There are very few elections one should want to lose, but for the Republicans, this may be one. Imagine what the 2018 mid-terms would be like under President Trump.
@JoannaPartridge: I've been told #Tesco isn't the only major retailer which has been approached by #Unilever, who are demanding 10% price rises across board
sell Unilever
If you can convince people to pay 10% more you must be quite the salesman.
@JoannaPartridge: I've been told #Tesco isn't the only major retailer which has been approached by #Unilever, who are demanding 10% price rises across board
sell Unilever
If you can convince people to pay 10% more you must be quite the salesman.
4king daft.
firstly theyre cutting their sales, then they're doing it by threatening the end user with a price increase.
@JoannaPartridge: I've been told #Tesco isn't the only major retailer which has been approached by #Unilever, who are demanding 10% price rises across board
sell Unilever
If you can convince people to pay 10% more you must be quite the salesman.
4king daft.
firstly theyre cutting their sales, then they're doing it by threatening the end user with a price increase.
Brand trashing.
The main takeaway is that Tesco are losing the margins fight to Aldi and Lidl.
@JoannaPartridge: I've been told #Tesco isn't the only major retailer which has been approached by #Unilever, who are demanding 10% price rises across board
sell Unilever
If you can convince people to pay 10% more you must be quite the salesman.
4king daft.
firstly theyre cutting their sales, then they're doing it by threatening the end user with a price increase.
Brand trashing.
Funny how Aldi havent put their brands up by 10%. Even Cuckoo Clock brands
With Tesco being massacred by Aldi and Lidl there is no way they will tolerate Unilevers demand.
It could well do. There's the pull factor of getting in before the drawbridge is possibly pulled up, against the push factors of the £ is worth less in Zlotys and Lev or whatever, the risk that those arriving post 23rd June will not be granted residency, the much smaller risk that it's ultra hard Brexit and some of those here pre June 23rd are declared illegal ( highly undesirable I might add but not 100% impossible if the EU play serious silly buggers I suppose), And the knowledge that substantial elements of the locals are distinctly dischuffed with the levels of immigration.
@JoannaPartridge: I've been told #Tesco isn't the only major retailer which has been approached by #Unilever, who are demanding 10% price rises across board
sell Unilever
If you can convince people to pay 10% more you must be quite the salesman.
4king daft.
firstly theyre cutting their sales, then they're doing it by threatening the end user with a price increase.
Brand trashing.
Funny how Aldi havent put their brands up by 10%. Even Cuckoo Clock brands
With Tesco being massacred by Aldi and Lidl there is no way they will tolerate Unilevers demand.
Whats the back story on Unilever?
There's a big Unilever factory next to Warrington Bank Quay station. Not sure if it's their hub.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
Is there a current price anywhere for the UK NOT to leave the EU? It's got to be a value bet now. If Jeremy Corbyn is landing blows over Brexit, it's dead in the water.
Highly unlikely. An awful lot of MPs may not like the idea of Brexit, but they know that it has to happen. Were the referendum result to be set aside then it would be hugely damaging and dangerous for democracy. It would convince a great many voters either that they can only get what they want by rejecting all of the establishment parties and veering to the extremes, or that the system is no longer capable of delivering full stop.
This leaves two other, more likely, scenarios. Firstly - and this is what I think is most likely - the courts will throw out the campaigners' attempts to force a Parliamentary vote on A50, in which case the Government will invoke it according to Theresa May's wishes and that will be the end of that. Secondly, if the Government is compelled to ask Parliament for permission, then A50 would almost certainly clear the Commons, but could well be vetoed by the Lords. Were that the case then the Prime Minister would go to the country on a manifesto committing her to Brexit (quite possibly together with the abolition of the Lords or the removal of virtually all of its remaining power,) win a comfortable majority, and then invoke A50 anyway.
I won't be 100% totally convinced that we are leaving until A50 has been triggered. But I'm at about 99.75% at the moment.
I believe the ingredients for both of those are sourced from the UK
Isn't Marmite essentially yeast extract left over from brewing? I recall the Magor brewery in Monmoutshire used to supply their old year extract ( I'm going back over 30 years mind).
I will judge Khan mainly on one thing. What he does to fight Islamic extremism. If nothing than I wont vote for him (unless Tories run another anti-muslim campaign that is).
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
Cliffnotes:- Yes increase in costs, but Unilever trying it on. And not the first time Tesco's have told a big firm to go do one, resulting in no product.
