In my job, I discuss Brexit all the time. Mostly, I'm meeting the managements of large international companies, and they are curious. How quickly will the UK government make up its mind? Will Britain be a harder place to do business? Will there be tariff free access to the EEA? Will it be harder to hire people?
Mostly they are a pragmatic bunch. They prefer stability (they're business people), and would have preferred a Remain vote, but they'll work with a Leave one. I think very few UK investment decisions are being taken right now. They're not being scrubbed (most firms are committed to having a significant UK presence), but their spreadsheets need numbers to be filled in, and right now - especially with the talk of Hard Brexit - they can't do that. I don't see a big upswing in firms choosing continental Europe. But for firms who are approaching capacity and which need certainty, I think there will be an incremental negative impact. The sooner that the relationship between the UK and the EU is resolved the sooner investment decisions will be made (in the UK's favour).
Interestingly, not all the questions are EU related. I was asked what tariff rates the UK government was likely to impose on goods coming from outside the EU. To which I had to say that I had no idea, but I would imagine that on day one we'd probably have a similar tariff structure to that of the EU.
We've had the "theatrics" and "charisma" of Blair and Cameron,. And that was fine at the right time (arguably Cameron's style wasn't really suited to 2008-2010 and that's one of the reasons he didn't win the 2010 election) but after Brexit we need serious politicians for serious times.
Will Theresa May ever win a personality or charisma contest? No! But that's not what we need right now - We need someone who is cautious, steely and stoical and who can go into the negotiations with the EU with a poker face and give the likes of Mr Juncker a kick in the shins.
Cameron may have been good on telly but when it counted he let the bureaucrats run rings round him and blew the referendum.
He doesn't have to have a by-election. The last one was just a UKIP stunt.
I think he could sit as an independent without a by-election, but not after re-joining the Tories.
Of course he could sit with the Tories just like Cameron's Witney predecessor sat with Labour for years which he would not have done had he needed a by-election!
Why would the Tories want Carswell back? I'm far from disliking him, but he could only cause trouble within the party. Even better, if he remains within UKIP then he's causing *them* trouble within their party!
Not trouble of his own making, admittedly. But trouble nonetheless.
But his departure would rob UKIP of the Short money. With their Euro-gravy train soon to hit the buffers and donors departing at at rate of knots, where is their cash coming from?
If and when Brexit takes place, there is no longer a need for UKIP. Once a single-issue political party achieves its aim, it's time for members to go their separate ways.
The ANC are still around twenty-odd years after Apartheid. India's Congress Party are still around (just!) nearly 70 years after Independence.
Always amusing when a tedious troll who helped topple a Tory MP tells me, who has helped elect several Tory MPs, that I'm a TINO.
So when are you going to sod off and join the Europhiles in the LibDems?
I'm staying. I didn't bugger off when the IDS lot took control, I stayed and fought, and changed my party for the better.
I'll do it again.
Who do we back to get rid of our Gordon, though? I'm begginning to warm to George.
I had a very interesting discussion yesterday with someone yesterday about that, it touches on Brexit on how Mrs May gets toppled in the next year.
It can happen.
Colour me intrigued, I've had no indication of plotting just yet, but I'm not really clued up with the senior Cameroons.
See my post at 4.06pm, it wasn't a Cameroon who I had the conversation with, but someone who campaigned for Leave (He always wanted an EEA/EFTA type of Brexit)
I just caught up. Very interesting.
A swift move to EFTA / EEA as a transitional arrangement seems sensible to me, Transitional could of course be c.a. ten years during which a FTA could be thrashed out. It is just not realistic to have uncertainty about 'hard Brexit' hanging around for two years while A50 is negotiated - the damage to business confidence would mount alamingly.
1936 – Around 200 men marched from Jarrow to London, carrying a petition to the British government requesting the re-establishment of industry in the town.
1936 – Around 200 men marched from Jarrow to London, carrying a petition to the British government requesting the re-establishment of industry in the town.
She's the only "show" in town at the moment so she can be PM for as long as she wants it.
In my job, I discuss Brexit all the time. Mostly, I'm meeting the managements of large international companies, and they are curious. How quickly will the UK government make up its mind? Will Britain be a harder place to do business? Will there be tariff free access to the EEA? Will it be harder to hire people?
Mostly they are a pragmatic bunch. They prefer stability (they're business people), and would have preferred a Remain vote, but they'll work with a Leave one. I think very few UK investment decisions are being taken right now. They're not being scrubbed (most firms are committed to having a significant UK presence), but their spreadsheets need numbers to be filled in, and right now - especially with the talk of Hard Brexit - they can't do that. I don't see a big upswing in firms choosing continental Europe. But for firms who are approaching capacity and which need certainty, I think there will be an incremental negative impact. The sooner that the relationship between the UK and the EU is resolved the sooner investment decisions will be made (in the UK's favour).
Interestingly, not all the questions are EU related. I was asked what tariff rates the UK government was likely to impose on goods coming from outside the EU. To which I had to say that I had no idea, but I would imagine that on day one we'd probably have a similar tariff structure to that of the EU.
Robert, would a Heads of Agreement be sufficient to unlock those investment decisions, do you think, or would it require certainty about the details?
Farmer Trump "Mr Trump's familiarity with the resultant legal loopholes is not in doubt. For example, under farmland assessment programmes, developers can claim tax breaks on land that is used for agricultural purposes. Mr Trump took advantage of this by installing a herd of goats on two golf courses that he owned in New Jersey, cutting his tax bill for the sites from $80,000 a year to less than $1,000." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37550378
Anyone think Theresa May could still be PM in 10 years' time?
The modern record is 11.5 years.
