I was going to be pedantic and point this out ( I think there are about a dozen 'Grammar Schools' in Scotland) but they are non-selective so I thought I'd let it past.
The other major difference between Scotland and England of course is the lack of fee paying schools.
You being funny?
I was with two friends when one of them, who had gone to Fettes, told the other: "Fettes is the Eton of the North." The other (an OE) said: "No, Eton is the Eton of the North."
Cameron Yarde Jnr Britain will be fastest growing G7 economy this year, says IMF https://t.co/wn7g41wYFe Feel that butt hurt
We have facts from this and ONS stating that we are growing well and then "beliefs" from the CBI and Govt people saying that it is all uncertain and there may be bumps ahead. It is very bizarre, almost surreal. A group of so called experts that keep wanting to ignore the evidence and instead return to their guesstimates.
Not at all helped by having as the Chancellor Hammond who is still spouting the Treasury line that Brexit was a mistake and we are have a rocky time ahead..... No wonder the £ dips again with such doom mongering.
The biggest problem the government faces is to explain why its economic policy over the past six years has been to reduce the deficit but suddenly, now, the immense challenges we face from Brexit make this unnecessary.
The objective to reduce the deficit is still important and necessary but the uncertainties surrounding Brexit and its implementation mean that the future of the economy will be difficult to forecast and therefore flexibility is necessary.
I need to go out so final post but an analogy for inflation is a fridge. I have my fridge set to 2 degrees celsius, that is a perfect temperature for maintaining fresh food and meats to stay fresh.
If the fridge breaks and goes high then that is a bad thing. If the temperature starts reaching double digits or higher then food is going to spoil and you risk food poisoning. Even in the higher single digits you risk food spoiling. Fridges breaking normally results in temperature rising so we all know that risk well and want to avoid it.
However that doesn't mean going lower is a good thing either. As we approach zero degrees or below there is a risk of your produce getting frost bitten and spoiling for a different reason.
If the temperature is too low then getting it back up to target is a good thing. The same is the case with inflation. Doesn't mean we want to raise it above target though.
The biggest problem the government faces is to explain why its economic policy over the past six years has been to reduce the deficit but suddenly, now, the immense challenges we face from Brexit make this unnecessary.
The objective to reduce the deficit is still important and necessary but the uncertainties surrounding Brexit and its implementation mean that the future of the economy will be difficult to forecast and therefore flexibility is necessary.
Blaming the uncertainty and potential turmoil of Brexit, and the EU for a u-turn in economic policy sits very comfortably with our brave new world of not being able to blame anyone but ourselves for our economic destiny.
"She’s very much assisted by the mediocre opposition that she faces from the LAB front bench which is one of the worst I have seen. "
I'm only 33, but when has there been worse?
IDS. Had say Ken Clarke or the vomit from a drunk been Leader of the Opposition in the run up to the Iraq war we might have avoided the greatest foreign policy and military disaster in this country's history.
Iraq the greatest military disaster in the UK's history? Give over, Mr. Eagles, we have done a lot worse in the past.
I was going to be pedantic and point this out ( I think there are about a dozen 'Grammar Schools' in Scotland) but they are non-selective so I thought I'd let it past.
The other major difference between Scotland and England of course is the lack of fee paying schools.
You being funny?
I was with two friends when one of them, who had gone to Fettes, told the other: "Fettes is the Eton of the North." The other (an OE) said: "No, Eton is the Eton of the North."
Oh how we laughed.
In Edinburgh where there are no "grammar schools" there are instead fee-paying merchant schools, and that's before you get on to full-on public schools like Fettes and Loretto. Per capita, fee-paying must be higher here than anywhere else in the UK.
I need to go out so final post but an analogy for inflation is a fridge. I have my fridge set to 2 degrees celsius, that is a perfect temperature for maintaining fresh food and meats to stay fresh.
If the fridge breaks and goes high then that is a bad thing. If the temperature starts reaching double digits or higher then food is going to spoil and you risk food poisoning. Even in the higher single digits you risk food spoiling. Fridges breaking normally results in temperature rising so we all know that risk well and want to avoid it.
However that doesn't mean going lower is a good thing either. As we approach zero degrees or below there is a risk of your produce getting frost bitten and spoiling for a different reason.
If the temperature is too low then getting it back up to target is a good thing. The same is the case with inflation. Doesn't mean we want to raise it above target though.
But it depends entirely on why your fridge is suddenly getting warmer,
Look on the bright side, Brexit is probably three years away minimum and five years maximum. What fun we are all going to have debating the same potential implications for the next 1095 to 1825 days.....!
Cameron Yarde Jnr Britain will be fastest growing G7 economy this year, says IMF
While we are still in the EU and single market...
We were supposed to be in recession this year for simply having voted to leave, long before negotiations finished.
And people wonder why the 'experts' aren't taken seriously anymore...
If you take the trouble to go back and see what the 'experts' actually said and wrote, as distinct from how the campaigning politicians chose to 'spin' their commentary, you will see that actually, so far, the experts have done pretty well. Which is not reassuring, given some of their longer term predictions.
Cameron Yarde Jnr Britain will be fastest growing G7 economy this year, says IMF
While we are still in the EU and single market...
We were supposed to be in recession this year for simply having voted to leave, long before negotiations finished.
And people wonder why the 'experts' aren't taken seriously anymore...
If you take the trouble to go back and see what the 'experts' actually said and wrote, as distinct from how the campaigning politicians chose to 'spin' their commentary, you will see that actually, so far, the experts have done pretty well. Which is not reassuring, given some of their longer term predictions.
I have taken the trouble thanks. That's a wonderful way of trying to deflect from the point with zero actual evidence presented for what you are saying. Sadly for you the scaremongering is all there in black and white. It was only a few months ago, I think we can all remember what was said.
"This is a simple, but vital, piece of legislation. It has one clear purpose: to deliver on our promise to give the British people the final say on our EU membership in an in/out referendum by the end of 2017. "
Can you provide the line in the act authorizing the referendum that says it was legally binding?
Can you provide the line that says that it wasn't?
This is a pointless discussion; if you look at the Act you can see that it is advisory; the government said it was advisory when it proposed it (but also promised to implement the result), and simple logic can establish that it is advisory. What's the point in arguing about it?
Yes it is; no you can't; no it didn't; and no it can't.
Cameron Yarde Jnr Britain will be fastest growing G7 economy this year, says IMF
While we are still in the EU and single market...
We were supposed to be in recession this year for simply having voted to leave, long before negotiations finished.
And people wonder why the 'experts' aren't taken seriously anymore...
If you take the trouble to go back and see what the 'experts' actually said and wrote, as distinct from how the campaigning politicians chose to 'spin' their commentary, you will see that actually, so far, the experts have done pretty well. Which is not reassuring, given some of their longer term predictions.
I was under the impression that Remain politicians only told the gospel truth without fear or favour and it was those nasty Leave politicians that lied, twisted and squirmed...
"This is a simple, but vital, piece of legislation. It has one clear purpose: to deliver on our promise to give the British people the final say on our EU membership in an in/out referendum by the end of 2017. "
Can you provide the line in the act authorizing the referendum that says it was legally binding?
Can you provide the line that says that it wasn't?
I have just re read the act provisions. There is no line which says it is legally binding. It does not need to have any line to verify that it is NOT legally binding as no referendum is unless specific provision is made for it to be so in its enabling act.
That's a matter of opinion.
"This is a simple, but vital, piece of legislation. It has one clear purpose: to deliver on our promise to give the British people the final say on our EU membership in an in/out referendum by the end of 2017."
That is what Parliament was told - the very first two sentences of the second reading debate - and Parliament did not act to amend the Bill to require a further vote before the government could invoke A50.
"CORRECTION: This article has been updated to reflect Florida’s expansive definition of an individual campaign donor, which can include an individual and that person’s businesses, so Trump’s contributions may have conformed to the law. An earlier version suggested the contributions may have exceeded the legal limit."
What polling evidence is there to support this theory that People do not seem to have noticed???..Anyone holidaying post BREXIT WIill have and there a whole pile of doo doo coming down the line with imports costing more.
"This is a simple, but vital, piece of legislation. It has one clear purpose: to deliver on our promise to give the British people the final say on our EU membership in an in/out referendum by the end of 2017. "
Can you provide the line in the act authorizing the referendum that says it was legally binding?
Can you provide the line that says that it wasn't?
I have just re read the act provisions. There is no line which says it is legally binding. It does not need to have any line to verify that it is NOT legally binding as no referendum is unless specific provision is made for it to be so in its enabling act.
That's a matter of opinion.
"This is a simple, but vital, piece of legislation. It has one clear purpose: to deliver on our promise to give the British people the final say on our EU membership in an in/out referendum by the end of 2017."
