Many of those who vote for Corbyn would think that it proved their altruism if you persuaded them that a Corbyn premiership would be bad for them personally.
It is a concern that no matter how ridiculous and pathetic Corbyn has been Labour only rarely dip below 30% in the polls. Fatally poor for an opposition as we approach mid term of course but a bed rock of support no matter what. The Labour brand remains worth fighting for.
I think what should worry the Cons more is people who have nothing to lose essentially taking a punt on something different. That's one of the key factors of the leave victory. Those 1.7m "rarely vote" types seem to have done exactly that and persuading someone who is struggling to find meaningful employment, barely surviving on a mixture of low wages and state handouts that they have something to lose is not easy, Osborne tried it with the punishment budget nonsense but that was kicked into touch an hour after it was revealed by Tory MPs who had just threatened to vote down their own benefit cuts a few weeks earlier.
Showing people treasury or IFS reports which say that Corbyn will have to cut £Xbn because "Y" policy will result in slower growth isn't enough either. Hopefully the government has learned that lesson as well.
I guess Corbyn will say that the 2% of GDP (£35bn?) that currently goes on Defence of the Realm will be much better spent elsewhere?
"We spend £7bn on nuclear weapons and submarines every year, let's fund the NHS instead"
In tribute to Anthony Jay:
Hacker: how many starving African children could be saved if Britain abandoned its nuclear weapons programme?
Humphrey: The answer is none. They'd spend all the money on conventional weapons instead,
Watched too much Yes, Minister in the last couple of days after the tribute thread here. It's amazing how something satirical written about politics between 28 and 36 years ago, can still hold so true today. Timeless, and shows that underneath it all, nothing much has actually changed.
[If he did not, of course I'll retract that comment. But this is another problem with just not reporting terrorist killings accurately].
He may well have done, but just because he might have or even did does not make him a terrorist. No evidence has come out to that effect, and he didn't apparently attend mosque.
its far too easy to brand Muslim and terrorist together.even if the person said ""Allahu Akbar"
Its very dangerous to do so and the BBC in this instance are right to take extreme caution as the fist step. asnd until events prove otherwise.
Would they be so cautious, one wonders, if there had been a whiff of a far-right connection?
I've been looking at the Labour manifestos since '79. They show that the party is serially unwilling to compromise with the electorate, with a brief hiatus under Blair.
From '79 to '92 they were de facto unilateralists (in '74 they ditched Polaris renewal, which is tantamount to disarmament). From '97 to the present. they have been pro-Europe, pro-immigration. We can now add in Jeremy's new twist, not only unilateral disarmament but lack of commitment to NATO. Even Foot wouldn't have gone that far.
No one says that a party has to toady to voters and throw away all semblance of principle. However, when you are so far from the English electorate's long held views, it does smack of the tin ear.
Many of those who vote for Corbyn would think that it proved their altruism if you persuaded them that a Corbyn premiership would be bad for them personally.
It is a concern that no matter how ridiculous and pathetic Corbyn has been Labour only rarely dip below 30% in the polls. Fatally poor for an opposition as we approach mid term of course but a bed rock of support no matter what. The Labour brand remains worth fighting for.
I think what should worry the Cons more is people who have nothing to lose essentially taking a punt on something different. That's one of the key factors of the leave victory. Those 1.7m "rarely vote" types seem to have done exactly that and persuading someone who is struggling to find meaningful employment, barely surviving on a mixture of low wages and state handouts that they have something to lose is not easy, Osborne tried it with the punishment budget nonsense but that was kicked into touch an hour after it was revealed by Tory MPs who had just threatened to vote down their own benefit cuts a few weeks earlier.
Showing people treasury or IFS reports which say that Corbyn will have to cut £Xbn because "Y" policy will result in slower growth isn't enough either. Hopefully the government has learned that lesson as well.
I guess Corbyn will say that the 2% of GDP (£35bn?) that currently goes on Defence of the Realm will be much better spent elsewhere?
"We spend £7bn on nuclear weapons and submarines every year, let's fund the NHS instead"
In tribute to Anthony Jay:
Hacker: how many starving African children could be saved if Britain abandoned its nuclear weapons programme?
Humphrey: The answer is none. They'd spend all the money on conventional weapons instead,
Watched too much Yes, Minister in the last couple of days after the tribute thread here. It's amazing how something satirical written about politics between 28 and 36 years ago, can still hold so true today. Timeless, and shows that underneath it all, nothing much has actually changed.
I think it's one of the best comedies ever, along with Fawlty Towers. Will it ever be equalled or surpassed?
I'm surprised the BBC doesn't do more satire based on more recent real life events. It's not too hard even for someone who just works in the field to piece together events inside say DECC and it's as tragic/funny as Yes Minister. Huge scope for a comedy/plot featuring lobbying by the Country Landowners Association and other bodies to distort - er, constructively amend - energy policy.
Many of those who vote for Corbyn would think that it proved their altruism if you persuaded them that a Corbyn premiership would be bad for them personally.
It is a concern that no matter how ridiculous and pathetic Corbyn has been Labour only rarely dip below 30% in the polls. Fatally poor for an opposition as we approach mid term of course but a bed rock of support no matter what. The Labour brand remains worth fighting for.
I got the GE in 2015 really wrong in Scotland because I thought the same thing: that there would be people who had voted Labour all their lives, and would never vote anything else. The brand was everything, and there would be some swingback from their dire position in the polls. I said as such on here (thus proving my lack of political nous).
But I was wrong, and Labour got annihilated in Scotand. And it was not as if Labour voters sat on their hands: turnout was up a lot.
The Labour brand is worth fighting for as long as it does not become poisoned, as Scottish Labour did for a number of reasons; most notably Falkirk.
There was also an alternative readily available in Scotland to lifelong Labour voters; one which was both effective (wouldn't let Tories in either locally or nationally), and left-wing. Indeed, one which trumpeted its anti-Toryness from the SIndyRef (even if that hugely oversimplified a complex situation).
In England, there isn't as yet an alternative that could do the same. UKIP appeals to social conservatives but if it had 50 seats in a hung parliament, who would it back? Likewise, the Lib Dems remain distrusted. The Greens are threatened more by Corbyn than the other way round, while a breakaway SDP2 faces all the same problems (and more) that did for SDP1.
Former Labour voters that move to other parties, and there are several possibilities, are not easily recaptured, as SLAB is finding out. Once habits are broken they are not easily re-established.
There is no route for Corbyn to gain the 100 seats needed to form a government, and without power all his plans and policies are worthless.
At best it will be Labour's lost decade and at worst an extinction event.
Pass the popcorn! Is popcorn really that popular in this country? I've never had any and I have not noticed it on supermarket shelves. Isn't it an American thing?
The important bit to remember is that Corbyn is not a politician in the normal sense of the word. He is not interested in winning power for his party, he does not believe in Parliament as an instrument of change, he will never seek to change voters' minds by actively engaging with them. All that can take you to the top of a demoralised, disorganised, unfocused Labour party for a time. But it can take you no further.
He has atleaat made Labour that elusive "movement" that Labour MP's including Stella Creasy (sp?) keep banging on about. It won't do shit to win them the next GE but what have the other prominent parts of the movement done to make it er move?
Pass the popcorn! Is popcorn really that popular in this country? I've never had any and I have not noticed it on supermarket shelves. Isn't it an American thing?
There are quite a few brands, often savoury and found near the crisps, even in small shops like my local Co-op.
For conference season I shall pop some fresh stuff myself, and by the bucketload!
I've been looking at the Labour manifestos since '79. They show that the party is serially unwilling to compromise with the electorate, with a brief hiatus under Blair.
From '79 to '92 they were de facto unilateralists (in '74 they ditched Polaris renewal, which is tantamount to disarmament). From '97 to the present. they have been pro-Europe, pro-immigration. We can now add in Jeremy's new twist, not only unilateral disarmament but lack of commitment to NATO. Even Foot wouldn't have gone that far.
No one says that a party has to toady to voters and throw away all semblance of principle. However, when you are so far from the English electorate's long held views, it does smack of the tin ear.
You probably mean the nuclear type of disarmament. Actually, it's required by the Non Proliferation Treaty; Bush senior was the last POTUS to do anything serious about it though. Since then, NATO has behaved more like an empire whose existence is threatened than a serious peace-keeping organisation.
Given the aggressive way NATO has behaved, it would actually be pretty rational for a party to propose following Ireland, Sweden, Switzerland, Finland and Austria to non-alignment, plus the retention of strong conventional forces for self-defence only.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
In think in ten years time leaving with EU will be widely regarded as one of the best things Britain ever did, and other than a few die-hard europhiles most people will swear they were leavers all along.
Pass the popcorn! Is popcorn really that popular in this country? I've never had any and I have not noticed it on supermarket shelves. Isn't it an American thing?
I've never seen the attraction either. Imagine sugar-coated cardboard and you won't be far wrong.
BoE consumer credit figures are odd today, down as expected, but coupled with rising consumer spending in July it looks like people are dipping into their savings or disposable income to keep their living standards high rather than borrow to do so. Interesting behavioural change.
BoE consumer credit figures are odd today, down as expected, but coupled with rising consumer spending in July it looks like people are dipping into their savings or disposable income to keep their living standards high rather than borrow to do so. Interesting behavioural change.
Cut back in big ticket items for now, in favour of visiting Cornwall?
I've been looking at the Labour manifestos since '79. They show that the party is serially unwilling to compromise with the electorate, with a brief hiatus under Blair.
