers, and those OEM suppliers had to know what was going on.
I think this assumes anyone will know if Brexit is a success or failure.
Estimates (ok let's leave out Patrick Minford's) put the likely diminution of aggregate and per capita GDP by 2030 of anywhere between 1.5-6% and 0.8-1% respectively.
Nothing you can drop on your foot so I think May and the Gruesome Threesome are pretty much in the clear.
The political risks come when demands or predictions made are very publicly not met. There is absolutely no doubt there will be a deal.
Brexit isn't going to be kittens and rainbows, but it's undeniably a hell of a lot easier to negotiate a bilateral FTA versus dealing with the EU en bloc
I was thinking about this. Getting the UK to agree an FTA is definitely easier than herding the EU cats. However there is the other side to think about. They are not going to be more amenable to the UK than to the EU. Globalisation is out of fashion and that's putting dampers on free trade agreements. Britain is coming late to the party, while the EU has a number of FTAs in place or in the works. This is not co-incidental. Brexit is itself a manifestation of that anti-globalisation mood.
On Obama's back of the queue comment. It was tendentious, maybe aggressive, but seems to be correct on the substance. US trade negotiators said since Brexit they have no current interest in doing an FTA with the UK. It makes no sense to do so until the UK sorts out its arrangement with the EU and until the US fixes its own agreement with the EU.
I think we all get a little carried away with FTAs. The EU has FTAs (or similar) with two out of its top ten trade partners. The WTO has been quite effective at reducing tariffs globally. It is now increasingly concerned with non-tariff barriers (per the G20 trade ministers communique last week)
In terms of the US, I quite understand their position - with TTIP struggling, the UK is hardly a priority.
IIRC the EU has 33 FTAs, EFTA has 26. Presented purely for information, rather than to make any particular point .
We are drifting away from the original subject of the political risk of Brexit. Are you suggesting Free Trade Agreements don't matter that much? If so, I agree, except for the one with the EU.
"The three Brexiteers will be all but irrelevant in the negotiations on Brexit. Their main significance will be the influence they have on their civil servants."
Do not underestimate the importance of doing just that. A large number of civil servants, especially at the FCO, have just had the rug of their world pulled out from beneath them and will be struggling to cope with the new requirements. Those same civil servants will be doing a lot of the detail and writing the position papers.
To get a good deal for the UK those civil servants will need close guidance and support.
They need, in general, to be removed from the process entirely until the implementation stage.
I don't think it is possible to exclude civil servants from government business. Someone has to do the preparatory work and write the position papers for a minister.
Breaking news in Germany that the EU commission knew about the emissions scandal in 2010 and did nothing about it.
Who still wants to pretend that the Commission isn't just an outpost of German industry?
Plenty of clowns on here I imagine
What I still do not understand is why Volkswagen are no up their arse in lawsuits and prosecutions. They deliberately and with malice aforethought set out to deceive the regulators and their customers and have admitted as much. They must have broken all sorts of laws. Why are they not be hounded through the courts?
They are. Figures like $15 bn and upwards are floating around for the provision they have made for settling lawsuits.
Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
They won't vote CDU.
THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).
When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
Punjabis vote Labour. See Ealing Southall.
Tamils in Kingston & Surbiton vote Con or Libdem.
Hmm. even more racist stereo-typing!
Which is what I was trying to highlight about surbiton's post.
Ethnic minorities disproportionately vote Labour - this is not news. However, a combination of David Cameron and the emergence of UKIP have made the Tories a much more attractive proposition.
Cameron's finest hour was undoubtedly forming the coalition government then running it smoothly for 5 years - no mean feat. He's been sloppy, slapdash & lazy since winning the majority - three adjectives no one has ever applied to May......
The irony is that Cameron's majority on the back of LibDem gains ensured that the referendum went ahead whereas a continuing Coalition would have blocked it and he'd still be PM et al.
Funny old lark this politics business.
He was hoping for a coalition too. But he attacked the yellows too much. Maybe he didn't think they would collapse like their promises.
Eddie Izzard means well, bless him. Nonetheless WTF is a 'radical moderate'? Surely that's an oxymoron?
It’s an oxymoron as you say – I think Eddie is trying to distinguish between the radical moderates, who are merely nuts and the radical radicals which are totally barking.
Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
They won't vote CDU.
THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).
When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
Punjabis vote Labour. See Ealing Southall.
Tamils in Kingston & Surbiton vote Con or Libdem.
Hmm. even more racist stereo-typing!
Which is what I was trying to highlight about surbiton's post.
The EU is notoriously sclerotic (which should surprise precisely no one). CETA was agreed in September 2014. It has yet to be put before EU national parliaments. The SIngapore FTA was agreed in October 2014. It's not even scheduled for ratification yet.
Brexit isn't going to be kittens and rainbows, but it's undeniably a hell of a lot easier to negotiate a bilateral FTA versus dealing with the EU en bloc
I was thinking about this. Getting the UK to agree an FTA is definitely easier than herding the EU cats. However there is the other side to think about. They are not going to be more amenable to the UK than to the EU. Globalisation is out of fashion and that's putting dampers on free trade agreements. Britain is coming late to the party, while the EU has a number of FTAs in place or in the works. This is not co-incidental. Brexit is itself a manifestation of that anti-globalisation mood.
