Sturgeon effortlessly beats Corbyn and Farron to the ' Sweet Spot ' on a centre left response to Brexit. She's also assimilated Brexit perfectly into her #indyref2 strategy. Make high profile attempts to be seen trying to make the Union work by offering to cooperate in UK wide centre left projects which the Tories will never agree to. Thus proving the Union doesn't. " Work ". At least we still have one national. Calibre centre leader while Labour and the Lib Dems are radioactive slag heaps. Until that is she destroys the nation. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-37266240
My God, a 'liberal' engaging in desperate admiration of the SNP leader. Things really have come to a sorry pass for the 'winning here' brigade.
Sturgeon is a very talented politician. I would rather Scotland stayed in the Union, but she has a mandate to keep Scotland in the EU. How she resolves this is a matter for Scots.
With Labour deserting the field of battle, I wouldn't mind the SNP being designated as the official opposition in Parliament. We are likely to hear more sense from them.
I'm afraid she doesn't.
Foreign policy is a reserved matter for Westminster and Scotland voted to stay in the Union.
If Scotland wishes to have its own independent foreign policy then it can, of course, vote for independence.
So you agree that Brexit is a material change of foreign policy (?the biggest one for 4 decades) that justifies a further independence referendum?
I suppose it would not if a Brexit deal kept access to the Single Market alongside the 4 freedoms, but I cannot see May agreeing that.
It looks like the end of the UK to me, but that is what was voted for in June.
No it wasn't. I think it has precipitated an already likely outcome , but even I would not say that was what was voted for, because it is not yet certain it will happen.
Especially when the latest poll has No ahead 54% to 46% in any indyref 2
Brexit strengthens the Union as it increases the cost of leaving it. Continued political integration with the EU makes it far cheaper for any constituent part of the UK to secede.
This is no surprise. Sarkozy is running to be the candidate next year. Expect more 'get tough' stuff along similar lines.
Slight problem with that is that all of them fail EU asylum rules in France let alone Britain. The problem is that they've let numbers grow past the point that you can send a few people in, to arrest and then deport....
''UKIP'S hard BREXIT position represents 30% of voters at best, they are on no position to dictate terms to the rest of the country, they are as bad as Remainers who want a second referendum''
You are correct. But if that 30% feel angry and betrayed, that may change the dynamics of England and Wales politics.
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
Just because Obama says stuff you don't want to hear doesn't mean that he hates Britain.
Expects Britain to pursue US interests, rather than our own, would be more accurate, but that's true of many US Presisents.
Interesting write up on this from 1991 by the UNHCR.
I does seem that when this was written and under consideration then such circumstances as Calais and mass migration routes across "entire continents" as opposed to one country to the next were not at the forefront of their minds or really considered. Those with connections to the country appealed to have special status of course.
''Indeed, UK asylum claims should. And those in France, a safe place, must seek asylum there first. Looks like the long run up to the French elections should be fun.''
I've always thought Sarkozy was a complete fool. Do French votes want their government to get tough with
A. democratic, Western and reasonably prosperous core nato ally Britain, Or B. Islamist Turkey.
Many European politicians seem to be opting for A. over B. I suggest its the wrong strategy.
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
Just because Obama says stuff you don't want to hear doesn't mean that he hates Britain.
Obama was telling the May the truth which is much better than pretending there will be a deal. The USA has no big benefit from the split up of the EU. This is being done by the UK for the benefit of the UK.
If the UK is lucky it will keep the same trade relationship with the USA as we had before. That is the best we can hope for.
The U.K. Was already on its last legs as the dominance of the SNP showed.
Yes, the way the SNP dominated less than half the vote for Indy showed the UK is finished.
Oh, wait...
Maybe you mean the way they dominate a majority minority of seats at Holyrood?
Usual Tory lies, it is an STV system , any idiot knows that, try the Westminster one that you seem to have forgotten. You think 56 out of 59 is not dominant
Fantastic. So we impose the same rules on Eurotunnel and ferry companies as we currently do on airlines then. The Geneva convention on asylum doesn't say that refugees are allowed to travel to their favourite country and claim there, it says that they should claim asylum in the nearest safe place.
The French have ignored the problem for so long because they hope the refugees will end up becoming a British problem. Unless they're trying to claim asylum *from* France, then why should the UK let them cross?
David Cameron had it completely right when he said we should pour aid money into countries around Syria to help those displaced by the war, Angela Merkel had it completely wrong when she suggested they should all come to Europe.
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
Just because Obama says stuff you don't want to hear doesn't mean that he hates Britain.
Oh, I think there's a strong body of evidence (not just this) to show he has a problem.
We are expected to heel to the US, but never the other way round.
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
Just because Obama says stuff you don't want to hear doesn't mean that he hates Britain.
Obama was telling the May the truth which is much better than pretending there will be a deal. The USA has no big benefit from the split up of the EU. This is being done by the UK for the benefit of the UK.
If the UK is lucky it will keep the same trade relationship with the USA as we had before. That is the best we can hope for.
What trade relationship? The EU never made an FTA with the USA and looks unlikely to do so.
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
Just because Obama says stuff you don't want to hear doesn't mean that he hates Britain.
Obama was telling the May the truth which is much better than pretending there will be a deal. The USA has no big benefit from the split up of the EU. This is being done by the UK for the benefit of the UK.
If the UK is lucky it will keep the same trade relationship with the USA as we had before. That is the best we can hope for.
Which is fine, as our trade with the US is in surplus.
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
Just because Obama says stuff you don't want to hear doesn't mean that he hates Britain.
Obama was telling the May the truth which is much better than pretending there will be a deal. The USA has no big benefit from the split up of the EU. This is being done by the UK for the benefit of the UK.
If the UK is lucky it will keep the same trade relationship with the USA as we had before. That is the best we can hope for.
It's a policy decision. And it looks like the UK is being wafted away by the US to the rest of the world.
He could have said that, respecting the decision of the British people, he would be happy to explore trade talks in parallel with the UK. Initially, on the basis of TTIP.
Particularly since that's what several US senators have said, and that TTIP is looking likely to fail anyway.
The U.K. Was already on its last legs as the dominance of the SNP showed.
Yes, the way the SNP dominated less than half the vote for Indy showed the UK is finished.
Oh, wait...
Maybe you mean the way they dominate a majority minority of seats at Holyrood?
Usual Tory lies, it is an STV system , any idiot knows that, try the Westminster one that you seem to have forgotten. You think 56 out of 59 is not dominant
The Scottish economy is in dire straits at the moment. My accountant is very busy at the moment only because there are so many frauds about. As an independent country Scotland is in a worse place than Greece. This should not be seen as good news but a warning to the English.
Five years of continual fighting about independence has left the economy in tatters. Many of the best brains have left and gone elsewhere and investment has been on hold forever. The economy survives at all due to the input of East Europeans.