That is what Parliament was told - the very first two sentences of the second reading debate - and Parliament did not act to amend the Bill to require a further vote before the government could invoke A50.
Quit this nonsense. The referendum was advisory. But the government promised to implement the outcome. End of.
The question of whether the referendum was advisory or not is ultmately irrelevant.
What matters now is what is good for the country. Whilst I was not ultimately convinced by the case for Brexit, the Brexit side won. The main uncertainty, for the country, our neighbours abroad, and the market, is priced in.
Having yet more uncertainty in the form of a vote in the Commons and going "actually, we've changed out mind, perhaps," seems insanity. No-one will know where they stand, and many, many people will be unhappy.
Personally, I would like to see a debate in the Commons, but no vote. Allow MPs to have their say, but have them admit that the will of the people is preeminent.
But aside from that: the people have voted. We must make the best of it. We cannot afford to go over the old ground again.
The question of whether the referendum was advisory or not is ultmately irrelevant.
What matters now is what is good for the country. Whilst I was not ultimately convinced by the case for Brexit, the Brexit side won. The main uncertainty, for the country, our neighbours abroad, and the market, is priced in.
Having yet more uncertainty in the form of a vote in the Commons and going "actually, we've changed out mind, perhaps," seems insanity. No-one will know where they stand, and many, many people will be unhappy.
Personally, I would like to see a debate in the Commons, but no vote. Allow MPs to have their say, but have them admit that the will of the people is preeminent.
But aside from that: the people have voted. We must make the best of it. We cannot afford to go over the old ground again.
What polling evidence is there to support this theory that People do not seem to have noticed???..Anyone holidaying post BREXIT WIill have and there a whole pile of doo doo coming down the line with imports costing more.
There doesn't seem to have been much public outcry about the price of overseas holidays or G & T's that I can see.
Off topic - I'm off to a Labour branch meeting this evening - first since Jezelection 2. I wonder if they'll sit the Momentum lot on one side of the room, and the rest of us on the other?
It will probably just be one big anticlimax, with an evening spent discussing raffles and pie & pea suppers.
Never were Grammar Schools in Scotland but I did go to the one probably nearest in Berwick on Tweed
Yes there were
There are about 20 out of around 400 secondary schools.
Scottish Education used to be some of the best in the UK - but its fallen behind rUK on both Labour & the SNP's watch....but Scottish experience with Grammar Schools is very different to England's.
Its a devolved matter in any case, so improving Scottish education standards is a question for Holyrood, not Westminster.
On topic, I think Brexit has spooked FX traders. The fall in the value of Sterling is not just due to environmental or random factors. The panic hasn't however fed through to the "real" economy.
Forecasters before Brexit didn't take account of higher margins on exported goods when the sales price increases in deflated pounds while input price inflation hasn't fed through yet to the bottom line. In a deflationary environment a couple percentage points of inflation due to the fall in the pound is nothing to worry about. In fact they can probably push some of the Brexit costs onto workers in the form of deflated real wages. It's all benign at the moment.
On the previous topic, polls show that the utterly reliable bellwether state of Ohio won't get it right for the first time in a presidential election since before World War II. Ohio will elect Trump while the USA will elect Clinton. Is there a mistake in one or other of those polls? Should we go with the bellwether?
The question of whether the referendum was advisory or not is ultmately irrelevant.
What matters now is what is good for the country. Whilst I was not ultimately convinced by the case for Brexit, the Brexit side won. The main uncertainty, for the country, our neighbours abroad, and the market, is priced in.
Having yet more uncertainty in the form of a vote in the Commons and going "actually, we've changed out mind, perhaps," seems insanity. No-one will know where they stand, and many, many people will be unhappy.
Personally, I would like to see a debate in the Commons, but no vote. Allow MPs to have their say, but have them admit that the will of the people is preeminent.
But aside from that: the people have voted. We must make the best of it. We cannot afford to go over the old ground again.
What polling evidence is there to support this theory that People do not seem to have noticed???..Anyone holidaying post BREXIT WIill have and there a whole pile of doo doo coming down the line with imports costing more.
There doesn't seem to have been much public outcry about the price of overseas holidays or G & T's that I can see.
All good gin is distilled in the UK from uk grain, and tonic water is mainly water. Why is the price of G & T's sensitive to currency movements? I suppose there's the lemons...
The question of whether the referendum was advisory or not is ultmately irrelevant.
What matters now is what is good for the country. Whilst I was not ultimately convinced by the case for Brexit, the Brexit side won. The main uncertainty, for the country, our neighbours abroad, and the market, is priced in.
Having yet more uncertainty in the form of a vote in the Commons and going "actually, we've changed out mind, perhaps," seems insanity. No-one will know where they stand, and many, many people will be unhappy.
Personally, I would like to see a debate in the Commons, but no vote. Allow MPs to have their say, but have them admit that the will of the people is preeminent.
But aside from that: the people have voted. We must make the best of it. We cannot afford to go over the old ground again.
There should be no doubt that A50 will be invoked, but Parliament should approve the date, and make comment on the desireability of hard vs soft Brexit.
Incidentally, will importing all Euro-Law onto our books include in corporating A50 into British law? and therefore making it the HoC business?
What polling evidence is there to support this theory that People do not seem to have noticed???..Anyone holidaying post BREXIT WIill have and there a whole pile of doo doo coming down the line with imports costing more.
There doesn't seem to have been much public outcry about the price of overseas holidays or G & T's that I can see.
Indeed and probably not as much evidence as the evidence for racism within ukip.. we will await the polls
The question of whether the referendum was advisory or not is ultmately irrelevant.
What matters now is what is good for the country. Whilst I was not ultimately convinced by the case for Brexit, the Brexit side won. The main uncertainty, for the country, our neighbours abroad, and the market, is priced in.
Having yet more uncertainty in the form of a vote in the Commons and going "actually, we've changed out mind, perhaps," seems insanity. No-one will know where they stand, and many, many people will be unhappy.
Personally, I would like to see a debate in the Commons, but no vote. Allow MPs to have their say, but have them admit that the will of the people is preeminent.
But aside from that: the people have voted. We must make the best of it. We cannot afford to go over the old ground again.
There should be no doubt that A50 will be invoked, but Parliament should approve the date, and make comment on the desireability of hard vs soft Brexit.
Incidentally, will importing all Euro-Law onto our books include in corporating A50 into British law? and therefore making it the HoC business?
I think it would be moot as the transfer will happen on the day we leave.
What polling evidence is there to support this theory that People do not seem to have noticed???..Anyone holidaying post BREXIT WIill have and there a whole pile of doo doo coming down the line with imports costing more.
There doesn't seem to have been much public outcry about the price of overseas holidays or G & T's that I can see.
All good gin is distilled in the UK from uk grain, and tonic water is mainly water. Why is the price of G & T's sensitive to currency movements? I suppose there's the lemons...
Yes, that struck me as strange too. Tanqueray, Bombay Sapphire as well as various lesser brands are produced in this country.
@Casino_Royale As you read through this thread, you can feel Britain shrinking: shrinking in economy size relative to its competitors, shrinking in influence, shrinking in its horizons.
"CORRECTION: This article has been updated to reflect Florida’s expansive definition of an individual campaign donor, which can include an individual and that person’s businesses, so Trump’s contributions may have conformed to the law. An earlier version suggested the contributions may have exceeded the legal limit."
@Casino_Royale As you read through this thread, you can feel Britain shrinking: shrinking in economy size relative to its competitors, shrinking in influence, shrinking in its horizons.
No, that's just your small, small mind.
Surely our horizons are growing, as we are turning away from the EU towards all the other countries in the world?
What polling evidence is there to support this theory that People do not seem to have noticed???..Anyone holidaying post BREXIT WIill have and there a whole pile of doo doo coming down the line with imports costing more.
There doesn't seem to have been much public outcry about the price of overseas holidays or G & T's that I can see.
All good gin is distilled in the UK from uk grain, and tonic water is mainly water. Why is the price of G & T's sensitive to currency movements? I suppose there's the lemons...
Distillation is an energy intensive process - hydrocarbon fuel prices in USD.
What polling evidence is there to support this theory that People do not seem to have noticed???..Anyone holidaying post BREXIT WIill have and there a whole pile of doo doo coming down the line with imports costing more.
There doesn't seem to have been much public outcry about the price of overseas holidays or G & T's that I can see.
All good gin is distilled in the UK from uk grain, and tonic water is mainly water. Why is the price of G & T's sensitive to currency movements? I suppose there's the lemons...
There are some lovely Spanish gins, and I am also a fan of Old Genever from the low countries. Malawi gin is very drinkeable too, I always bring a bottle or two back when I visit.
The question of whether the referendum was advisory or not is ultmately irrelevant.
