I called this for leave after Sunderland. I was not alone. The only ones who didn't were the ones who just did not want to believe it.
Leave was certainly favourite after Sunderland, but it was Newcastle that tipped it in my mind. Staggering that Remain was favourite for another two hours or so.
Yes. It was free money for those in a position to take advantage of it. Will we ever see markets so in denial again?
I think Rubio finished 3rd so moves to odds on favourite must challenge it for irrationalness and lasted for days!
Good for them politically, but what where they doing in West Virginia so far from Nevada and Florida where they are running for the Senate ? Was there a secret GOP meeting in West Virginia or something ?
The paradox ( which May appears to have understood ) is that the more radical Brexit is the last likely it is to happen. He ' domestication ' approach to EU law radically supplies the process and avoids a gargantuan quagmire as Brexit became about making it easier to kill song birds in mating season, import illegally logged timber or downgrade safety features on car child seats.
So europhile like me can and will chuckle that we'll enjoy seeing the whole acquis put into UK law. It will also make it easier to fight repeal. The battles will longer, fought on domestic ground and will be much more single issue based. However we need to accept that by skillfully avoiding the quagmire May makes Brexit actually happening much more likely and simpler.
The more you think about it is a master stroke by the PM
If anyone invents time travel, they need to go back to April 2015 and tell people that in 18 months time we would have voted to leave the EU, Theresa May would be PM of a Tory minority government and Ed Balls.would be mostly known for his dancing
Surely the proof that time travel is impossible is that we have never seen any time travellers appear from the future, even at the pivotal historical moments that any time traveller would choose to visit?
Surely all that proves is that decent invisibility cloaks are invented before time travel.
Wouldn't have to have been (will have going to be) before.
The paradox ( which May appears to have understood ) is that the more radical Brexit is the last likely it is to happen. He ' domestication ' approach to EU law radically supplies the process and avoids a gargantuan quagmire as Brexit became about making it easier to kill song birds in mating season, import illegally logged timber or downgrade safety features on car child seats.
So europhile like me can and will chuckle that we'll enjoy seeing the whole acquis put into UK law. It will also make it easier to fight repeal. The battles will longer, fought on domestic ground and will be much more single issue based. However we need to accept that by skillfully avoiding the quagmire May makes Brexit actually happening much more likely and simpler.
Sheer delusion. The battles will be much easier to fight once we've Brexited.
So, European Working Time directive - do we want that on our books? Nah, it's one of those dozy 'European' rules. We're hard working Brits.
I called this for leave after Sunderland. I was not alone. The only ones who didn't were the ones who just did not want to believe it.
Leave was certainly favourite after Sunderland, but it was Newcastle that tipped it in my mind. Staggering that Remain was favourite for another two hours or so.
Yes. It was free money for those in a position to take advantage of it. Will we ever see markets so in denial again?
I think Rubio finished 3rd so moves to odds on favourite must challenge it for irrationalness and lasted for days!
Good for them politically, but what where they doing in West Virginia so far from Nevada and Florida where they are running for the Senate ? Was there a secret GOP meeting in West Virginia or something ?
Probably no connection but West Virginia has the worst youth drug problem in the USA.
If anyone invents time travel, they need to go back to April 2015 and tell people that in 18 months time we would have voted to leave the EU, Theresa May would be PM of a Tory minority government and Ed Balls.would be mostly known for his dancing
Surely the proof that time travel is impossible is that we have never seen any time travellers appear from the future, even at the pivotal historical moments that any time traveller would choose to visit?
Doesn't that only prove that time travel in a backwards direction is impossible?
I'm not going to say a thing about what I saw in a finance channel circa early 1999. And what I read in a newspaper later on.
If anyone invents time travel, they need to go back to April 2015 and tell people that in 18 months time we would have voted to leave the EU, Theresa May would be PM of a Tory minority government and Ed Balls.would be mostly known for his dancing
Surely the proof that time travel is impossible is that we have never seen any time travellers appear from the future, even at the pivotal historical moments that any time traveller would choose to visit?
Surely all that proves is that decent invisibility cloaks are invented before time travel.
Wouldn't have to have been (will have going to be) before.
Not really. Like all in inventions it would at first be incredibly expensive and incredibly rare, but given time would become affordable and available to more people. Why would they all use invisibility? It would be no time at all before someone became tempted to appear and intervene in history. But there is no evidence for it ever having happened. Apart from whatshername in Outlander, of course.
If anyone invents time travel, they need to go back to April 2015 and tell people that in 18 months time we would have voted to leave the EU, Theresa May would be PM of a Tory minority government and Ed Balls.would be mostly known for his dancing
Surely the proof that time travel is impossible is that we have never seen any time travellers appear from the future, even at the pivotal historical moments that any time traveller would choose to visit?
Doesn't that only prove that time travel in a backwards direction is impossible?
Fair point.
On the other hand rcs1000 might be right about the invisibility cloaks.
Also, I'm not sure anyone would want to do forward time travel unless they knew they could come back again. It probably wouldn't be very nice to be stuck in the future indefinitely.
Backwards time travel might be possible if you need a portal to arrive at. Since we don't have the portals, they can't drop by 2016 for a cup of coffee (which no doubt will be banned in 3016).
The paradox ( which May appears to have understood ) is that the more radical Brexit is the last likely it is to happen. He ' domestication ' approach to EU law radically supplies the process and avoids a gargantuan quagmire as Brexit became about making it easier to kill song birds in mating season, import illegally logged timber or downgrade safety features on car child seats.
So europhile like me can and will chuckle that we'll enjoy seeing the whole acquis put into UK law. It will also make it easier to fight repeal. The battles will longer, fought on domestic ground and will be much more single issue based. However we need to accept that by skillfully avoiding the quagmire May makes Brexit actually happening much more likely and simpler.
Sheer delusion. The battles will be much easier to fight once we've Brexited.
So, European Working Time directive - do we want that on our books? Nah, it's one of those dozy 'European' rules. We're hard working Brits.
Adopting all EU laws into British law will be ironic. In practice, I suspect few will be repealed, because nearly all are sensible protections. I think the battles afterwards with the hard right will see most of them intactfor this reason.
Any analysis about time travel has to start from the viewpoint that anything that is possible, no matter how inadvisable, will have been tried by someone at some point.
Jacob Rees Mogg on Sky endorsing PM's decision on taking all EU regs into UK law as the intelligent way to proceed
I remember Dan Hannan saying something similar during the campaign, that on the day we leave all the law we have will be the same, and it will then be up to Parliament to decide what to change over time. The key point was that Parliament was now properly sovereign again, and could change what the hell it likes.
The paradox ( which May appears to have understood ) is that the more radical Brexit is the last likely it is to happen. He ' domestication ' approach to EU law radically supplies the process and avoids a gargantuan quagmire as Brexit became about making it easier to kill song birds in mating season, import illegally logged timber or downgrade safety features on car child seats.
So europhile like me can and will chuckle that we'll enjoy seeing the whole acquis put into UK law. It will also make it easier to fight repeal. The battles will longer, fought on domestic ground and will be much more single issue based. However we need to accept that by skillfully avoiding the quagmire May makes Brexit actually happening much more likely and simpler.
Sheer delusion. The battles will be much easier to fight once we've Brexited.
So, European Working Time directive - do we want that on our books? Nah, it's one of those dozy 'European' rules. We're hard working Brits.
I think by " sheer delusion " you mean you disagree with me. Brexit is a ' useful crisis '. Inertia is very powerful. If the whole corpus of EU law is put into British law and downgrades have be fought for individually it will be harder to dilute that the lot being scrapped and advocates having to argue for pieces to be proactively readopted.
We're voting Leave to take control and enshrine EU law into UK law
This is, of course, the very best way to make a success of Leave. To do it slowly and safely and surgically. Gradually unwrapping the dead hand of Europe from our British throat. Finger by finger
The fact this might well work is what annoys Remainians most of all. They want Brexit to fail.
The conundrum is this Sean.....
Brexit will succeed if the EU implodes over the next years. It will fail, if the EU consolidates and strengthens. The destiny of the two are interlocked, and mutually incompatible.
I personally do not want the EU to fail. I would much (much) rather Brexit fails and the UK to re-join with our tail between our legs much as we did in the early 70's. The prospect of the EU imploding and being riven by chaos, acrimony and possibly much worse, is a more serious prospect for the world in my opinion.
But that said, there are plenty of pbERS who are willing the EU to fail no matter how much damage it will cause for future generations. They are the same kind who are supporting Trump.
The paradox ( which May appears to have understood ) is that the more radical Brexit is the last likely it is to happen. He ' domestication ' approach to EU law radically supplies the process and avoids a gargantuan quagmire as Brexit became about making it easier to kill song birds in mating season, import illegally logged timber or downgrade safety features on car child seats.
So europhile like me can and will chuckle that we'll enjoy seeing the whole acquis put into UK law. It will also make it easier to fight repeal. The battles will longer, fought on domestic ground and will be much more single issue based. However we need to accept that by skillfully avoiding the quagmire May makes Brexit actually happening much more likely and simpler.
Sheer delusion. The battles will be much easier to fight once we've Brexited.
So, European Working Time directive - do we want that on our books? Nah, it's one of those dozy 'European' rules. We're hard working Brits.
I think by " sheer delusion " you mean you disagree with me. Brexit is a ' useful crisis '. Inertia is very powerful. If the whole corpus of EU law is put into British law and downgrades have be fought for individually it will be harder to dilute that the lot being scrapped and advocates having to argue for pieces to be proactively readopted.
Still, it's always handy for the hard right to reveal its true intentions.
The paradox ( which May appears to have understood ) is that the more radical Brexit is the last likely it is to happen. He ' domestication ' approach to EU law radically supplies the process and avoids a gargantuan quagmire as Brexit became about making it easier to kill song birds in mating season, import illegally logged timber or downgrade safety features on car child seats.
So europhile like me can and will chuckle that we'll enjoy seeing the whole acquis put into UK law. It will also make it easier to fight repeal. The battles will longer, fought on domestic ground and will be much more single issue based. However we need to accept that by skillfully avoiding the quagmire May makes Brexit actually happening much more likely and simpler.