Dr. Foxinsox, do you think it's legitimate for one part of the country to hold the rest to ransom?
I hope Scotland remains in the UK, but if the desires of England/Wales and Scotland have diverged so much it's impossible for us to remain in one nation-state, it should end.
The UK cannot either permit Scotland to exercise veto rights over British policy, nor can it force Scotland to remain an unwilling member of the UK.
As a Leave voter, I'm somewhat more comfortable with the prospect of post-independence [for Scotland] relations, providing (as with the EU) daft sods on either side don't end up making decisions.
Edited extra bit: and it's worth noting that, when giving the vote, Scots opted to remain in the UK.
I agree with you. England should not hold the rest of the UK to ransom.
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
Just because Obama says stuff you don't want to hear doesn't mean that he hates Britain.
Obama was telling the May the truth which is much better than pretending there will be a deal. The USA has no big benefit from the split up of the EU. This is being done by the UK for the benefit of the UK.
If the UK is lucky it will keep the same trade relationship with the USA as we had before. That is the best we can hope for.
It's a policy decision. And it looks like the UK is being wafted away by the US to the rest of the world.
He could have said that, respecting the decision of the British people, he would be happy to explore trade talks in parallel with the UK. Initially, on the basis of TTIP.
Particularly since that's what several US senators have said, and that TTIP is looking likely to fail anyway.
Obama is bitter because he knows that the TTIP is dead without UK support within the EU. Free trade was supposed to be his lasting legacy, but without British support that legacy is dead. Without the TTIP I also don't see much chance of the TPP going ahead, Asian nations won't seek to disadvantage themselves by being forced to take up US standards when European nations are not going to do so.
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
Just because Obama says stuff you don't want to hear doesn't mean that he hates Britain.
Obama was telling the May the truth which is much better than pretending there will be a deal. The USA has no big benefit from the split up of the EU. This is being done by the UK for the benefit of the UK.
If the UK is lucky it will keep the same trade relationship with the USA as we had before. That is the best we can hope for.
For the State Department the U.K was most useful as a bridge to Europe which has now gone so clearly we are of less interest other than to some Republicans who like the idea of the Anglosphere
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
Just because Obama says stuff you don't want to hear doesn't mean that he hates Britain.
Does it even matter what Obama thinks? He's gone in a few months
In any case why should the US prioritise a deal with Britain over the EU ? They have been working on this with the EU for several years for a start. The rEU have 400m people. UK, 63m and in the UK there are no people to talk to.
Dr. Foxinsox, do you think it's legitimate for one part of the country to hold the rest to ransom?
I hope Scotland remains in the UK, but if the desires of England/Wales and Scotland have diverged so much it's impossible for us to remain in one nation-state, it should end.
The UK cannot either permit Scotland to exercise veto rights over British policy, nor can it force Scotland to remain an unwilling member of the UK.
As a Leave voter, I'm somewhat more comfortable with the prospect of post-independence [for Scotland] relations, providing (as with the EU) daft sods on either side don't end up making decisions.
Edited extra bit: and it's worth noting that, when giving the vote, Scots opted to remain in the UK.
I agree with you. England should not hold the rest of the UK to ransom.
England and Wales comprise 90% of the population, and backed Brexit.
Sturgeon effortlessly beats Corbyn and Farron to the ' Sweet Spot ' on a centre left response to Brexit. She's also assimilated Brexit perfectly into her #indyref2 strategy. Make high profile attempts to be seen trying to make the Union work by offering to cooperate in UK wide centre left projects which the Tories will never agree to. Thus proving the Union doesn't. " Work ". At least we still have one national. Calibre centre leader while Labour and the Lib Dems are radioactive slag heaps. Until that is she destroys the nation. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-37266240
My God, a 'liberal' engaging in desperate admiration of the SNP leader. Things really have come to a sorry pass for the 'winning here' brigade.
Sturgeon is a very talented politician. I would rather Scotland stayed in the Union, but she has a mandate to keep Scotland in the EU. How she resolves this is a matter for Scots.
With Labour deserting the field of battle, I wouldn't mind the SNP being designated as the official opposition in Parliament. We are likely to hear more sense from them.
I'm afraid she doesn't.
Foreign policy is a reserved matter for Westminster and Scotland voted to stay in the Union.
If Scotland wishes to have its own independent foreign policy then it can, of course, vote for independence.
So you agree that Brexit is a material change of foreign policy (?the biggest one for 4 decades) that justifies a further independence referendum?
I suppose it would not if a Brexit deal kept access to the Single Market alongside the 4 freedoms, but I cannot see May agreeing that.
It looks like the end of the UK to me, but that is what was voted for in June.
No it wasn't. I think it has precipitated an already likely outcome , but even I would not say that was what was voted for, because it is not yet certain it will happen.
Especially when the latest poll has No ahead 54% to 46% in any indyref 2
Brexit strengthens the Union as it increases the cost of leaving it. Continued political integration with the EU makes it far cheaper for any constituent part of the UK to secede.
Some truth in that but only if we avoid hard BREXIT and the costs of being outside the EU
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
Just because Obama says stuff you don't want to hear doesn't mean that he hates Britain.
Does it even matter what Obama thinks? He's gone in a few months
In any case why should the US prioritise a deal with Britain over the EU ? They have been working on this with the EU for several years for a start. The rEU have 400m people. UK, 63m and in the UK there are no people to talk to.
Because the EU nations are all walking away from the TTIP. There is no support for it within the EU without the UK. Obama is bitter.
''Obama is bitter because he knows that the TTIP is dead without UK support within the EU. Free trade was supposed to be his lasting legacy, but without British support that legacy is dead.''
He has our support for free trade. It's the support of continental Europe he doesn't have. Yet he would rather have private meetings with them and try to bully us.
He's unravelling. its all emotion now. Not pretty for America.
''UKIP'S hard BREXIT position represents 30% of voters at best, they are on no position to dictate terms to the rest of the country, they are as bad as Remainers who want a second referendum''
You are correct. But if that 30% feel angry and betrayed, that may change the dynamics of England and Wales politics.
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
I've had zero time for Obama for about 6yrs. He takes a very long time to say almost nothing. Speechifying is the perfect description. Why anyone here is paying attention to him over Brexit perplexes me. He's well into lame duck mode.
My favourite observation of his platitudes remains this...
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
Just because Obama says stuff you don't want to hear doesn't mean that he hates Britain.
Obama was telling the May the truth which is much better than pretending there will be a deal. The USA has no big benefit from the split up of the EU. This is being done by the UK for the benefit of the UK.
If the UK is lucky it will keep the same trade relationship with the USA as we had before. That is the best we can hope for.
It's a policy decision. And it looks like the UK is being wafted away by the US to the rest of the world.
