politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The single market versus immigration: what do voters really

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The single market versus immigration: what do voters really want from Brexit?

As Westminster returns from holiday and the Labour leadership contest draws to a close attention is turning to Theresa May’s debut on the world stage and what ‘Brexit means Brexit’ will actually mean in practice. This week, Lord Ashcroft has produced some polling (conducted in August) that attempts to find out what voters think Brexit should mean.

Read the full story here

Sandpit

Gold medal?

RobD

Glorious second!

Speedy

It's not very complicated, voters want some immigration controls above access to the single market, though how much control over immigration is debatable.

The debate about Brexit is still revolving around immigration and not free trade.

DavidL

Really surprised that SNP supporters put more weight on controlling immigration, especially as immigration is nothing like the problem in Scotland that it is in southern England.

TheScreamingEagles

DavidL said:

Really surprised that SNP supporters put more weight on controlling immigration, especially as immigration is nothing like the problem in Scotland that it is in southern England.

Could be plausible if the SNP supporters view English people living in Scotland as immigrants.

IIRC the English living in Scotland voting heavily for No in 2014.

Speedy

DavidL said:

Really surprised that SNP supporters put more weight on controlling immigration, especially as immigration is nothing like the problem in Scotland that it is in southern England.

It's not surprising if you think that the SNP is comprised by 1/3rd Tory, 1/3rd Labour and 1/3rd Liberal voters.

DavidL

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

Really surprised that SNP supporters put more weight on controlling immigration, especially as immigration is nothing like the problem in Scotland that it is in southern England.

Could be plausible if the SNP supporters view English people living in Scotland as immigrants.

IIRC the English living in Scotland voting heavily for No in 2014.

Still seems odd. To be honest another 500K people in Scotland would almost certainly boost the economy a lot more than North Sea oil is ever going to again.

Speedy

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

Really surprised that SNP supporters put more weight on controlling immigration, especially as immigration is nothing like the problem in Scotland that it is in southern England.

Could be plausible if the SNP supporters view English people living in Scotland as immigrants.

IIRC the English living in Scotland voting heavily for No in 2014.

Still seems odd. To be honest another 500K people in Scotland would almost certainly boost the economy a lot more than North Sea oil is ever going to again.

The SNP is not a monolithic entity, it has a wide collection of voters ranging from conservatives to the far left, the only thing they have in common is independence.

HYUFD

Obviously May is going to try and control migration as she has said however she has also said she wants a free trade deal so is not trying to pursue either hard or soft Brexit but both. Most other polls have shown over 50% want some single market membership and some controlled migration, only 30% want no free movement and no single market membership at all and 20% free movement as now and full single market membership so this poll does not contradict that.

However as more warnings come of factories moving to the EU, part of the London insurance market following etc getting some single market membership will become ever more important

DavidL

Speedy said:

DavidL said:

Really surprised that SNP supporters put more weight on controlling immigration, especially as immigration is nothing like the problem in Scotland that it is in southern England.

It's not surprising if you think that the SNP is comprised by 1/3rd Tory, 1/3rd Labour and 1/3rd Liberal voters.

I think the SNP are now nearly 2/3 ex Labour which is why they lost ground in traditional tory areas at the Scottish elections. They are portraying themselves as a firmly centre left party whilst Salmond was always just a bit more ambiguous about it.

Of course, according to this poll Labour supporters are more concerned about immigration too. Presumably they did not do their polling of Labour supporters in London.

HYUFD

DavidL said:

Really surprised that SNP supporters put more weight on controlling immigration, especially as immigration is nothing like the problem in Scotland that it is in southern England.

The SNP is a nationalist party so not really that surprising

Speedy

HYUFD said:

Obviously May is going to try and control migration as she has said however she has also said she wants a free trade deal so is not trying to pursue either hard or soft Brexit but both. Most other polls have shown over 50% want some single market membership and some controlled migration, only 30% want no free movement and no single market membership at all and 20% free movement as now and full single market membership so this poll does not contradict that.

However as more warnings come of factories moving to the EU, part of the London insurance market etc getting some single market membership will become ever more important

Not really, thanks to the devaluation of the pound it's about the same or a bit cheaper to make products in the UK than in the EU.

kle4

Sharper divide than I would have thought. Medium hard Brexit a more likely result than Medium soft Brexit.

ydoethur

Speedy said:

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

Really surprised that SNP supporters put more weight on controlling immigration, especially as immigration is nothing like the problem in Scotland that it is in southern England.

Could be plausible if the SNP supporters view English people living in Scotland as immigrants.

IIRC the English living in Scotland voting heavily for No in 2014.

Still seems odd. To be honest another 500K people in Scotland would almost certainly boost the economy a lot more than North Sea oil is ever going to again.

The SNP is not a monolithic entity, it has a wide collection of voters ranging from conservatives to the far left, the only thing they have in common is independence.

45% voted for independence.

Six months later 50% voted for the SNP.

I think the key determinant of at least a large minority of SNP voters is that they believe the SNP will try to promote Scotland's interests whereas they believe the other three (maybe four) parties are dominated by Londoners who are as distant from Scotland as the average Martian.

This view may or may not be correct but it is at least a perfectly rational decision. if current polling is to be believed maybe as many as half of SNP voters are not interested in immediate independence, a striking indictment of the failure of Westminster parties north of the border.

Incidentally I shall be absent from PB for at least the next several weeks as term begins, as my workload is going to be too heavy to spend time mucking around online. I don't know when - or indeed, given the pressures I am under, if - I will be back. So thank you now to everyone for all the debates, discussions and arguments, and I wish you all well.

John_M

kle4 said:

Sharper divide than I would have thought. Medium hard Brexit a more likely result than Medium soft Brexit.

I don't think May will take overmuch notice of Lord Ashcroft's polls. She'll give us a political Brexit, i.e. that which is achievable.

As long as we're outside the political structures of the EU, I'll be content.

HurstLlama

HYUFD said:

...

However as more warnings come of factories moving to the EU, part of the London insurance market following etc getting some single market membership will become ever more important

I very much doubt it as we heard all those same things on the run up to the decision as to whether to join the Euro. The Lloyds one I thought particularly spectacular, given that Lloyds is a market and not a company.

Sandpit

Thanks Kieran, good article on presentation of polling questions, always worth remembering when looking at 'headline' figures from someone with skin in the game.

Speedy

DavidL said:

Speedy said:

DavidL said:

Really surprised that SNP supporters put more weight on controlling immigration, especially as immigration is nothing like the problem in Scotland that it is in southern England.

It's not surprising if you think that the SNP is comprised by 1/3rd Tory, 1/3rd Labour and 1/3rd Liberal voters.

I think the SNP are now nearly 2/3 ex Labour which is why they lost ground in traditional tory areas at the Scottish elections. They are portraying themselves as a firmly centre left party whilst Salmond was always just a bit more ambiguous about it.

Of course, according to this poll Labour supporters are more concerned about immigration too. Presumably they did not do their polling of Labour supporters in London.