Sheer delusion. The battles will be much easier to fight once we've Brexited.
So, European Working Time directive - do we want that on our books? Nah, it's one of those dozy 'European' rules. We're hard working Brits.
I think by " sheer delusion " you mean you disagree with me. Brexit is a ' useful crisis '. Inertia is very powerful. If the whole corpus of EU law is put into British law and downgrades have be fought for individually it will be harder to dilute that the lot being scrapped and advocates having to argue for pieces to be proactively readopted.
Indeed, inertia was so powerful that Remain won....
The paradox ( which May appears to have understood ) is that the more radical Brexit is the last likely it is to happen. He ' domestication ' approach to EU law radically supplies the process and avoids a gargantuan quagmire as Brexit became about making it easier to kill song birds in mating season, import illegally logged timber or downgrade safety features on car child seats.
So europhile like me can and will chuckle that we'll enjoy seeing the whole acquis put into UK law. It will also make it easier to fight repeal. The battles will longer, fought on domestic ground and will be much more single issue based. However we need to accept that by skillfully avoiding the quagmire May makes Brexit actually happening much more likely and simpler.
Sheer delusion. The battles will be much easier to fight once we've Brexited.
So, European Working Time directive - do we want that on our books? Nah, it's one of those dozy 'European' rules. We're hard working Brits.
I think by " sheer delusion " you mean you disagree with me. Brexit is a ' useful crisis '. Inertia is very powerful. If the whole corpus of EU law is put into British law and downgrades have be fought for individually it will be harder to dilute that the lot being scrapped and advocates having to argue for pieces to be proactively readopted.
Indeed, inertia was so powerful that Remain won....
Oh, wait...
That was a referendum. It's why Brexiters wasn't a referendum. Assembling a parliamentary majority for Brexit would have been too much like hard work. Just as ripping to shreds the corpus of EU consumer, social and environmental protections will be once it relies on a UK Act.
If anyone invents time travel, they need to go back to April 2015 and tell people that in 18 months time we would have voted to leave the EU, Theresa May would be PM of a Tory minority government and Ed Balls.would be mostly known for his dancing
Surely the proof that time travel is impossible is that we have never seen any time travellers appear from the future, even at the pivotal historical moments that any time traveller would choose to visit?
Surely all that proves is that decent invisibility cloaks are invented before time travel.
Wouldn't have to have been (will have going to be) before.
Not really. Like all in inventions it would at first be incredibly expensive and incredibly rare, but given time would become affordable and available to more people. Why would they all use invisibility? It would be no time at all before someone became tempted to appear and intervene in history. But there is no evidence for it ever having happened. Apart from whatshername in Outlander, of course.
All true, but my point was that if you had a time machine, the invisibility cloak wouldn't need to have been invented *before* it for you to get one.
If this EU law thing is true then May is proving herself a very astute politician, so far.
There was an interesting Red Box in the Times a few days ago which critiqued all the recent books on Cameron and Brexit, and said the one firm conclusion was that May was a very considerable political operator, and much more cunning than Cameron.
It's early days. Honeymoon period. But we might have found the one politician who can successfully traverse this minefield.
At least it shows that plenty of thought is finally being put into what happens next. That the Civil Service were told not to even think about leaving the EU until after Cameron had resigned, was one of that man's greatest failings in the job.
I'm looking forward to this week, hopefully we will see some good policy ideas from Mrs May's team, and by the end of it a good idea of the government's priorities for the coming year.
We're voting Leave to take control and enshrine EU law into UK law
This is, of course, the very best way to make a success of Leave. To do it slowly and safely and surgically. Gradually unwrapping the dead hand of Europe from our British throat. Finger by finger
The fact this might well work is what annoys Remainians most of all. They want Brexit to fail.
The conundrum is this Sean.....
Brexit will succeed if the EU implodes over the next years. It will fail, if the EU consolidates and strengthens. The destiny of the two are interlocked, and mutually incompatible.
I personally do not want the EU to fail. I would much (much) rather Brexit fails and the UK to re-join with our tail between our legs much as we did in the early 70's. The prospect of the EU imploding and being riven by chaos, acrimony and possibly much worse, is a more serious prospect for the world in my opinion.
But that said, there are plenty of pbERS who are willing the EU to fail no matter how much damage it will cause for future generations. They are the same kind who are supporting Trump.
Spot on Tyson. And we start from a much higher base than the outers did post 1975. Every scrap of the Eurosphere we can save in Britain post Brexit makes the historic task of reunion easier. Or at the very least more possible. And your crucial point is the matter isn't entirely in our own hands. If the EU doesn't collapse in acrimony it ruins a key plank of so many Brexiters plans.
Theresa May absolutely rules out a General Election before 2020
I wonder if she is simply playing politics with red meat issues like grammar schools, knowing full well that she hasn't a hope that they will go through, whilst tracking the party to the centre. A wafer thin majority helps her immensely.
May may well prove to be a very astute politician indeed.....
The paradox ( which May appears to have understood ) is that the more radical Brexit is the last likely it is to happen. He ' domestication ' approach to EU law radically supplies the process and avoids a gargantuan quagmire as Brexit became about making it easier to kill song birds in mating season, import illegally logged timber or downgrade safety features on car child seats.
So europhile like me can and will chuckle that we'll enjoy seeing the whole acquis put into UK law. It will also make it easier to fight repeal. The battles will longer, fought on domestic ground and will be much more single issue based. However we need to accept that by skillfully avoiding the quagmire May makes Brexit actually happening much more likely and simpler.
Sheer delusion. The battles will be much easier to fight once we've Brexited.
So, European Working Time directive - do we want that on our books? Nah, it's one of those dozy 'European' rules. We're hard working Brits.
I think by " sheer delusion " you mean you disagree with me. Brexit is a ' useful crisis '. Inertia is very powerful. If the whole corpus of EU law is put into British law and downgrades have be fought for individually it will be harder to dilute that the lot being scrapped and advocates having to argue for pieces to be proactively readopted.
Indeed, inertia was so powerful that Remain won....
Oh, wait...
That was a referendum. It's why Brexiters wasn't a referendum. Assembling a parliamentary majority for Brexit would have been too much like hard work. Just as ripping to shreds the corpus of EU consumer, social and environmental protections will be once it relies on a UK Act.
Eh? 'Brexiters wasn't a referendum'??
The Tory party is increasing eurosceptic. And for now, we're the only show in Govt. town. And we're determined to remove the unnecessary and downright detrimental as soon as we can.
Inertia proves little use when approaching immoveable objects.....
Jacob Rees Mogg on Sky endorsing PM's decision on taking all EU regs into UK law as the intelligent way to proceed
Yes we have all the time in the world to expunge the ones we dont want and rewrite the ones we do in the future (much as RoI are currently doing with old UK ones)
If anyone invents time travel, they need to go back to April 2015 and tell people that in 18 months time we would have voted to leave the EU, Theresa May would be PM of a Tory minority government and Ed Balls.would be mostly known for his dancing
Surely the proof that time travel is impossible is that we have never seen any time travellers appear from the future, even at the pivotal historical moments that any time traveller would choose to visit?
Surely all that proves is that decent invisibility cloaks are invented before time travel.
Wouldn't have to have been (will have going to be) before.
Not really. Like all in inventions it would at first be incredibly expensive and incredibly rare, but given time would become affordable and available to more people. Why would they all use invisibility? It would be no time at all before someone became tempted to appear and intervene in history. But there is no evidence for it ever having happened. Apart from whatshername in Outlander, of course.
All true, but my point was that if you had a time machine, the invisibility cloak wouldn't need to have been invented *before* it for you to get one.
I thought invisibility cloaks pretty much exist already.
Can't be bothered to find it, but I've seen video of it deployed on a military vehicle, so all you see is the scenery behind the vehicle with a little distortion.
If this EU law thing is true then May is proving herself a very astute politician, so far.
There was an interesting Red Box in the Times a few days ago which critiqued all the recent books on Cameron and Brexit, and said the one firm conclusion was that May was a very considerable political operator, and much more cunning than Cameron.
It's early days. Honeymoon period. But we might have found the one politician who can successfully traverse this minefield.
At least it shows that plenty of thought is finally being put into what happens next. That the Civil Service were told not to even think about leaving the EU until after Cameron had resigned, was one of that man's greatest failings in the job.
I'm looking forward to this week, hopefully we will see some good policy ideas from Mrs May's team, and by the end of it a good idea of the government's priorities for the coming year.
And the end of the labour party as a credible alternative government
We're voting Leave to take control and enshrine EU law into UK law
This is, of course, the very best way to make a success of Leave. To do it slowly and safely and surgically. Gradually unwrapping the dead hand of Europe from our British throat. Finger by finger
The fact this might well work is what annoys Remainians most of all. They want Brexit to fail.
The conundrum is this Sean.....
Brexit will succeed if the EU implodes over the next years. It will fail, if the EU consolidates and strengthens. The destiny of the two are interlocked, and mutually incompatible.
I personally do not want the EU to fail. I would much (much) rather Brexit fails and the UK to re-join with our tail between our legs much as we did in the early 70's. The prospect of the EU imploding and being riven by chaos, acrimony and possibly much worse, is a more serious prospect for the world in my opinion.
But that said, there are plenty of pbERS who are willing the EU to fail no matter how much damage it will cause for future generations. They are the same kind who are supporting Trump.
Rubbish. We can be good neighbours without continuing now stale European Union affair,
Arguably, we can be better neighbours - cos we won't keep sniping and will prove a useful element of healthy competition with our European friends.
I'm willing the EU to succeed, and the UK to succeed.
The paradox ( which May appears to have understood ) is that the more radical Brexit is the last likely it is to happen. He ' domestication ' approach to EU law radically supplies the process and avoids a gargantuan quagmire as Brexit became about making it easier to kill song birds in mating season, import illegally logged timber or downgrade safety features on car child seats.
So europhile like me can and will chuckle that we'll enjoy seeing the whole acquis put into UK law. It will also make it easier to fight repeal. The battles will longer, fought on domestic ground and will be much more single issue based. However we need to accept that by skillfully avoiding the quagmire May makes Brexit actually happening much more likely and simpler.