From '79 to '92 they were de facto unilateralists (in '74 they ditched Polaris renewal, which is tantamount to disarmament). From '97 to the present. they have been pro-Europe, pro-immigration. We can now add in Jeremy's new twist, not only unilateral disarmament but lack of commitment to NATO. Even Foot wouldn't have gone that far.
No one says that a party has to toady to voters and throw away all semblance of principle. However, when you are so far from the English electorate's long held views, it does smack of the tin ear.
You probably mean the nuclear type of disarmament. Actually, it's required by the Non Proliferation Treaty; Bush senior was the last POTUS to do anything serious about it though. Since then, NATO has behaved more like an empire whose existence is threatened than a serious peace-keeping organisation.
Given the aggressive way NATO has behaved, it would actually be pretty rational for a party to propose following Ireland, Sweden, Switzerland, Finland and Austria to non-alignment, plus the retention of strong conventional forces for self-defence only.
The NPT is a dead duck while non-signatories are pursuing the creation of atomic weapons. This is to some extent a Catch 22 in that the fact that the exempted states have them gives the aspirant ones some kind of moral legitimacy to equality but it's the best we have. The weapons can't be uninvented.
As for non-alignment, that's simply a polite way of describing freeloading or cowardice. What you describe as 'NATO's agression is in fact self-determination. It's amazing the knots that the left get into in foreign affairs; how we should stand alongside the right of a small state or potential state to self-determination but if that means actually challenging the dominant power from whose heavy hand the smaller one is trying to escape then suddenly that becomes 'imperialism' or the like. The net result being the hypocritical acceptance of spheres of influence and the denial of places like Estonia the right to form their own foreign policy. If it wants a powerful protector against a neighbour which invaded and occupied it, why shouldn't it be able to seek that? Considering Russia's actions in Georgia and Ukraine, it's hardly paranoid in perceiving a threat there.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
Hang on. This is the TTIP agreement we are talking about. Quite a few Leavers cited it as a reason to get out of the EU as it would lead to privatisation of the NHS and hormone filled beef.
It was the UK that was most pushing for the TTIP within the EU, and part of the reason that the USA wanted to keep our membership.
With Brexit the EU will want to reconsider and I do not blame them at all!
BoE consumer credit figures are odd today, down as expected, but coupled with rising consumer spending in July it looks like people are dipping into their savings or disposable income to keep their living standards high rather than borrow to do so. Interesting behavioural change.
Very interesting. People coming to the realisation that there's better things to do with savings in an era of zero interest rates?
You know I always thought it was amazing that the Japanese economy what with their obsession with robotics etc is less productive than even the low productive U.K http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37218507
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
Hang on. This is the TTIP agreement we are talking about. Quite a few Leavers cited it as a reason to get out of the EU as it would lead to privatisation of the NHS and hormone filled beef.
It was the UK that was most pushing for the TTIP within the EU, and part of the reason that the USA wanted to keep our membership.
With Brexit the EU will want to reconsider and I do not blame them at all!
Parked until after the French elections, I'd imagine.
Although the EC numbers remain broadly the same with Arizona and Georgia moving in Trump's direction. Critical for Trump but icing on the cake for Clinton. Trump has to wrench all of Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania (FOP) into his column. Lose any one and he's cooked.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
Hang on. This is the TTIP agreement we are talking about. Quite a few Leavers cited it as a reason to get out of the EU as it would lead to privatisation of the NHS and hormone filled beef.
It was the UK that was most pushing for the TTIP within the EU, and part of the reason that the USA wanted to keep our membership.
With Brexit the EU will want to reconsider and I do not blame them at all!
I think it's important to avoid seeing every mortal thing through the lens of Brexit. This is just the French catching up with German comments last week. TTIP seemed so secretive, and the reporting so partisan, I'm not sure I know enough about it one way or the other.
In this instance, I'm sure Brexiteer egos would have been bruised had the EU ratified TTIP while the UK languished at the back of the US queue, but it really doesn't signify much more than European domestic politics now rearing their head at EU level c.f. CETA.
You know I always thought it was amazing that the Japanese economy what with their obsession with robotics etc is less productive than even the low productive U.K http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37218507
Aggregate productivity statistics can be very misleading.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
Hang on. This is the TTIP agreement we are talking about. Quite a few Leavers cited it as a reason to get out of the EU as it would lead to privatisation of the NHS and hormone filled beef.
It was the UK that was most pushing for the TTIP within the EU, and part of the reason that the USA wanted to keep our membership.
With Brexit the EU will want to reconsider and I do not blame them at all!
No, no, no. Every brexiter is different. Left wingers ones voted out because they didn't want TTIP, whilst right wing ones voted out because we can make trade deals much faster outside the E.U. I know that like having your brioche and eating it too, but that is the nature of binary referendum.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
In think in ten years time leaving with EU will be widely regarded as one of the best things Britain ever did, and other than a few die-hard europhiles most people will swear they were leavers all along.
Plenty of people predicted that the EU would show much less interest in free trade if Britain left. It is one of the many negative outcomes that was utterly predictable from a vote to Leave.
Of course, Britain has far less negotiating power on its own, so we may well have achieved an inferior result for everyone.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
Hang on. This is the TTIP agreement we are talking about. Quite a few Leavers cited it as a reason to get out of the EU as it would lead to privatisation of the NHS and hormone filled beef.
It was the UK that was most pushing for the TTIP within the EU, and part of the reason that the USA wanted to keep our membership.
With Brexit the EU will want to reconsider and I do not blame them at all!
I think it's important to avoid seeing every mortal thing through the lens of Brexit. This is just the French catching up with German comments last week. TTIP seemed so secretive, and the reporting so partisan, I'm not sure I know enough about it one way or the other.
In this instance, I'm sure Brexiteer egos would have been bruised had the EU ratified TTIP while the UK languished at the back of the US queue, but it really doesn't signify much more than European domestic politics now rearing their head at EU level c.f. CETA.
I'd guess that CETA and the prospective Japan-EU trade deals are also dead. It's a shame because CETA was so close to being ratified. I don't see how it will go through at this point in time. Still the EU's loss is our gain, I'm sure we can get a deal done with Canada and Japan with more favourable terms on services as well. It does show just how difficult UK-EU negotiations are going to be once they commence, though at least not all 27 agendas have to be satisfied and we only need a QMV.
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
Who's back of the queue now, eh?
It is France calling for the break off rather than the USA.
Exactly, it's Obama and the Americans who are at the back of the queue.
But, yes, who cares? If the French and Germans don't want to do a deal with the Americans, that's their business. Whether we should seek to is another matter, and not something I know a great deal amount.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
Hang on. This is the TTIP agreement we are talking about. Quite a few Leavers cited it as a reason to get out of the EU as it would lead to privatisation of the NHS and hormone filled beef.
It was the UK that was most pushing for the TTIP within the EU, and part of the reason that the USA wanted to keep our membership.
With Brexit the EU will want to reconsider and I do not blame them at all!
I fear you'd defend the EU if they proposed to bring back slavery, quite honestly.
The point about this is, that there has been a pathetic level of progress on these talks across sectors. The EU just isn't interested in closing a deal here.
And one of the main reasons for this is, that in both Germany and France, there is a strong strand of opinion that argues that a transatlantic deal would lead to a drop in intra-EU trade (as indeed it surely would) which would damage the cause of EU integration.
Will the scales ever drop from EU supporters's eyes? The EU only favours liberal policies if it thinks they will increase pressure for political integration. If it fears the reverse, it will squash them. That is where we are now on the trade front, and one of the key reasons for leaving.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
Hang on. This is the TTIP agreement we are talking about. Quite a few Leavers cited it as a reason to get out of the EU as it would lead to privatisation of the NHS and hormone filled beef.
It was the UK that was most pushing for the TTIP within the EU, and part of the reason that the USA wanted to keep our membership.
With Brexit the EU will want to reconsider and I do not blame them at all!
I think it's important to avoid seeing every mortal thing through the lens of Brexit. This is just the French catching up with German comments last week. TTIP seemed so secretive, and the reporting so partisan, I'm not sure I know enough about it one way or the other.
In this instance, I'm sure Brexiteer egos would have been bruised had the EU ratified TTIP while the UK languished at the back of the US queue, but it really doesn't signify much more than European domestic politics now rearing their head at EU level c.f. CETA.
I'd guess that CETA and the prospective Japan-EU trade deals are also dead. It's a shame because CETA was so close to being ratified. I don't see how it will go through at this point in time. Still the EU's loss is our gain, I'm sure we can get a deal done with Canada and Japan with more favourable terms on services as well. It does show just how difficult UK-EU negotiations are going to be once they commence, though at least not all 27 agendas have to be satisfied and we only need a QMV.
Hard Brexit is the default outcome. If it happens, it will be grim for both Britain and the rest of the EU. Hey ho. Vox populi, vox dei.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
In think in ten years time leaving with EU will be widely regarded as one of the best things Britain ever did, and other than a few die-hard europhiles most people will swear they were leavers all along.
Plenty of people predicted that the EU would show much less interest in free trade if Britain left. It is one of the many negative outcomes that was utterly predictable from a vote to Leave.
Of course, Britain has far less negotiating power on its own, so we may well have achieved an inferior result for everyone.
My counter argument is that CETA and TTIP were already in trouble before the referendum. Again, not everything that happens is caused by Brexit, whether that's good or ill. It takes British exceptionalism too far.
Mr. Meeks, less negotiating clout due to a smaller market is certainly true. However, that clout will be used to secure a pro-British deal, not a pro-EU one. If a deal harms the UK but helps Italy, Slovenia and Poland, it's in the EU's interest, but not ours. Now, any deal will be made with the British interest fully represented on one side of the negotiating table, rather than Brussels deciding what's best for the EU.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
In think in ten years time leaving with EU will be widely regarded as one of the best things Britain ever did, and other than a few die-hard europhiles most people will swear they were leavers all along.