What matters now is what is good for the country. Whilst I was not ultimately convinced by the case for Brexit, the Brexit side won. The main uncertainty, for the country, our neighbours abroad, and the market, is priced in.
Having yet more uncertainty in the form of a vote in the Commons and going "actually, we've changed out mind, perhaps," seems insanity. No-one will know where they stand, and many, many people will be unhappy.
Personally, I would like to see a debate in the Commons, but no vote. Allow MPs to have their say, but have them admit that the will of the people is preeminent.
But aside from that: the people have voted. We must make the best of it. We cannot afford to go over the old ground again.
There should be no doubt that A50 will be invoked, but Parliament should approve the date, and make comment on the desireability of hard vs soft Brexit.
Incidentally, will importing all Euro-Law onto our books include in corporating A50 into British law? and therefore making it the HoC business?
Put simply: what good would come of it?
The war's over. All it would do is cause yet more chaos and trouble. The best that would come of it, is if it went to the vote and the government won, in which case nothing has been gained. The worst is that no-one: the government, our neighbours, or ourselves, would know where we stand.
What polling evidence is there to support this theory that People do not seem to have noticed???..Anyone holidaying post BREXIT WIill have and there a whole pile of doo doo coming down the line with imports costing more.
There doesn't seem to have been much public outcry about the price of overseas holidays or G & T's that I can see.
Indeed and probably not as much evidence as the evidence for racism within ukip.. we will await the polls
Ian Birrell reckons this Conservative conference is indistinguishable from UKIP's.
What polling evidence is there to support this theory that People do not seem to have noticed???..Anyone holidaying post BREXIT WIill have and there a whole pile of doo doo coming down the line with imports costing more.
There doesn't seem to have been much public outcry about the price of overseas holidays or G & T's that I can see.
All good gin is distilled in the UK from uk grain, and tonic water is mainly water. Why is the price of G & T's sensitive to currency movements? I suppose there's the lemons...
Yes, that struck me as strange too. Tanqueray, Bombay Sapphire as well as various lesser brands are produced in this country.
Monkey 47 is supposed to be the ne plus ultra of gins. I tried it in Paris. They served it neat in a carafe, with separate bowls of lemon and ice.
Nice enough.
Edit: no idea where it comes from. Google would reveal, I suppose.
The question of whether the referendum was advisory or not is ultmately irrelevant.
What matters now is what is good for the country. Whilst I was not ultimately convinced by the case for Brexit, the Brexit side won. The main uncertainty, for the country, our neighbours abroad, and the market, is priced in.
Having yet more uncertainty in the form of a vote in the Commons and going "actually, we've changed out mind, perhaps," seems insanity. No-one will know where they stand, and many, many people will be unhappy.
Personally, I would like to see a debate in the Commons, but no vote. Allow MPs to have their say, but have them admit that the will of the people is preeminent.
But aside from that: the people have voted. We must make the best of it. We cannot afford to go over the old ground again.
There should be no doubt that A50 will be invoked, but Parliament should approve the date, and make comment on the desireability of hard vs soft Brexit.
Incidentally, will importing all Euro-Law onto our books include in corporating A50 into British law? and therefore making it the HoC business?
Put simply: what good would come of it?
The war's over. All it would do is cause yet more chaos and trouble. The best that would come of it, is if it went to the vote and the government won, in which case nothing has been gained. The worst is that no-one: the government, our neighbours, or ourselves, would know where we stand.
I am not wanting A50 stopped (indeed I would like it invoked sooner), simply wanting the executive arm of government the servant of the legislature rather than its master.
In time a different party will be in power, and precedent for such decisions would matter. Should PM Corbyn be allowed to scrap our nuclear weapons without debate in the commons for example?
What polling evidence is there to support this theory that People do not seem to have noticed???..Anyone holidaying post BREXIT WIill have and there a whole pile of doo doo coming down the line with imports costing more.
There doesn't seem to have been much public outcry about the price of overseas holidays or G & T's that I can see.
Indeed and probably not as much evidence as the evidence for racism within ukip.. we will await the polls
Ian Birrell reckons this Conservative conference is indistinguishable from UKIP's.
What polling evidence is there to support this theory that People do not seem to have noticed???..Anyone holidaying post BREXIT WIill have and there a whole pile of doo doo coming down the line with imports costing more.
There doesn't seem to have been much public outcry about the price of overseas holidays or G & T's that I can see.
All good gin is distilled in the UK from uk grain, and tonic water is mainly water. Why is the price of G & T's sensitive to currency movements? I suppose there's the lemons...
Yes, that struck me as strange too. Tanqueray, Bombay Sapphire as well as various lesser brands are produced in this country.
Monkey 47 is supposed to be the ne plus ultra of gins. I tried it in Paris. They served it neat in a carafe, with separate bowls of lemon and ice.
Nice enough.
Edit: no idea where it comes from. Google would reveal, I suppose.
What polling evidence is there to support this theory that People do not seem to have noticed???..Anyone holidaying post BREXIT WIill have and there a whole pile of doo doo coming down the line with imports costing more.
There doesn't seem to have been much public outcry about the price of overseas holidays or G & T's that I can see.
All good gin is distilled in the UK from uk grain, and tonic water is mainly water. Why is the price of G & T's sensitive to currency movements? I suppose there's the lemons...
Yes, that struck me as strange too. Tanqueray, Bombay Sapphire as well as various lesser brands are produced in this country.
Monkey 47 is supposed to be the ne plus ultra of gins. I tried it in Paris. They served it neat in a carafe, with separate bowls of lemon and ice.
Nice enough.
Edit: no idea where it comes from. Google would reveal, I suppose.
"This is a simple, but vital, piece of legislation. It has one clear purpose: to deliver on our promise to give the British people the final say on our EU membership in an in/out referendum by the end of 2017. "
Can you provide the line in the act authorizing the referendum that says it was legally binding?
Can you provide the line that says that it wasn't?
I have just re read the act provisions. There is no line which says it is legally binding. It does not need to have any line to verify that it is NOT legally binding as no referendum is unless specific provision is made for it to be so in its enabling act.
That's a matter of opinion.
"This is a simple, but vital, piece of legislation. It has one clear purpose: to deliver on our promise to give the British people the final say on our EU membership in an in/out referendum by the end of 2017."
That is what Parliament was told - the very first two sentences of the second reading debate - and Parliament did not act to amend the Bill to require a further vote before the government could invoke A50.
Quit this nonsense. The referendum was advisory. But the government promised to implement the outcome. End of.
@Casino_Royale As you read through this thread, you can feel Britain shrinking: shrinking in economy size relative to its competitors, shrinking in influence, shrinking in its horizons.
No, that's just your small, small mind.
Surely our horizons are growing, as we are turning away from the EU towards all the other countries in the world?
EU minus UK = 27 nation states* Non-EU = 166 nation states*
* "And by country, we mean a sovereign state that is a member of the UN in its own right" - R. Osman
@Casino_Royale As you read through this thread, you can feel Britain shrinking: shrinking in economy size relative to its competitors, shrinking in influence, shrinking in its horizons.
No, that's just your small, small mind.
Surely our horizons are growing, as we are turning away from the EU towards all the other countries in the world?
I don't think our horizons are really changing. The referendum hasn't changed who we are. It's just shown that there is a vast nation beyond North London and South Manchester for whom the price of prosecco and prosciutto at the market in their favourite Tuscan village isn't really a factor in their lives. Most of us spend all of our lives in Britain, with the possible occasional exception, if we're feeling particularly flush, of a week or two somewhere else in the summer where normal rules don't apply and everything is expected to be eye-wateringly expensive anyway. Because abroad. And this is certainly not an issue in October. That's not to say the value of the pound doesn't have economic consequences. It's just for most people, those consequences are fairly abstract.
The question of whether the referendum was advisory or not is ultmately irrelevant.
What matters now is what is good for the country. Whilst I was not ultimately convinced by the case for Brexit, the Brexit side won. The main uncertainty, for the country, our neighbours abroad, and the market, is priced in.
Having yet more uncertainty in the form of a vote in the Commons and going "actually, we've changed out mind, perhaps," seems insanity. No-one will know where they stand, and many, many people will be unhappy.
Personally, I would like to see a debate in the Commons, but no vote. Allow MPs to have their say, but have them admit that the will of the people is preeminent.
But aside from that: the people have voted. We must make the best of it. We cannot afford to go over the old ground again.
There should be no doubt that A50 will be invoked, but Parliament should approve the date, and make comment on the desireability of hard vs soft Brexit.
Incidentally, will importing all Euro-Law onto our books include in corporating A50 into British law? and therefore making it the HoC business?
Put simply: what good would come of it?
The war's over. All it would do is cause yet more chaos and trouble. The best that would come of it, is if it went to the vote and the government won, in which case nothing has been gained. The worst is that no-one: the government, our neighbours, or ourselves, would know where we stand.