London is in a world of it's own.

I did a check on both yougov polls from the 2015 and the 2016 Labour leaders race, Corbyn's performance in 2016 is reversed, he does the worst in London and Scotland and best in the North and the Midlands, exactly the opposite from 2015.

Pretty much like the CLP nominations.

kle4

Theuniondivvie said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Cyclefree said:

TOPPING said:

Cyclefree said:

TOPPING said:

HYUFD said:

Sean_F said:

@Gardenwalker has it. The reality will be that Brexit means we will have to face up to ourselves and that it is and has been our own decisions that have been responsible for much of the woes that eg. the poor have suffered.

OK that's fine - evidently no political system, or colour of government was going to fix it, not Lab, not Cons so the UK had to do something drastic; like cutting down your apple tree to get the ball back that was stuck in the branches.

It's a shame, though, because it really was not the EU that was responsible for the poverty in the UK, nor for taking our "sovereignty" and forcing us to do very much against our will that we might not have done anyway.

Actually (and blowing my own trumpet here) I said as much here -
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/06/18/britains-original-sins/ and here - http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/07/12/uniting-the-country/.

I think the EU's political culture did not help and had, in some cases, a baleful influence on British politics. The top down somewhat elitist approach, the contempt for democracy, the endless reiteration of there being no alternative, of the destination being irreversible, the refusal to deal with people's concerns, the elevation of principles and currencies into sacred cows all led to the referendum result. EU politicians have their share of the blame, even if British politicians also do. Fundamentally, I think British democracy has particular roots which being in the EU were not nurtured and were in some cases harmed. Where the EU was good at helping to reinforce democracy in former Warsaw Pact countries, it harmed or was indifferent to British political culture and British democracy, from which it could have learnt much.

To sum it up in one sentence. We didn't go through what we went through in the 20th century so that an unelected Belgian could tell us what weed killer we could or couldnt put on the marigold beds in our garden.

Perhaps what continental Europeans went through in the 20th century makes them feel that an unelected Belgian (or Pole or Irishman) making decisions on weedkiller is an entirely acceptable price to pay to prevent it happening again.

But that specific price is not necessary. The bigger sovereignty issues may well be, the that one is not.

John_M

Sandpit said:

Thanks Kieran, good article on presentation of polling questions, always worth remembering when looking at 'headline' figures from someone with skin in the game.

People don't understand the single market. It's almost pointless asking them questions about it. Look at the difficulties people have distinguishing 'access' and 'membership'.

kle4

John_M said:

kle4 said:

Sharper divide than I would have thought. Medium hard Brexit a more likely result than Medium soft Brexit.

I don't think May will take overmuch notice of Lord Ashcroft's polls. She'll give us a political Brexit, i.e. that which is achievable.

That was my point. Medium Hard Brexit seems more achievable, not merely because but backed up by these numbers, than Medium Soft Brexit.

And yes, to anyone wondering, I am aware the distinctions between those two are currently undefined.

HYUFD

Speedy said:

HYUFD said:

Obviously May is going to try and control migration as she has said however she has also said she wants a free trade deal so is not trying to pursue either hard or soft Brexit but both. Most other polls have shown over 50% want some single market membership and some controlled migration, only 30% want no free movement and no single market membership at all and 20% free movement as now and full single market membership so this poll does not contradict that.

However as more warnings come of factories moving to the EU, part of the London insurance market etc getting some single market membership will become ever more important

Not really, thanks to the devaluation of the pound it's about the same or a bit cheaper to make products in the UK than in the EU.

Not if you are importing components into the UK

TheScreamingEagles

It'll be a crying shame if/when we're no longer members of the single market, because I rate The Single European Act as the finest bit of legislation Lady Thatcher passed as Prime Minister

HurstLlama

ydoethur said:

Speedy said:

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

Really surprised that SNP supporters put more weight on controlling immigration, especially as immigration is nothing like the problem in Scotland that it is in southern England.

Could be plausible if the SNP supporters view English people living in Scotland as immigrants.

IIRC the English living in Scotland voting heavily for No in 2014.

Still seems odd. To be honest another 500K people in Scotland would almost certainly boost the economy a lot more than North Sea oil is ever going to again.

The SNP is not a monolithic entity, it has a wide collection of voters ranging from conservatives to the far left, the only thing they have in common is independence.

45% voted for independence.

Six months later 50% voted for the SNP.

I think the key determinant of at least a large minority of SNP voters is that they believe the SNP will try to promote Scotland's interests whereas they believe the other three (maybe four) parties are dominated by Londoners who are as distant from Scotland as the average Martian.

This view may or may not be correct but it is at least a perfectly rational decision. if current polling is to be believed maybe as many as half of SNP voters are not interested in immediate independence, a striking indictment of the failure of Westminster parties north of the border.

Incidentally I shall be absent from PB for at least the next several weeks as term begins, as my workload is going to be too heavy to spend time mucking around online. I don't know when - or indeed, given the pressures I am under, if - I will be back. So thank you now to everyone for all the debates, discussions and arguments, and I wish you all well.

Good luck with the new term, Doc and with the new syllabus. I hope you will be able to pop in from time to time to let us know how it is going, even if it is just a quick update on a Saturday evening or Sunday morning.

Rest assured your erudite and sagacious contributions will be sorely missed.

Take care of yourself.

Oh, and good luck with the organ.

GIN1138

kle4 said:

Sharper divide than I would have thought. Medium hard Brexit a more likely result than Medium soft Brexit.

James seems to think we're leaving the single market and the cutoms union?



What has become clear in the last week or so, is that the UK is not going to end up staying in the single market—in either the EU or the EEA. Davis’s appearance today also suggested that the UK would leave the customs union when it left the EU. However, it is also becoming apparent that the UK relationship with the EU on matters such as security means that post-Brexit, the UK and the EU will have more than just a trading relationship.



http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/clues-david-davis-means-brexit/

HYUFD

HurstLlama said:

HYUFD said:

...

However as more warnings come of factories moving to the EU, part of the London insurance market following etc getting some single market membership will become ever more important

I very much doubt it as we heard all those same things on the run up to the decision as to whether to join the Euro. The Lloyds one I thought particularly spectacular, given that Lloyds is a market and not a company.

Part of the Lloyds insurance market is made up of Japanese insurance companies now which partly explains it. The Euro was also a different kettle of fish as even outside it we were still in the same free trading area as the Eurozone and the £ was stronger

John_M

HYUFD said:

Speedy said:

HYUFD said:

Obviously May is going to try and control migration as she has said however she has also said she wants a free trade deal so is not trying to pursue either hard or soft Brexit but both. Most other polls have shown over 50% want some single market membership and some controlled migration, only 30% want no free movement and no single market membership at all and 20% free movement as now and full single market membership so this poll does not contradict that.

However as more warnings come of factories moving to the EU, part of the London insurance market etc getting some single market membership will become ever more important

Not really, thanks to the devaluation of the pound it's about the same or a bit cheaper to make products in the UK than in the EU.