@StigAbell: Someone should just shout "stop talking Britain down" and "weak pound is good for exports" until dispute is resolved. That should do it. twitter.com/ITVJoel/status…
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
One of the most irritating recent theories is that somehow, the votes of 18-24 year olds count for more than everyone elses'.
I am simultaneously android delighted and annoyed by this.
Delighted because it is an excellent description of what was happening. Pissed of because I was in the middle of requesting the data to analyse myself to find this out.
The way the Black vote jumped in such a huge digital step up and down had made me very suspicious of the weighting and number if African Americans in the poll.
Fantastic analysis.
538 figures the LAT poll is skewed by R+0.6 NYT is suggesting that should be more like R+3.5
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
One of the most irritating recent theories is that somehow, the votes of 18-24 year olds count for more than everyone elses'.
Ageism is very fashionable amongst some sections of the population nowadays (usually the same people who hypocritically wail about tidal waves of xenophobia and such like supposedly having been triggered by the referendum vote.) They maintain the pretence of being democrats, but in truth would rather than that electorate consisted entirely of those people who agree with them about everything.
Of course, the votes of the young would have a bit more weight when measured against those of the old, if only the young could be bothered to go out and vote in the same proportions.
@ITVJoel: According to the supermarket's website, Tesco is out of Ben and Jerry's ice cream, Marmite, Hellmann's Mayonnaise and Colman's Mustard.
Bet they didn't sell much of those...
"What 85 is trying to tell you is that we ain't got no entertainment centre, no climate control, no video system, no surveillance, no freezers, no f*cking ice cream, no rubbers, no women, no guns. All we got here is shit!"
Is there a current price anywhere for the UK NOT to leave the EU? It's got to be a value bet now. If Jeremy Corbyn is landing blows over Brexit, it's dead in the water.
Highly unlikely. An awful lot of MPs may not like the idea of Brexit, but they know that it has to happen. Were the referendum result to be set aside then it would be hugely damaging and dangerous for democracy. It would convince a great many voters either that they can only get what they want by rejecting all of the establishment parties and veering to the extremes, or that the system is no longer capable of delivering full stop.
This leaves two other, more likely, scenarios. Firstly - and this is what I think is most likely - the courts will throw out the campaigners' attempts to force a Parliamentary vote on A50, in which case the Government will invoke it according to Theresa May's wishes and that will be the end of that. Secondly, if the Government is compelled to ask Parliament for permission, then A50 would almost certainly clear the Commons, but could well be vetoed by the Lords. Were that the case then the Prime Minister would go to the country on a manifesto committing her to Brexit (quite possibly together with the abolition of the Lords or the removal of virtually all of its remaining power,) win a comfortable majority, and then invoke A50 anyway.
I won't be 100% totally convinced that we are leaving until A50 has been triggered. But I'm at about 99.75% at the moment.
Personally, I think Mrs May is making a major tactical blunder by not forcing the Commons to endorse Brexit.
Labour MPs, whose areas voted overwhelmingly for Brexit, will be faced with a dilemma: back their constituents, and back democracy, or back the EU.
They will - I guarantee - back democracy,
And aside from a few Remainers who won't be standing in 2020, who will oppose it in the Conservative Party? Opposing the will of the people would, in all but a very few cases, be signing their own deselection warrant.
Following a 550-100 vote in the Commons, and a referendum victory the Lords would not stand in the way. Even Paddy Ashdown and Vince Cable say they peoples' voice must be respected.
Most importantly, this ties everyone to Brexit. People cannot walk away from having voted for it in the Commons.
If there is no vote, and if we run into serious economic problems in 2017 or 2018 (and ones that might be nothing to do with Brexit), then the decision will have been widely taken. People will not be able to complain that they would have opposed it.
The biggest threat to Brexit is not the government not invoking Article 50, it is of the government falling between invocation and Brexit, and being replaced - in a General Election - by pro-Europeans. This eliminates that risk.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
One of the most irritating recent theories is that somehow, the votes of 18-24 year olds count for more than everyone elses'.
yes the obnoxious toad who backed ramping up uni fees so that kids leave with £50k of debt is now suddenly worried about them
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
One of the most irritating recent theories is that somehow, the votes of 18-24 year olds count for more than everyone elses'.
Yeah I know that deeply pisses me off. Just like my generation did, they'll age and their views will alter. Freedom to live in Rome, or Paris or whatever and live in Corbyn's la la land might look attractive at 20, but by 35 95%+ of them will be in the UK and freedom of movement will look different as they compete for jobs, as will Corbyn's views on the economy ( welcome to the real world!), security and foreign policy. 'twas ever thus.