He could have said that, respecting the decision of the British people, he would be happy to explore trade talks in parallel with the UK. Initially, on the basis of TTIP.
Particularly since that's what several US senators have said, and that TTIP is looking likely to fail anyway.
Good morning all.
A reminder, should we need one, that countries have interests, not friends.
I take a gentler view of Obama's remarks. Obama still wants TTIP. He's not going to abandon that, or soft pedal to deal with the UK. We already have healthy bilateral trade under GATT. What's the benefit to his administration or the US?
Similarly, Japan's remarks are perfectly fair, and they were addressed to both the EU and UK. It's a reminder that the Brexit talks aren't between the UK and the EU27, the entire G20 (plus extras) is going to be pushing for a deal that, at worst, least damages their interests.
In terms of the Union, I didn't let that affect my vote. It's a matter for the Scots.
Finally, in terms of immigration systems, I've said repeatedly that the UK economy is far more complex than the Australian, and even they don't have a wholly point-based system. We'll have something complex to best match our economic needs.
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
Just because Obama says stuff you don't want to hear doesn't mean that he hates Britain.
Obama was telling the May the truth which is much better than pretending there will be a deal. The USA has no big benefit from the split up of the EU. This is being done by the UK for the benefit of the UK.
If the UK is lucky it will keep the same trade relationship with the USA as we had before. That is the best we can hope for.
It's a policy decision. And it looks like the UK is being wafted away by the US to the rest of the world.
He could have said that, respecting the decision of the British people, he would be happy to explore trade talks in parallel with the UK. Initially, on the basis of TTIP.
Particularly since that's what several US senators have said, and that TTIP is looking likely to fail anyway.
Obama is bitter because he knows that the TTIP is dead without UK support within the EU. Free trade was supposed to be his lasting legacy, but without British support that legacy is dead. Without the TTIP I also don't see much chance of the TPP going ahead, Asian nations won't seek to disadvantage themselves by being forced to take up US standards when European nations are not going to do so.
Obama has merely made a statement of fact. The UK is of less interest to the US then the EU and a number of other bigger countries with more dynamic economies. We are going to have to get used to being of less importance to our international partners - the Japanese document published over the weekend makes that clear. This could also work to our advantage, of course. We just need to be creative.
On immigration, I'd much prefer to implement an income based system for visas, it would be less bureaucratic than a points based system and easier to implement. £36k per year gets someone a three year unlimited renewal visa, £18k per year gets someone a six month visa (renewable just once) and minimum wage jobs gets someone a three month seasonal work visa.
That's an easy system we could roll out globally and have reciprocated to British citizens looking to go overseas. If those wage barriers cause higher than expected immigration then they can be raised to cut immigration.
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
Just because Obama says stuff you don't want to hear doesn't mean that he hates Britain.
Oh, I think there's a strong body of evidence (not just this) to show he has a problem.
We are expected to heel to the US, but never the other way round.
I don't think there is any evidence at all to show that he hates Britain. I just think it is an easy get out for people who do not want to engage with what he says.
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
Just because Obama says stuff you don't want to hear doesn't mean that he hates Britain.
Does it even matter what Obama thinks? He's gone in a few months
In any case why should the US prioritise a deal with Britain over the EU ? They have been working on this with the EU for several years for a start. The rEU have 400m people. UK, 63m and in the UK there are no people to talk to.
Because the EU nations are all walking away from the TTIP. There is no support for it within the EU without the UK. Obama is bitter.
' British ' Foriegn Policy for the last 500 years has been #1 Free Trade #2 Prevent a single power dominating Europe. Yes, Obama is personally bitter about doing Cameron's bidding over a Referendum intervention and then being mildly humiliated by the result. However if one of the sheet anchors of western Civilisation suddenly reverses it's Foriegn Policy of 500 years years because of, erm ... then folk like US Presidents will be genuinely baffled. The UK's USP as an ally is that we're reliable.
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
Just because Obama says stuff you don't want to hear doesn't mean that he hates Britain.
Obama was telling the May the truth which is much better than pretending there will be a deal. The USA has no big benefit from the split up of the EU. This is being done by the UK for the benefit of the UK.
If the UK is lucky it will keep the same trade relationship with the USA as we had before. That is the best we can hope for.
Yep - this was one of my main reasons for voting Remain. I just don't see us being able to get the kind of trade deals that would be necessary to compensate for no longer being part of the Single Market.
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
I've had zero time for Obama for about 6yrs. He takes a very long time to say almost nothing. Speechifying is the perfect description. Why anyone here is paying attention to him over Brexit perplexes me. He's well into lame duck mode.
My favourite observation of his platitudes remains this...
On immigration, I'd much prefer to implement an income based system for visas, it would be less bureaucratic than a points based system and easier to implement. £36k per year gets someone a three year unlimited renewal visa, £18k per year gets someone a six month visa (renewable just once) and minimum wage jobs gets someone a three month seasonal work visa.
That's an easy system we could roll out globally and have reciprocated to British citizens looking to go overseas. If those wage barriers cause higher than expected immigration then they can be raised to cut immigration.
What about the Brits who live in Spain, Portugal..........?
On immigration, I'd much prefer to implement an income based system for visas, it would be less bureaucratic than a points based system and easier to implement. £36k per year gets someone a three year unlimited renewal visa, £18k per year gets someone a six month visa (renewable just once) and minimum wage jobs gets someone a three month seasonal work visa.
That's an easy system we could roll out globally and have reciprocated to British citizens looking to go overseas. If those wage barriers cause higher than expected immigration then they can be raised to cut immigration.
Also need to take into account dependants, so if someone wishes to bring a wife and two kids with them their income will need to be higher, to cover costs of services and ensure that they are net contributors to the Exchequer.
'Where has he said that the UK is a villain? He has merely said that a trade deal with us will not be a US priority. '
The next time the US expects us to support them in some war and our military to fight & die alongside them , that definitely won't be a priority either.
Removes all doubt ,if there was any, that the so called 'special relationship' is complete bollocks.
LOL! That's actually pretty smart from Smith. I guess at this point he's appealing to those who voted Corbyn last year, rather than those who voted Conservative in the general election.
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
I've had zero time for Obama for about 6yrs. He takes a very long time to say almost nothing. Speechifying is the perfect description. Why anyone here is paying attention to him over Brexit perplexes me. He's well into lame duck mode.
My favourite observation of his platitudes remains this...
''What trade relationship? The EU never made an FTA with the USA and looks unlikely to do so.''
Absolutely. And yet who is the villain in Obama's eyes? Protectionist, socialist France?
No, its free trade Britain.
Obama's a dead duck, and so is his TTIP deal without British support. That's why he was annoyed at the Brexit vote and still annoyed now.
My old mates in the US tell me that the White House is pissed off with the UK and Germany. The main reasons are 1) TTIP is dead without the UK 2) Brexit means EU army & EU defence industry. The former undermines NATO, the latter is contrary to US milind interests.