I am not wanting A50 stopped (indeed I would like it invoked sooner), simply wanting the executive arm of government the servant of the legislature rather than its master.
In time a different party will be in power, and precedent for such decisions would matter. Should PM Corbyn be allowed to scrap our nuclear weapons without debate in the commons for example?
Is that even possible to do under the prerogative?
The question of whether the referendum was advisory or not is ultmately irrelevant.
What matters now is what is good for the country. Whilst I was not ultimately convinced by the case for Brexit, the Brexit side won. The main uncertainty, for the country, our neighbours abroad, and the market, is priced in.
Having yet more uncertainty in the form of a vote in the Commons and going "actually, we've changed out mind, perhaps," seems insanity. No-one will know where they stand, and many, many people will be unhappy.
Personally, I would like to see a debate in the Commons, but no vote. Allow MPs to have their say, but have them admit that the will of the people is preeminent.
But aside from that: the people have voted. We must make the best of it. We cannot afford to go over the old ground again.
There should be no doubt that A50 will be invoked, but Parliament should approve the date, and make comment on the desireability of hard vs soft Brexit.
Incidentally, will importing all Euro-Law onto our books include in corporating A50 into British law? and therefore making it the HoC business?
I'd have thought that was the best for the Government. If they bring their proposed Article 50 declaration for approval by parliament, then the negotiating team go to Brussels with the strength of parliament behind them, and unless it's opposed by all non-Tories, with some conviction that it would survive a change of Government. It also shields the Tories from some of the blame if the negotiations go badly wrong, which is possible to say the least.
Whether the actual decision to invoke A50 is approved by parliament doesn't matter so much as the text of the initial "press release" declaration - I'm surprised the Government aren't trying to bind parliament in as support.
"CORRECTION: This article has been updated to reflect Florida’s expansive definition of an individual campaign donor, which can include an individual and that person’s businesses, so Trump’s contributions may have conformed to the law. An earlier version suggested the contributions may have exceeded the legal limit."
The question of whether the referendum was advisory or not is ultmately irrelevant.
What matters now is what is good for the country. Whilst I was not ultimately convinced by the case for Brexit, the Brexit side won. The main uncertainty, for the country, our neighbours abroad, and the market, is priced in.
Having yet more uncertainty in the form of a vote in the Commons and going "actually, we've changed out mind, perhaps," seems insanity. No-one will know where they stand, and many, many people will be unhappy.
Personally, I would like to see a debate in the Commons, but no vote. Allow MPs to have their say, but have them admit that the will of the people is preeminent.
But aside from that: the people have voted. We must make the best of it. We cannot afford to go over the old ground again.
There should be no doubt that A50 will be invoked, but Parliament should approve the date, and make comment on the desireability of hard vs soft Brexit.
Incidentally, will importing all Euro-Law onto our books include in corporating A50 into British law? and therefore making it the HoC business?
Put simply: what good would come of it?
The war's over. All it would do is cause yet more chaos and trouble. The best that would come of it, is if it went to the vote and the government won, in which case nothing has been gained. The worst is that no-one: the government, our neighbours, or ourselves, would know where we stand.
I am not wanting A50 stopped (indeed I would like it invoked sooner), simply wanting the executive arm of government the servant of the legislature rather than its master.
In time a different party will be in power, and precedent for such decisions would matter. Should PM Corbyn be allowed to scrap our nuclear weapons without debate in the commons for example?
Again, I ask what good would come of your proposal?
If a Corbyn government held a referendum on our nuclear deterrent, and he won, then he would have a solid basis on which to scrap it. To get to that stage, he would have to have enough of a majority in the Commons (and to a lesser extent Lords) to get the referendum bill through. After that, he would have to win the argument.
If he decided not to scrap them after that, he would have to answer to his supporters why he's gone against their will, and to everyone else why he's just wasted the vast cost of a referendum.
But it's a false analogy, as "should we scrap the nuclear deterrent" is a much simpler question than the one we had on the EU, where the lamentable state of the campaigns meant no-one knew what it meant.
As I've said, I would prefer a debate but no vote. But most of all I want certainty.
For all our talk on here, the Torygraph seems to have forgotten the basics of how the British state works when they say that "Theresa May will repeal the 1972 European Communities Act". She can't do any such thing.
Neither Theresa May nor the government have the authority to trigger Article 50 either. Why? Because doing so would reverse a decision by Parliament, which can only be done by Parliament. Only Parliament can give them that authority. Even if the leader of this pearls-and-hairstyle cackheap of a government, with its clown as a Foreign Secretary - a government which probably won't last long - did send in an Article 50 letter, the Supreme Court would declare that her act of doing so was unlawful. And that, dear Leavers, is what counts. The Commission would have to swallow that and rip the letter up.
Life on the backbenches giving you more time, eh George?
What polling evidence is there to support this theory that People do not seem to have noticed???..Anyone holidaying post BREXIT WIill have and there a whole pile of doo doo coming down the line with imports costing more.
There doesn't seem to have been much public outcry about the price of overseas holidays or G & T's that I can see.
All good gin is distilled in the UK from uk grain, and tonic water is mainly water. Why is the price of G & T's sensitive to currency movements? I suppose there's the lemons...
There are some lovely Spanish gins, and I am also a fan of Old Genever from the low countries. Malawi gin is very drinkeable too, I always bring a bottle or two back when I visit.
For some reason people here feel that Beefeater is the best, personally I think it tastes like denture cleaner and that any self respecting Englishman abroad should be drinking Gordon's London Gin with Schweppes Indian Tonic Water not that there usually a lot of choice. The first time I came here twenty years ago Tonic water (of any brand) was like gold dust and Expats hoarded it for special occasions. If it wasn't a high day or holidays you tended to be offered "Gin & Royal", where Royal True Orange is the local branding of Tango Orange. A little bit odd, but after the first couple it goes down much the same Thankfully the range is a bit more cosmopolitan these days.
"CORRECTION: This article has been updated to reflect Florida’s expansive definition of an individual campaign donor, which can include an individual and that person’s businesses, so Trump’s contributions may have conformed to the law. An earlier version suggested the contributions may have exceeded the legal limit."
The support Trump gets on this forum from ostensibly sensible posters is beyond reason. Even many on his own side consider him one of the worst presidential candidates for generations, and the guy is demonstrably a straight-up racist.
"This is a simple, but vital, piece of legislation. It has one clear purpose: to deliver on our promise to give the British people the final say on our EU membership in an in/out referendum by the end of 2017. "
Can you provide the line in the act authorizing the referendum that says it was legally binding?
Can you provide the line that says that it wasn't?
I have just re read the act provisions. There is no line which says it is legally binding. It does not need to have any line to verify that it is NOT legally binding as no referendum is unless specific provision is made for it to be so in its enabling act.
That's a matter of opinion.
"This is a simple, but vital, piece of legislation. It has one clear purpose: to deliver on our promise to give the British people the final say on our EU membership in an in/out referendum by the end of 2017."
That is what Parliament was told - the very first two sentences of the second reading debate - and Parliament did not act to amend the Bill to require a further vote before the government could invoke A50.
Quit this nonsense. The referendum was advisory. But the government promised to implement the outcome. End of.
The Government did so promise.But did Parliament?
Parliament doesn't implement things, it legislates
"CORRECTION: This article has been updated to reflect Florida’s expansive definition of an individual campaign donor, which can include an individual and that person’s businesses, so Trump’s contributions may have conformed to the law. An earlier version suggested the contributions may have exceeded the legal limit."
The support Trump gets on this forum from ostensibly sensible posters is beyond reason. Even many on his own side consider him one of the worst presidential candidates for generations, and the guy is demonstrably a straight-up racist.
Only from the PB Trumpers.
Only on PB.
He only has support on PB? Wow, the readership must be larger than I first thought.
On topic, I think Brexit has spooked FX traders. The fall in the value of Sterling is not just due to environmental or random factors. The panic hasn't however fed through to the "real" economy.
Forecasters before Brexit didn't take account of higher margins on exported goods when the sales price increases in deflated pounds while input price inflation hasn't fed through yet to the bottom line. In a deflationary environment a couple percentage points of inflation due to the fall in the pound is nothing to worry about. In fact they can probably push some of the Brexit costs onto workers in the form of deflated real wages. It's all benign at the moment.
On the previous topic, polls show that the utterly reliable bellwether state of Ohio won't get it right for the first time in a presidential election since before World War II. Ohio will elect Trump while the USA will elect Clinton. Is there a mistake in one or other of those polls? Should we go with the bellwether?
"She’s very much assisted by the mediocre opposition that she faces from the LAB front bench which is one of the worst I have seen. "
I'm only 33, but when has there been worse?