Plenty of people predicted that the EU would show much less interest in free trade if Britain left. It is one of the many negative outcomes that was utterly predictable from a vote to Leave.
Of course, Britain has far less negotiating power on its own, so we may well have achieved an inferior result for everyone.
My counter argument is that CETA and TTIP were already in trouble before the referendum. Again, not everything that happens is caused by Brexit, whether that's good or ill. It takes British exceptionalism too far.
Yes, I quite appreciate that for Leavers there can be no negative consequences of Leaving. The idea that taking the most ardent free trading major nation on the EU side out of the balance might have tipped it must not be allowed to take hold.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
Hang on. This is the TTIP agreement we are talking about. Quite a few Leavers cited it as a reason to get out of the EU as it would lead to privatisation of the NHS and hormone filled beef.
It was the UK that was most pushing for the TTIP within the EU, and part of the reason that the USA wanted to keep our membership.
With Brexit the EU will want to reconsider and I do not blame them at all!
I think it's important to avoid seeing every mortal thing through the lens of Brexit. This is just the French catching up with German comments last week. TTIP seemed so secretive, and the reporting so partisan, I'm not sure I know enough about it one way or the other.
In this instance, I'm sure Brexiteer egos would have been bruised had the EU ratified TTIP while the UK languished at the back of the US queue, but it really doesn't signify much more than European domestic politics now rearing their head at EU level c.f. CETA.
I'd guess that CETA and the prospective Japan-EU trade deals are also dead. It's a shame because CETA was so close to being ratified. I don't see how it will go through at this point in time. Still the EU's loss is our gain, I'm sure we can get a deal done with Canada and Japan with more favourable terms on services as well. It does show just how difficult UK-EU negotiations are going to be once they commence, though at least not all 27 agendas have to be satisfied and we only need a QMV.
Hard Brexit is the default outcome. If it happens, it will be grim for both Britain and the rest of the EU. Hey ho. Vox populi, vox dei.
I think the default outcome is free trade in goods and partial trade in services, though not financial services. Capital and people might be a tough sell on both sides, at least in a reasonable amount of time. So 1.5/4 freedoms with the possibility of moving to 2.5 (capital) over the longer term and maybe even 3.5 (the rest of services and half people) in the very long term depending on how things shake out.
BoE consumer credit figures are odd today, down as expected, but coupled with rising consumer spending in July it looks like people are dipping into their savings or disposable income to keep their living standards high rather than borrow to do so. Interesting behavioural change.
Very interesting. People coming to the realisation that there's better things to do with savings in an era of zero interest rates?
There’s a school of thought which says that as there’s more credit about than be supported, that extending ones borrowings ...i.e. buying on credit could soon be a Very Bad Idea.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
Hang on. This is the TTIP agreement we are talking about. Quite a few Leavers cited it as a reason to get out of the EU as it would lead to privatisation of the NHS and hormone filled beef.
It was the UK that was most pushing for the TTIP within the EU, and part of the reason that the USA wanted to keep our membership.
With Brexit the EU will want to reconsider and I do not blame them at all!
I think it's important to avoid seeing every mortal thing through the lens of Brexit. This is just the French catching up with German comments last week. TTIP seemed so secretive, and the reporting so partisan, I'm not sure I know enough about it one way or the other.
In this instance, I'm sure Brexiteer egos would have been bruised had the EU ratified TTIP while the UK languished at the back of the US queue, but it really doesn't signify much more than European domestic politics now rearing their head at EU level c.f. CETA.
I'd guess that CETA and the prospective Japan-EU trade deals are also dead. It's a shame because CETA was so close to being ratified. I don't see how it will go through at this point in time. Still the EU's loss is our gain, I'm sure we can get a deal done with Canada and Japan with more favourable terms on services as well. It does show just how difficult UK-EU negotiations are going to be once they commence, though at least not all 27 agendas have to be satisfied and we only need a QMV.
Hard Brexit is the default outcome. If it happens, it will be grim for both Britain and the rest of the EU. Hey ho. Vox populi, vox dei.
I think the default outcome is free trade in goods and partial trade in services, though not financial services. Capital and people might be a tough sell on both sides, at least in a reasonable amount of time. So 1.5/4 freedoms with the possibility of moving to 2.5 (capital) over the longer term and maybe even 3.5 (the rest of services and half people) in the very long term depending on how things shake out.
You're assuming that either side is competent enough to know what it wants and then to secure it politically. I see no evidence of that on either side as yet.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
That's something of a non-sequitur. Would France be more or less inclined to free trade without the EU? It's the EU which keeps France as open as it is.
And unless Britain can get a better deal with the US than the EU could, then the point remains that Britain's interests in that sphere have been damaged by leaving.
FWIW, I thought that TTIP was a poorly constructed idea with some anti-democratic features, and would probably have failed in the US Congress anyway so who pulled/pulls the trigger on putting it out of its misery is to some extent moot if there are five or six lined up to fire.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
In think in ten years time leaving with EU will be widely regarded as one of the best things Britain ever did, and other than a few die-hard europhiles most people will swear they were leavers all along.
Plenty of people predicted that the EU would show much less interest in free trade if Britain left. It is one of the many negative outcomes that was utterly predictable from a vote to Leave.
Of course, Britain has far less negotiating power on its own, so we may well have achieved an inferior result for everyone.
My counter argument is that CETA and TTIP were already in trouble before the referendum. Again, not everything that happens is caused by Brexit, whether that's good or ill. It takes British exceptionalism too far.
Yes, I quite appreciate that for Leavers there can be no negative consequences of Leaving. The idea that taking the most ardent free trading major nation on the EU side out of the balance might have tipped it must not be allowed to take hold.
They were both in trouble, but I think we would have got CETA through had the vote been to remain, and we may have got an EU-Japan deal done in the next five years as well. The TTIP was dead though, support in the US after Obama is going to be poor and that has nothing to do with Brexit, indeed it is the anti-globalisation feeling that has driven both Brexit here and the anti-TTIP sentiment in the US/EU. Brexit is the symptom rather than the cause.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
In think in ten years time leaving with EU will be widely regarded as one of the best things Britain ever did, and other than a few die-hard europhiles most people will swear they were leavers all along.
Plenty of people predicted that the EU would show much less interest in free trade if Britain left. It is one of the many negative outcomes that was utterly predictable from a vote to Leave.
Of course, Britain has far less negotiating power on its own, so we may well have achieved an inferior result for everyone.
My counter argument is that CETA and TTIP were already in trouble before the referendum. Again, not everything that happens is caused by Brexit, whether that's good or ill. It takes British exceptionalism too far.
Yes, indeed they were. And for precisely the reasons I just laid out. The EU doesn't want trade liberalisation that threatens to cut across political integration.
You're assuming that either side is competent enough to know what it wants and then to secure it politically. I see no evidence of that on either side as yet.
I think we know what we want and the EU knows what they want, the issue will be admitting it to the people and coming to a compromise. There doesn't seem to me to be a way to keep the financial passport without also keeping free movement of people, those two come as a package. However, we may be able to use some forms of equivalency where we need it and mutual recognition of highly skilled visas as well, or near free movement for highly skilled workers rather than all people. Those are the compromises both sides will need to work out, the will is probably there but you never know.
Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Max, I agree, but it's worth noting that Corbyn wants open borders and his past (and present) attitude towards terrorism isn't going to win him friends amongst those of us with hands rather than hooks.
Mr. Mortimer, ideally, I'd agree. But it's hard to see how that could happen. UKIP is throwing away a golden opportunity by eating its own head with its own leadership woes, the Lib Dems have been crushed and Farron's too leftish (and Corbyn has that sort of vote sewn up), and the SNP are geographically limited.
The Lib Dems and UKIP should make gains, but it's difficult to see them supplanting Labour unless Corbyn's still there in 2025.
Many of those who vote for Corbyn would think that it proved their altruism if you persuaded them that a Corbyn premiership would be bad for them personally.
It is a concern that no matter how ridiculous and pathetic Corbyn has been Labour only rarely dip below 30% in the polls. Fatally poor for an opposition as we approach mid term of course but a bed rock of support no matter what. The Labour brand remains worth fighting for.
I think what should worry the Cons more is people who have nothing to lose essentially taking a punt on something different. That's one of the key factors of the leave victory. Those 1.7m "rarely vote" types seem to have done exactly that and persuading someone who is struggling to find meaningful employment, barely surviving on a mixture of low wages and state handouts that they have something to lose is not easy, Osborne tried it with the punishment budget nonsense but that was kicked into touch an hour after it was revealed by Tory MPs who had just threatened to vote down their own benefit cuts a few weeks earlier.
Showing people treasury or IFS reports which say that Corbyn will have to cut £Xbn because "Y" policy will result in slower growth isn't enough either. Hopefully the government has learned that lesson as well.
However weak Corbyn may be as a leader the Tories would be foolish to underestimate the attractiveness of Labour, even with him as leader, to those who feel that they have nothing to lose or who feel that the Tories are not on their side.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
In think in ten years time leaving with EU will be widely regarded as one of the best things Britain ever did, and other than a few die-hard europhiles most people will swear they were leavers all along.
Plenty of people predicted that the EU would show much less interest in free trade if Britain left. It is one of the many negative outcomes that was utterly predictable from a vote to Leave.
Of course, Britain has far less negotiating power on its own, so we may well have achieved an inferior result for everyone.