LOL! That's actually pretty smart from Smith. I guess at this point he's appealing to those who voted Corbyn last year, rather than those who voted Conservative in the general election.
Of course he is! He needs to win the leadership election first.
Obama has merely made a statement of fact. The UK is of less interest to the US then the EU and a number of other bigger countries with more dynamic economies. We are going to have to get used to being of less importance to our international partners - the Japanese document published over the weekend makes that clear. This could also work to our advantage, of course. We just need to be creative.
Not really, the G20 is all about politicking and the theme was to ensure no other European country leaves the EU. Harsh treatment of the UK initially has been agreed beforehand, if you can't see through that then you need to think a little bit harder. On Japan, again, it's not really a big deal because trade harmonisation comes from the WTO via the EU, we will still be compliant with WTO standards after we leave the EU. It's really just an empty threat, politicians don't dictate where companies do their business.
What was most interesting about the G20 was not economic, it was political. In those terms it didn't go well for either the UK, US or EU. Obama's pivot to Asia is dead, the EU's relationship with Turkey is dead, the UK relationship with everyone has gone to "it's complicated" and Japan are making nice with Russia, while Turkey are doing the same. Both nations who have active US bases, one of which is extremely important in the defence of Europe from ISIS and the other extremely important for the defence of Asia from China.
Trade wasn't the most interesting part of the G20, it was merely a sideshow to the huge political upheaval in the world. Obama is the weakest President in my lifetime, neither Bush nor Clinton would have overseen a Japanese pivot to Russia and just shrugged their shoulders as Obama seems to have.
On our own trade, as I said yesterday, we should form a free trading zone for goods and services with Canada, Australia and New Zealand pretty quickly, all four nations have a shared heritage and will get on board quickly, we can see already those three nations are interested in trading with the UK on better terms than is currently allowed. Especially now that CETA looks to be dead.
Sturgeon effortlessly beats Corbyn and Farron to the ' Sweet Spot ' on a centre left response to Brexit. She's also assimilated Brexit perfectly into her #indyref2 strategy. Make high profile attempts to be seen trying to make the Union work by offering to cooperate in UK wide centre left projects which the Tories will never agree to. Thus proving the Union doesn't. " Work ". At least we still have one national. Calibre centre leader while Labour and the Lib Dems are radioactive slag heaps. Until that is she destroys the nation. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-37266240
My God, a 'liberal' engaging in desperate admiration of the SNP leader. Things really have come to a sorry pass for the 'winning here' brigade.
Sturgeon is a very talented politician. I would rather Scotland stayed in the Union, but she has a mandate to keep Scotland in the EU. How she resolves this is a matter for Scots.
With Labour deserting the field of battle, I wouldn't mind the SNP being designated as the official opposition in Parliament. We are likely to hear more sense from them.
I'll repeat my previous remark.
I always felt there was very little 'liberal' in the Liberal Democrats. Their pathetic hero-worship of a nasty piece of work like Sturgeon just illustrates that.
I do not agree with the SNP, but undeniably the leadership of Salmond then Sturgeon has transformed the political landscape. While disagreeing with them it is perfectly possible to respect their political talents.
If Brexit breaks up the UK (as seems likely), I shall be sorry. Leavers cannot say that they weren't warned.
The U.K. Was already on its last legs as the dominance of the SNP showed.
The SNP that had just lost it's majority in the Scottish Parliament?
Another 5 years of steady as it goes would have allowed the Unionists to chip away at the SNP vote and remove some of the hysteria Indyref introduced. Little Englanders is a fairly accurate description of the Brexiters given the harm they have done to the Union
On immigration, I'd much prefer to implement an income based system for visas, it would be less bureaucratic than a points based system and easier to implement. £36k per year gets someone a three year unlimited renewal visa, £18k per year gets someone a six month visa (renewable just once) and minimum wage jobs gets someone a three month seasonal work visa.
That's an easy system we could roll out globally and have reciprocated to British citizens looking to go overseas. If those wage barriers cause higher than expected immigration then they can be raised to cut immigration.
What about the Brits who live in Spain, Portugal..........?
Make the buggers pay through the nose. They are leeching off Spanish healthcare.
On immigration, I'd much prefer to implement an income based system for visas, it would be less bureaucratic than a points based system and easier to implement. £36k per year gets someone a three year unlimited renewal visa, £18k per year gets someone a six month visa (renewable just once) and minimum wage jobs gets someone a three month seasonal work visa.
That's an easy system we could roll out globally and have reciprocated to British citizens looking to go overseas. If those wage barriers cause higher than expected immigration then they can be raised to cut immigration.
Also need to take into account dependants, so if someone wishes to bring a wife and two kids with them their income will need to be higher, to cover costs of services and ensure that they are net contributors to the Exchequer.
The lower tier visas come with no dependent rights, the higher one adds £3k in income requirements per dependent? It's such a simple system to adjust rather than a cumbersome points based system.
'Where has he said that the UK is a villain? He has merely said that a trade deal with us will not be a US priority. '
The next time the US expects us to support them in some war and our military to fight & die alongside them , that definitely won't be a priority either.
Removes all doubt ,if there was any, that the so called 'special relationship' is complete bollocks.
Not really. It proves the US has a knobber as president right now. MaxPB's comments re his weakness and Japan looking to Russia are spot on. Obama is a chocolate teapot. If it's Trump we'll be getting a good deal reasonably fast (he has said so). If it's Hillary I don't know - but she can't be as reflexively and unthinkingly stupid about her country's relationship with its oldest and strongest ally as the community organiser. We, the world and the USA must just sit it out and wait while this abject loser of a president sees out his term.
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
Just because Obama says stuff you don't want to hear doesn't mean that he hates Britain.
Obama was telling the May the truth which is much better than pretending there will be a deal. The USA has no big benefit from the split up of the EU. This is being done by the UK for the benefit of the UK.
If the UK is lucky it will keep the same trade relationship with the USA as we had before. That is the best we can hope for.
Yep - this was one of my main reasons for voting Remain. I just don't see us being able to get the kind of trade deals that would be necessary to compensate for no longer being part of the Single Market.
Except several Remain voting ministers have said how surprised they are at just how many countries are interested in doing a trade deal with the U.K.
The US is the exception, not the rule. Must be that fabled special relationship.
Ah, was it only 6 short weeks ago that you were agreeing that Scotland should opt for Indy due to our distinct vote on Brexit?
Your dark night of Remanian despair must have been of Scandinavian midsummer brevity.
Oh dear.
At no point did I say Nicola had a mandate for another vote.
So Scotland should opt for Indy due to Brexit but Sturgeon doesn't have a mandate so Scotland won't be able to opt for Indy.
An 'interesting' interpretation.