On Obama's back of the queue comment. It was tendentious, maybe aggressive, but seems to be correct on the substance. US trade negotiators said since Brexit they have no current interest in doing an FTA with the UK. It makes no sense to do so until the UK sorts out its arrangement with the EU and until the US fixes its own agreement with the EU.
Do you have a (post referendum) link for your last assertion?
The only actual quote from a US trade official there is one saying we will have to wait and see. And you misquoted him, no doubt accidently.
I don't much like your implication. I never claimed to quote from a particular article and my summary of the situation matches what was reported in the article.
"The three Brexiteers will be all but irrelevant in the negotiations on Brexit. Their main significance will be the influence they have on their civil servants."
Do not underestimate the importance of doing just that. A large number of civil servants, especially at the FCO, have just had the rug of their world pulled out from beneath them and will be struggling to cope with the new requirements. Those same civil servants will be doing a lot of the detail and writing the position papers.
To get a good deal for the UK those civil servants will need close guidance and support.
They need, in general, to be removed from the process entirely until the implementation stage.
I don't think it is possible to exclude civil servants from government business. Someone has to do the preparatory work and write the position papers for a minister.
Of course it is. You set up your own unit with your own experts to do the prep work. Actually, if we want this to happen, such a move is probably essential. The civil service are working for the other side.
Comments
I think this is right.
Estimates (ok let's leave out Patrick Minford's) put the likely diminution of aggregate and per capita GDP by 2030 of anywhere between 1.5-6% and 0.8-1% respectively.
No one is going to be up in arms at the fact that the country is 4% poorer than it might otherwise have been, and by 2020 almost nothing will be known.
The damage Brexit will cause will be its opportunity cost. £100m not being invested here, £100m in extra costs for business there.
Nothing you can drop on your foot so I think May and the Gruesome Threesome are pretty much in the clear.
Do not underestimate the importance of doing just that. A large number of civil servants, especially at the FCO, have just had the rug of their world pulled out from beneath them and will be struggling to cope with the new requirements. Those same civil servants will be doing a lot of the detail and writing the position papers.
To get a good deal for the UK those civil servants will need close guidance and support.
Six months ago David Cameron was dominant. He had saved the Union and won an election, returning the Tory party to a majority position.
George Osborne readied himself for the succession. Meanwhile, Boris Johnson worked to overtake Osborne. The great reformer Michael Gove weighed his options ahead of the referendum. Other ministers, MPs, chums and advisers who had hitched their wagons to the Cameron/Osborne project bustled around enjoying power or proximity to power.
Underneath them, a whole social network – with its own manners, assumptions and habits – whirred away in London and nice parts of the home counties at weekends.
It is all turned to dust now....... The group that only recently dominated British politics is now history.
http://reaction.life/mays-rise-seals-incredible-destruction-entire-generation-top-tories/
https://twitter.com/eddiefornec/status/753620828584042496
It's not just experience of how politics works, it's the length of time they've had to watch effects, see things come round for the nth time, think through how they'd tackle things, and so on.
MP 2001-2008
Mayor of London 2008-2016
Foreign Secretary 2016-
Hardly a newbie.
But if a politician says, as David Davis has just done, "Of course Germany et al will be rational and sign up to full access to the SM with no FOM because they want to sell us lots of cars" and then Merkel turns round and says, "No way!". It subsequently turns out completely different from what was said, so the government loses a lot of credibility. Ditto if a high profile employers says, "We are off to Holland because they are in the EU, but Britain isn't" Ditto, a high profile FTA gets canned because the other country decides to concentrate on its relations with the EU instead.
Is there a minister for folding towels?
If BREXIT is a disaster the whole government goes down....what will Mrs Bone say?
The EU is notoriously sclerotic (which should surprise precisely no one). CETA was agreed in September 2014. It has yet to be put before EU national parliaments. The SIngapore FTA was agreed in October 2014. It's not even scheduled for ratification yet.
Brexit isn't going to be kittens and rainbows, but it's undeniably a hell of a lot easier to negotiate a bilateral FTA versus dealing with the EU en bloc
When Royal James possest the crown,
And popery grew in fashion;
The Penal Law I shouted down,
And read the Declaration:
The Church of Rome I found would fit
Full well my Constitution,
And I had been a Jesuit
But for the Revolution.
Oh hang on...
So I am still of the opinion that the country will be poorer than it otherwise would have been but imperceptibly so.
Then again, I am certainly looking forward to the zero-rating of VAT on home energy supplies.
When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
Very pleased with Tezza so far.
On Obama's back of the queue comment. It was tendentious, maybe aggressive, but seems to be correct on the substance. US trade negotiators said since Brexit they have no current interest in doing an FTA with the UK. It makes no sense to do so until the UK sorts out its arrangement with the EU and until the US fixes its own agreement with the EU.
Funny old lark this politics business.
last week)
https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news16_e/dgra_09jul16_e.pdf
In terms of the US, I quite understand their position - with TTIP struggling, the UK is hardly a priority.
IIRC the EU has 33 FTAs, EFTA has 26. Presented purely for information, rather than to make any particular point