I have doubts, since she will probably win the 2020GE, but the 2025GE is very far away to tell. We don't know the economic and social conditions, we don't know if there would be a foreign policy disaster, we don't even know the next Labour leader after Corbyn.
Although the election is over I wonder how Trump and Hillary will deal with this.
Have the generator serviced and gassed up ready to go. But still beautiful autumnal sunshine and blue skies in MD. Perhaps I should get the pool furniture in ...
In my job, I discuss Brexit all the time. Mostly, I'm meeting the managements of large international companies, and they are curious. How quickly will the UK government make up its mind? Will Britain be a harder place to do business? Will there be tariff free access to the EEA? Will it be harder to hire people?
Mostly they are a pragmatic bunch. They prefer stability (they're business people), and would have preferred a Remain vote, but they'll work with a Leave one. I think very few UK investment decisions are being taken right now. They're not being scrubbed (most firms are committed to having a significant UK presence), but their spreadsheets need numbers to be filled in, and right now - especially with the talk of Hard Brexit - they can't do that. I don't see a big upswing in firms choosing continental Europe. But for firms who are approaching capacity and which need certainty, I think there will be an incremental negative impact. The sooner that the relationship between the UK and the EU is resolved the sooner investment decisions will be made (in the UK's favour).
Interestingly, not all the questions are EU related. I was asked what tariff rates the UK government was likely to impose on goods coming from outside the EU. To which I had to say that I had no idea, but I would imagine that on day one we'd probably have a similar tariff structure to that of the EU.
Robert, would a Heads of Agreement be sufficient to unlock those investment decisions, do you think, or would it require certainty about the details?
The vast bulk of them, yes.
I think it's worth remembering that these are quite long cycle decisions. Firms are discussing plant expansion now, that will get Final Investment Decision in the first half of next year, result in capex in 2H17 and 1H18, and then production in 2019 and beyond. So, we'll not see any impact on GDP for another nine months or so. A rapidly agreed Heads of Terms would likely result in any short-term impact being very mild. Otherwise, it is likely there will be a "bump". If negotiations were dragged out over the full two years from early 2017, with no "smoke signals", then I think there could be quite a serious - albeit likely short-lived - economic impact.
"The Electoral Commission have confirmed that Diane James never officially became UKIP leader as there were ‘issues’ with the signing of the leadership form. Apparently she added “V.C.” to the signature which stands for “Vi coactus” or “under duress”.
Anyone come across a V.C, situation before.
Why sign in the first place if under duress?
vi coacta in this instance
wiki: "The term is sometimes used on medical prescriptions, especially on opiates, when they are given under duress; i.e. the patient forcing the doctor to write the prescription." Which seems surpassingly odd, you'd have thought the doctor would just refuse.
I’ve known GP’s who complained of being threatened with violence if they didn’t prescribe opiates. Or amphetamines. And I’ve known at least one GP who actually wrote the “required” prescription.
Didn’t "VC" it, but I recognised it as “wrong” and refused it.
Dr Theodore Dalrymple has written about this in his book Romancing Opiates.
My friends and I used to forge private prescriptions for dihydrocodeine - one down from diamorphine (heroin) - on an almost-industrial scale. If we'd ever been caught we'd surely have gone to jail.
Never having worked in Central London I’ve never seen a private prescription for dihydrocodeine. Seen some dodgy NHS ones though.
It was stupidly easy to forge private scripts, in the past. I presume things have tightened up
You can buy stolen blank NHS scripts on the "black market"
NHS precription forms are now all numbered, and can be traced. It’s somewhat time consuming (!) though. Can believe that about private scripts. I once knew a GP whose signature looked like the Greek gamma.
If Theresa May had been Conservative leader in 2010 she'd have won an overall majority... She'd have increased the Con majority in 2015 and she'd never have risked an EU referendum...
Cameron had "charisma" but ultimately he was risk taker and a fool. Would Theresa have played Russian roulette with electorate like Cameron? I think not.
Though as a "Leaver" I have to thank Cameron for his arrogance and foolishness...
In my job, I discuss Brexit all the time. Mostly, I'm meeting the managements of large international companies, and they are curious. How quickly will the UK government make up its mind? Will Britain be a harder place to do business? Will there be tariff free access to the EEA? Will it be harder to hire people?
Mostly they are a pragmatic bunch. They prefer stability (they're business people), and would have preferred a Remain vote, but they'll work with a Leave one. I think very few UK investment decisions are being taken right now. They're not being scrubbed (most firms are committed to having a significant UK presence), but their spreadsheets need numbers to be filled in, and right now - especially with the talk of Hard Brexit - they can't do that. I don't see a big upswing in firms choosing continental Europe. But for firms who are approaching capacity and which need certainty, I think there will be an incremental negative impact. The sooner that the relationship between the UK and the EU is resolved the sooner investment decisions will be made (in the UK's favour).
Interestingly, not all the questions are EU related. I was asked what tariff rates the UK government was likely to impose on goods coming from outside the EU. To which I had to say that I had no idea, but I would imagine that on day one we'd probably have a similar tariff structure to that of the EU.
Robert, would a Heads of Agreement be sufficient to unlock those investment decisions, do you think, or would it require certainty about the details?
The vast bulk of them, yes.
I think it's worth remembering that these are quite long cycle decisions. Firms are discussing plant expansion now, that will get Final Investment Decision in the first half of next year, result in capex in 2H17 and 1H18, and then production in 2019 and beyond. So, we'll not see any impact on GDP for another nine months or so. A rapidly agreed Heads of Terms would likely result in any short-term impact being very mild. Otherwise, it is likely there will be a "bump". If negotiations were dragged out over the full two years from early 2017, with no "smoke signals", then I think there could be quite a serious - albeit likely short-lived - economic impact.