My counter argument is that CETA and TTIP were already in trouble before the referendum. Again, not everything that happens is caused by Brexit, whether that's good or ill. It takes British exceptionalism too far.
Yes, I quite appreciate that for Leavers there can be no negative consequences of Leaving. The idea that taking the most ardent free trading major nation on the EU side out of the balance might have tipped it must not be allowed to take hold.
There have been fourteen rounds of TTIP talks. Not a single article has been agreed. This isn't some finely-balanced argument where stupid Britain fucked it up for everyone due to its nostalgia for lbs and ounces.
Unless you're unwilling to believe the French and German press, TTIP is failing due to lack of domestic support in France and Germany. That's why I think it's tangential to Brexit.
The negatives from leaving the EU are well document and accepted by at least some on here A £40bn short term opportunity cost. A permanent reduction in trend growth rate, the size of that reduction dependent on destination. Potential damage to important sectors of the economy, with the amount dependent on destination.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
Hang on. This is the TTIP agreement we are talking about. Quite a few Leavers cited it as a reason to get out of the EU as it would lead to privatisation of the NHS and hormone filled beef.
It was the UK that was most pushing for the TTIP within the EU, and part of the reason that the USA wanted to keep our membership.
With Brexit the EU will want to reconsider and I do not blame them at all!
I fear you'd defend the EU if they proposed to bring back slavery, quite honestly.
The point about this is, that there has been a pathetic level of progress on these talks across sectors. The EU just isn't interested in closing a deal here.
And one of the main reasons for this is, that in both Germany and France, there is a strong strand of opinion that argues that a transatlantic deal would lead to a drop in intra-EU trade (as indeed it surely would) which would damage the cause of EU integration.
Will the scales ever drop from EU supporters's eyes? The EU only favours liberal policies if it thinks they will increase pressure for political integration. If it fears the reverse, it will squash them. That is where we are now on the trade front, and one of the key reasons for leaving.
Personally I am quite happy to see TTIP in its current form die. I will be one of many queueing up to dance on its grave.
Not all trade deals are good trade deals, contrary to Brexiteer philosophy.
On topic, Jeremy Corbyn has already seen off one Conservative Prime Minister. It is entirely possible, with a majority of 12, an incumbent of Number 10 who has an extremely challenging intray and who doesn't seem attuned to disaffected minorities in her party, that he will in due course see off another.
I don't rate his chances of ever becoming Prime Minister, mind.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
In think in ten years time leaving with EU will be widely regarded as one of the best things Britain ever did, and other than a few die-hard europhiles most people will swear they were leavers all along.
Plenty of people predicted that the EU would show much less interest in free trade if Britain left. It is one of the many negative outcomes that was utterly predictable from a vote to Leave.
Of course, Britain has far less negotiating power on its own, so we may well have achieved an inferior result for everyone.
So what you are saying is that Britain should have remained in the EU so that TTIP could be forced through, and then forced upon the French and Germans who don't know what is good for them?
I accept that Corbyn is a courteous man, one with a sense of humour - not always on show but given the attacks on him, that's not too surprising - a relatively humble individual who is still in many ways the never-grown-up student 1970s activist he always was, despite his office, title and income. But attractive or endearing those qualities might be, they're far from sufficient to make a prime minister.
Really? I think his blanking of Cameron was not courteous. He redeemed himself slightly at Dave's last PMQs. But 'Jeremy' can let his politics override basic politeness. He does nothing to stop his mob.
[Snipped] Re your point on his unwillingness to restrain his mob, I get the impression that he thinks that denouncing the act is of itself sufficient, without the need to reference specific examples. But again I agree, he seems to have a strange disconnect between denouncing aggressive behaviour and failing to address it where he has the power to do so.
Well, there are two interpretations of that: one is that he is too weak and ineffectual to do so. The other - the more cynical interpretation - is that he does just enough to be able to say that he has condemned the bad behavior so that he cannot be criticized - but nothing more because, fundamentally, he does not really disagree with either the aggression or, more likely, dislikes or does not care about the targets of the aggression and is therefore indifferent to their concerns. It is why he feels able to speak at rallies (such as Al Quds Day) which are little more than Jewish hate fests while claiming to be against racism.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
In think in ten years time leaving with EU will be widely regarded as one of the best things Britain ever did, and other than a few die-hard europhiles most people will swear they were leavers all along.
Plenty of people predicted that the EU would show much less interest in free trade if Britain left. It is one of the many negative outcomes that was utterly predictable from a vote to Leave.
Of course, Britain has far less negotiating power on its own, so we may well have achieved an inferior result for everyone.
So what you are saying is that Britain should have remained in the EU so that TTIP could be forced through, and then forced upon the French and Germans who don't know what is good for them?
Well that's a ludicrous proposition isn't it? The UK couldn't have forced the other member states to go along with it. Talk about pie-in-the-sky reasoning.
Again the pro-EU partisans are looking through the wrong end of the telescope. We needed to leave precisely because the EU wasn't acting in our (liberal) interests on trade and was not going to start doing so. TTIP was dead months before the referendum.
Now we have the chance to frame a trade policy that works for us (especially consumers!) and is not a haphazard adjunct of a political integration process we anyway were not happy with.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
Hang on. This is the TTIP agreement we are talking about. Quite a few Leavers cited it as a reason to get out of the EU as it would lead to privatisation of the NHS and hormone filled beef.
It was the UK that was most pushing for the TTIP within the EU, and part of the reason that the USA wanted to keep our membership.
With Brexit the EU will want to reconsider and I do not blame them at all!
I fear you'd defend the EU if they proposed to bring back slavery, quite honestly. The point about this is, that there has been a pathetic level of progress on these talks across sectors. The EU just isn't interested in closing a deal here. ..... Will the scales ever drop from EU supporters's eyes? The EU only favours liberal policies if it thinks they will increase pressure for political integration. If it fears the reverse, it will squash them. That is where we are now on the trade front, and one of the key reasons for leaving.
We see the EU in action today with the attempt to dictate Irish govt tax policies.... The EU used to be thought of as a good thing by the Irish but events are starting to change that view. Oh and the EU will be billing 4million Irish with an extra E380m EU bill this year.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
Hang on. This is the TTIP agreement we are talking about. Quite a few Leavers cited it as a reason to get out of the EU as it would lead to privatisation of the NHS and hormone filled beef.
It was the UK that was most pushing for the TTIP within the EU, and part of the reason that the USA wanted to keep our membership.
With Brexit the EU will want to reconsider and I do not blame them at all!
I fear you'd defend the EU if they proposed to bring back slavery, quite honestly.
The point about this is, that there has been a pathetic level of progress on these talks across sectors. The EU just isn't interested in closing a deal here.
And one of the main reasons for this is, that in both Germany and France, there is a strong strand of opinion that argues that a transatlantic deal would lead to a drop in intra-EU trade (as indeed it surely would) which would damage the cause of EU integration.
Will the scales ever drop from EU supporters's eyes? The EU only favours liberal policies if it thinks they will increase pressure for political integration. If it fears the reverse, it will squash them. That is where we are now on the trade front, and one of the key reasons for leaving.
Personally I am quite happy to see TTIP in its current form die. I will be one of many queueing up to dance on its grave.
Not all trade deals are good trade deals, contrary to Brexiteer philosophy.
Hang on, it was the Remainers who were keen to portray Britain as being too small to negotiate trade deals if we left. Surely you should have said was "not all trade deals are good trade deals, contrary to Remainer philosophy."
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
Who's back of the queue now, eh?
It is France calling for the break off rather than the USA.
A good example of why having 28 interests all on the same side of a negotiation is very difficult to make work. It will always be someone's election year or there will be a special interest that derails the whole thing.
@PeterMannionMP: Christ Jez, Plugging into the 'creativity of the networked young' is sooo 2012.... #justsaying #ICallAppBritain https://t.co/FvfBzWO3cK
He's a Pacifist, there is absolutely no frucking way the country is going to vote him in to no.10. He's a dangerous man and enough people will see that.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
Hang on. This is the TTIP agreement we are talking about. Quite a few Leavers cited it as a reason to get out of the EU as it would lead to privatisation of the NHS and hormone filled beef.
It was the UK that was most pushing for the TTIP within the EU, and part of the reason that the USA wanted to keep our membership.
With Brexit the EU will want to reconsider and I do not blame them at all!
I fear you'd defend the EU if they proposed to bring back slavery, quite honestly.
The point about this is, that there has been a pathetic level of progress on these talks across sectors. The EU just isn't interested in closing a deal here.
And one of the main reasons for this is, that in both Germany and France, there is a strong strand of opinion that argues that a transatlantic deal would lead to a drop in intra-EU trade (as indeed it surely would) which would damage the cause of EU integration.
Will the scales ever drop from EU supporters's eyes? The EU only favours liberal policies if it thinks they will increase pressure for political integration. If it fears the reverse, it will squash them. That is where we are now on the trade front, and one of the key reasons for leaving.
Personally I am quite happy to see TTIP in its current form die. I will be one of many queueing up to dance on its grave.
Not all trade deals are good trade deals, contrary to Brexiteer philosophy.
Hang on, it was the Remainers who were keen to portray Britain as being too small to negotiate trade deals if we left. Surely you should have said was "not all trade deals are good trade deals, contrary to Remainer philosophy."
Too small to negotiate good trade deals? Possibly we may find out.
Certainly being over the barrel after A50 is invoked is not a good negotiating position, which is why hard Brexit may be the better option, with serious discussion on deals happening afterwards.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
In think in ten years time leaving with EU will be widely regarded as one of the best things Britain ever did, and other than a few die-hard europhiles most people will swear they were leavers all along.