Not if you are importing components into the UK

Car component tariffs are ~3.5%. All the current tariffs are nullified by the sterling devaluation bar agricultural products (19%). They're not the point. It's all the NTBs which would make it a giant pita for automotive companies.

FrancisUrquhart

Hi, my name's Jim...lets get this party started.

HYUFD

TheScreamingEagles said:

It'll be a crying shame if/when we're no longer members of the single market, because I rate The Single European Act as the finest bit of legislation Lady Thatcher passed as Prime Minister

Particularly for all those Leave voters in Sunderland and Derby etc who will end up on the dole! Though some Remain voters will not be exactly filled with sorrow

AndyJS

Apparently Brexit has led to a surge in interest in London property, the opposite of what we were led to believe beforehand:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-uk-leaves-the-eu-37260267

DavidL

ydoethur said:

Speedy said:

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

Really surprised that SNP supporters put more weight on controlling immigration, especially as immigration is nothing like the problem in Scotland that it is in southern England.

Could be plausible if the SNP supporters view English people living in Scotland as immigrants.

IIRC the English living in Scotland voting heavily for No in 2014.

Still seems odd. To be honest another 500K people in Scotland would almost certainly boost the economy a lot more than North Sea oil is ever going to again.

The SNP is not a monolithic entity, it has a wide collection of voters ranging from conservatives to the far left, the only thing they have in common is independence.

45% voted for independence.

Six months later 50% voted for the SNP.

I think the key determinant of at least a large minority of SNP voters is that they believe the SNP will try to promote Scotland's interests whereas they believe the other three (maybe four) parties are dominated by Londoners who are as distant from Scotland as the average Martian.

This view may or may not be correct but it is at least a perfectly rational decision. if current polling is to be believed maybe as many as half of SNP voters are not interested in immediate independence, a striking indictment of the failure of Westminster parties north of the border.

Incidentally I shall be absent from PB for at least the next several weeks as term begins, as my workload is going to be too heavy to spend time mucking around online. I don't know when - or indeed, given the pressures I am under, if - I will be back. So thank you now to everyone for all the debates, discussions and arguments, and I wish you all well.

Everyone needs some downtime. Pop in when you can. You'll be missed.

TheScreamingEagles

ydoethur said:

Speedy said:

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

Really surprised that SNP supporters put more weight on controlling immigration, especially as immigration is nothing like the problem in Scotland that it is in southern England.

Could be plausible if the SNP supporters view English people living in Scotland as immigrants.

IIRC the English living in Scotland voting heavily for No in 2014.

Still seems odd. To be honest another 500K people in Scotland would almost certainly boost the economy a lot more than North Sea oil is ever going to again.

The SNP is not a monolithic entity, it has a wide collection of voters ranging from conservatives to the far left, the only thing they have in common is independence.

45% voted for independence.

Six months later 50% voted for the SNP.

I think the key determinant of at least a large minority of SNP voters is that they believe the SNP will try to promote Scotland's interests whereas they believe the other three (maybe four) parties are dominated by Londoners who are as distant from Scotland as the average Martian.

This view may or may not be correct but it is at least a perfectly rational decision. if current polling is to be believed maybe as many as half of SNP voters are not interested in immediate independence, a striking indictment of the failure of Westminster parties north of the border.

Incidentally I shall be absent from PB for at least the next several weeks as term begins, as my workload is going to be too heavy to spend time mucking around online. I don't know when - or indeed, given the pressures I am under, if - I will be back. So thank you now to everyone for all the debates, discussions and arguments, and I wish you all well.

Come back soon!

GIN1138

FrancisUrquhart said:

Hi, my name's Jim...lets get this party started.

I'd like a Zanussi spin drier please...

HYUFD

ydoethur said:

Speedy said:

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

Really surprised that SNP supporters put more weight on controlling immigration, especially as immigration is nothing like the problem in Scotland that it is in southern England.

Could be plausible if the SNP supporters view English people living in Scotland as immigrants.

IIRC the English living in Scotland voting heavily for No in 2014.

Still seems odd. To be honest another 500K people in Scotland would almost certainly boost the economy a lot more than North Sea oil is ever going to again.

The SNP is not a monolithic entity, it has a wide collection of voters ranging from conservatives to the far left, the only thing they have in common is independence.

45% voted for independence.

Six months later 50% voted for the SNP.

I think the key determinant of at least a large minority of SNP voters is that they believe the SNP will try to promote Scotland's interests whereas they believe the other three (maybe four) parties are dominated by Londoners who are as distant from Scotland as the average Martian.

This view may or may not be correct but it is at least a perfectly rational decision. if current polling is to be believed maybe as many as half of SNP voters are not interested in immediate independence, a striking indictment of the failure of Westminster parties north of the border.

Incidentally I shall be absent from PB for at least the next several weeks as term begins, as my workload is going to be too heavy to spend time mucking around online. I don't know when - or indeed, given the pressures I am under, if - I will be back. So thank you now to everyone for all the debates, discussions and arguments, and I wish you all well.

Have a good term and pop in if you ever get a chance. I am off to the Canaries for a week tomorrow just as the off peak season begins as the schools go back

DavidL

GIN1138 said:

kle4 said:

Sharper divide than I would have thought. Medium hard Brexit a more likely result than Medium soft Brexit.

James seems to think we're leaving the single market and the cutoms union?



What has become clear in the last week or so, is that the UK is not going to end up staying in the single market—in either the EU or the EEA. Davis’s appearance today also suggested that the UK would leave the customs union when it left the EU. However, it is also becoming apparent that the UK relationship with the EU on matters such as security means that post-Brexit, the UK and the EU will have more than just a trading relationship.



http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/clues-david-davis-means-brexit/

Am I alone in still being worried that someone as pratty as David Davis is destined to play such a major role in this?

HYUFD

AndyJS said:

Apparently Brexit has led to a surge in interest in London property, the opposite of what we were led to believe beforehand:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-uk-leaves-the-eu-37260267

Mainly foreigners looking for cheap deals to rent out because of the low £

kle4

DavidL said:

GIN1138 said:

kle4 said:

Sharper divide than I would have thought. Medium hard Brexit a more likely result than Medium soft Brexit.

James seems to think we're leaving the single market and the cutoms union?



What has become clear in the last week or so, is that the UK is not going to end up staying in the single market—in either the EU or the EEA. Davis’s appearance today also suggested that the UK would leave the customs union when it left the EU. However, it is also becoming apparent that the UK relationship with the EU on matters such as security means that post-Brexit, the UK and the EU will have more than just a trading relationship.



http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/clues-david-davis-means-brexit/

Am I alone in still being worried that someone as pratty as David Davis is destined to play such a major role in this?

Nope.

John_M

DavidL said:

GIN1138 said:

kle4 said:

Sharper divide than I would have thought. Medium hard Brexit a more likely result than Medium soft Brexit.

James seems to think we're leaving the single market and the cutoms union?