"The lost boys: how the white working class got left behind The gap between poor and middle-class white pupils is widening. What can we do about the educational plight of underprivileged white youngsters?"
Farmer Trump "Mr Trump's familiarity with the resultant legal loopholes is not in doubt. For example, under farmland assessment programmes, developers can claim tax breaks on land that is used for agricultural purposes. Mr Trump took advantage of this by installing a herd of goats on two golf courses that he owned in New Jersey, cutting his tax bill for the sites from $80,000 a year to less than $1,000." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37550378
Another farmy-farm player.
Wow, Gordon Brown's Farmy Farm. That brings back memories from an earlier version of pb.com!.
"The Electoral Commission have confirmed that Diane James never officially became UKIP leader as there were ‘issues’ with the signing of the leadership form. Apparently she added “V.C.” to the signature which stands for “Vi coactus” or “under duress”.
Anyone come across a V.C, situation before.
Why sign in the first place if under duress?
vi coacta in this instance
wiki: "The term is sometimes used on medical prescriptions, especially on opiates, when they are given under duress; i.e. the patient forcing the doctor to write the prescription." Which seems surpassingly odd, you'd have thought the doctor would just refuse.
I’ve known GP’s who complained of being threatened with violence if they didn’t prescribe opiates. Or amphetamines. And I’ve known at least one GP who actually wrote the “required” prescription.
Didn’t "VC" it, but I recognised it as “wrong” and refused it.
Dr Theodore Dalrymple has written about this in his book Romancing Opiates.
My friends and I used to forge private prescriptions for dihydrocodeine - one down from diamorphine (heroin) - on an almost-industrial scale. If we'd ever been caught we'd surely have gone to jail.
Never having worked in Central London I’ve never seen a private prescription for dihydrocodeine. Seen some dodgy NHS ones though.
It was stupidly easy to forge private scripts, in the past. I presume things have tightened up
You can buy stolen blank NHS scripts on the "black market"
Do people even bother with all that these days given the Dark web stores & huge supplies of drugs from Holland?
If Theresa May had been Conservative leader in 2010 she'd have won an overall majority... She'd have increased the Con majority in 2015 and she'd never have risked an EU referendum...
Cameron had "charisma" but ultimately he was risk taker and a fool. Would Theresa have played Russian roulette with electorate like Cameron? I think not.
Though as a "Leaver" I have to thank Cameron for his arrogance and foolishness...
On this afternoon's evidence, she'd have been like a rabbit caught in the headlights during the debates and might even have made Brown look charismatic.
Cameron was chosen in 2005 because he was the nearest thing the Conservatives had to Blair and let's be fair, Blair won three elections so he must have had something. May would have seen as a Howard-lite figure at best or in the shadow of Thatcher. There would of course have been no Coalition and whether any minority Conservative Government would have survived is a matter for conjecture at somewhere like alternatehistory.com.
Farmer Trump "Mr Trump's familiarity with the resultant legal loopholes is not in doubt. For example, under farmland assessment programmes, developers can claim tax breaks on land that is used for agricultural purposes. Mr Trump took advantage of this by installing a herd of goats on two golf courses that he owned in New Jersey, cutting his tax bill for the sites from $80,000 a year to less than $1,000." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37550378
Another farmy-farm player.
Wow, Gordon Brown's Farmy Farm. That brings back memories from an earlier version of pb.com!.
I remember a famous pb poster who also had a fantasy farm,....
Anyone think Theresa May could still be PM in 10 years' time?
The modern record is 11.5 years.
I have doubts, since she will probably win the 2020GE, but the 2025GE is very far away to tell. We don't know the economic and social conditions, we don't know if there would be a foreign policy disaster, we don't even know the next Labour leader after Corbyn.
I think the public get a bit sick of you after roughly 10 years 'frontline'.
Also, if they don't like you at the start, they never will.
Farmer Trump "Mr Trump's familiarity with the resultant legal loopholes is not in doubt. For example, under farmland assessment programmes, developers can claim tax breaks on land that is used for agricultural purposes. Mr Trump took advantage of this by installing a herd of goats on two golf courses that he owned in New Jersey, cutting his tax bill for the sites from $80,000 a year to less than $1,000." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37550378
Another farmy-farm player.
Wow, Gordon Brown's Farmy Farm. That brings back memories from an earlier version of pb.com!.
I remember a famous pb poster who also had a fantasy farm,....
It would have taken just 0.4% of Dem voters (263,875 people) to have voted Republican to have given Romeny the win.
The Electoral College is intended to deliver a big win in delegates for a modest lead in votes.
2004 is an unusual case where it didn't. Bush led by almost as big a margin as Obama in 2012, but only led by 35 in the Electoral College. He piled up votes where he didn't need them, while falling just short in some key States.
Not really "intended", when the constitution was framed it was assumed the states' own legislatures would choose the electors.
Britain is apparently being transformed into 1930's Germany. The author plainly believes that no argument can ever be sufficiently overhyped.
Let these people rant away. They are standing on a very small - and very crumbly - piece of the political cliff edge.
This is pure comedy gold:
"that was decided on a knife-edge – a mere 1.3 million votes"
This is my favourite line. "Explicitly discriminating against foreign doctors purely because they are foreign is unequivocally wrong."
Er no, it's called an immigration policy. Most countries have them.
Strikes me that many modern "liberals" are simply rather thick. Just DIM.
The way accusations of Racism are sprayed around in that article shows why the word is rapidly being devalued towards meaninglessness. (much as the way 'child abuse' originally meant something horrific -pederasty but has now been expanded to mean even parents raising their voice to an errant kid).
The play book is to invent a word for something that most right thinking people would describe as dreadful behaviour and then spray it around to smear you opponents for things that may not even be a wrong but shuts down debate so you can avoid having to justify your ever more irrational philosophy.