Sheer delusion. The battles will be much easier to fight once we've Brexited.
So, European Working Time directive - do we want that on our books? Nah, it's one of those dozy 'European' rules. We're hard working Brits.
I think by " sheer delusion " you mean you disagree with me. Brexit is a ' useful crisis '. Inertia is very powerful. If the whole corpus of EU law is put into British law and downgrades have be fought for individually it will be harder to dilute that the lot being scrapped and advocates having to argue for pieces to be proactively readopted.
Indeed, inertia was so powerful that Remain won....
Oh, wait...
That was a referendum. It's why Brexiters wasn't a referendum. Assembling a parliamentary majority for Brexit would have been too much like hard work. Just as ripping to shreds the corpus of EU consumer, social and environmental protections will be once it relies on a UK Act.
Eh? 'Brexiters wasn't a referendum'??
The Tory party is increasing eurosceptic. And for now, we're the only show in Govt. town. And we're determined to remove the unnecessary and downright detrimental as soon as we can.
Inertia proves little use when approaching immoveable objects.....
Yet May has just announced the whole lot is going into UK law. Kicking your great bonfire into the at least medium length grass. That's the paradox. By ruling out the great right wing fantasy of regulatory bonfire she makes Brexit more likely to actually happen.
If anyone invents time travel, they need to go back to April 2015 and tell people that in 18 months time we would have voted to leave the EU, Theresa May would be PM of a Tory minority government and Ed Balls.would be mostly known for his dancing
Surely the proof that time travel is impossible is that we have never seen any time travellers appear from the future, even at the pivotal historical moments that any time traveller would choose to visit?
Surely all that proves is that decent invisibility cloaks are invented before time travel.
Wouldn't have to have been (will have going to be) before.
Not if the first time traveller first jumped forward, stole an invisibility cloak from his future, then came back in time with it to before time travel was invented ...
If anyone invents time travel, they need to go back to April 2015 and tell people that in 18 months time we would have voted to leave the EU, Theresa May would be PM of a Tory minority government and Ed Balls.would be mostly known for his dancing
Surely the proof that time travel is impossible is that we have never seen any time travellers appear from the future, even at the pivotal historical moments that any time traveller would choose to visit?
Surely all that proves is that decent invisibility cloaks are invented before time travel.
Wouldn't have to have been (will have going to be) before.
Not really. Like all in inventions it would at first be incredibly expensive and incredibly rare, but given time would become affordable and available to more people. Why would they all use invisibility? It would be no time at all before someone became tempted to appear and intervene in history. But there is no evidence for it ever having happened. Apart from whatshername in Outlander, of course.
All true, but my point was that if you had a time machine, the invisibility cloak wouldn't need to have been invented *before* it for you to get one.
Invisibility cloaks already exist. They're not perfect, but they're pretty good - they work by fibre-optics which make each point on the front of the cloak look like what the view from the back of the cloak looks like. http://science.howstuffworks.com/invisibility-cloak.htm
If this EU law thing is true then May is proving herself a very astute politician, so far.
There was an interesting Red Box in the Times a few days ago which critiqued all the recent books on Cameron and Brexit, and said the one firm conclusion was that May was a very considerable political operator, and much more cunning than Cameron.
It's early days. Honeymoon period. But we might have found the one politician who can successfully traverse this minefield.
At least it shows that plenty of thought is finally being put into what happens next. That the Civil Service were told not to even think about leaving the EU until after Cameron had resigned, was one of that man's greatest failings in the job.
I'm looking forward to this week, hopefully we will see some good policy ideas from Mrs May's team, and by the end of it a good idea of the government's priorities for the coming year.
Plenty? Really? I guess at best it suggests we have moved off from first base. But commentators were predicting that we would have to incorporate all EU law into British law months ago.
Ultimately, when I get into any kind of discussion with Brexit people (which I do try to avoid) they always throw at me the EU is failing...look at poor Greece and Italy, it is only a matter of time, better to jump ship now, bla..bla..bla....
If they are right, then Brexit will be better for the UK. No doubt about it. Better to extricate ourself now, and free ourselves from the yoke of this destructive union, rather than later. But Europe will be a much worse place. I think it is better and ultimately more altruistic to think that Britain made a silly mistake that it will come to regret and will rectify in the future, albeit with a bit of said yoke over our face.
The paradox ( which May appears to have understood ) is that the more radical Brexit is the last likely it is to happen. He ' domestication ' approach to EU law radically supplies the process and avoids a gargantuan quagmire as Brexit became about making it easier to kill song birds in mating season, import illegally logged timber or downgrade safety features on car child seats.
So europhile like me can and will chuckle that we'll enjoy seeing the whole acquis put into UK law. It will also make it easier to fight repeal. The battles will longer, fought on domestic ground and will be much more single issue based. However we need to accept that by skillfully avoiding the quagmire May makes Brexit actually happening much more likely and simpler.
Sheer delusion. The battles will be much easier to fight once we've Brexited.
So, European Working Time directive - do we want that on our books? Nah, it's one of those dozy 'European' rules. We're hard working Brits.
I think by " sheer delusion " you mean you disagree with me. Brexit is a ' useful crisis '. Inertia is very powerful. If the whole corpus of EU law is put into British law and downgrades have be fought for individually it will be harder to dilute that the lot being scrapped and advocates having to argue for pieces to be proactively readopted.
Indeed, inertia was so powerful that Remain won....
Oh, wait...
That was a referendum. It's why Brexiters wasn't a referendum. Assembling a parliamentary majority for Brexit would have been too much like hard work. Just as ripping to shreds the corpus of EU consumer, social and environmental protections will be once it relies on a UK Act.
Eh? 'Brexiters wasn't a referendum'??
The Tory party is increasing eurosceptic. And for now, we're the only show in Govt. town. And we're determined to remove the unnecessary and downright detrimental as soon as we can.
Inertia proves little use when approaching immoveable objects.....
Yet May has just announced the whole lot is going into UK law. Kicking your great bonfire into the at least medium length grass. That's the paradox. By ruling out the great right wing fantasy of regulatory bonfire she makes Brexit more likely to actually happen.
Yes, which is why it's an interesting move. The biggest hurdle to Brexit has been put off until after we leave. Smart move. One that is hurting remoaners the most, judging by the reaction.
The paradox ( which May appears to have understood ) is that the more radical Brexit is the last likely it is to happen. He ' domestication ' approach to EU law radically supplies the process and avoids a gargantuan quagmire as Brexit became about making it easier to kill song birds in mating season, import illegally logged timber or downgrade safety features on car child seats.
So europhile like me can and will chuckle that we'll enjoy seeing the whole acquis put into UK law. It will also make it easier to fight repeal. The battles will longer, fought on domestic ground and will be much more single issue based. However we need to accept that by skillfully avoiding the quagmire May makes Brexit actually happening much more likely and simpler.
Sheer delusion. The battles will be much easier to fight once we've Brexited.
So, European Working Time directive - do we want that on our books? Nah, it's one of those dozy 'European' rules. We're hard working Brits.
I think by " sheer delusion " you mean you disagree with me. Brexit is a ' useful crisis '. Inertia is very powerful. If the whole corpus of EU law is put into British law and downgrades have be fought for individually it will be harder to dilute that the lot being scrapped and advocates having to argue for pieces to be proactively readopted.
Indeed, inertia was so powerful that Remain won....
Oh, wait...
That was a referendum. It's why Brexiters wasn't a referendum. Assembling a parliamentary majority for Brexit would have been too much like hard work. Just as ripping to shreds the corpus of EU consumer, social and environmental protections will be once it relies on a UK Act.
Eh? 'Brexiters wasn't a referendum'??
The Tory party is increasing eurosceptic. And for now, we're the only show in Govt. town. And we're determined to remove the unnecessary and downright detrimental as soon as we can.
Inertia proves little use when approaching immoveable objects.....
Yet May has just announced the whole lot is going into UK law. Kicking your great bonfire into the at least medium length grass. That's the paradox. By ruling out the great right wing fantasy of regulatory bonfire she makes Brexit more likely to actually happen.
And that is what she means by 'Brexit means Brexit'
We're voting Leave to take control and enshrine EU law into UK law
This is, of course, the very best way to make a success of Leave. To do it slowly and safely and surgically. Gradually unwrapping the dead hand of Europe from our British throat. Finger by finger
The fact this might well work is what annoys Remainians most of all. They want Brexit to fail.
The conundrum is this Sean.....
Brexit will succeed if the EU implodes over the next years. It will fail, if the EU consolidates and strengthens. The destiny of the two are interlocked, and mutually incompatible.
I personally do not want the EU to fail. I would much (much) rather Brexit fails and the UK to re-join with our tail between our legs much as we did in the early 70's. The prospect of the EU imploding and being riven by chaos, acrimony and possibly much worse, is a more serious prospect for the world in my opinion.
But that said, there are plenty of pbERS who are willing the EU to fail no matter how much damage it will cause for future generations. They are the same kind who are supporting Trump.
Spot on Tyson. And we start from a much higher base than the outers did post 1975. Every scrap of the Eurosphere we can save in Britain post Brexit makes the historic task of reunion easier. Or at the very least more possible. And your crucial point is the matter isn't entirely in our own hands. If the EU doesn't collapse in acrimony it ruins a key plank of so many Brexiters plans.
If we leave you do realise we will never ever return. It's inconceivable. Look at the polling on EU membership in Norway and Switzerland. Affluent countries no longer want to join. At all.
The hurdles would be gargantuan. However at key points since 1945 both us us ever joining or ever leaving would have been considered " Inconceivable ".
We're voting Leave to take control and enshrine EU law into UK law
This is, of course, the very best way to make a success of Leave. To do it slowly and safely and surgically. Gradually unwrapping the dead hand of Europe from our British throat. Finger by finger
The fact this might well work is what annoys Remainians most of all. They want Brexit to fail.
The conundrum is this Sean.....
Brexit will succeed if the EU implodes over the next years. It will fail, if the EU consolidates and strengthens. The destiny of the two are interlocked, and mutually incompatible.