What has become clear in the last week or so, is that the UK is not going to end up staying in the single market—in either the EU or the EEA. Davis’s appearance today also suggested that the UK would leave the customs union when it left the EU. However, it is also becoming apparent that the UK relationship with the EU on matters such as security means that post-Brexit, the UK and the EU will have more than just a trading relationship.



http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/clues-david-davis-means-brexit/

Am I alone in still being worried that someone as pratty as David Davis is destined to play such a major role in this?

As Davis stated this afternoon, May is leading the negotiations. His department is there to support her. I appreciate this may not allay your concerns .

TheScreamingEagles

DavidL said:

GIN1138 said:

kle4 said:

Sharper divide than I would have thought. Medium hard Brexit a more likely result than Medium soft Brexit.

James seems to think we're leaving the single market and the cutoms union?



What has become clear in the last week or so, is that the UK is not going to end up staying in the single market—in either the EU or the EEA. Davis’s appearance today also suggested that the UK would leave the customs union when it left the EU. However, it is also becoming apparent that the UK relationship with the EU on matters such as security means that post-Brexit, the UK and the EU will have more than just a trading relationship.



http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/clues-david-davis-means-brexit/

Am I alone in still being worried that someone as pratty as David Davis is destined to play such a major role in this?

You're not the only one.

Today's Brexit Questions was David Davis versus Emily Thornberry.

I weep for my country.

justin124

DavidL said:

Speedy said:

DavidL said:

Really surprised that SNP supporters put more weight on controlling immigration, especially as immigration is nothing like the problem in Scotland that it is in southern England.

It's not surprising if you think that the SNP is comprised by 1/3rd Tory, 1/3rd Labour and 1/3rd Liberal voters.

I think the SNP are now nearly 2/3 ex Labour which is why they lost ground in traditional tory areas at the Scottish elections. They are portraying themselves as a firmly centre left party whilst Salmond was always just a bit more ambiguous about it.

I agree with that , and believe that much of the increase in Tory support in Scotland is to be explained by the return of former Tory voters who for the last 25 years had been voting SNP on a tactical Anti-Labour basis. It remains to be seen whether former Labour voters will do likewise when the SNP falters.

HYUFD

John_M said:

HYUFD said:

Speedy said:

HYUFD said:

Obviously May is going to try and control migration as she has said however she has also said she wants a free trade deal so is not trying to pursue either hard or soft Brexit but both. Most other polls have shown over 50% want some single market membership and some controlled migration, only 30% want no free movement and no single market membership at all and 20% free movement as now and full single market membership so this poll does not contradict that.

However as more warnings come of factories moving to the EU, part of the London insurance market etc getting some single market membership will become ever more important

Not really, thanks to the devaluation of the pound it's about the same or a bit cheaper to make products in the UK than in the EU.

Not if you are importing components into the UK

Car component tariffs are ~3.5%. All the current tariffs are nullified by the sterling devaluation bar agricultural products (19%). They're not the point. It's all the NTBs which would make it a giant pita for automotive companies.

Which would come back with a vengeance on exporters to the EU from the UK if we leave the single market

GIN1138

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

GIN1138 said:

kle4 said:

Sharper divide than I would have thought. Medium hard Brexit a more likely result than Medium soft Brexit.

James seems to think we're leaving the single market and the cutoms union?



What has become clear in the last week or so, is that the UK is not going to end up staying in the single market—in either the EU or the EEA. Davis’s appearance today also suggested that the UK would leave the customs union when it left the EU. However, it is also becoming apparent that the UK relationship with the EU on matters such as security means that post-Brexit, the UK and the EU will have more than just a trading relationship.



http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/clues-david-davis-means-brexit/

Am I alone in still being worried that someone as pratty as David Davis is destined to play such a major role in this?

You're not the only one.

Today's Brexit Questions was David Davis versus Emily Thornberry.

I weep for my country.

By all accounts DD did quite well?

nunu

Speedy said:

It's not very complicated, voters want some immigration controls above access to the single market, though how much control over immigration is debatable.

The debate about Brexit is still revolving around immigration and not free trade.

We are going to see a Polish delicatessen on every corner..............

Speedy

Theuniondivvie said:

Perhaps what continental Europeans went through in the 20th century makes them feel that an unelected Belgian (or Pole or Irishman) making decisions on weedkiller is an entirely acceptable price to pay to prevent it happening again.

I agree about history having a marking.

For some countries it's about economic issues, in some it's social issues like history.

Eastern Europe with the exception of Greece and ex-Yugoslavia it's only about the money, they don't like europe because of memories of it's soviet counterpart, you can see the euroskeptic divide right through the former East German border, but they like the money.

Ex-yugoslavia is in to protect them from the serbs.

Greece is in to protect them from the turks.

Iberia is clearly in only for the money they get.

Germany is in it for economic dominance, as usual.

France is in it for political dominance, as usual.

Belgium for the perks of having the capital.

The Netherlands to re-export german stuff.

The baltics to protect them from the russians.

The scandinavians for a market for their high quality stuff, though they don't produce anymore.

Ireland to protect them from the english.

But no one knows why Italy is in it.

TheScreamingEagles

The morning thread may contain, one or two, very subtle* references to Star Wars.

*Subtle by my standards anyway

MP_SE

John_M said:

Sandpit said:

Thanks Kieran, good article on presentation of polling questions, always worth remembering when looking at 'headline' figures from someone with skin in the game.

People don't understand the single market. It's almost pointless asking them questions about it. Look at the difficulties people have distinguishing 'access' and 'membership'.

There appears to be a conscious effort to conflate access and membership of the single market. Just like Europe and the EU.

tyson

Oh good. Not a YUP or childish smiley face in sight. Some people here are at least growing up.

WE can all agree on one thing.....Didn't David David make a right twat of himself today? I think I am going to start Nick Palmers tick tock thing to mark the time when the country fully realises that Brexit was a horrible, terrible mistake. A Utopian wet dream for right wing fantasists for a future that ain't going to happen. The Brexit countdown to moron status is ticking.......

AlastairMeeks

DavidL said:

GIN1138 said:

kle4 said:

Sharper divide than I would have thought. Medium hard Brexit a more likely result than Medium soft Brexit.

James seems to think we're leaving the single market and the cutoms union?



What has become clear in the last week or so, is that the UK is not going to end up staying in the single market—in either the EU or the EEA. Davis’s appearance today also suggested that the UK would leave the customs union when it left the EU. However, it is also becoming apparent that the UK relationship with the EU on matters such as security means that post-Brexit, the UK and the EU will have more than just a trading relationship.



http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/clues-david-davis-means-brexit/

Am I alone in still being worried that someone as pratty as David Davis is destined to play such a major role in this?

Which Eurosceptic luminaries did you regard as being this side of the prat event horizon?

John_M

Completely off topic. If inflation hits 3%, that's worth about £48.6bn p.a. off the national debt.

TheScreamingEagles

AlastairMeeks said:

DavidL said:

GIN1138 said:

kle4 said:

Sharper divide than I would have thought. Medium hard Brexit a more likely result than Medium soft Brexit.