If you want to understand what real racism is go to the District Six Museum in Cape Town.
To which the only response is that he will only make UKIP grate again....
RaheemKassam "I, like ordinary UKIP members, am so tired of the chicanery at the top of this party. There is so much corruption. There is so much duplicity. There are so many people shaking hands with one another and then knifing them in private."
If Theresa May had been Conservative leader in 2010 she'd have won an overall majority... She'd have increased the Con majority in 2015 and she'd never have risked an EU referendum...
Cameron had "charisma" but ultimately he was risk taker and a fool. Would Theresa have played Russian roulette with electorate like Cameron? I think not.
Though as a "Leaver" I have to thank Cameron for his arrogance and foolishness...
On this afternoon's evidence, she'd have been like a rabbit caught in the headlights during the debates and might even have made Brown look charismatic.
Cameron was chosen in 2005 because he was the nearest thing the Conservatives had to Blair and let's be fair, Blair won three elections so he must have had something. May would have seen as a Howard-lite figure at best or in the shadow of Thatcher. There would of course have been no Coalition and whether any minority Conservative Government would have survived is a matter for conjecture at somewhere like alternatehistory.com.
Would Theresa May have agreed to TV debates in 2010? I think it's unlikely she'd have risked them (remember it was Coulson who was the driving force behind the TV debates and she'd never have taken the risk of employing Coulson either)
I think May would have been the serious "Change" candidate the electorate was looking for in 2010 after the Great Crash - Remember, 2010 was all about punishing Labour and getting Gordon Brown out -
Theresa would have still run that campaign but would not have risked the debates and she'd have kept the focus on Labour's record rather than the muddled Big Society stuff that Cameron got involved with.
It's easy to forget now but Cameron's 2010 election was a shocker - Definitely a warning of what was to come from his referendum campaign.
Without those missteps I think she'd have pulled off a small overall majority in 2010 and an increased majority in 2015.
She definitely wouldn't have risked an EU referendum either.
John Major had a vision of the state as servant of its public. His much-mocked citizen's charter, complete with cones hotline, set the course of government engagement with the public for the next generation.
Theresa May, on the other hand, seems to be a fan of big bossy government.
Is she though? Or is she just rebalancing government?
In recent weeks the planned sugar tax has been watered down - that was Osborne's plan which would have hit the working class most. The government has also made moves to liberalise planning rules to stimulate housebuilding. And they're about to break a 6 year deadlock on airport expansion (the responsibility for which is Cameron/ Osborne's politicing)
Janen Ganesh and other metropolitan elites are discombobulated because it appears that we have a politician who is actually serious about returning immigration to pre-2004 levels.
But across the policy spectrum more broadly, it is difficult to yet see how the government is becoming more 'bossy' or 'big'. Rather, it is focused on the interests of ordinary people rather than media, financial and legal elites.
I've been banging on for weeks, but it's finally become clear that Antonio Guterres will be the next UN Secretary General. Since Antonio is a man, my tip (I think 2/1) with PP will come off, and Antonio will buy me dinner somewhere
Interesting read. The conclusion seems to be that Brexit is a big meh in the medium term and that the hardest of Hard Brexits - just leaving completely - has its upsides in that it will be incredibly easy to negotiate. Grateful for comments from financial types on the site:
To which the only response is that he will only make UKIP grate again....
RaheemKassam "I, like ordinary UKIP members, am so tired of the chicanery at the top of this party. There is so much corruption. There is so much duplicity. There are so many people shaking hands with one another and then knifing them in private."
UKIP are finished. They are losing councillors all over the place and their MEPs will soon cease to exist.
On the right only a total headbanger wouldnt be happy to vote for Mrs Mays Tories.
UKIPs best bet was to take advantage of Corbyn et al and reinvent themselves as a (non sectarian) British working class economically and socially conservative Democratic Unionist Party. Blown that now.
Liberals would have been better off if Laws had kept his seat and become leader but they are where they are and, a plus, not infighting like ferrets in a sack. There is a whole slew of left leading voters who will fall into their lap as they look aghast at Labour. Recent victories in places like Derby may be a straw in the wind but Libs are the only real alternative for anyone sane who dosent want to vote Tory.
Farmer Trump "Mr Trump's familiarity with the resultant legal loopholes is not in doubt. For example, under farmland assessment programmes, developers can claim tax breaks on land that is used for agricultural purposes. Mr Trump took advantage of this by installing a herd of goats on two golf courses that he owned in New Jersey, cutting his tax bill for the sites from $80,000 a year to less than $1,000." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37550378
Another farmy-farm player.
Wow, Gordon Brown's Farmy Farm. That brings back memories from an earlier version of pb.com!.
I remember a famous pb poster who also had a fantasy farm,....
I'm not sure it will be as bad as that. Losing single market membership doesn't reduce all of the other inherent market advantages we have.
I know, but you can imagine the pressure Mrs May will come under from them, especially the ones that are donors!
Yes, I think that's fair. Even a 10% reduction in Financial services tax return would result in a £6bn budget shortfall. Even now I think the bank levy is going to have to be eliminated, it is an easy way to keep them on side now that the deficit targets have been put back.
I wouldnt worry too much. To have any chance of getting our way in negotiations with an acceptable soft brexit deal we have to make plain as a pikestaff to the EU that as far as we are concerned, if they dont play ball we are prepared to say 'Face, Bovvered?, Sod You, Doubles and WTO all round' - and importantly do the research and preparation for this.
The higher proportion of the public who support a 'come and take us on if you think you're hard enough; no one likes us we don't care stance on this, the better chance we have of negotiating an acceptable soft brexit agreement.
The higher proportion of the public who support a 'come and take us on if you think you're hard enough; no one likes us we don't care stance on this, the better chance we have of negotiating an acceptable soft brexit agreement.