I personally do not want the EU to fail. I would much (much) rather Brexit fails and the UK to re-join with our tail between our legs much as we did in the early 70's. The prospect of the EU imploding and being riven by chaos, acrimony and possibly much worse, is a more serious prospect for the world in my opinion.
But that said, there are plenty of pbERS who are willing the EU to fail no matter how much damage it will cause for future generations. They are the same kind who are supporting Trump.
Rubbish. We can be good neighbours without continuing now stale European Union affair,
Arguably, we can be better neighbours - cos we won't keep sniping and will prove a useful element of healthy competition with our European friends.
I'm willing the EU to succeed, and the UK to succeed.
Tyson is just a blimpish EU imperialist, bitter about a lost colony and pining for its humiliation. A sad Tuscan relic.
The paradox ( which May appears to have understood ) is that the more radical Brexit is the last likely it is to happen. He ' domestication ' approach to EU law radically supplies the process and avoids a gargantuan quagmire as Brexit became about making it easier to kill song birds in mating season, import illegally logged timber or downgrade safety features on car child seats.
Sheer delusion. The battles will be much easier to fight once we've Brexited.
So, European Working Time directive - do we want that on our books? Nah, it's one of those dozy 'European' rules. We're hard working Brits.
I think by " sheer delusion " you mean you disagree with me. Brexit is a ' useful crisis '. Inertia is very powerful. If the whole corpus of EU law is put into British law and downgrades have be fought for individually it will be harder to dilute that the lot being scrapped and advocates having to argue for pieces to be proactively readopted.
Indeed, inertia was so powerful that Remain won....
Oh, wait...
That was a referendum. It's why Brexiters wasn't a referendum. Assembling a parliamentary majority for Brexit would have been too much like hard work. Just as ripping to shreds the corpus of EU consumer, social and environmental protections will be once it relies on a UK Act.
Eh? 'Brexiters wasn't a referendum'??
The Tory party is increasing eurosceptic. And for now, we're the only show in Govt. town. And we're determined to remove the unnecessary and downright detrimental as soon as we can.
Inertia proves little use when approaching immoveable objects.....
Yet May has just announced the whole lot is going into UK law. Kicking your great bonfire into the at least medium length grass. That's the paradox. By ruling out the great right wing fantasy of regulatory bonfire she makes Brexit more likely to actually happen.
Rubbish. There was never any other realistic way of doing it. Only a fool would have thought otherwise.
The measures are already in UK law as secondary legislation. All this does is keep that secondary legislation alive when the 72 act is repealed.
The difference is that parliament will then be able to ditch or amend the bits it dosent want, when it wants. As it is all secondary legislation it wont even need a vote in the house in a lot.
My first letters to MPs will be on EU seed selling legislation and various railway related matters.
The resurrection of Damien Greens career has been all but ignored. The fact that this humane, money saving and minor change is utterly radical is telling about the IDS regime. < The Telegraph: Reassessment tests for sickness benefit claimants with severe illnesses to be scrapped. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIw8tySpS4
Sensible change and one of many to come to benefit those in need.
Agree, a good tweak that saves money and helps a lot of those who were caught in the net with the last changes. At least it shows that the people in charge are listening to the problems on the ground, in what is just about the most difficult area of public policy to get right.
It almost makes me weep that this was even necessary. IDS is a fucking idiot who should not be left in charge of a bus queue.
And Cameron was wrong to discard Damien Green. A genuinely decent and clever man.
We're voting Leave to take control and enshrine EU law into UK law
This is, of course, the very best way to make a success of Leave. To do it slowly and safely and surgically. Gradually unwrapping the dead hand of Europe from our British throat. Finger by finger
The fact this might well work is what annoys Remainians most of all. They want Brexit to fail.
The conundrum is this Sean.....
Brexit will succeed if the EU implodes over the next years. It will fail, if the EU consolidates and strengthens. The destiny of the two are interlocked, and mutually incompatible.
I personally do not want the EU to fail. I would much (much) rather Brexit fails and the UK to re-join with our tail between our legs much as we did in the early 70's. The prospect of the EU imploding and being riven by chaos, acrimony and possibly much worse, is a more serious prospect for the world in my opinion.
But that said, there are plenty of pbERS who are willing the EU to fail no matter how much damage it will cause for future generations. They are the same kind who are supporting Trump.
Spot on Tyson. And we start from a much higher base than the outers did post 1975. Every scrap of the Eurosphere we can save in Britain post Brexit makes the historic task of reunion easier. Or at the very least more possible. And your crucial point is the matter isn't entirely in our own hands. If the EU doesn't collapse in acrimony it ruins a key plank of so many Brexiters plans.
If we leave you do realise we will never ever return. It's inconceivable. Look at the polling on EU membership in Norway and Switzerland. Affluent countries no longer want to join. At all.
Everything is somewhat conceivable. But it seems highly improbable - even if we failed and they succeeded to the extent we'd swallow our pride and beg to be let back in, and all-in this time, they would never want us back in.
We can imagine the scene when the Brexiteer anti immigrants have got their way and sent all the Polish plumbers back home . SeanT calls an emergency plumber number and a participant from Jeremy Kyles last show turns up demands £ 300 up front and goes leaving a worse problem than he had before .
We're voting Leave to take control and enshrine EU law into UK law
This is, of course, the very best way to make a success of Leave. To do it slowly and safely and surgically. Gradually unwrapping the dead hand of Europe from our British throat. Finger by finger
The fact this might well work is what annoys Remainians most of all. They want Brexit to fail.
The conundrum is this Sean.....
Brexit will succeed if the EU implodes over the next years. It will fail, if the EU consolidates and strengthens. The destiny of the two are interlocked, and mutually incompatible.
I personally do not want the EU to fail. I would much (much) rather Brexit fails and the UK to re-join with our tail between our legs much as we did in the early 70's. The prospect of the EU imploding and being riven by chaos, acrimony and possibly much worse, is a more serious prospect for the world in my opinion.
But that said, there are plenty of pbERS who are willing the EU to fail no matter how much damage it will cause for future generations. They are the same kind who are supporting Trump.
Spot on Tyson. And we start from a much higher base than the outers did post 1975. Every scrap of the Eurosphere we can save in Britain post Brexit makes the historic task of reunion easier. Or at the very least more possible. And your crucial point is the matter isn't entirely in our own hands. If the EU doesn't collapse in acrimony it ruins a key plank of so many Brexiters plans.
British Public opinion splits about 70/30 Eurosceptic/Europhile according to Nat Soc Cen. You're in the position of Southern Irish Unionists after 1922.
If this EU law thing is true then May is proving herself a very astute politician, so far.
There was an interesting Red Box in the Times a few days ago which critiqued all the recent books on Cameron and Brexit, and said the one firm conclusion was that May was a very considerable political operator, and much more cunning than Cameron.
It's early days. Honeymoon period. But we might have found the one politician who can successfully traverse this minefield.
At least it shows that plenty of thought is finally being put into what happens next. That the Civil Service were told not to even think about leaving the EU until after Cameron had resigned, was one of that man's greatest failings in the job.
I'm looking forward to this week, hopefully we will see some good policy ideas from Mrs May's team, and by the end of it a good idea of the government's priorities for the coming year.
And the end of the labour party as a credible alternative government
That was pretty much a given after last week's shambles. The infighting vs the antisemitism isn't going to win anything soon.
Ultimately, when I get into any kind of discussion with Brexit people (which I do try to avoid) they always throw at me the EU is failing...look at poor Greece and Italy, it is only a matter of time, better to jump ship now, bla..bla..bla....
If they are right, then Brexit will be better for the UK. No doubt about it. Better to extricate ourself now, and free ourselves from the yoke of this destructive union, rather than later. But Europe will be a much worse place. I think it is better and ultimately more altruistic to think that Britain made a silly mistake that it will come to regret and will rectify in the future, albeit with a bit of said yoke over our face.
Tyson, you're seeing this in a too black and white sense. No one is going to face an apocalypse and no one is going to see growth akin to China once rid of the other side. More likely it will be a boring middle road where we recover after we leave and do well for ourselves and the EU continues on the same path and pushes a few other countries towards the exit to allow full integration of the countries that want it to create a smaller more focussed EU state.
We're voting Leave to take control and enshrine EU law into UK law
This is, of course, the very best way to make a success of Leave. To do it slowly and safely and surgically. Gradually unwrapping the dead hand of Europe from our British throat. Finger by finger
The fact this might well work is what annoys Remainians most of all. They want Brexit to fail.
The conundrum is this Sean.....
Brexit will succeed if the EU implodes over the next years. It will fail, if the EU consolidates and strengthens. The destiny of the two are interlocked, and mutually incompatible.
I personally do not want the EU to fail. I would much (much) rather Brexit fails and the UK to re-join with our tail between our legs much as we did in the early 70's. The prospect of the EU imploding and being riven by chaos, acrimony and possibly much worse, is a more serious prospect for the world in my opinion.
But that said, there are plenty of pbERS who are willing the EU to fail no matter how much damage it will cause for future generations. They are the same kind who are supporting Trump.
Spot on Tyson. And we start from a much higher base than the outers did post 1975. Every scrap of the Eurosphere we can save in Britain post Brexit makes the historic task of reunion easier. Or at the very least more possible. And your crucial point is the matter isn't entirely in our own hands. If the EU doesn't collapse in acrimony it ruins a key plank of so many Brexiters plans.
British Public opinion splits about 70/30 Eurosceptic/Europhile according to Nat Soc Cen. You're in the position of Southern Irish Unionists after 1922.
What happened to Socrates? I seem to remember him being banned, though can't remember over what. I do remember him being somewhat left wing for US politics and right wing, perhaps even UKIP-ish, for British politics.
I just found myself thinking that certain PB posters surprise me on how they come down on certain specific policy issues, which in turn made me think of Socrates, as he was constantly surprising me.
We can imagine the scene when the Brexiteer anti immigrants have got their way and sent all the Polish plumbers back home . SeanT calls an emergency plumber number and a participant from Jeremy Kyles last show turns up demands £ 300 up front and goes leaving a worse problem than he had before .