IDS. Had say Ken Clarke or the vomit from a drunk been Leader of the Opposition in the run up to the Iraq war we might have avoided the greatest foreign policy and military disaster in this country's history.
Iraq the greatest military disaster in the UK's history? Give over, Mr. Eagles, we have done a lot worse in the past.
WW1 was. Despite eventual victory. Should have stayed well out of it.
The question of whether the referendum was advisory or not is ultmately irrelevant.
What matters now is what is good for the country. Whilst I was not ultimately convinced by the case for Brexit, the Brexit side won. The main uncertainty, for the country, our neighbours abroad, and the market, is priced in.
Having yet more uncertainty in the form of a vote in the Commons and going "actually, we've changed out mind, perhaps," seems insanity. No-one will know where they stand, and many, many people will be unhappy.
Personally, I would like to see a debate in the Commons, but no vote. Allow MPs to have their say, but have them admit that the will of the people is preeminent.
But aside from that: the people have voted. We must make the best of it. We cannot afford to go over the old ground again.
There should be no doubt that A50 will be invoked, but Parliament should approve the date, and make comment on the desireability of hard vs soft Brexit.
Incidentally, will importing all Euro-Law onto our books include in corporating A50 into British law? and therefore making it the HoC business?
Put simply: what good would come of it?
The war's over. All it would do is cause yet more chaos and trouble. The best that would come of it, is if it went to the vote and the government won, in which case nothing has been gained. The worst is that no-one: the government, our neighbours, or ourselves, would know where we stand.
I am not wanting A50 stopped (indeed I would like it invoked sooner), simply wanting the executive arm of government the servant of the legislature rather than its master.
In time a different party will be in power, and precedent for such decisions would matter. Should PM Corbyn be allowed to scrap our nuclear weapons without debate in the commons for example?
Is that even possible to do under the prerogative?
The limits of the perogative are not well defined at present, hence the lack of clarity over whether it includes the right to invoke A50.
It was the English experience in the Civil War and Glorious Revolution that made the US founding fathers so keen on placing restraints on the Executive. (And the right to bear arms in self defence too)
"CORRECTION: This article has been updated to reflect Florida’s expansive definition of an individual campaign donor, which can include an individual and that person’s businesses, so Trump’s contributions may have conformed to the law. An earlier version suggested the contributions may have exceeded the legal limit."
oh it's legal thats fine then..............
The editors note made me chuckle
"Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S."
"CORRECTION: This article has been updated to reflect Florida’s expansive definition of an individual campaign donor, which can include an individual and that person’s businesses, so Trump’s contributions may have conformed to the law. An earlier version suggested the contributions may have exceeded the legal limit."
The support Trump gets on this forum from ostensibly sensible posters is beyond reason. Even many on his own side consider him one of the worst presidential candidates for generations, and the guy is demonstrably a straight-up racist.
Only from the PB Trumpers.
Only on PB.
He only has support on PB? Wow, the readership must be larger than I first thought.
He clearly has support elsewhere, but the support he carries on here is downright weird, even by PB's standards.
@Casino_Royale As you read through this thread, you can feel Britain shrinking: shrinking in economy size relative to its competitors, shrinking in influence, shrinking in its horizons.
No, that's just your small, small mind.
Surely our horizons are growing, as we are turning away from the EU towards all the other countries in the world?
I don't think our horizons are really changing. The referendum hasn't changed who we are. It's just shown that there is a vast nation beyond North London and South Manchester for whom the price of prosecco and prosciutto at the market in their favourite Tuscan village isn't really a factor in their lives. Most of us spend all of our lives in Britain, with the possible occasional exception, if we're feeling particularly flush, of a week or two somewhere else in the summer where normal rules don't apply and everything is expected to be eye-wateringly expensive anyway. Because abroad. And this is certainly not an issue in October. That's not to say the value of the pound doesn't have economic consequences. It's just for most people, those consequences are fairly abstract.
I made this point a year or two ago, and got shouted at by Europhobes and Europhiles alike!
A small percentage of people travel the world extensively, and think nothing of picking up the case packed by their door and jetting off. These people are, I think, over-represented on PB.
A much larger percentage travel abroad on holiday, whether to Europe or further. But this is a much less common occurrence.
A large percentage of people rarely travel abroad, and I reckon 10% or so could not afford a holiday in the UK, yet alone a foreign one.
What polling evidence is there to support this theory that People do not seem to have noticed???..Anyone holidaying post BREXIT WIill have and there a whole pile of doo doo coming down the line with imports costing more.
There doesn't seem to have been much public outcry about the price of overseas holidays or G & T's that I can see.
All good gin is distilled in the UK from uk grain, and tonic water is mainly water. Why is the price of G & T's sensitive to currency movements? I suppose there's the lemons...
There are some lovely Spanish gins, and I am also a fan of Old Genever from the low countries. Malawi gin is very drinkeable too, I always bring a bottle or two back when I visit.
For some reason people here feel that Beefeater is the best, personally I think it tastes like denture cleaner and that any self respecting Englishman abroad should be drinking Gordon's London Gin with Schweppes Indian Tonic Water not that there usually a lot of choice. The first time I came here twenty years ago Tonic water (of any brand) was like gold dust and Expats hoarded it for special occasions. If it wasn't a high day or holidays you tended to be offered "Gin & Royal", where Royal True Orange is the local branding of Tango Orange. A little bit odd, but after the first couple it goes down much the same Thankfully the range is a bit more cosmopolitan these days.
I was introduced to tonic syrup by my brother – Jack Rudy is the brand I think. You mix it with gin and sparkling water.
As a lifelong Schweppes man, I'm converted. You don't need much of it and it tastes great.
"CORRECTION: This article has been updated to reflect Florida’s expansive definition of an individual campaign donor, which can include an individual and that person’s businesses, so Trump’s contributions may have conformed to the law. An earlier version suggested the contributions may have exceeded the legal limit."
The support Trump gets on this forum from ostensibly sensible posters is beyond reason. Even many on his own side consider him one of the worst presidential candidates for generations, and the guy is demonstrably a straight-up racist.
Only from the PB Trumpers.
Only on PB.
In 1996 the American people were said to have been offered the choice between a "sleazebag and a corpse" and chose the sleazebag, this time they have a choice between a boorish racist and a corrupt national security risk, interesting times.
I voted Leave and have no regrets about that. I recall, however, making the point myself a few months before the Referendum that whilst I would expect Parliament to accept the verdict of the people in democratic terms, there would be no obligation on it to approve a particular deal negotiated by the Government. At that point we might find a significant number of Tory remainers seeking to block any package - and to be able to justify so doing on the basis that the electorate had not approved it.
The question of whether the referendum was advisory or not is ultmately irrelevant.
What matters now is what is good for the country. Whilst I was not ultimately convinced by the case for Brexit, the Brexit side won. The main uncertainty, for the country, our neighbours abroad, and the market, is priced in.
Having yet more uncertainty in the form of a vote in the Commons and going "actually, we've changed out mind, perhaps," seems insanity. No-one will know where they stand, and many, many people will be unhappy.
Personally, I would like to see a debate in the Commons, but no vote. Allow MPs to have their say, but have them admit that the will of the people is preeminent.
But aside from that: the people have voted. We must make the best of it. We cannot afford to go over the old ground again.
There should be no doubt that A50 will be invoked, but Parliament should approve the date, and make comment on the desireability of hard vs soft Brexit.
Incidentally, will importing all Euro-Law onto our books include in corporating A50 into British law? and therefore making it the HoC business?
Put simply: what good would come of it?
The war's over. All it would do is cause yet more chaos and trouble. The best that would come of it, is if it went to the vote and the government won, in which case nothing has been gained. The worst is that no-one: the government, our neighbours, or ourselves, would know where we stand.
I am not wanting A50 stopped (indeed I would like it invoked sooner), simply wanting the executive arm of government the servant of the legislature rather than its master.
In time a different party will be in power, and precedent for such decisions would matter. Should PM Corbyn be allowed to scrap our nuclear weapons without debate in the commons for example?
Is that even possible to do under the prerogative?
The limits of the perogative are not well defined at present, hence the lack of clarity over whether it includes the right to invoke A50.
It was the English experience in the Civil War and Glorious Revolution that made the US founding fathers so keen on placing restraints on the Executive. (And the right to bear arms in self defence too)
I wouldn't go as far as to say it was not well defined as it has been studied and tested in the courts for a while now. This article 50 case will be the latest court case on the matter.
"CORRECTION: This article has been updated to reflect Florida’s expansive definition of an individual campaign donor, which can include an individual and that person’s businesses, so Trump’s contributions may have conformed to the law. An earlier version suggested the contributions may have exceeded the legal limit."
The support Trump gets on this forum from ostensibly sensible posters is beyond reason. Even many on his own side consider him one of the worst presidential candidates for generations, and the guy is demonstrably a straight-up racist.