I believe it is what is known as doing a Millwall.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
If more people got out of their cars and biked instead there would be
a) fewer accidents b) less pollution c) thinner, better looking people d) less sickness e) less pressure on companies through absence f) less congestion g) better mental health h) more sex
Certainly looking at the people in Copenhagen when I was there over the summer these all seemed to be true.
The problem in Britain with cyclists is needing to share space, if there were decent cycle lanes like in Denmark there would be fewer issues. We could learn a lot from our continentalcousins.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
If more people got out of their cars and biked instead there would be
a) fewer accidents b) less pollution c) thinner, better looking people d) less sickness e) less pressure on companies through absence f) less congestion g) better mental health h) more sex
Certainly looking at the people in Copenhagen when I was there over the summer these all seemed to be true.
The problem in Britain with cyclists is needing to share space, if there were decent cycle lanes like in Denmark there would be fewer issues. We could learn a lot from our continentalcousins.
Ghent is similar, as I suspect are a lot of the provincial towns in Europe, particularly in the flatter parts.
It's an interesting one. As most of our politicians seem unaware of what the Single Market is or what leaving it actually means, I would not expect voters to be that switched on. Do pensioners, for example, really believe that they should no longer have the automatic right to retire to Spain and to be treated for free by the Spanish healthcare system? Do they believe that pensioners currently retired out there should lose that free access?
Personally torn on this. I think leaving the EU a mistake, but hard Brexit was always more or less inevitable once the decision was made to go. I think the prize now is a levelheaded but limited informal relationship with the EU
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
If more people got out of their cars and biked instead there would be
a) fewer accidents b) less pollution c) thinner, better looking people d) less sickness e) less pressure on companies through absence f) less congestion g) better mental health h) more sex
Certainly looking at the people in Copenhagen when I was there over the summer these all seemed to be true.
The problem in Britain with cyclists is needing to share space, if there were decent cycle lanes like in Denmark there would be fewer issues. We could learn a lot from our continentalcousins.
Have you been to London lately. It is infested with segregated cycle only lanes.
The higher proportion of the public who support a 'come and take us on if you think you're hard enough; no one likes us we don't care stance on this, the better chance we have of negotiating an acceptable soft brexit agreement.
I believe it is what is known as doing a Millwall.
It's an interesting one. As most of our politicians seem unaware of what the Single Market is or what leaving it actually means, I would not expect voters to be that switched on. Do pensioners, for example, really believe that they should no longer have the automatic right to retire to Spain and to be treated for free by the Spanish healthcare system? Do they believe that pensioners currently retired out there should lose that free access?
Pretty sure we had a load of pensioners retired out there before 1973...
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
If more people got out of their cars and biked instead there would be
a) fewer accidents b) less pollution c) thinner, better looking people d) less sickness e) less pressure on companies through absence f) less congestion g) better mental health h) more sex
Certainly looking at the people in Copenhagen when I was there over the summer these all seemed to be true.
The problem in Britain with cyclists is needing to share space, if there were decent cycle lanes like in Denmark there would be fewer issues. We could learn a lot from our continentalcousins.
Have you been to London lately. It is infested with segregated cycle only lanes.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
If more people got out of their cars and biked instead there would be
a) fewer accidents b) less pollution c) thinner, better looking people d) less sickness e) less pressure on companies through absence f) less congestion g) better mental health h) more sex
Certainly looking at the people in Copenhagen when I was there over the summer these all seemed to be true.
The problem in Britain with cyclists is needing to share space, if there were decent cycle lanes like in Denmark there would be fewer issues. We could learn a lot from our continentalcousins.
Have you been to London lately. It is infested with segregated cycle only lanes.
And cyclists still use the pavements.
And the non cycle bits of the roads (in blissful ignorance of the highway code)
It's an interesting one. As most of our politicians seem unaware of what the Single Market is or what leaving it actually means, I would not expect voters to be that switched on. Do pensioners, for example, really believe that they should no longer have the automatic right to retire to Spain and to be treated for free by the Spanish healthcare system? Do they believe that pensioners currently retired out there should lose that free access?
And what would they say if told, no you can't have your urine bottles swapped at 4 A.M. on Sunday morning because the hypothetical Ana who used to look after you is now back in Portugal?
Even if that's a ridiculous example, the point is that there are choices and consequences to those choices. Needless to say those choices and consequences are never fleshed out.
It's an interesting one. As most of our politicians seem unaware of what the Single Market is or what leaving it actually means, I would not expect voters to be that switched on. Do pensioners, for example, really believe that they should no longer have the automatic right to retire to Spain and to be treated for free by the Spanish healthcare system? Do they believe that pensioners currently retired out there should lose that free access?
Pretty sure we had a load of pensioners retired out there before 1973...
It's an interesting one. As most of our politicians seem unaware of what the Single Market is or what leaving it actually means, I would not expect voters to be that switched on. Do pensioners, for example, really believe that they should no longer have the automatic right to retire to Spain and to be treated for free by the Spanish healthcare system? Do they believe that pensioners currently retired out there should lose that free access?
I agree that everyone knows what immigration is and very few people know what the Single Market is. So I take those figures with a big pinch of salt. However the swing between the two polls can't be explained away by ignorance. There has been a big shift in opinion. That may be the lack of economic apocalypse ( although the lag on the devaluation effects is about to run out ) and/or we know have a pro Brexit government or merely an in for a penny in for a pound attitude. As ever we need more polling !
It's an interesting one. As most of our politicians seem unaware of what the Single Market is or what leaving it actually means, I would not expect voters to be that switched on. Do pensioners, for example, really believe that they should no longer have the automatic right to retire to Spain and to be treated for free by the Spanish healthcare system? Do they believe that pensioners currently retired out there should lose that free access?