You sound very bitter - I am a Brexiteer and do not want EU trades people sending home. Indeed with the house building needed we may well have to allow more but the point is that we must have control and we must decide who can come into country.
We're voting Leave to take control and enshrine EU law into UK law
This is, of course, the very best way to make a success of Leave. To do it slowly and safely and surgically. Gradually unwrapping the dead hand of Europe from our British throat. Finger by finger
The fact this might well work is what annoys Remainians most of all. They want Brexit to fail.
The conundrum is this Sean.....
Brexit will succeed if the EU implodes over the next years. It will fail, if the EU consolidates and strengthens. The destiny of the two are interlocked, and mutually incompatible.
I personally do not want the EU to fail. I would much (much) rather Brexit fails and the UK to re-join with our tail between our legs much as we did in the early 70's. The prospect of the EU imploding and being riven by chaos, acrimony and possibly much worse, is a more serious prospect for the world in my opinion.
But that said, there are plenty of pbERS who are willing the EU to fail no matter how much damage it will cause for future generations. They are the same kind who are supporting Trump.
A more likely outcome is that the EU further unifies, to an extent, and survives. But generally is still rather sluggish. Meanwhile Britain - after initial pain - grows faster, and is certainly politically happier, more comfortable in its own skin.
So nobody will face apocalypse. Cheer up.
@seanT- tell me how that works...that the EU remains intact and strengthens- but we flourish on the outside...ie outside the greatest free market the world has ever created.
Have you read anything about global capitalism? Do you simply ignore the threats made by global industries that they will not invest in the UK post Brexit- the Japanese, banks etc... Do you just think that is some Remain propaganda? Who will invest in the UK when they can invest in Dublin, or Frankfurt, or wherever and have access to the market?
Or are you living in the deluded world of Liam Fox talking absolute bollocks?
As said (unless you can come up with some argument I haven't read) Brexit will succeed if the EU fails....and there are many, many people who are willing that on. I'm not one of them.
The resurrection of Damien Greens career has been all but ignored. The fact that this humane, money saving and minor change is utterly radical is telling about the IDS regime. < The Telegraph: Reassessment tests for sickness benefit claimants with severe illnesses to be scrapped. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIw8tySpS4
Sensible change and one of many to come to benefit those in need.
Agree, a good tweak that saves money and helps a lot of those who were caught in the net with the last changes. At least it shows that the people in charge are listening to the problems on the ground, in what is just about the most difficult area of public policy to get right.
It almost makes me weep that this was even necessary. IDS is a fucking idiot who should not be left in charge of a bus queue.
And Cameron was wrong to discard Damien Green. A genuinely decent and clever man.
Osborne breathing down his neck demanding immediate cuts to a long term project that would have structurally reduced the benefits budget likely the cause of any perceived harm.
IDS and Green without Osbo would have been a different story.
One of Cameron's abiding flaws was sticking by his political pals. Almost always until it was too late.
If this EU law thing is true then May is proving herself a very astute politician, so far.
There was an interesting Red Box in the Times a few days ago which critiqued all the recent books on Cameron and Brexit, and said the one firm conclusion was that May was a very considerable political operator, and much more cunning than Cameron.
It's early days. Honeymoon period. But we might have found the one politician who can successfully traverse this minefield.
At least it shows that plenty of thought is finally being put into what happens next. That the Civil Service were told not to even think about leaving the EU until after Cameron had resigned, was one of that man's greatest failings in the job.
I'm looking forward to this week, hopefully we will see some good policy ideas from Mrs May's team, and by the end of it a good idea of the government's priorities for the coming year.
And the end of the labour party as a credible alternative government
That was pretty much a given after last week's shambles. The infighting vs the antisemitism isn't going to win anything soon.
How long before labour MP's join the May government
Ultimately, when I get into any kind of discussion with Brexit people (which I do try to avoid) they always throw at me the EU is failing...look at poor Greece and Italy, it is only a matter of time, better to jump ship now, bla..bla..bla....
If they are right, then Brexit will be better for the UK. No doubt about it. Better to extricate ourself now, and free ourselves from the yoke of this destructive union, rather than later. But Europe will be a much worse place. I think it is better and ultimately more altruistic to think that Britain made a silly mistake that it will come to regret and will rectify in the future, albeit with a bit of said yoke over our face.
Tyson, you're seeing this in a too black and white sense. No one is going to face an apocalypse and no one is going to see growth akin to China once rid of the other side. More likely it will be a boring middle road where we recover after we leave and do well for ourselves and the EU continues on the same path and pushes a few other countries towards the exit to allow full integration of the countries that want it to create a smaller more focussed EU state.
If everything in the global economy were peaceful and quiet, perhaps. But you don't need that much insight to look around and see in what perilous times we are all currently living.
We're voting Leave to take control and enshrine EU law into UK law
This is, of course, the very best way to make a success of Leave. To do it slowly and safely and surgically. Gradually unwrapping the dead hand of Europe from our British throat. Finger by finger
The fact this might well work is what annoys Remainians most of all. They want Brexit to fail.
The conundrum is this Sean.....
Brexit will succeed if the EU implodes over the next years. It will fail, if the EU consolidates and strengthens. The destiny of the two are interlocked, and mutually incompatible.
I personally do not want the EU to fail. I would much (much) rather Brexit fails and the UK to re-join with our tail between our legs much as we did in the early 70's. The prospect of the EU imploding and being riven by chaos, acrimony and possibly much worse, is a more serious prospect for the world in my opinion.
But that said, there are plenty of pbERS who are willing the EU to fail no matter how much damage it will cause for future generations. They are the same kind who are supporting Trump.
A more likely outcome is that the EU further unifies, to an extent, and survives. But generally is still rather sluggish. Meanwhile Britain - after initial pain - grows faster, and is certainly politically happier, more comfortable in its own skin.
So nobody will face apocalypse. Cheer up.
@seanT- tell me how that works...that the EU remains intact and strengthens- but we flourish on the outside...ie outside the greatest free market the world has ever created.
Have you read anything about global capitalism? Do you simply ignore the threats made by global industries that they will not invest in the UK post Brexit- the Japanese, banks etc... Do you just think that is some Remain propaganda? Who will invest in the UK when they can invest in Dublin, or Frankfurt, or wherever and have access to the market?
Or are you living in the deluded world of Liam Fox talking absolute bollocks?
As said (unless you can come up with some argument I haven't read) Brexit will succeed if the EU fails....and there are many, many people who are willing that on. I'm not one of them.
Remain propaganda, sure.
Just like the threats to pull out if we didn't join the Euro.
We're voting Leave to take control and enshrine EU law into UK law
This is, of course, the very best way to make a success of Leave. To do it slowly and safely and surgically. Gradually unwrapping the dead hand of Europe from our British throat. Finger by finger
The fact this might well work is what annoys Remainians most of all. They want Brexit to fail.
The conundrum is this Sean.....
Brexit will succeed if the EU implodes over the next years. It will fail, if the EU consolidates and strengthens. The destiny of the two are interlocked, and mutually incompatible.
I personally do not want the EU to fail. I would much (much) rather Brexit fails and the UK to re-join with our tail between our legs much as we did in the early 70's. The prospect of the EU imploding and being riven by chaos, acrimony and possibly much worse, is a more serious prospect for the world in my opinion.
But that said, there are plenty of pbERS who are willing the EU to fail no matter how much damage it will cause for future generations. They are the same kind who are supporting Trump.
Spot on Tyson. And we start from a much higher base than the outers did post 1975. Every scrap of the Eurosphere we can save in Britain post Brexit makes the historic task of reunion easier. Or at the very least more possible. And your crucial point is the matter isn't entirely in our own hands. If the EU doesn't collapse in acrimony it ruins a key plank of so many Brexiters plans.
British Public opinion splits about 70/30 Eurosceptic/Europhile according to Nat Soc Cen. You're in the position of Southern Irish Unionists after 1922.
Yet you won by less than 4%.
Of course. The prospect of change is alarming. But Brexit will become the status quo.
We're voting Leave to take control and enshrine EU law into UK law
This is, of course, the very best way to make a success of Leave. To do it slowly and safely and surgically. Gradually unwrapping the dead hand of Europe from our British throat. Finger by finger
The fact this might well work is what annoys Remainians most of all. They want Brexit to fail.
The conundrum is this Sean.....
Brexit will succeed if the EU implodes over the next years. It will fail, if the EU consolidates and strengthens. The destiny of the two are interlocked, and mutually incompatible.
I personally do not want the EU to fail. I would much (much) rather Brexit fails and the UK to re-join with our tail between our legs much as we did in the early 70's. The prospect of the EU imploding and being riven by chaos, acrimony and possibly much worse, is a more serious prospect for the world in my opinion.
But that said, there are plenty of pbERS who are willing the EU to fail no matter how much damage it will cause for future generations. They are the same kind who are supporting Trump.
Spot on Tyson. And we start from a much higher base than the outers did post 1975. Every scrap of the Eurosphere we can save in Britain post Brexit makes the historic task of reunion easier. Or at the very least more possible. And your crucial point is the matter isn't entirely in our own hands. If the EU doesn't collapse in acrimony it ruins a key plank of so many Brexiters plans.
British Public opinion splits about 70/30 Eurosceptic/Europhile according to Nat Soc Cen. You're in the position of Southern Irish Unionists after 1922.
Yet you won by less than 4%.
Given the fear and pressure brought to bear by the establishment, it's amazing that Leave won by that much.
We're voting Leave to take control and enshrine EU law into UK law
This is, of course, the very best way to make a success of Leave. To do it slowly and safely and surgically. Gradually unwrapping the dead hand of Europe from our British throat. Finger by finger
The fact this might well work is what annoys Remainians most of all. They want Brexit to fail.
The conundrum is this Sean.....
Brexit will succeed if the EU implodes over the next years. It will fail, if the EU consolidates and strengthens. The destiny of the two are interlocked, and mutually incompatible.
I personally do not want the EU to fail. I would much (much) rather Brexit fails and the UK to re-join with our tail between our legs much as we did in the early 70's. The prospect of the EU imploding and being riven by chaos, acrimony and possibly much worse, is a more serious prospect for the world in my opinion.