James seems to think we're leaving the single market and the cutoms union?



What has become clear in the last week or so, is that the UK is not going to end up staying in the single market—in either the EU or the EEA. Davis’s appearance today also suggested that the UK would leave the customs union when it left the EU. However, it is also becoming apparent that the UK relationship with the EU on matters such as security means that post-Brexit, the UK and the EU will have more than just a trading relationship.



http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/clues-david-davis-means-brexit/

Am I alone in still being worried that someone as pratty as David Davis is destined to play such a major role in this?

Which Eurosceptic luminaries did you regard as being this side of the prat event horizon?

Dominic Raab.

Mortimer

TheScreamingEagles said:

It'll be a crying shame if/when we're no longer members of the single market, because I rate The Single European Act as the finest bit of legislation Lady Thatcher passed as Prime Minister

Not the anti Union legislation? I'm a big fan of that.

DavidL

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

GIN1138 said:

kle4 said:

Sharper divide than I would have thought. Medium hard Brexit a more likely result than Medium soft Brexit.

James seems to think we're leaving the single market and the cutoms union?



What has become clear in the last week or so, is that the UK is not going to end up staying in the single market—in either the EU or the EEA. Davis’s appearance today also suggested that the UK would leave the customs union when it left the EU. However, it is also becoming apparent that the UK relationship with the EU on matters such as security means that post-Brexit, the UK and the EU will have more than just a trading relationship.



http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/clues-david-davis-means-brexit/

Am I alone in still being worried that someone as pratty as David Davis is destined to play such a major role in this?

You're not the only one.

Today's Brexit Questions was David Davis versus Emily Thornberry.

I weep for my country.

Christ, how many jobs does that woman have?

TheScreamingEagles

Mortimer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

It'll be a crying shame if/when we're no longer members of the single market, because I rate The Single European Act as the finest bit of legislation Lady Thatcher passed as Prime Minister

Not the anti Union legislation? I'm a big fan of that.

Second on my list.

Alistair

ydoethur said:

Speedy said:

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

Really surprised that SNP supporters put more weight on controlling immigration, especially as immigration is nothing like the problem in Scotland that it is in southern England.

Could be plausible if the SNP supporters view English people living in Scotland as immigrants.

IIRC the English living in Scotland voting heavily for No in 2014.

Still seems odd. To be honest another 500K people in Scotland would almost certainly boost the economy a lot more than North Sea oil is ever going to again.

The SNP is not a monolithic entity, it has a wide collection of voters ranging from conservatives to the far left, the only thing they have in common is independence.

45% voted for independence.

Six months later 50% voted for the SNP.

Indy Ref Turnout: 84.6%
Scottish General Election Turnout: 71.1%
Holyrood election Turnout: 55.6%

I think there might be some differential turnout going on.

John_M

Also OT, slogging through Hansard, Japanese companies have 140k UK employees.

Speedy

GIN1138 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

GIN1138 said:

kle4 said:

Sharper divide than I would have thought. Medium hard Brexit a more likely result than Medium soft Brexit.

James seems to think we're leaving the single market and the cutoms union?



What has become clear in the last week or so, is that the UK is not going to end up staying in the single market—in either the EU or the EEA. Davis’s appearance today also suggested that the UK would leave the customs union when it left the EU. However, it is also becoming apparent that the UK relationship with the EU on matters such as security means that post-Brexit, the UK and the EU will have more than just a trading relationship.



http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/clues-david-davis-means-brexit/

Am I alone in still being worried that someone as pratty as David Davis is destined to play such a major role in this?

You're not the only one.

Today's Brexit Questions was David Davis versus Emily Thornberry.

I weep for my country.

By all accounts DD did quite well?

For someone who is still in love with George Osborne what did you expect his emotions about David Davis to be ?

HurstLlama

John_M said:

Sandpit said:

Thanks Kieran, good article on presentation of polling questions, always worth remembering when looking at 'headline' figures from someone with skin in the game.

People don't understand the single market. It's almost pointless asking them questions about it. Look at the difficulties people have distinguishing 'access' and 'membership'.

Let us face it, Mr. M, a great part of the electorate are absolutely clueless about just about everything and especially anything involving numbers (about 40% of adults have less than the numerical ability expected of 14 year olds, which means that any discussion involving percentages goes straight over their heads).

Yet we are all supposed to pretend that universal suffrage is such a spiffing idea.

AlastairMeeks

An excellent article by Keiran Pedley. Two points in particular:

1) what if the public want the unattainable? Should the government still try for it or should they aim for more attainable goals?

2) what if the public change their minds later? The government would presumably prefer to target the public's final choice rather than their first one.

GIN1138

tyson said:

Oh good. Not a YUP or childish smiley face in sight. Some people here are at least growing up.

That's what you think!

HurstLlama

DavidL said:

GIN1138 said:

kle4 said:

Sharper divide than I would have thought. Medium hard Brexit a more likely result than Medium soft Brexit.

James seems to think we're leaving the single market and the cutoms union?



What has become clear in the last week or so, is that the UK is not going to end up staying in the single market—in either the EU or the EEA. Davis’s appearance today also suggested that the UK would leave the customs union when it left the EU. However, it is also becoming apparent that the UK relationship with the EU on matters such as security means that post-Brexit, the UK and the EU will have more than just a trading relationship.



http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/clues-david-davis-means-brexit/

Am I alone in still being worried that someone as pratty as David Davis is destined to play such a major role in this?

I very much doubt it. Doesn't mean you are correct of course.

TheScreamingEagles

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

GIN1138 said:

kle4 said:

Sharper divide than I would have thought. Medium hard Brexit a more likely result than Medium soft Brexit.

James seems to think we're leaving the single market and the cutoms union?



What has become clear in the last week or so, is that the UK is not going to end up staying in the single market—in either the EU or the EEA. Davis’s appearance today also suggested that the UK would leave the customs union when it left the EU. However, it is also becoming apparent that the UK relationship with the EU on matters such as security means that post-Brexit, the UK and the EU will have more than just a trading relationship.



http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/clues-david-davis-means-brexit/

Am I alone in still being worried that someone as pratty as David Davis is destined to play such a major role in this?

You're not the only one.

Today's Brexit Questions was David Davis versus Emily Thornberry.

I weep for my country.

Christ, how many jobs does that woman have?

Four I think.

Shadow Foreign Secretary, Shadow Brexit Secretary, MP for Islington South, and Shadow Minister for English Flags and White Van Man

john_zims

@Speedy

'It's not very complicated, voters want some immigration controls above access to the single market, though how much control over immigration is debatable.

The debate about Brexit is still revolving around immigration and not free trade.'


Spot on, good luck to any politicians that choose to ignore it.

FrancisUrquhart

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

GIN1138 said:

kle4 said:

Sharper divide than I would have thought. Medium hard Brexit a more likely result than Medium soft Brexit.

James seems to think we're leaving the single market and the cutoms union?