And what would they say if told, no you can't have your urine bottles swapped at 4 A.M. on Sunday morning because the hypothetical Ana who used to look after you is now back in Portugal?
Even if that's a ridiculous example, the point is that there are choices and consequences to those choices. Needless to say those choices and consequences are never fleshed out.
Clearly I'm unhinged, self hating remoaner who as a citizen of the world is a citizen of nowhere but we are seeing this already with Immigration. In order to meet the net migration pledge we're going to have to stop 65% to 70% of the current people entering entering. But when Rudd announces some practical measures to make a modest start on this some globalising Brexiters start bed wetting. And that's with all the outrage/fauxtrage on the companies reporting thing. Wait till people notice Rudd is proposing to nuke the finances of non Russell Group universities ( many down ticket unis are in Leave areas ) by restricting/removing their visa rights. The capacity for " I wanted Brexit but I didn't mean that " outbursts is enormous.
It's an interesting one. As most of our politicians seem unaware of what the Single Market is or what leaving it actually means, I would not expect voters to be that switched on. Do pensioners, for example, really believe that they should no longer have the automatic right to retire to Spain and to be treated for free by the Spanish healthcare system? Do they believe that pensioners currently retired out there should lose that free access?
Pretty sure we had a load of pensioners retired out there before 1973...
Nope. You must be a mere slip of a lad, not to remember how difficult and expensive doing anything abroad was in those days, with exchange controls and no cheap flights and no interweb. I'm not saying there were none, but "a load" massively overstates it.
It's an interesting one. As most of our politicians seem unaware of what the Single Market is or what leaving it actually means, I would not expect voters to be that switched on. Do pensioners, for example, really believe that they should no longer have the automatic right to retire to Spain and to be treated for free by the Spanish healthcare system? Do they believe that pensioners currently retired out there should lose that free access?
Pretty sure we had a load of pensioners retired out there before 1973...
It's an interesting one. As most of our politicians seem unaware of what the Single Market is or what leaving it actually means, I would not expect voters to be that switched on. Do pensioners, for example, really believe that they should no longer have the automatic right to retire to Spain and to be treated for free by the Spanish healthcare system? Do they believe that pensioners currently retired out there should lose that free access?
Pretty sure we had a load of pensioners retired out there before 1973...
I think you mean 1986 ...
The ones that Mr Plod was looking for?
?? I was pointing out that Spain did not join the EEC until 1986, so that is a more relevant comparator than 1973.
Clearly I'm unhinged, self hating remoaner who as a citizen of the world is a citizen of nowhere but we are seeing this already with Immigration. In order to meet the net migration pledge we're going to have to stop 65% to 70% of the current people entering entering. But when Rudd announces some practical measures to make a modest start on this some globalising Brexiters start bed wetting. And that's with all the outrage/fauxtrage on the companies reporting thing. Wait till people notice Rudd is proposing to nuke the finances of non Russell Group universities ( many down ticket unis are in Leave areas ) by restricting/removing their visa rights. The capacity for " I wanted Brexit but I didn't mean that " outbursts is enormous.
I have to admit to not really expecting to see immigration fall much after Brexit beyond recession effects. Theresa May does seem serious about it, however. Our Ana will be thinking, I'm not wanted here. Which if you are trying to get the immigration numbers down is perhaps the whole point. But it isn't just numbers, it's personal.
Anecdote: a Chinese friend applied for a British visa from the US. After a long period of non-communication with the company the UK outsources its applications processing to, it transpired they had lost her passport. No apology, no compensation, but once she has laboriously obtained a new passport she can apply again with a further fee. She has no intention of ever stepping foot in Britain again. It's not just the fact the UKBA and its contractors, who don't think they are obliged to provide any service at all for the very stiff fees they charge and consequently muck up on a routine basis. It's the attitude she can't stand. From her point of view the British think she's dirt. I can say, it's not always like that. The truth is, Theresa May wants to make it more like that.
It's an interesting one. As most of our politicians seem unaware of what the Single Market is or what leaving it actually means, I would not expect voters to be that switched on. Do pensioners, for example, really believe that they should no longer have the automatic right to retire to Spain and to be treated for free by the Spanish healthcare system? Do they believe that pensioners currently retired out there should lose that free access?
Pretty sure we had a load of pensioners retired out there before 1973...
Nope. You must be a mere slip of a lad, not to remember how difficult and expensive doing anything abroad was in those days, with exchange controls and no cheap flights and no interweb. I'm not saying there were none, but "a load" massively overstates it.
There was nothing difficult about travelling to or living in Spain under Franco or Portugal under the Salazar regime. It was a bit more expensive to get there, perhaps and if they didn't want you they could throw you out but the administration was not much different that it is today. You arrived, filled out a form, paid a small sum of money (plus, in Portugal, an equal sum in the form of a bribe to the official) and you got your residence permit. Easy peasy. Crikey, in the sixties there were small towns wholly owned by Germans along the Spanish Coast.
It's an interesting one. As most of our politicians seem unaware of what the Single Market is or what leaving it actually means, I would not expect voters to be that switched on. Do pensioners, for example, really believe that they should no longer have the automatic right to retire to Spain and to be treated for free by the Spanish healthcare system? Do they believe that pensioners currently retired out there should lose that free access?
Pretty sure we had a load of pensioners retired out there before 1973...
Nope. You must be a mere slip of a lad, not to remember how difficult and expensive doing anything abroad was in those days, with exchange controls and no cheap flights and no interweb. I'm not saying there were none, but "a load" massively overstates it.
I was at junior school in 1973 it's true, but I also remember my retired working class grandparents had a little flat in Benidorm that they used to live in through the winter months, and only come back to the UK when it got warmer.