But that said, there are plenty of pbERS who are willing the EU to fail no matter how much damage it will cause for future generations. They are the same kind who are supporting Trump.
Spot on Tyson. And we start from a much higher base than the outers did post 1975. Every scrap of the Eurosphere we can save in Britain post Brexit makes the historic task of reunion easier. Or at the very least more possible. And your crucial point is the matter isn't entirely in our own hands. If the EU doesn't collapse in acrimony it ruins a key plank of so many Brexiters plans.
British Public opinion splits about 70/30 Eurosceptic/Europhile according to Nat Soc Cen. You're in the position of Southern Irish Unionists after 1922.
And your comparison of our 43 years of EU membership and Ireland's centuries of colonial oppression by England/Britain is facile.
What happened to Socrates? I seem to remember him being banned, though can't remember over what. I do remember him being somewhat left wing for US politics and right wing, perhaps even UKIP-ish, for British politics.
I just found myself thinking that certain PB posters surprise me on how they come down on certain specific policy issues, which in turn made me think of Socrates, as he was constantly surprising me.
If you haven't been banned at least twice from PB, you're not a real poster and are probably just a Mike Smithson sock puppet.
We're voting Leave to take control and enshrine EU law into UK law
This is, of course, the very best way to make a success of Leave. To do it slowly and safely and surgically. Gradually unwrapping the dead hand of Europe from our British throat. Finger by finger
The fact this might well work is what annoys Remainians most of all. They want Brexit to fail.
The conundrum is this Sean.....
Brexit will succeed if the EU implodes over the next years. It will fail, if the EU consolidates and strengthens. The destiny of the two are interlocked, and mutually incompatible.
I personally do not want the EU to fail. I would much (much) rather Brexit fails and the UK to re-join with our tail between our legs much as we did in the early 70's. The prospect of the EU imploding and being riven by chaos, acrimony and possibly much worse, is a more serious prospect for the world in my opinion.
But that said, there are plenty of pbERS who are willing the EU to fail no matter how much damage it will cause for future generations. They are the same kind who are supporting Trump.
Spot on Tyson. And we start from a much higher base than the outers did post 1975. Every scrap of the Eurosphere we can save in Britain post Brexit makes the historic task of reunion easier. Or at the very least more possible. And your crucial point is the matter isn't entirely in our own hands. If the EU doesn't collapse in acrimony it ruins a key plank of so many Brexiters plans.
British Public opinion splits about 70/30 Eurosceptic/Europhile according to Nat Soc Cen. You're in the position of Southern Irish Unionists after 1922.
Yet you won by less than 4%.
Of course. The prospect of change is alarming. But Brexit will become the status quo.
If this EU law thing is true then May is proving herself a very astute politician, so far.
There was an interesting Red Box in the Times a few days ago which critiqued all the recent books on Cameron and Brexit, and said the one firm conclusion was that May was a very considerable political operator, and much more cunning than Cameron.
It's early days. Honeymoon period. But we might have found the one politician who can successfully traverse this minefield.
At least it shows that plenty of thought is finally being put into what happens next. That the Civil Service were told not to even think about leaving the EU until after Cameron had resigned, was one of that man's greatest failings in the job.
I'm looking forward to this week, hopefully we will see some good policy ideas from Mrs May's team, and by the end of it a good idea of the government's priorities for the coming year.
And the end of the labour party as a credible alternative government
That was pretty much a given after last week's shambles. The infighting vs the antisemitism isn't going to win anything soon.
How long before labour MP's join the May government
They are not many winnable seats that are vacated by current Tory MP's.
Hilary Benn should have defected and ran for Witney under the Tory banner in the by-election when he had the chance.
If this EU law thing is true then May is proving herself a very astute politician, so far.
There was an interesting Red Box in the Times a few days ago which critiqued all the recent books on Cameron and Brexit, and said the one firm conclusion was that May was a very considerable political operator, and much more cunning than Cameron.
It's early days. Honeymoon period. But we might have found the one politician who can successfully traverse this minefield.
At least it shows that plenty of thought is finally being put into what happens next. That the Civil Service were told not to even think about leaving the EU until after Cameron had resigned, was one of that man's greatest failings in the job.
I'm looking forward to this week, hopefully we will see some good policy ideas from Mrs May's team, and by the end of it a good idea of the government's priorities for the coming year.
And the end of the labour party as a credible alternative government
That was pretty much a given after last week's shambles. The infighting vs the antisemitism isn't going to win anything soon.
How long before labour MP's join the May government
One or two crossing the floor this week would go down well
If this EU law thing is true then May is proving herself a very astute politician, so far.
There was an interesting Red Box in the Times a few days ago which critiqued all the recent books on Cameron and Brexit, and said the one firm conclusion was that May was a very considerable political operator, and much more cunning than Cameron.
It's early days. Honeymoon period. But we might have found the one politician who can successfully traverse this minefield.
At least it shows that plenty of thought is finally being put into what happens next. That the Civil Service were told not to even think about leaving the EU until after Cameron had resigned, was one of that man's greatest failings in the job.
I'm looking forward to this week, hopefully we will see some good policy ideas from Mrs May's team, and by the end of it a good idea of the government's priorities for the coming year.
And the end of the labour party as a credible alternative government
That was pretty much a given after last week's shambles. The infighting vs the antisemitism isn't going to win anything soon.
How long before labour MP's join the May government
One or two crossing the floor this week would go down well
On Wednesday just before the PM's conference speech would be good
I thought we had something called the European Communities Act of 1972 which allowed EU law to become UK law. Wouldn't we decide what bits of EU legislation we chose to keep as part of the A50 negotiation and then bundle up the new "order" as a new Act of Parliament once A50 had been concluded.
Er, no.
Have you any idea how much of our law has cumulatively come from the EU?
How on earth could we decide within 2 years what to keep and what not? Do you think that laws are simple, and one just says "oh, we'll have that one" but "that one's a bit rum, let's reject"
In most cases, those we don't like will be amended or replaced with an alternative. Think of the issues - agricultural support, sustainability of fishing, migration, employment rights, and many more areas. But that is to talk in generalities.
Now think of the specifics: the reporting processes that pharmaceutical companies must comply with, the tariffs on New Zealand lamb, the emissions standards of HGVs. This is to touch on perhaps 0.01% of the issues affected.
To reset all our law at the moment of exit would be an affront to Parliamentary democracy, a practical near impossibility for the legal machine to digest and a wrecking ball on stable functioning of the economy.
May's plan is the sensible way.
It has the added advantage of giving us a bit of leverage should the Europeans prove tricky about negotiating a reasonable settlement. It shows that constitutionally the ball is in our court, and we may fire the gun on actual Brexit as and when we please.
It will include absolutely everything. They are going for the "write all the EU stuff into British law then worry about amending it all later" approach. Pragmatically sensible. But it will leave some of the ultra-Brexiteers wondering why we bothered, at least in the short term.
This is surely just a procedural thing to stop all the secondary laws under the 1972 act becoming void when the 1972 act is repealed.
The resurrection of Damien Greens career has been all but ignored. The fact that this humane, money saving and minor change is utterly radical is telling about the IDS regime. < The Telegraph: Reassessment tests for sickness benefit claimants with severe illnesses to be scrapped. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIw8tySpS4
Sensible change and one of many to come to benefit those in need.
Agree, a good tweak that saves money and helps a lot of those who were caught in the net with the last changes. At least it shows that the people in charge are listening to the problems on the ground, in what is just about the most difficult area of public policy to get right.
It almost makes me weep that this was even necessary. IDS is a fucking idiot who should not be left in charge of a bus queue.
And Cameron was wrong to discard Damien Green. A genuinely decent and clever man.
Osborne breathing down his neck demanding immediate cuts to a long term project that would have structurally reduced the benefits budget likely the cause of any perceived harm. IDS and Green without Osbo would have been a different story. One of Cameron's abiding flaws was sticking by his political pals. Almost always until it was too late.
The fundamental fault line of Cameron's chumocracy. Appointment on basis of chums and not on merit.
We're voting Leave to take control and enshrine EU law into UK law
This is, of course, the very best way to make a success of Leave. To do it slowly and safely and surgically. Gradually unwrapping the dead hand of Europe from our British throat. Finger by finger
The fact this might well work is what annoys Remainians most of all. They want Brexit to fail.
The conundrum is this Sean.....
Brexit will succeed if the EU implodes over the next years. It will fail, if the EU consolidates and strengthens. The destiny of the two are interlocked, and mutually incompatible.
I personally do not want the EU to fail. I would much (much) rather Brexit fails and the UK to re-join with our tail between our legs much as we did in the early 70's. The prospect of the EU imploding and being riven by chaos, acrimony and possibly much worse, is a more serious prospect for the world in my opinion.
But that said, there are plenty of pbERS who are willing the EU to fail no matter how much damage it will cause for future generations. They are the same kind who are supporting Trump.
Spot on Tyson. And we start from a much higher base than the outers did post 1975. Every scrap of the Eurosphere we can save in Britain post Brexit makes the historic task of reunion easier. Or at the very least more possible. And your crucial point is the matter isn't entirely in our own hands. If the EU doesn't collapse in acrimony it ruins a key plank of so many Brexiters plans.
British Public opinion splits about 70/30 Eurosceptic/Europhile according to Nat Soc Cen. You're in the position of Southern Irish Unionists after 1922.
We're voting Leave to take control and enshrine EU law into UK law
This is, of course, the very best way to make a success of Leave. To do it slowly and safely and surgically. Gradually unwrapping the dead hand of Europe from our British throat. Finger by finger
The fact this might well work is what annoys Remainians most of all. They want Brexit to fail.
The conundrum is this Sean.....
Brexit will succeed if the EU implodes over the next years. It will fail, if the EU consolidates and strengthens. The destiny of the two are interlocked, and mutually incompatible.
I personally do not want the EU to fail. I would much (much) rather Brexit fails and the UK to re-join with our tail between our legs much as we did in the early 70's. The prospect of the EU imploding and being riven by chaos, acrimony and possibly much worse, is a more serious prospect for the world in my opinion.