What has become clear in the last week or so, is that the UK is not going to end up staying in the single market—in either the EU or the EEA. Davis’s appearance today also suggested that the UK would leave the customs union when it left the EU. However, it is also becoming apparent that the UK relationship with the EU on matters such as security means that post-Brexit, the UK and the EU will have more than just a trading relationship.



http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/clues-david-davis-means-brexit/

Am I alone in still being worried that someone as pratty as David Davis is destined to play such a major role in this?

You're not the only one.

Today's Brexit Questions was David Davis versus Emily Thornberry.

I weep for my country.

Christ, how many jobs does that woman have?

Four I think.

Shadow Foreign Secretary, Shadow Brexit Secretary, MP for Islington South, and Shadow Minister for English Flags and White Van Man

She also starred in that tv programme the other night.

Speedy

John_M said:

Completely off topic. If inflation hits 3%, that's worth about £48.6bn p.a. off the national debt.

If inflation hits 2% it will be a success for the government.

And to think 40 years ago an increase in inflation would have been deemed a disaster.
We live in a different world.

DavidL

AlastairMeeks said:

DavidL said:

GIN1138 said:

kle4 said:

Sharper divide than I would have thought. Medium hard Brexit a more likely result than Medium soft Brexit.

James seems to think we're leaving the single market and the cutoms union?



What has become clear in the last week or so, is that the UK is not going to end up staying in the single market—in either the EU or the EEA. Davis’s appearance today also suggested that the UK would leave the customs union when it left the EU. However, it is also becoming apparent that the UK relationship with the EU on matters such as security means that post-Brexit, the UK and the EU will have more than just a trading relationship.



http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/clues-david-davis-means-brexit/

Am I alone in still being worried that someone as pratty as David Davis is destined to play such a major role in this?

Which Eurosceptic luminaries did you regard as being this side of the prat event horizon?

Boris and Gove. My only reservation is the really idiotic way they fell out and shot each other in the head. That was weird. I also had a lot of time for Giselle Stuart and some for Daniel Hannan but I think on balance it would be fair to say that I voted Leave despite the Leave campaign, not because of it.

TheScreamingEagles

AlastairMeeks said:

An excellent article by Keiran Pedley. Two points in particular:

1) what if the public want the unattainable? Should the government still try for it or should they aim for more attainable goals?

2) what if the public change their minds later? The government would presumably prefer to target the public's final choice rather than their first one.

1) Try and if they fail, say we tried, we'll have to go for the attainable options

TOPPING

I'm back!

Sorry to bang on about ECHR but @Charles and @Casino_Royale and the others you are wrong!



Read this if you can be bothered then let's talk tomorrow. Or not.

https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-and-human-rights/

DavidL

tyson said:

Oh good. Not a YUP or childish smiley face in sight. Some people here are at least growing up.

WE can all agree on one thing.....Didn't David David make a right twat of himself today? I think I am going to start Nick Palmers tick tock thing to mark the time when the country fully realises that Brexit was a horrible, terrible mistake. A Utopian wet dream for right wing fantasists for a future that ain't going to happen. The Brexit countdown to moron status is ticking.......

Its bad enough he shares my name once. Twice is cruel.

John_M

HurstLlama said:

John_M said:

Sandpit said:

Thanks Kieran, good article on presentation of polling questions, always worth remembering when looking at 'headline' figures from someone with skin in the game.

People don't understand the single market. It's almost pointless asking them questions about it. Look at the difficulties people have distinguishing 'access' and 'membership'.

Let us face it, Mr. M, a great part of the electorate are absolutely clueless about just about everything and especially anything involving numbers (about 40% of adults have less than the numerical ability expected of 14 year olds, which means that any discussion involving percentages goes straight over their heads).

Yet we are all supposed to pretend that universal suffrage is such a spiffing idea.

Indeed Mr L. as I wrote this week, even the illustrious brains trust of PB, surely some of the UK's finest minds have, on occasion, found it difficult to cudgel some of the concepts into
some semblance of rationality and order.

chestnut

tyson said:

Oh good. Not a YUP or childish smiley face in sight. Some people here are at least growing up.

WE can all agree on one thing.....Didn't David David make a right twat of himself today? I think I am going to start Nick Palmers tick tock thing to mark the time when the country fully realises that Brexit was a horrible, terrible mistake. A Utopian wet dream for right wing fantasists for a future that ain't going to happen. The Brexit countdown to moron status is ticking.......

Evening, Benito.

Alistair

justin124 said:

DavidL said:

Speedy said:

DavidL said:

Really surprised that SNP supporters put more weight on controlling immigration, especially as immigration is nothing like the problem in Scotland that it is in southern England.

It's not surprising if you think that the SNP is comprised by 1/3rd Tory, 1/3rd Labour and 1/3rd Liberal voters.

I think the SNP are now nearly 2/3 ex Labour which is why they lost ground in traditional tory areas at the Scottish elections. They are portraying themselves as a firmly centre left party whilst Salmond was always just a bit more ambiguous about it.

I agree with that , and believe that much of the increase in Tory support in Scotland is to be explained by the return of former Tory voters who for the last 25 years had been voting SNP on a tactical Anti-Labour basis. It remains to be seen whether former Labour voters will do likewise when the SNP falters.

The increase was on a turnout of 55.6%. An increase of the previous election of 5.2 percentage points.

There is hee-haw evidence of SNP-to-Con switchers. The Conservatives had a brillaint Get Out the Vote effort - they captured almost the entirety of that 5.2% increase in the electorate.

In all these Highland constituencies that people are throwing around as 'evidence' of SNP-to-Con switching they all shared 1 similar property going into the election - Massive SNP majorities. In several cases where the Conservative made big strides in closing the percentage gap the SNP absolute vote actually went up not down.

It was differential turnout not SNP-to-Con switchers.

AlastairMeeks

TheScreamingEagles said:

AlastairMeeks said:

An excellent article by Keiran Pedley. Two points in particular:

1) what if the public want the unattainable? Should the government still try for it or should they aim for more attainable goals?

2) what if the public change their minds later? The government would presumably prefer to target the public's final choice rather than their first one.

1) Try and if they fail, say we tried, we'll have to go for the attainable options

That risks complete failure, especially with a ticking clock.

Alistair

I even have this in handy graph form - the higher the turnout in the constituency the lower the SNP vote share.

https://twitter.com/twitonatrain/status/729997538372259840

Speedy

HurstLlama said:

John_M said:

Sandpit said:

Thanks Kieran, good article on presentation of polling questions, always worth remembering when looking at 'headline' figures from someone with skin in the game.

People don't understand the single market. It's almost pointless asking them questions about it. Look at the difficulties people have distinguishing 'access' and 'membership'.

Let us face it, Mr. M, a great part of the electorate are absolutely clueless about just about everything and especially anything involving numbers (about 40% of adults have less than the numerical ability expected of 14 year olds, which means that any discussion involving percentages goes straight over their heads).

Yet we are all supposed to pretend that universal suffrage is such a spiffing idea.