It's an interesting one. As most of our politicians seem unaware of what the Single Market is or what leaving it actually means, I would not expect voters to be that switched on. Do pensioners, for example, really believe that they should no longer have the automatic right to retire to Spain and to be treated for free by the Spanish healthcare system? Do they believe that pensioners currently retired out there should lose that free access?
Pretty sure we had a load of pensioners retired out there before 1973...
Nope. You must be a mere slip of a lad, not to remember how difficult and expensive doing anything abroad was in those days, with exchange controls and no cheap flights and no interweb. I'm not saying there were none, but "a load" massively overstates it.
There was nothing difficult about travelling to or living in Spain under Franco or Portugal under the Salazar regime. It was a bit more expensive to get there, perhaps and if they didn't want you they could throw you out but the administration was not much different that it is today. You arrived, filled out a form, paid a small sum of money (plus, in Portugal, an equal sum in the form of a bribe to the official) and you got your residence permit. Easy peasy. Crikey, in the sixties there were small towns wholly owned by Germans along the Spanish Coast.
I don't doubt you, but people didn't do it so much. In 1981 there were 198,000 foreigners (all nationalities) living in Spain as against 5 million in 2014 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Spain
The less educated fear they are being governed by intellectual snobs who know nothing of their lives and experiences. The educated fear their fate may be decided by know-nothings who are ignorant of how the world really works. Bringing the two sides together is going to be very hard.
I have to admit to not really expecting to see immigration fall much after Brexit beyond recession effects. Theresa May does seem serious about it, however. Our Ana will be thinking, I'm not wanted here. Which if you are trying to get the immigration numbers down is perhaps the whole point. But it isn't just numbers, it's personal.
Anecdote: a Chinese friend applied for a British visa from the US. After a long period of non-communication with the company the UK outsources its applications processing to, it transpired they had lost her passport. No apology, no compensation, but once she has laboriously obtained a new passport she can apply again with a further fee. She has no intention of ever stepping foot in Britain again. It's not just the fact the UKBA and its contractors, who don't think they are obliged to provide any service at all for the very stiff fees they charge and consequently muck up on a routine basis. It's the attitude she can't stand. From her point of view the British think she's dirt. I can say, it's not always like that. The truth is, Theresa May wants to make it more like that.
It's personal.
I have always been totally against outsourcing visa processing, as it means visa applications are dealt with on a purely mechanical basis, rather than allowing flexibility and discretion, particularly for known applicants. Embassies should process them, and apply discretion. It also means that Embassies would have more contact with locals.
That said, I think your Chinese friend's reaction is somewhat childish and she stands to be disappointed many times in her life if she plans to do much traveling to other countries. Visa applications are a pain in the arse for pretty much every country where they are needed. The UK process is no worse than the US', and certainly far easier than most African or Middle Eastern countries which require prior travel visas.
Having organized about 20 international meetings and conferences for people of multiple nationalities including people from all 5 continents, I have some experience in this. Indeed, we simply don't organize meetings in some countries because of visa issues. Britain is not one of them.
Comments
Mostly they are a pragmatic bunch. They prefer stability (they're business people), and would have preferred a Remain vote, but they'll work with a Leave one. I think very few UK investment decisions are being taken right now. They're not being scrubbed (most firms are committed to having a significant UK presence), but their spreadsheets need numbers to be filled in, and right now - especially with the talk of Hard Brexit - they can't do that. I don't see a big upswing in firms choosing continental Europe. But for firms who are approaching capacity and which need certainty, I think there will be an incremental negative impact. The sooner that the relationship between the UK and the EU is resolved the sooner investment decisions will be made (in the UK's favour).
Interestingly, not all the questions are EU related. I was asked what tariff rates the UK government was likely to impose on goods coming from outside the EU. To which I had to say that I had no idea, but I would imagine that on day one we'd probably have a similar tariff structure to that of the EU.
We've had the "theatrics" and "charisma" of Blair and Cameron,. And that was fine at the right time (arguably Cameron's style wasn't really suited to 2008-2010 and that's one of the reasons he didn't win the 2010 election) but after Brexit we need serious politicians for serious times.
Will Theresa May ever win a personality or charisma contest? No! But that's not what we need right now - We need someone who is cautious, steely and stoical and who can go into the negotiations with the EU with a poker face and give the likes of Mr Juncker a kick in the shins.
Cameron may have been good on telly but when it counted he let the bureaucrats run rings round him and blew the referendum.
Mrs May will do much better.
India's Congress Party are still around (just!) nearly 70 years after Independence.
Fortunately for us, Sean, he has explicitly stated that he doesn't really want to know us.
1936 – Around 200 men marched from Jarrow to London, carrying a petition to the British government requesting the re-establishment of industry in the town.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jarrow_March
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_at4+shtml/113631.shtml?5day#contents
Although the election is over I wonder how Trump and Hillary will deal with this.
I have doubts, since she will probably win the 2020GE, but the 2025GE is very far away to tell.
We don't know the economic and social conditions, we don't know if there would be a foreign policy disaster, we don't even know the next Labour leader after Corbyn.
I think it's worth remembering that these are quite long cycle decisions. Firms are discussing plant expansion now, that will get Final Investment Decision in the first half of next year, result in capex in 2H17 and 1H18, and then production in 2019 and beyond. So, we'll not see any impact on GDP for another nine months or so. A rapidly agreed Heads of Terms would likely result in any short-term impact being very mild. Otherwise, it is likely there will be a "bump". If negotiations were dragged out over the full two years from early 2017, with no "smoke signals", then I think there could be quite a serious - albeit likely short-lived - economic impact.
Can believe that about private scripts. I once knew a GP whose signature looked like the Greek gamma.