Only from the PB Trumpers.
Only on PB.
In 1996 the American people were said to have been offered the choice between a "sleazebag and a corpse" and chose the sleazebag, this time they have a choice between a boorish racist and a corrupt national security risk, interesting times.
"This is a simple, but vital, piece of legislation. It has one clear purpose: to deliver on our promise to give the British people the final say on our EU membership in an in/out referendum by the end of 2017. "
Can you provide the line in the act authorizing the referendum that says it was legally binding?
Can you provide the line that says that it wasn't?
I have just re read the act provisions. There is no line which says it is legally binding. It does not need to have any line to verify that it is NOT legally binding as no referendum is unless specific provision is made for it to be so in its enabling act.
That's a matter of opinion.
"This is a simple, but vital, piece of legislation. It has one clear purpose: to deliver on our promise to give the British people the final say on our EU membership in an in/out referendum by the end of 2017."
That is what Parliament was told - the very first two sentences of the second reading debate - and Parliament did not act to amend the Bill to require a further vote before the government could invoke A50.
Quit this nonsense. The referendum was advisory. But the government promised to implement the outcome. End of.
The Government did so promise.But did Parliament?
Parliament doesn't implement things, it legislates
It can also pass motions disapproving of a Government's actions
"CORRECTION: This article has been updated to reflect Florida’s expansive definition of an individual campaign donor, which can include an individual and that person’s businesses, so Trump’s contributions may have conformed to the law. An earlier version suggested the contributions may have exceeded the legal limit."
The support Trump gets on this forum from ostensibly sensible posters is beyond reason. Even many on his own side consider him one of the worst presidential candidates for generations, and the guy is demonstrably a straight-up racist.
Only from the PB Trumpers.
Only on PB.
He only has support on PB? Wow, the readership must be larger than I first thought.
He clearly has support elsewhere, but the support he carries on here is downright weird, even by PB's standards.
PB would be a boring place if we agreed on everything
What polling evidence is there to support this theory that People do not seem to have noticed???..Anyone holidaying post BREXIT WIill have and there a whole pile of doo doo coming down the line with imports costing more.
There doesn't seem to have been much public outcry about the price of overseas holidays or G & T's that I can see.
All good gin is distilled in the UK from uk grain, and tonic water is mainly water. Why is the price of G & T's sensitive to currency movements? I suppose there's the lemons...
There are some lovely Spanish gins, and I am also a fan of Old Genever from the low countries. Malawi gin is very drinkeable too, I always bring a bottle or two back when I visit.
For some reason people here feel that Beefeater is the best, personally I think it tastes like denture cleaner and that any self respecting Englishman abroad should be drinking Gordon's London Gin with Schweppes Indian Tonic Water not that there usually a lot of choice. The first time I came here twenty years ago Tonic water (of any brand) was like gold dust and Expats hoarded it for special occasions. If it wasn't a high day or holidays you tended to be offered "Gin & Royal", where Royal True Orange is the local branding of Tango Orange. A little bit odd, but after the first couple it goes down much the same Thankfully the range is a bit more cosmopolitan these days.
I was introduced to tonic syrup by my brother – Jack Rudy is the brand I think. You mix it with gin and sparkling water.
As a lifelong Schweppes man, I'm converted. You don't need much of it and it tastes great.
Oo that looks interesting. I am back in the UK in a couple of months or so for a few weeks, will add it to my shopping list.
The question of whether the referendum was advisory or not is ultmately irrelevant.
What matters now is what is good for the country. Whilst I was not ultimately convinced by the case for Brexit, the Brexit side won. The main uncertainty, for the country, our neighbours abroad, and the market, is priced in.
Having yet more uncertainty in the form of a vote in the Commons and going "actually, we've changed out mind, perhaps," seems insanity. No-one will know where they stand, and many, many people will be unhappy.
Personally, I would like to see a debate in the Commons, but no vote. Allow MPs to have their say, but have them admit that the will of the people is preeminent.
But aside from that: the people have voted. We must make the best of it. We cannot afford to go over the old ground again.
There should be no doubt that A50 will be invoked, but Parliament should approve the date, and make comment on the desireability of hard vs soft Brexit.
Incidentally, will importing all Euro-Law onto our books include in corporating A50 into British law? and therefore making it the HoC business?
Put simply: what good would come of it?
The war's over. All it would do is cause yet more chaos and trouble. The best that would come of it, is if it went to the vote and the government won, in which case nothing has been gained. The worst is that no-one: the government, our neighbours, or ourselves, would know where we stand.
I am not wanting A50 stopped (indeed I would like it invoked sooner), simply wanting the executive arm of government the servant of the legislature rather than its master.
In time a different party will be in power, and precedent for such decisions would matter. Should PM Corbyn be allowed to scrap our nuclear weapons without debate in the commons for example?
Bad example. Whether to use the weapons or not is a matter for the executive. So he can say we won't use them and that is his decision and his alone not a matter for Parliament. That is the difference between legislation and execution.
"CORRECTION: This article has been updated to reflect Florida’s expansive definition of an individual campaign donor, which can include an individual and that person’s businesses, so Trump’s contributions may have conformed to the law. An earlier version suggested the contributions may have exceeded the legal limit."
The support Trump gets on this forum from ostensibly sensible posters is beyond reason. Even many on his own side consider him one of the worst presidential candidates for generations, and the guy is demonstrably a straight-up racist.
Only from the PB Trumpers.
Only on PB.
He only has support on PB? Wow, the readership must be larger than I first thought.
He clearly has support elsewhere, but the support he carries on here is downright weird, even by PB's standards.
PB would be a boring place if we agreed on everything
Indeed so – the PB consensus that Trump is the best candidate is, as you say, somewhat dull.
@Casino_Royale As you read through this thread, you can feel Britain shrinking: shrinking in economy size relative to its competitors, shrinking in influence, shrinking in its horizons.
No, that's just your small, small mind.
Surely our horizons are growing, as we are turning away from the EU towards all the other countries in the world?
This irritates me. All the other countries of the world were there when we were members of the EU, Those horizons haven't changed one bit. We are just turning away from the EU. Period. Maybe we can't stand them. Maybe we actually like them but think we should stand on our own feet. Fair enough! Nevertheless Brexit is a disconnection. It's us turning inwards somewhat. That's where the tyre hits the road.
"CORRECTION: This article has been updated to reflect Florida’s expansive definition of an individual campaign donor, which can include an individual and that person’s businesses, so Trump’s contributions may have conformed to the law. An earlier version suggested the contributions may have exceeded the legal limit."
The support Trump gets on this forum from ostensibly sensible posters is beyond reason. Even many on his own side consider him one of the worst presidential candidates for generations, and the guy is demonstrably a straight-up racist.
Only from the PB Trumpers.
Only on PB.
He only has support on PB? Wow, the readership must be larger than I first thought.
He clearly has support elsewhere, but the support he carries on here is downright weird, even by PB's standards.
PB would be a boring place if we agreed on everything
There was a moment a few years ago where a thread had a dangerous amount of agreement in it, but fortunately someone came along and stopped that ...
"CORRECTION: This article has been updated to reflect Florida’s expansive definition of an individual campaign donor, which can include an individual and that person’s businesses, so Trump’s contributions may have conformed to the law. An earlier version suggested the contributions may have exceeded the legal limit."
The support Trump gets on this forum from ostensibly sensible posters is beyond reason. Even many on his own side consider him one of the worst presidential candidates for generations, and the guy is demonstrably a straight-up racist.
Only from the PB Trumpers.
Only on PB.
He only has support on PB? Wow, the readership must be larger than I first thought.
He clearly has support elsewhere, but the support he carries on here is downright weird, even by PB's standards.
PB would be a boring place if we agreed on everything
Indeed so – the PB consensus that Trump is the best candidate is, as you say, somewhat dull.
"CORRECTION: This article has been updated to reflect Florida’s expansive definition of an individual campaign donor, which can include an individual and that person’s businesses, so Trump’s contributions may have conformed to the law. An earlier version suggested the contributions may have exceeded the legal limit."
The support Trump gets on this forum from ostensibly sensible posters is beyond reason. Even many on his own side consider him one of the worst presidential candidates for generations, and the guy is demonstrably a straight-up racist.
Only from the PB Trumpers.
Only on PB.
In 1996 the American people were said to have been offered the choice between a "sleazebag and a corpse" and chose the sleazebag, this time they have a choice between a boorish racist and a corrupt national security risk, interesting times.
What polling evidence is there to support this theory that People do not seem to have noticed???..Anyone holidaying post BREXIT WIill have and there a whole pile of doo doo coming down the line with imports costing more.
There doesn't seem to have been much public outcry about the price of overseas holidays or G & T's that I can see.