Plenty of people predicted that the EU would show much less interest in free trade if Britain left. It is one of the many negative outcomes that was utterly predictable from a vote to Leave.
Of course, Britain has far less negotiating power on its own, so we may well have achieved an inferior result for everyone.
So what you are saying is that Britain should have remained in the EU so that TTIP could be forced through, and then forced upon the French and Germans who don't know what is good for them?
Well that's a ludicrous proposition isn't it? The UK couldn't have forced the other member states to go along with it. Talk about pie-in-the-sky reasoning.
Again the pro-EU partisans are looking through the wrong end of the telescope. We needed to leave precisely because the EU wasn't acting in our (liberal) interests on trade and was not going to start doing so. TTIP was dead months before the referendum.
Now we have the chance to frame a trade policy that works for us (especially consumers!) and is not a haphazard adjunct of a political integration process we anyway were not happy with.
No small amount of the opposition to TTIP came though because it just wasn't a very good deal. And even were it to have been ratified by the EU process, there's a very good chance that it'd fail in Congress, which will no doubt follow the increasingly protectionist mood in the US; a mood that both Trump and Clinton are tapping into.
Although the EC numbers remain broadly the same with Arizona and Georgia moving in Trump's direction. Critical for Trump but icing on the cake for Clinton. Trump has to wrench all of Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania (FOP) into his column. Lose any one and he's cooked.
He COULD survive without ONE of Ohio OR Pennsylvania IF he got all the others on Nate's 'snake'. (Florida (D 1.9), North Carolina (D 0.1), Iowa (D 0.7), Ohio (D 1.6) New Hampshire (D 3.2), Nevada (D 3.3), Pennsylvania (D 3.4) as well as the ones he's forecast to win.
The good news is that most of these will declare early so we'll probably know quite early on whether Trump can beat the establishment.
The TV companies like to declare each state virtually as the polls close - is this usually based on exit polling or do they base it on polls just before polling date.
(If you remember a few elections ago one candidate conceded when Florida was called against them - and then unconceded when Florida became TCTC - so Farage is not unique in concessions)
''We see the EU in action today with the attempt to dictate Irish govt tax policies.... The EU used to be thought of as a good thing by the Irish but events are starting to change that view. Oh and the EU will be billing 4million Irish with an extra E380m EU bill this year.''
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
Who's back of the queue now, eh?
It is France calling for the break off rather than the USA.
A good example of why having 28 interests all on the same side of a negotiation is very difficult to make work. It will always be someone's election year or there will be a special interest that derails the whole thing.
Having those same 28 states all in the conference chamber, alongside those they're trying to negotiate with doesn't make it any easier!
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
Hang on. This is the TTIP agreement we are talking about. Quite a few Leavers cited it as a reason to get out of the EU as it would lead to privatisation of the NHS and hormone filled beef.
It was the UK that was most pushing for the TTIP within the EU, and part of the reason that the USA wanted to keep our membership.
With Brexit the EU will want to reconsider and I do not blame them at all!
I fear you'd defend the EU if they proposed to bring back slavery, quite honestly.
The point about this is, that there has been a pathetic level of progress on these talks across sectors. The EU just isn't interested in closing a deal here.
And one of the main reasons for this is, that in both Germany and France, there is a strong strand of opinion that argues that a transatlantic deal would lead to a drop in intra-EU trade (as indeed it surely would) which would damage the cause of EU integration.
Will the scales ever drop from EU supporters's eyes? The EU only favours liberal policies if it thinks they will increase pressure for political integration. If it fears the reverse, it will squash them. That is where we are now on the trade front, and one of the key reasons for leaving.
Personally I am quite happy to see TTIP in its current form die. I will be one of many queueing up to dance on its grave.
Not all trade deals are good trade deals, contrary to Brexiteer philosophy.
Hang on, it was the Remainers who were keen to portray Britain as being too small to negotiate trade deals if we left. Surely you should have said was "not all trade deals are good trade deals, contrary to Remainer philosophy."
Too small to negotiate good trade deals? Possibly we may find out.
Certainly being over the barrel after A50 is invoked is not a good negotiating position, which is why hard Brexit may be the better option, with serious discussion on deals happening afterwards.
I think hard Brexit is the way to go and it should be done as quickly as possible.
With a majority of 12 there is no way May is going to be able to do any serious negotiation with the EU and it will simply take up too much government time and energy meaning nothing else will get sorted in the country. The NHS needs plenty of attention as does Education, Welfare Reform, Defence etc. Best just to get on with it.
No small amount of the opposition to TTIP came though because it just wasn't a very good deal. And even were it to have been ratified by the EU process, there's a very good chance that it'd fail in Congress, which will no doubt follow the increasingly protectionist mood in the US; a mood that both Trump and Clinton are tapping into.
Sure, but the idea that if Britain had voted remain then TTIP might have survived is nonsensical. The French government doesn't care very much what we think — see today's papers for another example — they are more concerned about the views of their citizens, and in particular their farmers.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
In think in ten years time leaving with EU will be widely regarded as one of the best things Britain ever did, and other than a few die-hard europhiles most people will swear they were leavers all along.
Plenty of people predicted that the EU would show much less interest in free trade if Britain left. It is one of the many negative outcomes that was utterly predictable from a vote to Leave.
Of course, Britain has far less negotiating power on its own, so we may well have achieved an inferior result for everyone.
So what you are saying is that Britain should have remained in the EU so that TTIP could be forced through, and then forced upon the French and Germans who don't know what is good for them?
Well that's a ludicrous proposition isn't it? The UK couldn't have forced the other member states to go along with it. Talk about pie-in-the-sky reasoning.
Again the pro-EU partisans are looking through the wrong end of the telescope. We needed to leave precisely because the EU wasn't acting in our (liberal) interests on trade and was not going to start doing so. TTIP was dead months before the referendum.
Now we have the chance to frame a trade policy that works for us (especially consumers!) and is not a haphazard adjunct of a political integration process we anyway were not happy with.
What is ludicrous is seeing the EU as some form of Borg-like entity that is seeking to subdue plucky Britons into zombie-like servitude. Until you shed that laughable delusion you will continue to embarrass yourself every time you move beyond your Waldorf and Stadler act.
The EU does not act singly. That has been its strength in the past and its weakness. It is losing a voice that has historically spoken in favour of openness, looking outward and free trade. It is hardly surprising that it is therefore becoming less interested in openness, looking outwards and free trade.
Meanwhile Britain itself seems to be moving away from those positions. It's lose-lose.
I got the GE in 2015 really wrong in Scotland because I thought the same thing: that there would be people who had voted Labour all their lives, and would never vote anything else. The brand was everything, and there would be some swingback from their dire position in the polls. I said as such on here (thus proving my lack of political nous).
But I was wrong, and Labour got annihilated in Scotand. And it was not as if Labour voters sat on their hands: turnout was up a lot.
The Labour brand is worth fighting for as long as it does not become poisoned, as Scottish Labour did for a number of reasons; most notably Falkirk.
There was also an alternative readily available in Scotland to lifelong Labour voters; one which was both effective (wouldn't let Tories in either locally or nationally), and left-wing. Indeed, one which trumpeted its anti-Toryness from the SIndyRef (even if that hugely oversimplified a complex situation).
In England, there isn't as yet an alternative that could do the same. UKIP appeals to social conservatives but if it had 50 seats in a hung parliament, who would it back? Likewise, the Lib Dems remain distrusted. The Greens are threatened more by Corbyn than the other way round, while a breakaway SDP2 faces all the same problems (and more) that did for SDP1.
Presumably a breakaway SDP2 would aim to present itself as a credible alternative government to the Conservatives, which would eliminate the suspicion that they might support the Tories in a coalition. If the Lib Dems then joined them in a pact that would go a long way towards detoxifying the LDs in the eyes of centre left voters, which would leave a new Alliance with quite a large pool of potential supporters to fish in.
They've got a ready made and pressing issue on which to make the split in the form of Brexit. Attempting to unite a pro-European coalition of voters in opposition to the Tories across the left and centre right would feel like a natural approach for moderate Labourites and Lib Dems. It'd probably end up with a chunk of Northern seats being left in the hands of a residual more Eurosceptic Corbyn led Labour party, but the Alliance would surely have a good chance of coming second.
The polling that was done around a potential Labour split showed a moderate breakaway+LDs level pegging with Corbyn's Labour, but that's before the public get sight of a full opposition front bench united in campaigning to halt Brexit.
If the economy starts to tank in the next year then a split could look more and more attractive to the PLP.
No small amount of the opposition to TTIP came though because it just wasn't a very good deal. And even were it to have been ratified by the EU process, there's a very good chance that it'd fail in Congress, which will no doubt follow the increasingly protectionist mood in the US; a mood that both Trump and Clinton are tapping into.
Sure, but the idea that if Britain had voted remain then TTIP might have survived is nonsensical. The French government doesn't care very much what we think — see today's papers for another example — they are more concerned about the views of their citizens, and in particular their farmers.
I'd agree with that. But the departure of the UK from the EU will tip it a little more towards an inwards-looking protectionism. Both Britain's voice and its votes will be absent and that will affect the internal dynamic of the Union.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
Hang on. This is the TTIP agreement we are talking about. Quite a few Leavers cited it as a reason to get out of the EU as it would lead to privatisation of the NHS and hormone filled beef.
It was the UK that was most pushing for the TTIP within the EU, and part of the reason that the USA wanted to keep our membership.
With Brexit the EU will want to reconsider and I do not blame them at all!