Cameron had "charisma" but ultimately he was risk taker and a fool. Would Theresa have played Russian roulette with electorate like Cameron? I think not.
Though as a "Leaver" I have to thank Cameron for his arrogance and foolishness...
"The lost boys: how the white working class got left behind
The gap between poor and middle-class white pupils is widening. What can we do about the educational plight of underprivileged white youngsters?"
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/education/2016/09/lost-boys-how-white-working-class-got-left-behind
EXCLUSIVE: @RaheemKassam Running For UKIP Leader, Wants to "Make UKIP Great Again" https://t.co/vAGkaXBc8S https://t.co/oFezvnGm8a
Cameron was chosen in 2005 because he was the nearest thing the Conservatives had to Blair and let's be fair, Blair won three elections so he must have had something. May would have seen as a Howard-lite figure at best or in the shadow of Thatcher. There would of course have been no Coalition and whether any minority Conservative Government would have survived is a matter for conjecture at somewhere like alternatehistory.com.
Also, if they don't like you at the start, they never will.
"The Tube Chat badges show that London isn't rude: it has a negative politeness culture
By James Cooray Smith"
http://www.citymetric.com/horizons/tube-chat-badges-show-london-isnt-rude-it-has-negative-politeness-culture-2481
In practice it's FPTP^2
The play book is to invent a word for something that most right thinking people would describe as dreadful behaviour and then spray it around to smear you opponents for things that may not even be a wrong but shuts down debate so you can avoid having to justify your ever more irrational philosophy.
If you want to understand what real racism is go to the District Six Museum in Cape Town.
"I, like ordinary UKIP members, am so tired of the chicanery at the top of this party. There is so much corruption. There is so much duplicity. There are so many people shaking hands with one another and then knifing them in private."
I think May would have been the serious "Change" candidate the electorate was looking for in 2010 after the Great Crash - Remember, 2010 was all about punishing Labour and getting Gordon Brown out -
Theresa would have still run that campaign but would not have risked the debates and she'd have kept the focus on Labour's record rather than the muddled Big Society stuff that Cameron got involved with.
It's easy to forget now but Cameron's 2010 election was a shocker - Definitely a warning of what was to come from his referendum campaign.
Without those missteps I think she'd have pulled off a small overall majority in 2010 and an increased majority in 2015.
She definitely wouldn't have risked an EU referendum either.
In recent weeks the planned sugar tax has been watered down - that was Osborne's plan which would have hit the working class most. The government has also made moves to liberalise planning rules to stimulate housebuilding. And they're about to break a 6 year deadlock on airport expansion (the responsibility for which is Cameron/ Osborne's politicing)
Janen Ganesh and other metropolitan elites are discombobulated because it appears that we have a politician who is actually serious about returning immigration to pre-2004 levels.
But across the policy spectrum more broadly, it is difficult to yet see how the government is becoming more 'bossy' or 'big'. Rather, it is focused on the interests of ordinary people rather than media, financial and legal elites.
Ange
How to save the princess in 8 programming languages
https://t.co/eINEZj4Iws https://t.co/n4euNJKEtU
https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/783692287507369984
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/britains-hard-brexit-will-be-a-huge-buying-opportunity-2016-10-05
On the right only a total headbanger wouldnt be happy to vote for Mrs Mays Tories.
UKIPs best bet was to take advantage of Corbyn et al and reinvent themselves as a (non sectarian) British working class economically and socially conservative Democratic Unionist Party. Blown that now.
Liberals would have been better off if Laws had kept his seat and become leader but they are where they are and, a plus, not infighting like ferrets in a sack. There is a whole slew of left leading voters who will fall into their lap as they look aghast at Labour. Recent victories in places like Derby may be a straw in the wind but Libs are the only real alternative for anyone sane who dosent want to vote Tory.
https://twitter.com/RobDotHutton/status/783712742956011521
After targeting people who are 'managing' Tezza can hardly hike their taxes.
And we can hardly make Britain a less attractive place to do business.
Guess we'll find out in the autumn.
Wealthy pensioners should be nervous, maybe.
The problem in Britain with cyclists is needing to share space, if there were decent cycle lanes like in Denmark there would be fewer issues. We could learn a lot from our continentalcousins.
Even if that's a ridiculous example, the point is that there are choices and consequences to those choices. Needless to say those choices and consequences are never fleshed out.
(In case it wasn't clear I was being a tad sarcastic about economic predictions re: Brexit)
Anecdote: a Chinese friend applied for a British visa from the US. After a long period of non-communication with the company the UK outsources its applications processing to, it transpired they had lost her passport. No apology, no compensation, but once she has laboriously obtained a new passport she can apply again with a further fee. She has no intention of ever stepping foot in Britain again. It's not just the fact the UKBA and its contractors, who don't think they are obliged to provide any service at all for the very stiff fees they charge and consequently muck up on a routine basis. It's the attitude she can't stand. From her point of view the British think she's dirt. I can say, it's not always like that. The truth is, Theresa May wants to make it more like that.
It's personal.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/05/trump-brexit-education-gap-tearing-politics-apart
The less educated fear they are being governed by intellectual snobs who know nothing of their lives and experiences. The educated fear their fate may be decided by know-nothings who are ignorant of how the world really works. Bringing the two sides together is going to be very hard.
That said, I think your Chinese friend's reaction is somewhat childish and she stands to be disappointed many times in her life if she plans to do much traveling to other countries. Visa applications are a pain in the arse for pretty much every country where they are needed. The UK process is no worse than the US', and certainly far easier than most African or Middle Eastern countries which require prior travel visas.
Having organized about 20 international meetings and conferences for people of multiple nationalities including people from all 5 continents, I have some experience in this. Indeed, we simply don't organize meetings in some countries because of visa issues. Britain is not one of them.