But that said, there are plenty of pbERS who are willing the EU to fail no matter how much damage it will cause for future generations. They are the same kind who are supporting Trump.
Spot on Tyson. And we start from a much higher base than the outers did post 1975. Every scrap of the Eurosphere we can save in Britain post Brexit makes the historic task of reunion easier. Or at the very least more possible. And your crucial point is the matter isn't entirely in our own hands. If the EU doesn't collapse in acrimony it ruins a key plank of so many Brexiters plans.
British Public opinion splits about 70/30 Eurosceptic/Europhile according to Nat Soc Cen. You're in the position of Southern Irish Unionists after 1922.
And your comparison of our 43 years of EU membership and Ireland's centuries of colonial oppression by England/Britain is facile.
Not in the least. It was a sincerely believed in cause that became a lost cause. As is commitment to the EU today.
I thought we had something called the European Communities Act of 1972 which allowed EU law to become UK law. Wouldn't we decide what bits of EU legislation we chose to keep as part of the A50 negotiation and then bundle up the new "order" as a new Act of Parliament once A50 had been concluded.
Er, no.
Have you any idea how much of our law has cumulatively come from the EU?
How on earth could we decide within 2 years what to keep and what not? Do you think that laws are simple, and one just says "oh, we'll have that one" but "that one's a bit rum, let's reject"
In most cases, those we don't like will be amended or replaced with an alternative. Think of the issues - agricultural support, sustainability of fishing, migration, employment rights, and many more areas. But that is to talk in generalities.
Now think of the specifics: the reporting processes that pharmaceutical companies must comply with, the tariffs on New Zealand lamb, the emissions standards of HGVs. This is to touch on perhaps 0.01% of the issues affected.
To reset all our law at the moment of exit would be an affront to Parliamentary democracy, a practical near impossibility for the legal machine to digest and a wrecking ball on stable functioning of the economy.
May's plan is the sensible way.
It has the added advantage of giving us a bit of leverage should the Europeans prove tricky about negotiating a reasonable settlement. It shows that constitutionally the ball is in our court, and we may fire the gun on actual Brexit as and when we please.
The resurrection of Damien Greens career has been all but ignored. The fact that this humane, money saving and minor change is utterly radical is telling about the IDS regime. < The Telegraph: Reassessment tests for sickness benefit claimants with severe illnesses to be scrapped. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIw8tySpS4
Sensible change and one of many to come to benefit those in need.
Agree, a good tweak that saves money and helps a lot of those who were caught in the net with the last changes. At least it shows that the people in charge are listening to the problems on the ground, in what is just about the most difficult area of public policy to get right.
It almost makes me weep that this was even necessary. IDS is a fucking idiot who should not be left in charge of a bus queue.
And Cameron was wrong to discard Damien Green. A genuinely decent and clever man.
Osborne breathing down his neck demanding immediate cuts to a long term project that would have structurally reduced the benefits budget likely the cause of any perceived harm.
IDS and Green without Osbo would have been a different story.
One of Cameron's abiding flaws was sticking by his political pals. Almost always until it was too late.
No, that won't do. This will save money. Testing the terminally ill was just sick. And vicious. And pointless. And repugnant. IDS = scum. It's that simple.
If this EU law thing is true then May is proving herself a very astute politician, so far.
There was an interesting Red Box in the Times a few days ago which critiqued all the recent books on Cameron and Brexit, and said the one firm conclusion was that May was a very considerable political operator, and much more cunning than Cameron.
It's early days. Honeymoon period. But we might have found the one politician who can successfully traverse this minefield.
At least it shows that plenty of thought is finally being put into what happens next. That the Civil Service were told not to even think about leaving the EU until after Cameron had resigned, was one of that man's greatest failings in the job.
I'm looking forward to this week, hopefully we will see some good policy ideas from Mrs May's team, and by the end of it a good idea of the government's priorities for the coming year.
And the end of the labour party as a credible alternative government
That was pretty much a given after last week's shambles. The infighting vs the antisemitism isn't going to win anything soon.
How long before labour MP's join the May government
One or two crossing the floor this week would go down well
On Wednesday just before the PM's conference speech would be good
Their challenge is that they won't win their seats under the Tory flag. We have analysed it a lot on PB.
Since most Labour "moderates" are in safe Labour seats there is no way for them to win if they stand as Tories in those seats, the Tory party will have to make way for them in safe Tory seats and how many Tory MP's will be happy to retire to give way to Labour "moderates" ?
If they didn't defect to stand as Tories in Witney they won't defect later.
We're voting Leave to take control and enshrine EU law into UK law
This is, of course, the very best way to make a success of Leave. To do it slowly and safely and surgically. Gradually unwrapping the dead hand of Europe from our British throat. Finger by finger
The fact this might well work is what annoys Remainians most of all. They want Brexit to fail.
The conundrum is this Sean.....
Brexit will succeed if the EU implodes over the next years. It will fail, if the EU consolidates and strengthens. The destiny of the two are interlocked, and mutually incompatible.
I personally do not want the EU to fail. I would much (much) rather Brexit fails and the UK to re-join with our tail between our legs much as we did in the early 70's. The prospect of the EU imploding and being riven by chaos, acrimony and possibly much worse, is a more serious prospect for the world in my opinion.
But that said, there are plenty of pbERS who are willing the EU to fail no matter how much damage it will cause for future generations. They are the same kind who are supporting Trump.
Spot on Tyson. And we start from a much higher base than the outers did post 1975. Every scrap of the Eurosphere we can save in Britain post Brexit makes the historic task of reunion easier. Or at the very least more possible. And your crucial point is the matter isn't entirely in our own hands. If the EU doesn't collapse in acrimony it ruins a key plank of so many Brexiters plans.
British Public opinion splits about 70/30 Eurosceptic/Europhile according to Nat Soc Cen. You're in the position of Southern Irish Unionists after 1922.
Yet you won by less than 4%.
Of course. The prospect of change is alarming. But Brexit will become the status quo.
Remain was the Status Quo. And it lost.
That shows how momentous the change was. A swing of 19% from 1975.
@Mortimer.... Please give me the evidence of capital being drawn to the UK post Brexit? I have only seen the converse unless I have missed something.
Exporters (who do not rely on imports) and tourism are making a short term gain.
But ultimately, foreign capital will only invest en masse in the UK if they can access the single market. But if the single market implodes, as I think many Brexiters hope for, then Brexit may be prescient.
Of course we could always negotiate access to the single market, accept freedom of Labour, and keep with EU legislation if the EU exists......
I thought we had something called the European Communities Act of 1972 which allowed EU law to become UK law. Wouldn't we decide what bits of EU legislation we chose to keep as part of the A50 negotiation and then bundle up the new "order" as a new Act of Parliament once A50 had been concluded.
Er, no.
Have you any idea how much of our law has cumulatively come from the EU?
How on earth could we decide within 2 years what to keep and what not? Do you think that laws are simple, and one just says "oh, we'll have that one" but "that one's a bit rum, let's reject"
In most cases, those we don't like will be amended or replaced with an alternative. Think of the issues - agricultural support, sustainability of fishing, migration, employment rights, and many more areas. But that is to talk in generalities.
Now think of the specifics: the reporting processes that pharmaceutical companies must comply with, the tariffs on New Zealand lamb, the emissions standards of HGVs. This is to touch on perhaps 0.01% of the issues affected.
To reset all our law at the moment of exit would be an affront to Parliamentary democracy, a practical near impossibility for the legal machine to digest and a wrecking ball on stable functioning of the economy.
May's plan is the sensible way.
It has the added advantage of giving us a bit of leverage should the Europeans prove tricky about negotiating a reasonable settlement. It shows that constitutionally the ball is in our court, and we may fire the gun on actual Brexit as and when we please.
The resurrection of Damien Greens career has been all but ignored. The fact that this humane, money saving and minor change is utterly radical is telling about the IDS regime. < The Telegraph: Reassessment tests for sickness benefit claimants with severe illnesses to be scrapped. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIw8tySpS4
Sensible change and one of many to come to benefit those in need.
Agree, a good tweak that saves money and helps a lot of those who were caught in the net with the last changes. At least it shows that the people in charge are listening to the problems on the ground, in what is just about the most difficult area of public policy to get right.
It almost makes me weep that this was even necessary. IDS is a fucking idiot who should not be left in charge of a bus queue.
And Cameron was wrong to discard Damien Green. A genuinely decent and clever man.
Osborne breathing down his neck demanding immediate cuts to a long term project that would have structurally reduced the benefits budget likely the cause of any perceived harm.
IDS and Green without Osbo would have been a different story.
One of Cameron's abiding flaws was sticking by his political pals. Almost always until it was too late.
No, that won't do. This will save money. Testing the terminally ill was just sick. And vicious. And pointless. And repugnant. IDS = scum. It's that simple.
Clearly Cameron and Osborne were happy with what he was doing. Remember, IDS resigned, he wasn't sacked.
Bitterness in remainers going off the scale tonight. Wherefore that glorious May day in 1997 now.....
Not really, I am quite happy that all our European laws are going to be enshrined in British law. It means that the nature of Brexit will be decided by Parliament as a whole rather than the PM.
If this EU law thing is true then May is proving herself a very astute politician, so far.
There was an interesting Red Box in the Times a few days ago which critiqued all the recent books on Cameron and Brexit, and said the one firm conclusion was that May was a very considerable political operator, and much more cunning than Cameron.
It's early days. Honeymoon period. But we might have found the one politician who can successfully traverse this minefield.
At least it shows that plenty of thought is finally being put into what happens next. That the Civil Service were told not to even think about leaving the EU until after Cameron had resigned, was one of that man's greatest failings in the job.
I'm looking forward to this week, hopefully we will see some good policy ideas from Mrs May's team, and by the end of it a good idea of the government's priorities for the coming year.
And the end of the labour party as a credible alternative government
That was pretty much a given after last week's shambles. The infighting vs the antisemitism isn't going to win anything soon.