I fear you'd defend the EU if they proposed to bring back slavery, quite honestly.
The point about this is, that there has been a pathetic level of progress on these talks across sectors. The EU just isn't interested in closing a deal here.
Personally I am quite happy to see TTIP in its current form die. I will be one of many queueing up to dance on its grave.
Not all trade deals are good trade deals, contrary to Brexiteer philosophy.
Hang on, it was the Remainers who were keen to portray Britain as being too small to negotiate trade deals if we left. Surely you should have said was "not all trade deals are good trade deals, contrary to Remainer philosophy."
Too small to negotiate good trade deals? Possibly we may find out.
Certainly being over the barrel after A50 is invoked is not a good negotiating position, which is why hard Brexit may be the better option, with serious discussion on deals happening afterwards.
I think hard Brexit is the way to go and it should be done as quickly as possible.
With a majority of 12 there is no way May is going to be able to do any serious negotiation with the EU and it will simply take up too much government time and energy meaning nothing else will get sorted in the country. The NHS needs plenty of attention as does Education, Welfare Reform, Defence etc. Best just to get on with it.
There are still 420k civil servants and 5.3 million public sector employees. I'm sure they'll manage to keep running the country.
Corbyn's digital manifesto is the usual rehash of the aspirational, the unachievable and the trivial. The only interesting idea is digital co-operatives, although that would take some dedication to deliver.
No small amount of the opposition to TTIP came though because it just wasn't a very good deal. And even were it to have been ratified by the EU process, there's a very good chance that it'd fail in Congress, which will no doubt follow the increasingly protectionist mood in the US; a mood that both Trump and Clinton are tapping into.
Sure, but the idea that if Britain had voted remain then TTIP might have survived is nonsensical. The French government doesn't care very much what we think — see today's papers for another example — they are more concerned about the views of their citizens, and in particular their farmers.
I'd agree with that. But the departure of the UK from the EU will tip it a little more towards an inwards-looking protectionism. Both Britain's voice and its votes will be absent and that will affect the internal dynamic of the Union.
There were several things that gave me pause for thought before casting my vote. One of them was a point made (where, I cannot recall!) that the UK's leaving meant the free-trade inclined countries would no longer be able to command a blocking minority under the new QMV rules.
''Meanwhile Britain itself seems to be moving away from those positions. It's lose-lose. ''
I don;t see much evidence of us moving away from free trade or openness.
Flogging ARM to SoftBank for £24 billion with barely a whimper. You don't get much more pro free trade than that. Meanwhile TTIP dies because French farmers will block some motorways.
''We see the EU in action today with the attempt to dictate Irish govt tax policies.... The EU used to be thought of as a good thing by the Irish but events are starting to change that view. Oh and the EU will be billing 4million Irish with an extra E380m EU bill this year.''
Britain will surely support us....
Oh, they are leaving....
As are Apple, by the look of it.
Oh, Britain has just cut its corporation tax....
The EU is bankrupt (financially AND morally, but we'll leave the morals out of this) - so will be trying VERY hard to raise money - and the low-hanging fruit are the international corporations.
No small amount of the opposition to TTIP came though because it just wasn't a very good deal. And even were it to have been ratified by the EU process, there's a very good chance that it'd fail in Congress, which will no doubt follow the increasingly protectionist mood in the US; a mood that both Trump and Clinton are tapping into.
Sure, but the idea that if Britain had voted remain then TTIP might have survived is nonsensical. The French government doesn't care very much what we think — see today's papers for another example — they are more concerned about the views of their citizens, and in particular their farmers.
I'd agree with that. But the departure of the UK from the EU will tip it a little more towards an inwards-looking protectionism. Both Britain's voice and its votes will be absent and that will affect the internal dynamic of the Union.
Yes it will. But the key word in your post is 'little'.
We could not have changed the EU's political dynamics or altered its related loss of interest in freer global trade. Only affected them at the margin.
But we can now get on with pursuing a global trade policy agenda that suits us. We won't get everything we want but we will, given a serious effort, get much more than we would have got within the EU (ie almost nothing). And given the shift in the balance of power in the world economy that is a strategically very important gain.
I'd agree with that. But the departure of the UK from the EU will tip it a little more towards an inwards-looking protectionism. Both Britain's voice and its votes will be absent and that will affect the internal dynamic of the Union.
True but it is debatable as to whether our influence in the EU was doing us much good. Maybe some of the other countries who think like us should start asking similar questions about their future in the EU.
''But the departure of the UK from the EU will tip it a little more towards an inwards-looking protectionism. Both Britain's voice and its votes will be absent and that will affect the internal dynamic of the Union. ''
Britain's exit is a gargantuan policy failure on the part of the smaller nations of the EU. As they are about to find out.
Apple fined €13bn in back taxes. It's not often I agree with the commission, but having sweetheart tax deals in a free capital movement zone is surely against single market rules. If Apple were paying Ireland's 12.5% rate then it wouldn't be so much of an issue, but they weren't, they have been paying ~1% on EU profits under their sweetheart deal.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
In think in ten years time leaving with EU will be widely regarded as one of the best things Britain ever did, and other than a few die-hard europhiles most people will swear they were leavers all along.
Plenty of people predicted that the EU would show much less interest in free trade if Britain left. It is one of the many negative outcomes that was utterly predictable from a vote to Leave.
Of course, Britain has far less negotiating power on its own, so we may well have achieved an inferior result for everyone.
So what you are saying is that Britain should have remained in the EU so that TTIP could be forced through, and then forced upon the French and Germans who don't know what is good for them?
Well that's a ludicrous proposition isn't it? The UK couldn't have forced the other member states to go along with it. Talk about pie-in-the-sky reasoning.
Again the pro-EU partisans are looking through the wrong end of the telescope. We needed to leave precisely because the EU wasn't acting in our (liberal) interests on trade and was not going to start doing so. TTIP was dead months before the referendum.
Now we have the chance to frame a trade policy that works for us (especially consumers!) and is not a haphazard adjunct of a political integration process we anyway were not happy with.
What is ludicrous is seeing the EU as some form of Borg-like entity that is seeking to subdue plucky Britons into zombie-like servitude. Until you shed that laughable delusion you will continue to embarrass yourself every time you move beyond your Waldorf and Stadler act.
The EU does not act singly. That has been its strength in the past and its weakness. It is losing a voice that has historically spoken in favour of openness, looking outward and free trade. It is hardly surprising that it is therefore becoming less interested in openness, looking outwards and free trade.
Meanwhile Britain itself seems to be moving away from those positions. It's lose-lose.
It's annoying being constantly proved wrong, isn't it? But maybe you will get over it.
No small amount of the opposition to TTIP came though because it just wasn't a very good deal. And even were it to have been ratified by the EU process, there's a very good chance that it'd fail in Congress, which will no doubt follow the increasingly protectionist mood in the US; a mood that both Trump and Clinton are tapping into.
Sure, but the idea that if Britain had voted remain then TTIP might have survived is nonsensical. The French government doesn't care very much what we think — see today's papers for another example — they are more concerned about the views of their citizens, and in particular their farmers.
I'd agree with that. But the departure of the UK from the EU will tip it a little more towards an inwards-looking protectionism. Both Britain's voice and its votes will be absent and that will affect the internal dynamic of the Union.
. One of them was a point made (where, I cannot recall!) that the UK's leaving meant the free-trade inclined countries would no longer be able to command a blocking minority under the new QMV rules.
He COULD survive without ONE of Ohio OR Pennsylvania IF he got all the others on Nate's 'snake'. (Florida (D 1.9), North Carolina (D 0.1), Iowa (D 0.7), Ohio (D 1.6) New Hampshire (D 3.2), Nevada (D 3.3), Pennsylvania (D 3.4) as well as the ones he's forecast to win.
The good news is that most of these will declare early so we'll probably know quite early on whether Trump can beat the establishment.
The TV companies like to declare each state virtually as the polls close - is this usually based on exit polling or do they base it on polls just before polling date.
(If you remember a few elections ago one candidate conceded when Florida was called against them - and then unconceded when Florida became TCTC - so Farage is not unique in concessions)
Without PA it's 269 each. New Hampshire is a big stretch presently and I'd like to see some polling in NE CD2 that would make it 270/268 to Clinton.
The fact is Trump has to run the table of all the swing states he's presently losing - Ohio, North Carolina, Florida, Iowa and Nevada to lose 273-265. He has to flip Pennsylvania.
''We see the EU in action today with the attempt to dictate Irish govt tax policies.... The EU used to be thought of as a good thing by the Irish but events are starting to change that view. Oh and the EU will be billing 4million Irish with an extra E380m EU bill this year.''
Britain will surely support us....
Oh, they are leaving....
As are Apple, by the look of it.
Oh, Britain has just cut its corporation tax....
The EU is bankrupt (financially AND morally, but we'll leave the morals out of this) - so will be trying VERY hard to raise money - and the low-hanging fruit are the international corporations.
The EU is not bankrupt. This idea that it's some kind of financial house of cards propped up by the UK's ~£9bn p.a. has to stop. In the main area I care about, it's fighting the morally good fight by dragging the A8 countries into the 21st century. Multi-nationals playing games with nation-state tax regimes is a practice that needs to be stopped, or at the very least, curtailed.
The EU should not be a bogeyman to anyone. It's an institution, like the NHS or the UN. Some of the things it does are good. Some are neutral. Some are bad. Just an institution.