All good gin is distilled in the UK from uk grain, and tonic water is mainly water. Why is the price of G & T's sensitive to currency movements? I suppose there's the lemons...
There are some lovely Spanish gins, and I am also a fan of Old Genever from the low countries. Malawi gin is very drinkeable too, I always bring a bottle or two back when I visit.
For some reason people here feel that Beefeater is the best, personally I think it tastes like denture cleaner and that any self respecting Englishman abroad should be drinking Gordon's London Gin with Schweppes Indian Tonic Water not that there usually a lot of choice. The first time I came here twenty years ago Tonic water (of any brand) was like gold dust and Expats hoarded it for special occasions. If it wasn't a high day or holidays you tended to be offered "Gin & Royal", where Royal True Orange is the local branding of Tango Orange. A little bit odd, but after the first couple it goes down much the same Thankfully the range is a bit more cosmopolitan these days.
I was introduced to tonic syrup by my brother – Jack Rudy is the brand I think. You mix it with gin and sparkling water.
As a lifelong Schweppes man, I'm converted. You don't need much of it and it tastes great.
Oo that looks interesting. I am back in the UK in a couple of months or so for a few weeks, will add it to my shopping list.
Good luck! I think it may in fact work out cheaper than the bar cans of SITW (I only buy the small bar cans because big bottles lose their fizz). The trick is to buy supermarket own-brand sparkling mineral water in the small bottles, Sainsbury's and Waitrose both do a very cost effective line, and mix with those...
"CORRECTION: This article has been updated to reflect Florida’s expansive definition of an individual campaign donor, which can include an individual and that person’s businesses, so Trump’s contributions may have conformed to the law. An earlier version suggested the contributions may have exceeded the legal limit."
The support Trump gets on this forum from ostensibly sensible posters is beyond reason. Even many on his own side consider him one of the worst presidential candidates for generations, and the guy is demonstrably a straight-up racist.
Only from the PB Trumpers.
Only on PB.
He only has support on PB? Wow, the readership must be larger than I first thought.
He clearly has support elsewhere, but the support he carries on here is downright weird, even by PB's standards.
PB would be a boring place if we agreed on everything
There was a moment a few years ago where a thread had a dangerous amount of agreement in it, but fortunately someone came along and stopped that ...
What polling evidence is there to support this theory that People do not seem to have noticed???..Anyone holidaying post BREXIT WIill have and there a whole pile of doo doo coming down the line with imports costing more.
There doesn't seem to have been much public outcry about the price of overseas holidays or G & T's that I can see.
All good gin is distilled in the UK from uk grain, and tonic water is mainly water. Why is the price of G & T's sensitive to currency movements? I suppose there's the lemons...
There are some lovely Spanish gins, and I am also a fan of Old Genever from the low countries. Malawi gin is very drinkeable too, I always bring a bottle or two back when I visit.
For some reason people here feel that Beefeater is the best, personally I think it tastes like denture cleaner and that any self respecting Englishman abroad should be drinking Gordon's London Gin with Schweppes Indian Tonic Water not that there usually a lot of choice. The first time I came here twenty years ago Tonic water (of any brand) was like gold dust and Expats hoarded it for special occasions. If it wasn't a high day or holidays you tended to be offered "Gin & Royal", where Royal True Orange is the local branding of Tango Orange. A little bit odd, but after the first couple it goes down much the same Thankfully the range is a bit more cosmopolitan these days.
My favourite remains Bombay Blue Sapphire from the freezer, full fat Fevertree from the fridge..no ice, no lemon.
@Casino_Royale As you read through this thread, you can feel Britain shrinking: shrinking in economy size relative to its competitors, shrinking in influence, shrinking in its horizons.
No, that's just your small, small mind.
Surely our horizons are growing, as we are turning away from the EU towards all the other countries in the world?
This irritates me. All the other countries of the world were there when we were members of the EU, Those horizons haven't changed one bit. We are just turning away from the EU. Period. Maybe we can't stand them. Maybe we actually like them but think we should stand on our own feet. Fair enough! Nevertheless Brexit is a disconnection. It's us turning inwards somewhat. That's where the tyre hits the road.
They were there, but we were locked into our trading arrangement with the EU.
"She’s very much assisted by the mediocre opposition that she faces from the LAB front bench which is one of the worst I have seen. "
I'm only 33, but when has there been worse?
IDS. Had say Ken Clarke or the vomit from a drunk been Leader of the Opposition in the run up to the Iraq war we might have avoided the greatest foreign policy and military disaster in this country's history.
Iraq the greatest military disaster in the UK's history? Give over, Mr. Eagles, we have done a lot worse in the past.
WW1 was. Despite eventual victory. Should have stayed well out of it.
The question of whether the referendum was advisory or not is ultmately irrelevant.
.
I think there is a lot of muddle here between what parliament can do and what it should do. Basically, our constitution is built on precedent, and there is precious little precedent on how to treat the result of a referendum, particularly when the result conflicts with the view of parliament (I think most, or all, or our previous referenda have confirmed what parliament would have wanted to do anyway). There is also a lot of constitutional ambiguity of where sovereignty lies. Theoretically, it lies with the sovereign, which, I suppose, is justified on the grounds that the sovereign embodies the nation, rather than because that one individual should make the decisions - but in reality, there would be some pretty explosive consequences if te sovereign started doing her own thing against the advice of parliament. Similarly, though, parliament is only justified in advising the sovereign on the grounds that it represents - however imperfectly - the will of the people who elect it. You can argue that this is not technically the case, but I think it would be difficult to argue otherwise philosophically. Most of the time, any anomalies between what the people want and what parliament advises the sovereign can be glossed over on the grounds of implementing a manifesto as a whole, but when we get a situation such as a referendum - that the governing party promised in its manifesto to hold and to implement the results of - it makes it much harder, philosophically, to ignore. Whichever way you slice it, sovereignty in a constitutional monarchy flows ultimately from the people - whether through electing members to a sovereign parliament which advises the sovereign, or through the sovereign herself embodying the British state. To argue otherwise would put the state on pretty shaky grounds. I would argue that where there is a referendum, that has been held by the government, the results of the referendum should be what advises the sovereign. And I would argue that this should also be true in the case of a Corbyn government which had held and won a referendum on scrapping nuclear weapons. I'd also argue that this should be true where a Corbyn government had held and won a referendum on the abolition of the monarchy, although this gets in even more of a constitutional and philosophical tangle!
Basically, it's a complex issue, we're in uncharted waters, and no-one should get too self-righteous about it.
What polling evidence is there to support this theory that People do not seem to have noticed???..Anyone holidaying post BREXIT WIill have and there a whole pile of doo doo coming down the line with imports costing more.
There doesn't seem to have been much public outcry about the price of overseas holidays or G & T's that I can see.
All good gin is distilled in the UK from uk grain, and tonic water is mainly water. Why is the price of G & T's sensitive to currency movements? I suppose there's the lemons...
Yes, that struck me as strange too. Tanqueray, Bombay Sapphire as well as various lesser brands are produced in this country.
Monkey 47 is supposed to be the ne plus ultra of gins. I tried it in Paris. They served it neat in a carafe, with separate bowls of lemon and ice.
Nice enough.
Edit: no idea where it comes from. Google would reveal, I suppose.
What's wrong with a good Plymouth gin?
I'm obsessed with gin. Plymouth Navy Strength is wonderfully flavoured, but a bit punchy, so I go for Plymouth Ordinary, or Sipsmith. They're best in a G&T
This is next on my list, apparently the best gin in the world
I've noticed on my travels that Latin/Hispanic countries are now obsessed with gin and tonic - from Lima to Malaga, Chile to the Algarve
Geentonic in great big quantities.
I hate gin, cannot stand the stuff. I had a terrible experience at the Lerida agricultural fair when I lived in Spain back in the late 1980s. You paid 200 pesetas to get in (£1) and then were able to sample as much of the produce on display as you wanted. This was at a time when San Miguel had a factory in the town and Estrella had one in Barcelona. Both had free bars based on the fact that the Spanish would have one beer and move on. Of course, they had not bargained for the small British and Irish ex-pat community in the town and we drank both bars dry. Having done so we wanted more and the only other bar functioning was run by Larios, who produce the domestic gin in Spain. So off we went to that and got pints of straight domestic gin with no ice. It went down and then a couple of hours later came back up again. The next day I had the second worse hangover of my life - and it was 40 degrees in the shade. Even now, just the smell of gin makes me nauseous. My stomach and my head will never forget.
"This is a simple, but vital, piece of legislation. It has one clear purpose: to deliver on our promise to give the British people the final say on our EU membership in an in/out referendum by the end of 2017. "
Can you provide the line in the act authorizing the referendum that says it was legally binding?
Can you provide the line that says that it wasn't?