Opting for "Indy" is opting for non-independence if it means rejoining the EU. Rather than use a positively misleading term, why not just refer to secession? If that is too long, just call it "Sessy".
Any referendum wording would have to be agreed with the UK government. "Should Scots continue to live in an independent country?" would be an appropriate wording post Brexit.
Obama has merely made a statement of fact. The UK is of less interest tocreative.
Not really, the G20 is all about politicking and the theme was to ensure no other European country leaves the EU. Harsh treatment of the UK initially has been agreed beforehand, if you can't see through that then you need to think a little bit harder. On Japan, again, it's not really a big deal because trade harmonisation comes from the WTO via the EU, we will still be compliant with WTO standards after we leave the EU. It's really just an empty threat, politicians don't dictate where companies do their business.
What was most interesting about the G20 was not economic, it was political. In those terms it didn't go well for either the UK, US or EU. Obama's pivot to Asia is dead, the EU's relationship with Turkey is dead, the UK relationship with everyone has gone to "it's complicated" and Japan are making nice with Russia, while Turkey are doing the same. Both nations who have active US bases, one of which is extremely important in the defence of Europe from ISIS and the other extremely important for the defence of Asia from China.
Trade wasn't the most interesting part of the G20, it was merely a sideshow to the huge political upheaval in the world. Obama is the weakest President in my lifetime, neither Bush nor Clinton would have overseen a Japanese pivot to Russia and just shrugged their shoulders as Obama seems to have.
On our own trade, as I said yesterday, we should form a free trading zone for goods and services with Canada, Australia and New Zealand pretty quickly, all four nations have a shared heritage and will get on board quickly, we can see already those three nations are interested in trading with the UK on better terms than is currently allowed. Especially now that CETA looks to be dead.
I am afraid I do not see the anti-UK conspiracy that you do.
Deals with Australia, Canada and New Zealand would be nice, and we can start to negotiate these once we have left the EU, but I am not sure how much extra each can give us - combined they have a slightly smaller population than France and already get a fair amount of UK exports. As part of NAFTA, Canada has to take that into consideration when negotiating free trade zones. They may not be as unconstrained as the Australians and Kiwis to get something meaningful done.
Obama's weakness is not personal, it is geopolitical. The reality is that America is not as powerful as it used to be. For me, it's better to have a US president who understands that rather than one who does not.
Obama has merely made a statement of fact. The UK is of less interest to the US then the EU and a number of other bigger countries with more dynamic economies. We are going to have to get used to being of less importance to our international partners - the Japanese document published over the weekend makes that clear. This could also work to our advantage, of course. We just need to be creative.
Not really, the G20 is all about politicking and the theme was to ensure no other European country leaves the EU. Harsh treatment of the UK initially has been agreed beforehand, if you can't see through that then you need to think a little bit harder. On Japan, again, it's not really a big deal because trade harmonisation comes from the WTO via the EU, we will still be compliant with WTO standards after we leave the EU. It's really just an empty threat, politicians don't dictate where companies do their business.
What was most interesting about the G20 was not economic, it was political. In those terms it didn't go well for either the UK, US or EU. Obama's pivot to Asia is dead, the EU's relationship with Turkey is dead, the UK relationship with everyone has gone to "it's complicated" and Japan are making nice with Russia, while Turkey are doing the same. Both nations who have active US bases, one of which is extremely important in the defence of Europe from ISIS and the other extremely important for the defence of Asia from China.
Trade wasn't the most interesting part of the G20, it was merely a sideshow to the huge political upheaval in the world. Obama is the weakest President in my lifetime, neither Bush nor Clinton would have overseen a Japanese pivot to Russia and just shrugged their shoulders as Obama seems to have.
On our own trade, as I said yesterday, we should form a free trading zone for goods and services with Canada, Australia and New Zealand pretty quickly, all four nations have a shared heritage and will get on board quickly, we can see already those three nations are interested in trading with the UK on better terms than is currently allowed. Especially now that CETA looks to be dead.
Yes, I think that's right. The G20 have sniffed out that the UK isn't quite sure what to do about Brexit so is taking the opportunity to fire a warning shot across its bows.
In Obama's case, there's an element of churlish petulance about the result as well, given he found out the British don't think he walks on water.
'Where has he said that the UK is a villain? He has merely said that a trade deal with us will not be a US priority. '
The next time the US expects us to support them in some war and our military to fight & die alongside them , that definitely won't be a priority either.
Removes all doubt ,if there was any, that the so called 'special relationship' is complete bollocks.
What war has the UK taken part in soley due to the bidding of the US?
Libya was as much the UKs idea as the US Gulf War 2 was Tony's idea Afghanistan was again something most of the UK was up for Gulf War 1 involved protecting UKs interested in Saudi Vietnam we said no.
@tnewtondunn: Theresa May ups her war with Brexiters on Australia-style system. No10 at G20: "A Points Based System will not work and is not an option".
' British ' Foriegn Policy for the last 500 years has been #1 Free Trade #2 Prevent a single power dominating Europe. Yes, Obama is personally bitter about doing Cameron's bidding over a Referendum intervention and then being mildly humiliated by the result. However if one of the sheet anchors of western Civilisation suddenly reverses it's Foriegn Policy of 500 years years because of, erm ... then folk like US Presidents will be genuinely baffled. The UK's USP as an ally is that we're reliable.
Yes, I think that's right. And it won't change either. May wants to make the UK the world leader in free trade.
However, on the second point, we failed on that: there is a single power that dominates Europe and that is the eurozone/EU, which is dominated by Germany. We were powerless to stop it.
It really is taking it a bit far to say that in order to stop one power dominating Europe we have to join and become part of that power.
Personally, I'd argue the only way to genuinely do it is to leave the EU and form an alternative epicentre of European power outwith it, which is precisely what we've done.
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
I've had zero time for Obama for about 6yrs. He takes a very long time to say almost nothing. Speechifying is the perfect description. Why anyone here is paying attention to him over Brexit perplexes me. He's well into lame duck mode.
My favourite observation of his platitudes remains this...
Obama has merely made a statement of fact. The UK is of less interest to the US then the EU and a number of other bigger countries with more dynamic economies. We are going to have to get used to being of less importance to our international partners - the Japanese document published over the weekend makes that clear. This could also work to our advantage, of course. We just need to be creative.
Not really, the G20 is all about politicking and the theme was to ensure no other European country leaves the EU. Harsh treatment of the UK initially has been agreed beforehand, if you can't see through that then you need to think a little bit harder. On Japan, again, it's not really a big deal because trade harmonisation comes from the WTO via the EU, we will still be compliant with WTO standards after we leave the EU. It's really just an empty threat, politicians don't dictate where companies do their business.