"about 40% of adults have less than the numerical ability expected of 14 year olds"

So much for the present comprehensive education system.

Stark_Dawning

I see the government has re-announced its 'trade deal' with Australia today. How many times is it now? I'm disappointed with Theresa. This brings back the worst memories of the Blair era: the 'pensioners' minimum income guarantee' being announced every month for six months. Theresa needs to nip this sort of thing in the bud. She needs to be seen as a grown-up politician in serious times. I didn't see DD's performance in the House, but the reaction appears to be that he bombed. But the guy has been out of front-line politics for an age, so I'm prepared to give him some slack.

TheScreamingEagles

AlastairMeeks said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

AlastairMeeks said:

An excellent article by Keiran Pedley. Two points in particular:

1) what if the public want the unattainable? Should the government still try for it or should they aim for more attainable goals?

2) what if the public change their minds later? The government would presumably prefer to target the public's final choice rather than their first one.

1) Try and if they fail, say we tried, we'll have to go for the attainable options

That risks complete failure, especially with a ticking clock.

The more I think about it, David Cameron spectacularly screwed up in not planning for a Leave victory and thinking Brexit negotiations would take place during the French Presidential election and the German elections in 2017.

TOPPING

Stark_Dawning said:

I see the government has re-announced its 'trade deal' with Australia today. How many times is it now? I'm disappointed with Theresa. This brings back the worst memories of the Blair era: the 'pensioners' minimum income guarantee' being announced every month for six months. Theresa needs to nip this sort of thing in the bud. She needs to be seen as a grown-up politician in serious times. I didn't see DD's performance in the House, but the reaction appears to be that he bombed. But the guy has been out of front-line politics for an age, so I'm prepared to give him some slack.

He was not even the future once.

tyson

I've just looked at my point score on the vanilla thing (I didn't realise you get points...who gives them and for what?).....my score is-2. It seems a travesty- for indicating that Brexit people are ridiculous and for taking a stand against YUP's and silly smiley faces, I deserve some points. At least 23, maybe one or two, maybe more, by my reckoning.

saddened

tyson said:

Oh good. Not a YUP or childish smiley face in sight. Some people here are at least growing up.

WE can all agree on one thing.....Didn't David David make a right twat of himself today? I think I am going to start Nick Palmers tick tock thing to mark the time when the country fully realises that Brexit was a horrible, terrible mistake. A Utopian wet dream for right wing fantasists for a future that ain't going to happen. The Brexit countdown to moron status is ticking.......

Another demonstration that you're a deeply unpleasant individual.

IanB2

Speedy said:

John_M said:

Completely off topic. If inflation hits 3%, that's worth about £48.6bn p.a. off the national debt.

If inflation hits 2% it will be a success for the government.

And to think 40 years ago an increase in inflation would have been deemed a disaster.
We live in a different world.

Not so good for the deficit, though. At least in the short term.

HurstLlama

Speedy said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Perhaps what continental Europeans went through in the 20th century makes them feel that an unelected Belgian (or Pole or Irishman) making decisions on weedkiller is an entirely acceptable price to pay to prevent it happening again.

I agree about history having a marking.

For some countries it's about economic issues, in some it's social issues like history.

Eastern Europe with the exception of Greece and ex-Yugoslavia it's only about the money, they don't like europe because of memories of it's soviet counterpart, you can see the euroskeptic divide right through the former East German border, but they like the money.

Ex-yugoslavia is in to protect them from the serbs.

Greece is in to protect them from the turks.

Iberia is clearly in only for the money they get.

Germany is in it for economic dominance, as usual.

France is in it for political dominance, as usual.

Belgium for the perks of having the capital.

The Netherlands to re-export german stuff.

The baltics to protect them from the russians.

The scandinavians for a market for their high quality stuff, though they don't produce anymore.

Ireland to protect them from the english.

But no one knows why Italy is in it.

I thought Italy joined in the hope of having some sort of stable government. After all their own politicians had been unable to get a government that lasted much more than a year and wasn't rife with corruption. Being governed from Brussels might have seemed the better option. Why they joined the Euro though is a complete mystery.

john_zims

@tyson

'Some people here are at least growing up.'

But not you.

IanB2

Speedy said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Perhaps what continental Europeans went through in the 20th century makes them feel that an unelected Belgian (or Pole or Irishman) making decisions on weedkiller is an entirely acceptable price to pay to prevent it happening again.

I agree about history having a marking.

For some countries it's about economic issues, in some it's social issues like history.

Eastern Europe with the exception of Greece and ex-Yugoslavia it's only about the money, they don't like europe because of memories of it's soviet counterpart, you can see the euroskeptic divide right through the former East German border, but they like the money.

Ex-yugoslavia is in to protect them from the serbs.

Greece is in to protect them from the turks.

Iberia is clearly in only for the money they get.

Germany is in it for economic dominance, as usual.

France is in it for political dominance, as usual.

Belgium for the perks of having the capital.

The Netherlands to re-export german stuff.

The baltics to protect them from the russians.

The scandinavians for a market for their high quality stuff, though they don't produce anymore.

Ireland to protect them from the english.

But no one knows why Italy is in it.

Italy is in out of the hope that Brussels is less corrupt and more competent than Rome (edit/ which I guess means that they are in to protect them from themselves, nicely completing your list with a flourish)

kle4

AlastairMeeks said:

An excellent article by Keiran Pedley. Two points in particular:

1) what if the public want the unattainable? Should the government still try for it or should they aim for more attainable goals?

2) what if the public change their minds later? The government would presumably prefer to target the public's final choice rather than their first one.

Good questions. For the first, government's regularly claim to try for aims that it turns out were unattainable, so I imagine they have to at least look like they try for the unattainable. For the second, surely that's the problem government's always have with the public, particularly when the cost of what we want turns out to be more than we are willing to pay, so they need to go for what they think best, knowing that chances are no one will be totally happy anyway in the end.

kle4

IanB2 said:

Speedy said:

John_M said:

Completely off topic. If inflation hits 3%, that's worth about £48.6bn p.a. off the national debt.

If inflation hits 2% it will be a success for the government.

And to think 40 years ago an increase in inflation would have been deemed a disaster.
We live in a different world.

Not so good for the deficit, though. At least in the short term.

Worrying about the deficit? That is so 2010-2015, grandad.

Speedy

Well I don't think I can publish my weekly update of my average daily tracking poll because as it's Labour Day in the US, some pollsters have not published their weekend figures.

But what it appears from the incomplete results is that Trump has plateaued since August 26th.

TheScreamingEagles

https://twitter.com/Daniel_Sugarman/status/772864881074769920

DavidL

AlastairMeeks said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

AlastairMeeks said:

An excellent article by Keiran Pedley. Two points in particular:

1) what if the public want the unattainable? Should the government still try for it or should they aim for more attainable goals?

2) what if the public change their minds later? The government would presumably prefer to target the public's final choice rather than their first one.

1) Try and if they fail, say we tried, we'll have to go for the attainable options

That risks complete failure, especially with a ticking clock.