I have just re read the act provisions. There is no line which says it is legally binding. It does not need to have any line to verify that it is NOT legally binding as no referendum is unless specific provision is made for it to be so in its enabling act.
That's a matter of opinion.
"This is a simple, but vital, piece of legislation. It has one clear purpose: to deliver on our promise to give the British people the final say on our EU membership in an in/out referendum by the end of 2017."
That is what Parliament was told - the very first two sentences of the second reading debate - and Parliament did not act to amend the Bill to require a further vote before the government could invoke A50.
Quit this nonsense. The referendum was advisory. But the government promised to implement the outcome. End of.
The Government did so promise.But did Parliament?
Parliament doesn't implement things, it legislates
It can also pass motions disapproving of a Government's actions
A motion of the House of Commons does not change the law.
Comments
If I'd lost a lot of money betting on foreign currency movements, I might feel differently.
Oh how we laughed.
Not at all helped by having as the Chancellor Hammond who is still spouting the Treasury line that Brexit was a mistake and we are have a rocky time ahead..... No wonder the £ dips again with such doom mongering.
If the fridge breaks and goes high then that is a bad thing. If the temperature starts reaching double digits or higher then food is going to spoil and you risk food poisoning. Even in the higher single digits you risk food spoiling. Fridges breaking normally results in temperature rising so we all know that risk well and want to avoid it.
However that doesn't mean going lower is a good thing either. As we approach zero degrees or below there is a risk of your produce getting frost bitten and spoiling for a different reason.
If the temperature is too low then getting it back up to target is a good thing. The same is the case with inflation. Doesn't mean we want to raise it above target though.
Um...
And people wonder why the 'experts' aren't taken seriously anymore...
barbara bush calling trump a sexist
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hm-treasury-analysis-the-immediate-economic-impact-of-leaving-the-eu
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jun/18/imf-says-brexit-would-trigger-uk-recession-eu-referendum
Etc etc
Most significant IMF forecast nothing to do with Brexit: downgrades US 2016 growth by 0.6 percentage points to 1.6%.
Apart from that, you're doing OK.
"This is a simple, but vital, piece of legislation. It has one clear purpose: to deliver on our promise to give the British people the final say on our EU membership in an in/out referendum by the end of 2017."
That is what Parliament was told - the very first two sentences of the second reading debate - and Parliament did not act to amend the Bill to require a further vote before the government could invoke A50.
"CORRECTION: This article has been updated to reflect Florida’s expansive definition of an individual campaign donor, which can include an individual and that person’s businesses, so Trump’s contributions may have conformed to the law. An earlier version suggested the contributions may have exceeded the legal limit."
What matters now is what is good for the country. Whilst I was not ultimately convinced by the case for Brexit, the Brexit side won. The main uncertainty, for the country, our neighbours abroad, and the market, is priced in.
Having yet more uncertainty in the form of a vote in the Commons and going "actually, we've changed out mind, perhaps," seems insanity. No-one will know where they stand, and many, many people will be unhappy.
Personally, I would like to see a debate in the Commons, but no vote. Allow MPs to have their say, but have them admit that the will of the people is preeminent.
But aside from that: the people have voted. We must make the best of it. We cannot afford to go over the old ground again.
It will probably just be one big anticlimax, with an evening spent discussing raffles and pie & pea suppers.
Scottish Education used to be some of the best in the UK - but its fallen behind rUK on both Labour & the SNP's watch....but Scottish experience with Grammar Schools is very different to England's.
Its a devolved matter in any case, so improving Scottish education standards is a question for Holyrood, not Westminster.
The way he crushed Jeb , she's hardly a disinterested spectator.
Forecasters before Brexit didn't take account of higher margins on exported goods when the sales price increases in deflated pounds while input price inflation hasn't fed through yet to the bottom line. In a deflationary environment a couple percentage points of inflation due to the fall in the pound is nothing to worry about. In fact they can probably push some of the Brexit costs onto workers in the form of deflated real wages. It's all benign at the moment.
On the previous topic, polls show that the utterly reliable bellwether state of Ohio won't get it right for the first time in a presidential election since before World War II. Ohio will elect Trump while the USA will elect Clinton. Is there a mistake in one or other of those polls? Should we go with the bellwether?
Incidentally, will importing all Euro-Law onto our books include in corporating A50 into British law? and therefore making it the HoC business?
Oh dear...
"CORRECTION: This article has been updated to reflect Florida’s expansive definition of an individual campaign donor, which can include an individual and that person’s businesses, so Trump’s contributions may have conformed to the law. An earlier version suggested the contributions may have exceeded the legal limit."
https://www.elon.edu/E/elon-poll/poll-archive/100416.html
The war's over. All it would do is cause yet more chaos and trouble. The best that would come of it, is if it went to the vote and the government won, in which case nothing has been gained. The worst is that no-one: the government, our neighbours, or ourselves, would know where we stand.
Nice enough.
Edit: no idea where it comes from. Google would reveal, I suppose.
Even the Guardian is calling out the IMF's garbage Brexit predictions.
Predictions referenced and retweeted endlessly by Remainers in the run up to the vote.
In time a different party will be in power, and precedent for such decisions would matter. Should PM Corbyn be allowed to scrap our nuclear weapons without debate in the commons for example?
The "progressive" Labour and LibDems do not...
Non-EU = 166 nation states*
* "And by country, we mean a sovereign state that is a member of the UN in its own right"
- R. Osman
The referendum hasn't changed who we are. It's just shown that there is a vast nation beyond North London and South Manchester for whom the price of prosecco and prosciutto at the market in their favourite Tuscan village isn't really a factor in their lives. Most of us spend all of our lives in Britain, with the possible occasional exception, if we're feeling particularly flush, of a week or two somewhere else in the summer where normal rules don't apply and everything is expected to be eye-wateringly expensive anyway. Because abroad. And this is certainly not an issue in October.
That's not to say the value of the pound doesn't have economic consequences. It's just for most people, those consequences are fairly abstract.
Whether the actual decision to invoke A50 is approved by parliament doesn't matter so much as the text of the initial "press release" declaration - I'm surprised the Government aren't trying to bind parliament in as support.
If a Corbyn government held a referendum on our nuclear deterrent, and he won, then he would have a solid basis on which to scrap it. To get to that stage, he would have to have enough of a majority in the Commons (and to a lesser extent Lords) to get the referendum bill through. After that, he would have to win the argument.
If he decided not to scrap them after that, he would have to answer to his supporters why he's gone against their will, and to everyone else why he's just wasted the vast cost of a referendum.
But it's a false analogy, as "should we scrap the nuclear deterrent" is a much simpler question than the one we had on the EU, where the lamentable state of the campaigns meant no-one knew what it meant.
As I've said, I would prefer a debate but no vote. But most of all I want certainty.
I reckon most of the stock in the shops today was imported over the summer. The price rises should begin to come into effect from Xmas.
Only from the PB Trumpers.
Only on PB.
Plato will be on shortly to show you that Trump is ahead in South Carolina.
http://xkcd.com/1122/
It was the English experience in the Civil War and Glorious Revolution that made the US founding fathers so keen on placing restraints on the Executive. (And the right to bear arms in self defence too)
"Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S."
A small percentage of people travel the world extensively, and think nothing of picking up the case packed by their door and jetting off. These people are, I think, over-represented on PB.
A much larger percentage travel abroad on holiday, whether to Europe or further. But this is a much less common occurrence.
A large percentage of people rarely travel abroad, and I reckon 10% or so could not afford a holiday in the UK, yet alone a foreign one.
To many people, Europe is a foreign world.
As a lifelong Schweppes man, I'm converted. You don't need much of it and it tastes great.
http://www.peerage.org/genealogy/royal-prerogative.pdf
I wouldn't go as far as to say it was not well defined as it has been studied and tested in the courts for a while now. This article 50 case will be the latest court case on the matter.
http://jackrudycocktailco.com/purchase/mixers/small-batch-tonic/
Trump is a racist? On what evidence?
http://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/10/clinton_takes_double-digit_lea_1.html
Winning white men.
I hate gin, cannot stand the stuff. I had a terrible experience at the Lerida agricultural fair when I lived in Spain back in the late 1980s. You paid 200 pesetas to get in (£1) and then were able to sample as much of the produce on display as you wanted. This was at a time when San Miguel had a factory in the town and Estrella had one in Barcelona. Both had free bars based on the fact that the Spanish would have one beer and move on. Of course, they had not bargained for the small British and Irish ex-pat community in the town and we drank both bars dry. Having done so we wanted more and the only other bar functioning was run by Larios, who produce the domestic gin in Spain. So off we went to that and got pints of straight domestic gin with no ice. It went down and then a couple of hours later came back up again. The next day I had the second worse hangover of my life - and it was 40 degrees in the shade. Even now, just the smell of gin makes me nauseous. My stomach and my head will never forget.