What was most interesting about the G20 was not economic, it was political. In those terms it didn't go well for either the UK, US or EU. Obama's pivot to Asia is dead, the EU's relationship with Turkey is dead, the UK relationship with everyone has gone to "it's complicated" and Japan are making nice with Russia, while Turkey are doing the same. Both nations who have active US bases, one of which is extremely important in the defence of Europe from ISIS and the other extremely important for the defence of Asia from China.
Trade wasn't the most interesting part of the G20, it was merely a sideshow to the huge political upheaval in the world. Obama is the weakest President in my lifetime, neither Bush nor Clinton would have overseen a Japanese pivot to Russia and just shrugged their shoulders as Obama seems to have.
On our own trade, as I said yesterday, we should form a free trading zone for goods and services with Canada, Australia and New Zealand pretty quickly, all four nations have a shared heritage and will get on board quickly, we can see already those three nations are interested in trading with the UK on better terms than is currently allowed. Especially now that CETA looks to be dead.
Yes, I think that's right. The G20 have sniffed out that the UK isn't quite sure what to do about Brexit so is taking the opportunity to fire a warning shot across its bows.
In Obama's case, there's an element of churlish petulance about the result as well, given he found out the British don't think he walks on water.
Or, alternatively, Obama is doing what he thinks is best for the US.
Just as many Brexiters voted the way they did because they thought it was best for the UK.
The churlish petulance this morning is coming from some moaning leavers.
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
The "special relationship" is and has always been a myth... We delude ourselves into thinking we are important to America when we are, infact, merely an insignificant "bit-player".
One good thing to come out of Brexit is that it will hopefully not only "reset" our relationship with the EU it will also "reset" our relationship with Uncle Sam.
If we realize we are unimportant and irrelevant to the US hopefully British prime Ministers will refuse to get involved in all their stupid, pointless wars from now on...
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
Just because Obama says stuff you don't want to hear doesn't mean that he hates Britain.
Obama was telling the May the truth which is much better than pretending there will be a deal. The USA has no big benefit from the split up of the EU. This is being done by the UK for the benefit of the UK.
If the UK is lucky it will keep the same trade relationship with the USA as we had before. That is the best we can hope for.
Yep - this was one of my main reasons for voting Remain. I just don't see us being able to get the kind of trade deals that would be necessary to compensate for no longer being part of the Single Market.
Except several Remain voting ministers have said how surprised they are at just how many countries are interested in doing a trade deal with the U.K.
The US is the exception, not the rule. Must be that fabled special relationship.
Everyone is interested I doing trade deals. That is different from getting then done. The terms, of course, are key.
I am afraid I do not see the anti-UK conspiracy that you do.
Deals with Australia, Canada and New Zealand would be nice, and we can start to negotiate these once we have left the EU, but I am not sure how much extra each can give us - combined they have a slightly smaller population than France and already get a fair amount of UK exports. As part of NAFTA, Canada has to take that into consideration when negotiating free trade zones. They may not be as unconstrained as the Australians and Kiwis to get something meaningful done.
Obama's weakness is not personal, it is geopolitical. The reality is that America is not as powerful as it used to be. For me, it's better to have a US president who understands that rather than one who does not.
It's not so much anti-UK as it is pro-status quo, if another country had done the same I'm sure Dave would have been there with Obama and Merkel doling out rubbish statements.
In a certain sense they do, but again trade harmonisation tends to come from above NAFTA in a lot of cases so it's not really an issue for Canada to enter a free trade deal with the UK/Australia/NZ all on the same terms.
I think we disagree on the last point, Obama is personally weak and it has led to upheaval in the middle east, worse than we've ever seen, it has led to Japan and other Asian countries moving away from the US sphere of influence, it has led to the EU moving away from the US sphere of influence. Obama just doesn't have "it" in the same way that Clinton (and even Bush to some degree) had "it" to ensure the US stays on top of the world order. However, this brings me to a bit of a contradiction on your part, you bang on about maltreatement from Obama as if it were the end of world (it isn't) but in the next sentence you are saying the US is weak rather than him personally. Both of those statements can't be true. If the US really is weak then it doesn't really matter what Obama thinks or says, if it isn't then it does matter, but the weakness would be personal to him and his presidency rather than the wider nation.
On immigration, I'd much prefer to implement an income based system for visas, it would be less bureaucratic than a points based system and easier to implement. £36k per year gets someone a three year unlimited renewal visa, £18k per year gets someone a six month visa (renewable just once) and minimum wage jobs gets someone a three month seasonal work visa.
That's an easy system we could roll out globally and have reciprocated to British citizens looking to go overseas. If those wage barriers cause higher than expected immigration then they can be raised to cut immigration.
Also need to take into account dependants, so if someone wishes to bring a wife and two kids with them their income will need to be higher, to cover costs of services and ensure that they are net contributors to the Exchequer.
The lower tier visas come with no dependent rights, the higher one adds £3k in income requirements per dependent? It's such a simple system to adjust rather than a cumbersome points based system.
That pretty much makes sense. Agree that the less complex the system the better, and that initially the aim should be to ensure that immigrants contribute more than they take out.
Add a few tweaks such as making income tax allowances monthly, so someone here for half a year doesnt effectively get a double allowance. Things can then be tweaked year on year to control numbers and allow for exemptions, eg for nurses, graduate trainees, other shortage trades and professions etc.
The next time the US expects us to support them in some war and our military to fight & die alongside them , that definitely won't be a priority either.
Yes, I think May far more likely to give a Wilsonian response than a Blair or Cameron one......
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
I've had zero time for Obama for about 6yrs. He takes a very long time to say almost nothing. Speechifying is the perfect description. Why anyone here is paying attention to him over Brexit perplexes me. He's well into lame duck mode.
My favourite observation of his platitudes remains this...
LOL! That's actually pretty smart from Smith. I guess at this point he's appealing to those who voted Corbyn last year, rather than those who voted Conservative in the general election.
Of course the reply would be a Labour manifesto with either Smith or Corbo on the front, reading simply:
Bankrupt Britain Pleading for IMF bailout Huge desire for Tory Britain
''What trade relationship? The EU never made an FTA with the USA and looks unlikely to do so.''
Absolutely. And yet who is the villain in Obama's eyes? Protectionist, socialist France?
No, its free trade Britain.
Obama's a dead duck, and so is his TTIP deal without British support. That's why he was annoyed at the Brexit vote and still annoyed now.
Quite. We were of more use to the US inside the EU than we are to them outside of it - that's the US national interest.
The British public has just decided the British national interest - and frankly its a little ungracious of foreign heads of state to criticise them for it.....
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
I've had zero time for Obama for about 6yrs. He takes a very long time to say almost nothing. Speechifying is the perfect description. Why anyone here is paying attention to him over Brexit perplexes me. He's well into lame duck mode.
My favourite observation of his platitudes remains this...