How long before labour MP's join the May government
One or two crossing the floor this week would go down well
On Wednesday just before the PM's conference speech would be good
Their challenge is that they won't win their seats under the Tory flag. We have analysed it a lot on PB.
Since most Labour "moderates" are in safe Labour seats there is no way for them to win if they stand as Tories in those seats, the Tory party will have to make way for them in safe Tory seats and how many Tory MP's will be happy to retire to give way to Labour "moderates" ?
If they didn't defect to stand as Tories in Witney they won't defect later.
But they may deny the labour whip and vote for conservative legislation. I think someone in labour voted against his own whip over 500 times
I thought we had something called the European Communities Act of 1972 which allowed EU law to become UK law. Wouldn't we decide what bits of EU legislation we chose to keep as part of the A50 negotiation and then bundle up the new "order" as a new Act of Parliament once A50 had been concluded.
Er, no.
Have you any idea how much of our law has cumulatively come from the EU?
How on earth could we decide within 2 years what to keep and what not? Do you think that laws are simple, and one just says "oh, we'll have that one" but "that one's a bit rum, let's reject"
In most cases, those we don't like will be amended or replaced with an alternative. Think of the issues - agricultural support, sustainability of fishing, migration, employment rights, and many more areas. But that is to talk in generalities.
Now think of the specifics: the reporting processes that pharmaceutical companies must comply with, the tariffs on New Zealand lamb, the emissions standards of HGVs. This is to touch on perhaps 0.01% of the issues affected.
To reset all our law at the moment of exit would be an affront to Parliamentary democracy, a practical near impossibility for the legal machine to digest and a wrecking ball on stable functioning of the economy.
May's plan is the sensible way.
It has the added advantage of giving us a bit of leverage should the Europeans prove tricky about negotiating a reasonable settlement. It shows that constitutionally the ball is in our court, and we may fire the gun on actual Brexit as and when we please.
Is this the "tim"? If so, welcome back.
Being nice about a Conservative politician? This can't be the 'tim' of old.
I thought we had something called the European Communities Act of 1972 which allowed EU law to become UK law. Wouldn't we decide what bits of EU legislation we chose to keep as part of the A50 negotiation and then bundle up the new "order" as a new Act of Parliament once A50 had been concluded.
Er, no.
Have you any idea how much of our law has cumulatively come from the EU?
How on earth could we decide within 2 years what to keep and what not? Do you think that laws are simple, and one just says "oh, we'll have that one" but "that one's a bit rum, let's reject"
In most cases, those we don't like will be amended or replaced with an alternative. Think of the issues - agricultural support, sustainability of fishing, migration, employment rights, and many more areas. But that is to talk in generalities.
Now think of the specifics: the reporting processes that pharmaceutical companies must comply with, the tariffs on New Zealand lamb, the emissions standards of HGVs. This is to touch on perhaps 0.01% of the issues affected.
To reset all our law at the moment of exit would be an affront to Parliamentary democracy, a practical near impossibility for the legal machine to digest and a wrecking ball on stable functioning of the economy.
May's plan is the sensible way.
It has the added advantage of giving us a bit of leverage should the Europeans prove tricky about negotiating a reasonable settlement. It shows that constitutionally the ball is in our court, and we may fire the gun on actual Brexit as and when we please.
Is this the "tim"? If so, welcome back.
Being nice about a Conservative politician? This can't be the 'tim' of old.
Given what's happened to Labour I expect that Tim is now a fully paid up member of the Tory party.
Bitterness in remainers going off the scale tonight. Wherefore that glorious May day in 1997 now.....
Not really, I am quite happy that all our European laws are going to be enshrined in British law. It means that the nature of Brexit will be decided by Parliament as a whole rather than the PM.
Exactly. It was always predictable. The issue, if there is one, is why it took the government three months to work it out.
Comments
https://twitter.com/PoliticoKevin/status/781967926458982400
Good for them politically, but what where they doing in West Virginia so far from Nevada and Florida where they are running for the Senate ?
Was there a secret GOP meeting in West Virginia or something ?
So, European Working Time directive - do we want that on our books? Nah, it's one of those dozy 'European' rules. We're hard working Brits.
http://wvpublic.org/post/drug-overdoses-claiming-west-virginias-youth
And what I read in a newspaper later on.
Brexit will succeed if the EU implodes over the next years. It will fail, if the EU consolidates and strengthens. The destiny of the two are interlocked, and mutually incompatible.
I personally do not want the EU to fail. I would much (much) rather Brexit fails and the UK to re-join with our tail between our legs much as we did in the early 70's. The prospect of the EU imploding and being riven by chaos, acrimony and possibly much worse, is a more serious prospect for the world in my opinion.
But that said, there are plenty of pbERS who are willing the EU to fail no matter how much damage it will cause for future generations. They are the same kind who are supporting Trump.
Oh, wait...
I'm looking forward to this week, hopefully we will see some good policy ideas from Mrs May's team, and by the end of it a good idea of the government's priorities for the coming year.
May may well prove to be a very astute politician indeed.....
The Tory party is increasing eurosceptic. And for now, we're the only show in Govt. town. And we're determined to remove the unnecessary and downright detrimental as soon as we can.
Inertia proves little use when approaching immoveable objects.....
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/20/health/invisibility-cloaks-research/
Can't be bothered to find it, but I've seen video of it deployed on a military vehicle, so all you see is the scenery behind the vehicle with a little distortion.
Arguably, we can be better neighbours - cos we won't keep sniping and will prove a useful element of healthy competition with our European friends.
I'm willing the EU to succeed, and the UK to succeed.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/invisibility-cloak.htm
This move to put all EU law under UK control seems a sensible move.
So I expect the Lords to oppose it.
Ultimately, when I get into any kind of discussion with Brexit people (which I do try to avoid) they always throw at me the EU is failing...look at poor Greece and Italy, it is only a matter of time, better to jump ship now, bla..bla..bla....
If they are right, then Brexit will be better for the UK. No doubt about it. Better to extricate ourself now, and free ourselves from the yoke of this destructive union, rather than later. But Europe will be a much worse place. I think it is better and ultimately more altruistic to think that Britain made a silly mistake that it will come to regret and will rectify in the future, albeit with a bit of said yoke over our face.
The measures are already in UK law as secondary legislation. All this does is keep that secondary legislation alive when the 72 act is repealed.
The difference is that parliament will then be able to ditch or amend the bits it dosent want, when it wants. As it is all secondary legislation it wont even need a vote in the house in a lot.
My first letters to MPs will be on EU seed selling legislation and various railway related matters.
And Cameron was wrong to discard Damien Green. A genuinely decent and clever man.
5/5 Scotland - Scottish law might also have to change too to end ECJ jurisdiction. Aren't the votes in Holyrood. Could get interesting.
I just found myself thinking that certain PB posters surprise me on how they come down on certain specific policy issues, which in turn made me think of Socrates, as he was constantly surprising me.
@seanT- tell me how that works...that the EU remains intact and strengthens- but we flourish on the outside...ie outside the greatest free market the world has ever created.
Have you read anything about global capitalism? Do you simply ignore the threats made by global industries that they will not invest in the UK post Brexit- the Japanese, banks etc... Do you just think that is some Remain propaganda? Who will invest in the UK when they can invest in Dublin, or Frankfurt, or wherever and have access to the market?
Or are you living in the deluded world of Liam Fox talking absolute bollocks?
As said (unless you can come up with some argument I haven't read) Brexit will succeed if the EU fails....and there are many, many people who are willing that on. I'm not one of them.
IDS and Green without Osbo would have been a different story.
One of Cameron's abiding flaws was sticking by his political pals. Almost always until it was too late.
Just like the threats to pull out if we didn't join the Euro.
Given the fear and pressure brought to bear by the establishment, it's amazing that Leave won by that much.
But a win is a win.
Miracles do happen.
Hilary Benn should have defected and ran for Witney under the Tory banner in the by-election when he had the chance.
Still, 18% think that it's all going to plan.
https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/782306086170816512
Have you any idea how much of our law has cumulatively come from the EU?
How on earth could we decide within 2 years what to keep and what not? Do you think that laws are simple, and one just says "oh, we'll have that one" but "that one's a bit rum, let's reject"
In most cases, those we don't like will be amended or replaced with an alternative. Think of the issues - agricultural support, sustainability of fishing, migration, employment rights, and many more areas. But that is to talk in generalities.
Now think of the specifics: the reporting processes that pharmaceutical companies must comply with, the tariffs on New Zealand lamb, the emissions standards of HGVs. This is to touch on perhaps 0.01% of the issues affected.
To reset all our law at the moment of exit would be an affront to Parliamentary democracy, a practical near impossibility for the legal machine to digest and a wrecking ball on stable functioning of the economy.
May's plan is the sensible way.
It has the added advantage of giving us a bit of leverage should the Europeans prove tricky about negotiating a reasonable settlement. It shows that constitutionally the ball is in our court, and we may fire the gun on actual Brexit as and when we please.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_referendum,_1995
We have analysed it a lot on PB.
Since most Labour "moderates" are in safe Labour seats there is no way for them to win if they stand as Tories in those seats, the Tory party will have to make way for them in safe Tory seats and how many Tory MP's will be happy to retire to give way to Labour "moderates" ?
If they didn't defect to stand as Tories in Witney they won't defect later.
@Reuters: Britain to enshrine all EU rules in UK law after Brexit: ITV reut.rs/2dlJLdM pic.twitter.com/IhqgrQNe0c
Interesting when combined with the IDS policy paper that says "We have no fucking idea how any of this works, but the courts can sort it out..."
I am unable to quantify in words just how much control it seems we have taken back, I am too overwhelmed by the amount of Sovereignty right now
LEAVE 52%
REMAIN 48%
Please give me the evidence of capital being drawn to the UK post Brexit? I have only seen the converse unless I have missed something.
Exporters (who do not rely on imports) and tourism are making a short term gain.
But ultimately, foreign capital will only invest en masse in the UK if they can access the single market. But if the single market implodes, as I think many Brexiters hope for, then Brexit may be prescient.
Of course we could always negotiate access to the single market, accept freedom of Labour, and keep with EU legislation if the EU exists......