A Libertarian Rebel Or, more accurately: Second Brit stabbed by knife-wielding French-Algerian Islamist shouting "Allahu Ahkbar!" dies. https://t.co/puaO0IqyRF
''We see the EU in action today with the attempt to dictate Irish govt tax policies.... The EU used to be thought of as a good thing by the Irish but events are starting to change that view. Oh and the EU will be billing 4million Irish with an extra E380m EU bill this year.''
Britain will surely support us....
Oh, they are leaving....
As are Apple, by the look of it.
Oh, Britain has just cut its corporation tax....
The EU is bankrupt (financially AND morally, but we'll leave the morals out of this) - so will be trying VERY hard to raise money - and the low-hanging fruit are the international corporations.
The EU is not bankrupt. This idea that it's some kind of financial house of cards propped up by the UK's ~£9bn p.a. has to stop. In the main area I care about, it's fighting the morally good fight by dragging the A8 countries into the 21st century. Multi-nationals playing games with nation-state tax regimes is a practice that needs to be stopped, or at the very least, curtailed.
The EU should not be a bogeyman to anyone. It's an institution, like the NHS or the UN. Some of the things it does are good. Some are neutral. Some are bad. Just an institution.
The problem is it's pretensions to being a nation state of its own right. That is where most of the poor decision making comes from. Drop that and it's unlikely we would have left.
''We see the EU in action today with the attempt to dictate Irish govt tax policies.... The EU used to be thought of as a good thing by the Irish but events are starting to change that view. Oh and the EU will be billing 4million Irish with an extra E380m EU bill this year.''
Britain will surely support us....
Oh, they are leaving....
As are Apple, by the look of it.
Oh, Britain has just cut its corporation tax....
The EU is bankrupt (financially AND morally, but we'll leave the morals out of this) - so will be trying VERY hard to raise money - and the low-hanging fruit are the international corporations.
The EU is not bankrupt. This idea that it's some kind of financial house of cards propped up by the UK's ~£9bn p.a. has to stop. In the main area I care about, it's fighting the morally good fight by dragging the A8 countries into the 21st century. Multi-nationals playing games with nation-state tax regimes is a practice that needs to be stopped, or at the very least, curtailed.
The EU should not be a bogeyman to anyone. It's an institution, like the NHS or the UN. Some of the things it does are good. Some are neutral. Some are bad. Just an institution.
The problem is it's pretensions to being a nation state of its own right. That is where most of the poor decision making comes from. Drop that and it's unlikely we would have left.
I can find fault with it on a number of levels. I just think it should be appraised coolly and analytically, rather than dealing with it as if the UK were leaping into its X-Wing to engage the EU Deathstar.
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
In think in ten years time leaving with EU will be widely regarded as one of the best things Britain ever did, and other than a few die-hard europhiles most people will swear they were leavers all along.
Plenty of people predicted that the EU would show much less interest in free trade if Britain left. It is one of the many negative outcomes that was utterly predictable from a vote to Leave.
Of course, Britain has far less negotiating power on its own, so we may well have achieved an inferior result for everyone.
So what you are saying is that Britain should have remained in the EU so that TTIP could be forced through, and then forced upon the French and Germans who don't know what is good for them?
Well that's a ludicrous proposition isn't it? The UK couldn't have forced the other member states to go along with it. Talk about pie-in-the-sky reasoning.
Again the pro-EU partisans are looking through the wrong end of the telescope. We needed to leave precisely because the EU wasn't acting in our (liberal) interests on trade and was not going to start doing so. TTIP was dead months before the referendum.
Now we have the chance to frame a trade policy that works for us (especially consumers!) and is not a haphazard adjunct of a political integration process we anyway were not happy with.
What is ludicrous is seeing the EU as some form of Borg-like entity that is seeking to subdue plucky Britons into zombie-like servitude. Until you shed that laughable delusion you will continue to embarrass yourself every time you move beyond your Waldorf and Stadler act.
The EU does not act singly. That has been its strength in the past and its weakness. It is losing a voice that has historically spoken in favour of openness, looking outward and free trade. It is hardly surprising that it is therefore becoming less interested in openness, looking outwards and free trade.
Meanwhile Britain itself seems to be moving away from those positions. It's lose-lose.
It's annoying being constantly proved wrong, isn't it? But maybe you will get over it.
''We see the EU in action today with the attempt to dictate Irish govt tax policies.... The EU used to be thought of as a good thing by the Irish but events are starting to change that view. Oh and the EU will be billing 4million Irish with an extra E380m EU bill this year.''
Britain will surely support us....
Oh, they are leaving....
As are Apple, by the look of it.
Oh, Britain has just cut its corporation tax....
The EU is bankrupt (financially AND morally, but we'll leave the morals out of this) - so will be trying VERY hard to raise money - and the low-hanging fruit are the international corporations.
The EU is not bankrupt. This idea that it's some kind of financial house of cards propped up by the UK's ~£9bn p.a. has to stop. In the main area I care about, it's fighting the morally good fight by dragging the A8 countries into the 21st century. Multi-nationals playing games with nation-state tax regimes is a practice that needs to be stopped, or at the very least, curtailed.
The EU should not be a bogeyman to anyone. It's an institution, like the NHS or the UN. Some of the things it does are good. Some are neutral. Some are bad. Just an institution.
The problem is it's pretensions to being a nation state of its own right. That is where most of the poor decision making comes from. Drop that and it's unlikely we would have left.
Quite. Apple basing themselves in Ireland is the Single Market working entirely as expected, which is why the EU have for years been targeting Ireland's low rate of corporation tax. Mr Drunker should know this all too well, he did the same as Ireland when he was running Luxembourg.
''We see the EU in action today with the attempt to dictate Irish govt tax policies.... The EU used to be thought of as a good thing by the Irish but events are starting to change that view. Oh and the EU will be billing 4million Irish with an extra E380m EU bill this year.''
Britain will surely support us....
Oh, they are leaving....
As are Apple, by the look of it.
Oh, Britain has just cut its corporation tax....
The EU is bankrupt (financially AND morally, but we'll leave the morals out of this) - so will be trying VERY hard to raise money - and the low-hanging fruit are the international corporations.
The EU is not bankrupt. This idea that it's some kind of financial house of cards propped up by the UK's ~£9bn p.a. has to stop. In the main area I care about, it's fighting the morally good fight by dragging the A8 countries into the 21st century. Multi-nationals playing games with nation-state tax regimes is a practice that needs to be stopped, or at the very least, curtailed.
The EU should not be a bogeyman to anyone. It's an institution, like the NHS or the UN. Some of the things it does are good. Some are neutral. Some are bad. Just an institution.
The problem is it's pretensions to being a nation state of its own right. That is where most of the poor decision making comes from. Drop that and it's unlikely we would have left.
I can find fault with it on a number of levels. I just think it should be appraised coolly and analytically, rather than dealing with it as if the UK were leaping into its X-Wing to engage the EU Deathstar.
Boris is Han Solo, Gove is Luke, Dave is Darth Vader and Junker is Emperor Palpatine. A movie I would watch.
A Libertarian Rebel Or, more accurately: Second Brit stabbed by knife-wielding French-Algerian Islamist shouting "Allahu Ahkbar!" dies. https://t.co/puaO0IqyRF
I suppose you know more than the mother of the daughter killed then...?
''We see the EU in action today with the attempt to dictate Irish govt tax policies.... The EU used to be thought of as a good thing by the Irish but events are starting to change that view. Oh and the EU will be billing 4million Irish with an extra E380m EU bill this year.''
Britain will surely support us....
Oh, they are leaving....
As are Apple, by the look of it.
Oh, Britain has just cut its corporation tax....
The EU is bankrupt (financially AND morally, but we'll leave the morals out of this) - so will be trying VERY hard to raise money - and the low-hanging fruit are the international corporations.
The EU is not bankrupt. This idea that it's some kind of financial house of cards propped up by the UK's ~£9bn p.a. has to stop. In the main area I care about, it's fighting the morally good fight by dragging the A8 countries into the 21st century. Multi-nationals playing games with nation-state tax regimes is a practice that needs to be stopped, or at the very least, curtailed.
The EU should not be a bogeyman to anyone. It's an institution, like the NHS or the UN. Some of the things it does are good. Some are neutral. Some are bad. Just an institution.
The problem is it's pretensions to being a nation state of its own right. That is where most of the poor decision making comes from. Drop that and it's unlikely we would have left.
Quite. Apple basing themselves in Ireland is the Single Market working entirely as expected, which is why the EU have for years been targeting Ireland's low rate of corporation tax. Mr Drunker should know this all too well, he did the same as Ireland when he was running Luxembourg.
If Apple had paid tax at 12.5% it would not have gone to court. The issue is the sweetheart deal Apple signed with the Irish government that allowed them to pay an effective rate of tax on their EU wide profits of under 1%. The UK has lost the most because of this since with are the number one EU market for Apple.
Corbyn's digital charter apparently includes protection against unwarranted observation by CCTV. Even if this was valid - and other laws probably already cover any instance where it is - the politics of it is just naff, being simply another opportunity to rehash traingate jokes.
AP BREAKING: EU says Ireland must recover up to 13 billion euros in illegal tax benefits from Apple.
Quite a nice little windfall for the Irish. About €3250 per Irish citizen.
I doubt Apple will move out either, Ireland is still a very attractive proposition taxwise within the EU - plus they're BASED there now. Of course Ireland are appealing... but privately they must be chuffed to bits, "the nasty EU took this money off you" - the thought counted in their relationship with Apple...
Cake had and well and truly eaten by Ireland in this case.
Comments
It's amazing how something satirical written about politics between 28 and 36 years ago, can still hold so true today. Timeless, and shows that underneath it all, nothing much has actually changed.