I am afraid I do not see the anti-UK conspiracy that you do.
Deals with Australia, Canada and New Zealand would be nice, and we can start to negotiate these once we have left the EU, but I am not sure how much extra each can give us - combined they have a slightly smaller population than France and already get a fair amount of UK exports. As part of NAFTA, Canada has to take that into consideration when negotiating free trade zones. They may not be as unconstrained as the Australians and Kiwis to get something meaningful done.
Obama's weakness is not personal, it is geopolitical. The reality is that America is not as powerful as it used to be. For me, it's better to have a US president who understands that rather than one who does not.
It's not so much anti-UK as it is pro-status quo, if another country had done the same I'm sure Dave would have been there with Obama and Merkel doling out rubbish statements.
In a certain sense they do, but again trade harmonisation tends to come from above NAFTA in a lot of cases so it's not really an issue for Canada to enter a free trade deal with the UK/Australia/NZ all on the same terms.
I think we disagree on the last point, Obama is personally weak and it has led to upheaval in the middle east, worse than we've ever seen, it has led to Japan and other Asian countries moving away from the US sphere of influence, it has led to the EU moving away from the US sphere of influence. Obama just doesn't have "it" in the same way that Clinton (and even Bush to some degree) had "it" to ensure the US stays on top of the world order. However, this brings me to a bit of a contradiction on your part, you bang on about maltreatement from Obama as if it were the end of world (it isn't) but in the next sentence you are saying the US is weak rather than him personally. Both of those statements can't be true. If the US really is weak then it doesn't really matter what Obama thinks or says, if it isn't then it does matter, but the weakness would be personal to him and his presidency rather than the wider nation.
I am not banging on about maltreatment from Obama. I am saying he has said and done nothing wrong as far as the UK is concerned.
@tnewtondunn: Theresa May ups her war with Brexiters on Australia-style system. No10 at G20: "A Points Based System will not work and is not an option".
An income-based system, as suggested by @Max_PB, would be much simpler and fairer to operate than wasting effort determining if person X has Y qualification or Z years of experience.
LOL! That's actually pretty smart from Smith. I guess at this point he's appealing to those who voted Corbyn last year, rather than those who voted Conservative in the general election.
Is that N.Ireland on the front with the union jack? or what?
I heard/read that May's backsliding on immigration points is based on our supposed inability to effectively protect our borders.
I rolled my eyes - what a piss-poor 'too hard box' rationale. We're an island FFS. It's a great deal easier than almost everywhere else.
The UK has a land border with the EU.
So what?
Immigrants are going to fly to Dublin and then come to the UK are they? Great. They won't be entitled to work here unless they fulfil the criteria decided as necessary for our national interest.
Off topic, I was infuriated by Obama's comments at the G20. Puffed up pompous little Britain-hating prat.
I hope May tells him (or Clinton, who will doubtless be similiar) to jog on next time Uncle Sam wants our help. I also hope the US falls flat on its face with TTIP.
Special relationship my arse.
Just because Obama says stuff you don't want to hear doesn't mean that he hates Britain.
Obama was telling the May the truth which is much better than pretending there will be a deal. The USA has no big benefit from the split up of the EU. This is being done by the UK for the benefit of the UK.
If the UK is lucky it will keep the same trade relationship with the USA as we had before. That is the best we can hope for.
Yep - this was one of my main reasons for voting Remain. I just don't see us being able to get the kind of trade deals that would be necessary to compensate for no longer being part of the Single Market.
Except several Remain voting ministers have said how surprised they are at just how many countries are interested in doing a trade deal with the U.K.
The US is the exception, not the rule. Must be that fabled special relationship.
Everyone is interested I doing trade deals. That is different from getting then done. The terms, of course, are key.
Indeed so. But the language and mood music from Obama has been different from that of Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
I see this as significant. I appreciate others may disagree.
I heard/read that May's backsliding on immigration points is based on our supposed inability to effectively protect our borders.
I rolled my eyes - what a piss-poor 'too hard box' rationale. We're an island FFS. It's a great deal easier than almost everywhere else.
The UK has a land border with the EU.
So what?
Immigrants are going to fly to Dublin and then come to the UK are they? Great. They won't be entitled to work here unless they fulfil the criteria decided as necessary for our national interest.
I was responding to the notion that the UK was an island.
Comments
You are correct. But if that 30% feel angry and betrayed, that may change the dynamics of England and Wales politics.
I does seem that when this was written and under consideration then such circumstances as Calais and mass migration routes across "entire continents" as opposed to one country to the next were not at the forefront of their minds or really considered. Those with connections to the country appealed to have special status of course.
http://www.unhcr.org/uk/excom/scip/3ae68ccec/background-note-safe-country-concept-refugee-status.html
I've always thought Sarkozy was a complete fool. Do French votes want their government to get tough with
A. democratic, Western and reasonably prosperous core nato ally Britain,
Or
B. Islamist Turkey.
Many European politicians seem to be opting for A. over B. I suggest its the wrong strategy.
If the UK is lucky it will keep the same trade relationship with the USA as we had before. That is the best we can hope for.
The French have ignored the problem for so long because they hope the refugees will end up becoming a British problem. Unless they're trying to claim asylum *from* France, then why should the UK let them cross?
David Cameron had it completely right when he said we should pour aid money into countries around Syria to help those displaced by the war, Angela Merkel had it completely wrong when she suggested they should all come to Europe.
We are expected to heel to the US, but never the other way round.
Two of those three will be gone shortly, the third looks like being rocked to the core in an election.
He could have said that, respecting the decision of the British people, he would be happy to explore trade talks in parallel with the UK. Initially, on the basis of TTIP.
Particularly since that's what several US senators have said, and that TTIP is looking likely to fail anyway.
Absolutely. And yet who is the villain in Obama's eyes? Protectionist, socialist France?
No, its free trade Britain.
Five years of continual fighting about independence has left the economy in tatters. Many of the best brains have left and gone elsewhere and investment has been on hold forever. The economy survives at all due to the input of East Europeans.
Do we want more change? Absolutely not!
@Nigel_Farage: Mrs. May's rejection of the type of migration system so many voted Leave to see implemented indicates serious backsliding.
Soon to be 50 out of 600 presumably.
Does Obama really have any policy beyond his personal prejudices?
He has our support for free trade. It's the support of continental Europe he doesn't have. Yet he would rather have private meetings with them and try to bully us.
He's unravelling. its all emotion now. Not pretty for America.
I rolled my eyes - what a piss-poor 'too hard box' rationale. We're an island FFS. It's a great deal easier than almost everywhere else.
A reminder, should we need one, that countries have interests, not friends.
I take a gentler view of Obama's remarks. Obama still wants TTIP. He's not going to abandon that, or soft pedal to deal with the UK. We already have healthy bilateral trade under GATT. What's the benefit to his administration or the US?