But what is complete failure Alastair? If our trade relationships with the EU on day 1 post Brexit are basically WTO rules in the absence of any agreement would that be complete failure? And if so what would the consequences be?

I am slowly coming around to the idea that it might be easier to negotiate with the EU once we have left rather than before. I think that they have a somewhat distorted view of their own importance to us and that it will be very difficult to negotiate with them until we show we really don't care that much. Certainly, I think our government has to go into the talks with this as a possibility that they can live with and to plan accordingly. If they don't we won't get anywhere.

IanB2

John_M said:

HurstLlama said:

John_M said:

Sandpit said:

Thanks Kieran, good article on presentation of polling questions, always worth remembering when looking at 'headline' figures from someone with skin in the game.

People don't understand the single market. It's almost pointless asking them questions about it. Look at the difficulties people have distinguishing 'access' and 'membership'.

Let us face it, Mr. M, a great part of the electorate are absolutely clueless about just about everything and especially anything involving numbers (about 40% of adults have less than the numerical ability expected of 14 year olds, which means that any discussion involving percentages goes straight over their heads).

Yet we are all supposed to pretend that universal suffrage is such a spiffing idea.

Indeed Mr L. as I wrote this week, even the illustrious brains trust of PB, surely some of the UK's finest minds have, on occasion, found it difficult to cudgel some of the concepts into
some semblance of rationality and order.

Since you don't need great vision and depth of understanding in order to be a candidate, or even be elected, it would be a funny world if the criteria for being allowed to make a choice were the more stringent?

ReggieCide

TheScreamingEagles said:

AlastairMeeks said:

An excellent article by Keiran Pedley. Two points in particular:

1) what if the public want the unattainable? Should the government still try for it or should they aim for more attainable goals?

2) what if the public change their minds later? The government would presumably prefer to target the public's final choice rather than their first one.

1) Try and if they fail, say we tried, we'll have to go for the attainable options

To think that we'll see TM's hand before the Europeans see it, when the two sides shake hands, is absurd. Think about it. As much as TM will want to push the right electoral buttons she knows that someone will put their shit into the fan that she's standing in front of straight after the handshake. Naturally the BBC will misrepresent it.

The polls don't have a chance in hell of judging public approval or otherwise of negotiation trade offs between immigration controls and single market access, which is THE issue.

kle4

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/Daniel_Sugarman/status/772864881074769920

Such a slur. He is not 'standing proudly' he is standing benevolently, like a kindly grandfather, with the half hearted clap and awkward smile of someone attending a children's godawful play.

DavidL

IanB2 said:

Speedy said:

John_M said:

Completely off topic. If inflation hits 3%, that's worth about £48.6bn p.a. off the national debt.

If inflation hits 2% it will be a success for the government.

And to think 40 years ago an increase in inflation would have been deemed a disaster.
We live in a different world.

Not so good for the deficit, though. At least in the short term.

A bit of fiscal drag would help the Chancellor quite a lot. It is more difficult to use those sort of sleights of hand when there is no inflation to talk of.

IanB2

kle4 said:

IanB2 said:

Speedy said:

John_M said:

Completely off topic. If inflation hits 3%, that's worth about £48.6bn p.a. off the national debt.

If inflation hits 2% it will be a success for the government.

And to think 40 years ago an increase in inflation would have been deemed a disaster.
We live in a different world.

Not so good for the deficit, though. At least in the short term.

Worrying about the deficit? That is so 2010-2015, grandad.

OK so you have gone full Japanese. I wonder how the story ends?

FrancisUrquhart

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/Daniel_Sugarman/status/772864881074769920

Now about that report on Antisemitism....I presume Hug a Hitler Ken will be off the naughty step soon too.

The slogan is kinda of ironic....Straight talking honest politics.

kle4

IanB2 said:

kle4 said:

IanB2 said:

Speedy said:

John_M said:

Completely off topic. If inflation hits 3%, that's worth about £48.6bn p.a. off the national debt.

If inflation hits 2% it will be a success for the government.

And to think 40 years ago an increase in inflation would have been deemed a disaster.
We live in a different world.

Not so good for the deficit, though. At least in the short term.

Worrying about the deficit? That is so 2010-2015, grandad.

OK so you have gone full Japanese. I wonder how the story ends?

It was a joke - I do care about the deficit, I just don't think there is any public or political will left to seriously reduce it, because it is too hard.

Speedy

IanB2 said:

Speedy said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Perhaps what continental Europeans went through in the 20th century makes them feel that an unelected Belgian (or Pole or Irishman) making decisions on weedkiller is an entirely acceptable price to pay to prevent it happening again.

I agree about history having a marking.

For some countries it's about economic issues, in some it's social issues like history.

Eastern Europe with the exception of Greece and ex-Yugoslavia it's only about the money, they don't like europe because of memories of it's soviet counterpart, you can see the euroskeptic divide right through the former East German border, but they like the money.

Ex-yugoslavia is in to protect them from the serbs.

Greece is in to protect them from the turks.

Iberia is clearly in only for the money they get.

Germany is in it for economic dominance, as usual.

France is in it for political dominance, as usual.

Belgium for the perks of having the capital.

The Netherlands to re-export german stuff.

The baltics to protect them from the russians.

The scandinavians for a market for their high quality stuff, though they don't produce anymore.

Ireland to protect them from the english.

But no one knows why Italy is in it.

Italy is in out of the hope that Brussels is less corrupt and more competent than Rome (edit/ which I guess means that they are in to protect them from themselves, nicely completing your list with a flourish)

Kinda of an oxymoron, since Brussels these days is definitely making things worse for Italy not better.

GIN1138

tyson said:

I've just looked at my point score on the vanilla thing (I didn't realise you get points...who gives them and for what?).....my score is-2. It seems a travesty- for indicating that Brexit people are ridiculous and for taking a stand against YUP's and silly smiley faces, I deserve some points. At least 23, maybe one or two, maybe more, by my reckoning.

Maybe you could try being a little nicer to your fellow PB'ers?

kle4

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/Daniel_Sugarman/status/772864881074769920

Now about that report on Antisemitism....I presume Hug a Hitler Ken will be off the naughty step soon too.

The slogan is kinda of ironic....Straight talking honest politics.

It's actually just missing some punctuation.

Straight. Talking. Honest? Politics!

All true.

FrancisUrquhart

No Daily Mail, Sun or Mirror front pages yet. Do I smell some more scandal?

kle4

GIN1138 said:

tyson said:

I've just looked at my point score on the vanilla thing (I didn't realise you get points...who gives them and for what?).....my score is-2. It seems a travesty- for indicating that Brexit people are ridiculous and for taking a stand against YUP's and silly smiley faces, I deserve some points. At least 23, maybe one or two, maybe more, by my reckoning.

Maybe you could try being a little nicer to your fellow PB'ers?

You get points for being nice? So why I am I stuck in the paltry 20s? Have I wasted courtesy on this band of filth mongers and smut peddlers?