From '79 to '92 they were de facto unilateralists (in '74 they ditched Polaris renewal, which is tantamount to disarmament). From '97 to the present. they have been pro-Europe, pro-immigration. We can now add in Jeremy's new twist, not only unilateral disarmament but lack of commitment to NATO. Even Foot wouldn't have gone that far.
No one says that a party has to toady to voters and throw away all semblance of principle. However, when you are so far from the English electorate's long held views, it does smack of the tin ear.
I'm surprised the BBC doesn't do more satire based on more recent real life events. It's not too hard even for someone who just works in the field to piece together events inside say DECC and it's as tragic/funny as Yes Minister. Huge scope for a comedy/plot featuring lobbying by the Country Landowners Association and other bodies to distort - er, constructively amend - energy policy.
There is no route for Corbyn to gain the 100 seats needed to form a government, and without power all his plans and policies are worthless.
At best it will be Labour's lost decade and at worst an extinction event.
For conference season I shall pop some fresh stuff myself, and by the bucketload!
Clinton 78.5 .. Trump 21.4 - Polls Only
Clinton 74.1 .. Trump 25.9 - Polls Plus
Clinton 78.4 .. Trump 21.6 - Nowcast
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo#now
BREAKING: France will call for an end to EU-US free trade talks
The EU's massive clout opens up even more markets for us, once again...
Given the aggressive way NATO has behaved, it would actually be pretty rational for a party to propose following Ireland, Sweden, Switzerland, Finland and Austria to non-alignment, plus the retention of strong conventional forces for self-defence only.
As for non-alignment, that's simply a polite way of describing freeloading or cowardice. What you describe as 'NATO's agression is in fact self-determination. It's amazing the knots that the left get into in foreign affairs; how we should stand alongside the right of a small state or potential state to self-determination but if that means actually challenging the dominant power from whose heavy hand the smaller one is trying to escape then suddenly that becomes 'imperialism' or the like. The net result being the hypocritical acceptance of spheres of influence and the denial of places like Estonia the right to form their own foreign policy. If it wants a powerful protector against a neighbour which invaded and occupied it, why shouldn't it be able to seek that? Considering Russia's actions in Georgia and Ukraine, it's hardly paranoid in perceiving a threat there.
It was the UK that was most pushing for the TTIP within the EU, and part of the reason that the USA wanted to keep our membership.
With Brexit the EU will want to reconsider and I do not blame them at all!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37218507
Although the EC numbers remain broadly the same with Arizona and Georgia moving in Trump's direction. Critical for Trump but icing on the cake for Clinton. Trump has to wrench all of Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania (FOP) into his column. Lose any one and he's cooked.
In this instance, I'm sure Brexiteer egos would have been bruised had the EU ratified TTIP while the UK languished at the back of the US queue, but it really doesn't signify much more than European domestic politics now rearing their head at EU level c.f. CETA.
Every brexiter is different.
Left wingers ones voted out because they didn't want TTIP, whilst right wing ones voted out because we can make trade deals much faster outside the E.U.
I know that like having your brioche and eating it too, but that is the nature of binary referendum.
Of course, Britain has far less negotiating power on its own, so we may well have achieved an inferior result for everyone.
But, yes, who cares? If the French and Germans don't want to do a deal with the Americans, that's their business. Whether we should seek to is another matter, and not something I know a great deal amount.
The point about this is, that there has been a pathetic level of progress on these talks across sectors. The EU just isn't interested in closing a deal here.
And one of the main reasons for this is, that in both Germany and France, there is a strong strand of opinion that argues that a transatlantic deal would lead to a drop in intra-EU trade (as indeed it surely would) which would damage the cause of EU integration.
Will the scales ever drop from EU supporters's eyes? The EU only favours liberal policies if it thinks they will increase pressure for political integration. If it fears the reverse, it will squash them. That is where we are now on the trade front, and one of the key reasons for leaving.
And unless Britain can get a better deal with the US than the EU could, then the point remains that Britain's interests in that sphere have been damaged by leaving.
FWIW, I thought that TTIP was a poorly constructed idea with some anti-democratic features, and would probably have failed in the US Congress anyway so who pulled/pulls the trigger on putting it out of its misery is to some extent moot if there are five or six lined up to fire.
Mr. Mortimer, ideally, I'd agree. But it's hard to see how that could happen. UKIP is throwing away a golden opportunity by eating its own head with its own leadership woes, the Lib Dems have been crushed and Farron's too leftish (and Corbyn has that sort of vote sewn up), and the SNP are geographically limited.
The Lib Dems and UKIP should make gains, but it's difficult to see them supplanting Labour unless Corbyn's still there in 2025.
Excellent visual!
However weak Corbyn may be as a leader the Tories would be foolish to underestimate the attractiveness of Labour, even with him as leader, to those who feel that they have nothing to lose or who feel that the Tories are not on their side.
Unless you're unwilling to believe the French and German press, TTIP is failing due to lack of domestic support in France and Germany. That's why I think it's tangential to Brexit.
The negatives from leaving the EU are well document and accepted by at least some on here A £40bn short term opportunity cost. A permanent reduction in trend growth rate, the size of that reduction dependent on destination. Potential damage to important sectors of the economy, with the amount dependent on destination.
Not all trade deals are good trade deals, contrary to Brexiteer philosophy.
I don't rate his chances of ever becoming Prime Minister, mind.
Again the pro-EU partisans are looking through the wrong end of the telescope. We needed to leave precisely because the EU wasn't acting in our (liberal) interests on trade and was not going to start doing so. TTIP was dead months before the referendum.
Now we have the chance to frame a trade policy that works for us (especially consumers!) and is not a haphazard adjunct of a political integration process we anyway were not happy with.
@jeremycorbyn: Join us live for our Digital Democracy manifesto launch at https://t.co/FlVc8rb2Ec at 10.45am #DigitalDemocracy https://t.co/ILLunXYswE
@PeterMannionMP: Christ Jez, Plugging into the 'creativity of the networked young' is sooo 2012.... #justsaying #ICallAppBritain https://t.co/FvfBzWO3cK
Certainly being over the barrel after A50 is invoked is not a good negotiating position, which is why hard Brexit may be the better option, with serious discussion on deals happening afterwards.
Jezza more likely to win the 2020 GE ....
The good news is that most of these will declare early so we'll probably know quite early on whether Trump can beat the establishment.
The TV companies like to declare each state virtually as the polls close - is this usually based on exit polling or do they base it on polls just before polling date.
(If you remember a few elections ago one candidate conceded when Florida was called against them - and then unconceded when Florida became TCTC - so Farage is not unique in concessions)
Britain will surely support us....
Oh, they are leaving....
As are Apple, by the look of it.
Oh, Britain has just cut its corporation tax....
With a majority of 12 there is no way May is going to be able to do any serious negotiation with the EU and it will simply take up too much government time and energy meaning nothing else will get sorted in the country. The NHS needs plenty of attention as does Education, Welfare Reform, Defence etc. Best just to get on with it.
The EU does not act singly. That has been its strength in the past and its weakness. It is losing a voice that has historically spoken in favour of openness, looking outward and free trade. It is hardly surprising that it is therefore becoming less interested in openness, looking outwards and free trade.
Meanwhile Britain itself seems to be moving away from those positions. It's lose-lose.
I don;t see much evidence of us moving away from free trade or openness.
They've got a ready made and pressing issue on which to make the split in the form of Brexit. Attempting to unite a pro-European coalition of voters in opposition to the Tories across the left and centre right would feel like a natural approach for moderate Labourites and Lib Dems. It'd probably end up with a chunk of Northern seats being left in the hands of a residual more Eurosceptic Corbyn led Labour party, but the Alliance would surely have a good chance of coming second.
The polling that was done around a potential Labour split showed a moderate breakaway+LDs level pegging with Corbyn's Labour, but that's before the public get sight of a full opposition front bench united in campaigning to halt Brexit.
If the economy starts to tank in the next year then a split could look more and more attractive to the PLP.
We could not have changed the EU's political dynamics or altered its related loss of interest in freer global trade. Only affected them at the margin.
But we can now get on with pursuing a global trade policy agenda that suits us. We won't get everything we want but we will, given a serious effort, get much more than we would have got within the EU (ie almost nothing). And given the shift in the balance of power in the world economy that is a strategically very important gain.
Britain's exit is a gargantuan policy failure on the part of the smaller nations of the EU. As they are about to find out.
...while still losing seats and entrenching Tory rule
BREAKING: EU says Ireland must recover up to 13 billion euros in illegal tax benefits from Apple.
MPs Demanding Brexit Vote Didn't Turn Up for EU Debates https://t.co/G1B8AetqHM https://t.co/rHfTuaoekz
https://www.global-counsel.co.uk/sites/default/files/special-reports/downloads/Global Counsel_Impact_of_Brexit.pdf
or more simply
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-5qhNf3mECyg/UzqS7Z6HaZI/AAAAAAAABG8/QYhturg-a6s/s1600/QMV+block.jpg
The fact is Trump has to run the table of all the swing states he's presently losing - Ohio, North Carolina, Florida, Iowa and Nevada to lose 273-265. He has to flip Pennsylvania.
It FOP or bust.
http://www.270towin.com/maps/NpD6L
The EU should not be a bogeyman to anyone. It's an institution, like the NHS or the UN. Some of the things it does are good. Some are neutral. Some are bad. Just an institution.
Or, more accurately:
Second Brit stabbed by knife-wielding French-Algerian Islamist shouting "Allahu Ahkbar!" dies. https://t.co/puaO0IqyRF
Cake had and well and truly eaten by Ireland in this case.