Similarly, Japan's remarks are perfectly fair, and they were addressed to both the EU and UK. It's a reminder that the Brexit talks aren't between the UK and the EU27, the entire G20 (plus extras) is going to be pushing for a deal that, at worst, least damages their interests.
In terms of the Union, I didn't let that affect my vote. It's a matter for the Scots.
Finally, in terms of immigration systems, I've said repeatedly that the UK economy is far more complex than the Australian, and even they don't have a wholly point-based system. We'll have something complex to best match our economic needs.
So why is he slighting us and cosying up to them? its irrational, and emotional.
That's an easy system we could roll out globally and have reciprocated to British citizens looking to go overseas. If those wage barriers cause higher than expected immigration then they can be raised to cut immigration.
Your dark night of Remanian despair must have been of Scandinavian midsummer brevity.
http://bloom.bg/2cs2Olm
At no point did I say Nicola had a mandate for another vote.
'Where has he said that the UK is a villain? He has merely said that a trade deal with us will not be a US priority. '
The next time the US expects us to support them in some war and our military to fight & die alongside them , that definitely won't be a priority either.
Removes all doubt ,if there was any, that the so called 'special relationship' is complete bollocks.
I guess at this point he's appealing to those who voted Corbyn last year, rather than those who voted Conservative in the general election.
An 'interesting' interpretation.
What was most interesting about the G20 was not economic, it was political. In those terms it didn't go well for either the UK, US or EU. Obama's pivot to Asia is dead, the EU's relationship with Turkey is dead, the UK relationship with everyone has gone to "it's complicated" and Japan are making nice with Russia, while Turkey are doing the same. Both nations who have active US bases, one of which is extremely important in the defence of Europe from ISIS and the other extremely important for the defence of Asia from China.
Trade wasn't the most interesting part of the G20, it was merely a sideshow to the huge political upheaval in the world. Obama is the weakest President in my lifetime, neither Bush nor Clinton would have overseen a Japanese pivot to Russia and just shrugged their shoulders as Obama seems to have.
On our own trade, as I said yesterday, we should form a free trading zone for goods and services with Canada, Australia and New Zealand pretty quickly, all four nations have a shared heritage and will get on board quickly, we can see already those three nations are interested in trading with the UK on better terms than is currently allowed. Especially now that CETA looks to be dead.
Another 5 years of steady as it goes would have allowed the Unionists to chip away at the SNP vote and remove some of the hysteria Indyref introduced. Little Englanders is a fairly accurate description of the Brexiters given the harm they have done to the Union
The US is the exception, not the rule. Must be that fabled special relationship.
Any referendum wording would have to be agreed with the UK government. "Should Scots continue to live in an independent country?" would be an appropriate wording post Brexit.
Deals with Australia, Canada and New Zealand would be nice, and we can start to negotiate these once we have left the EU, but I am not sure how much extra each can give us - combined they have a slightly smaller population than France and already get a fair amount of UK exports. As part of NAFTA, Canada has to take that into consideration when negotiating free trade zones. They may not be as unconstrained as the Australians and Kiwis to get something meaningful done.
Obama's weakness is not personal, it is geopolitical. The reality is that America is not as powerful as it used to be. For me, it's better to have a US president who understands that rather than one who does not.
In Obama's case, there's an element of churlish petulance about the result as well, given he found out the British don't think he walks on water.
"Nicola has a mandate"
"No, she doesn't"
"But you said something about a completely different subject 6 weeks ago"
"So she still doesn't have a mandate"
"An 'interesting' interpretation."
Glad we cleared that one up...
https://www.markiteconomics.com/Survey/PressRelease.mvc/3de4f3638ea3472bb7b986ebe0b9931d
Libya was as much the UKs idea as the US
Gulf War 2 was Tony's idea
Afghanistan was again something most of the UK was up for
Gulf War 1 involved protecting UKs interested in Saudi
Vietnam we said no.
https://www.markiteconomics.com/Survey/PressRelease.mvc/3de4f3638ea3472bb7b986ebe0b9931d
Based on UK sector splits and excluding oil and gas, it gives a composite PMI of 52.7 for August.
However, on the second point, we failed on that: there is a single power that dominates Europe and that is the eurozone/EU, which is dominated by Germany. We were powerless to stop it.
It really is taking it a bit far to say that in order to stop one power dominating Europe we have to join and become part of that power.
Personally, I'd argue the only way to genuinely do it is to leave the EU and form an alternative epicentre of European power outwith it, which is precisely what we've done.
Chris Williamson
Risk of imminent recession fades as record rise pushes ‘all sector’ UK PMI up to 53.2 v 47.4 in July. https://t.co/cRICwfb4UB
That might explain a lot.
I have huge respect for him and his integrity.
Just as many Brexiters voted the way they did because they thought it was best for the UK.
The churlish petulance this morning is coming from some moaning leavers.
One good thing to come out of Brexit is that it will hopefully not only "reset" our relationship with the EU it will also "reset" our relationship with Uncle Sam.
If we realize we are unimportant and irrelevant to the US hopefully British prime Ministers will refuse to get involved in all their stupid, pointless wars from now on...
In a certain sense they do, but again trade harmonisation tends to come from above NAFTA in a lot of cases so it's not really an issue for Canada to enter a free trade deal with the UK/Australia/NZ all on the same terms.
I think we disagree on the last point, Obama is personally weak and it has led to upheaval in the middle east, worse than we've ever seen, it has led to Japan and other Asian countries moving away from the US sphere of influence, it has led to the EU moving away from the US sphere of influence. Obama just doesn't have "it" in the same way that Clinton (and even Bush to some degree) had "it" to ensure the US stays on top of the world order. However, this brings me to a bit of a contradiction on your part, you bang on about maltreatement from Obama as if it were the end of world (it isn't) but in the next sentence you are saying the US is weak rather than him personally. Both of those statements can't be true. If the US really is weak then it doesn't really matter what Obama thinks or says, if it isn't then it does matter, but the weakness would be personal to him and his presidency rather than the wider nation.
Add a few tweaks such as making income tax allowances monthly, so someone here for half a year doesnt effectively get a double allowance. Things can then be tweaked year on year to control numbers and allow for exemptions, eg for nurses, graduate trainees, other shortage trades and professions etc.
Bankrupt Britain
Pleading for IMF bailout
Huge desire for Tory Britain
The British public has just decided the British national interest - and frankly its a little ungracious of foreign heads of state to criticise them for it.....
Immigrants are going to fly to Dublin and then come to the UK are they? Great. They won't be entitled to work here unless they fulfil the criteria decided as necessary for our national interest.
I see this as significant. I appreciate others may disagree.
I wonder what odds you could get on UKIP carding a 20% poll score with a reputable pollster before the end of 2016. And 2017.
A ticky-boxy system?