Is there a current price anywhere for the UK NOT to leave the EU? It's got to be a value bet now. If Jeremy Corbyn is landing blows over Brexit, it's dead in the water.
Highly unlikely. An awful lot of MPs may not like the idea of Brexit, but they know that it has to happen. Were the referendum result to be set aside then it would be hugely damaging and dangerous for democracy. It would convince a great many voters either that they can only get what they want by rejecting all of the establishment parties and veering to the extremes, or that the system is no longer capable of delivering full stop.
This leaves two other, more likely, scenarios. Firstly - and this is what I think is most likely - the courts will throw out the campaigners' attempts to force a Parliamentary vote on A50, in which case the Government will invoke it according to Theresa May's wishes and that will be the end of that. Secondly, if the Government is compelled to ask Parliament for permission, then A50 would almost certainly clear the Commons, but could well be vetoed by the Lords. Were that the case then the Prime Minister would go to the country
I won't be 100% totally convinced that we are leaving until A50 has been triggered. But I'm at about 99.75% at the moment.
Personally, I think Mrs May is making a major tactical blunder by not forcing the Commons to endorse Brexit.
Labour MPs, whose areas voted overwhelmingly for Brexit, will be faced with a dilemma: back their constituents, and back democracy, or back the EU.
They will - I guarantee - back democracy,
And aside from a few Remainers who won't be standing in 2020, who will oppose it in the Conservative Party? Opposing the will of the people would, in all but a very few cases, be signing their own deselection warrant.
Following a 550-100 vote in the Commons, and a referendum victory the Lords would not stand in the way. Even Paddy Ashdown and Vince Cable say they peoples' voice must be respected.
If there is no vote, and if we run into serious economic problems in 2017 or 2018 (and ones that might be nothing to do with Brexit), then the decision will have been widely taken. People will not be able to complain that they would have opposed it.
The biggest threat to Brexit is not the government not invoking Article 50, it is of the government falling between invocation and Brexit, and being replaced - in a General Election - by pro-Europeans. This eliminates that risk.
Wouldn't a Commons vote on the Repeal Bill do basically the same thing?
I can see the attraction, though. And if the Commons did vote down Article 50, then call an election.
Before the referendum Stronger IN claimed that 'leaving the EU meant leaving the single market (from Euro guido).
52% still voted for that.
All that remain love for Keir Starmer. And it turned out he was talking through his ar$e when he said there was no mandate for a hard Brexit.
Still, it was good while is lasted, eh?
You can't get into "he said, she said". Let us not forget that one of the most prominent Leavers said "A small vote for Leave is not a vote for a big change in our relationship with the EU". That sounds pretty much like promising EEA to me.
All any politician can do is to try and secure the best deal for the next two decades for the people of the UK, and to try and ensure that such a deal satisfies 70% of the voters.
That means immigration controls, but it also probably means the smallest possible change in our trading arrangements that satisfies the immigration control requirement.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
Anna Sour-by*?
* I didn't invent that, BTW!
What I have never been able to understand is the absolute loyalty to the EU project - a "nation" in the making with no common culture, demos, political ideology or even a common purpose.
Is there a current price anywhere for the UK NOT to leave the EU? It's got to be a value bet now. If Jeremy Corbyn is landing blows over Brexit, it's dead in the water.
Highly unlikely. An awful lot of MPs may not like the idea of Brexit, but they know that it has to happen. Were the referendum result to be set aside then it would be hugely damaging and dangerous for democracy. It would convince a great many voters either that they can only get what they want by rejecting all of the establishment parties and veering to the extremes, or that the system is no longer capable of delivering full stop.
This leaves two other, more likely, scenarios. Firstly - and this is what I think is most likely - the courts will throw out the campaigners' attempts to force a Parliamentary vote on A50, in which case the Government will invoke it according to Theresa May's wishes ...ll of its remaining power,) win a comfortable majority, and then invoke A50 anyway.
I won't be 100% totally convinced that we are leaving until A50 has been triggered. But I'm at about 99.75% at the moment.
Personally, I think Mrs May is making a major tactical blunder by not forcing the Commons to endorse Brexit. Labour MPs, whose areas voted overwhelmingly for Brexit, will be faced with a dilemma: back their constituents, and back democracy, or back the EU. ..... And aside from a few Remainers who won't be standing in 2020, who will oppose it in the Conservative Party? Opposing the will of the people would, in all but a very few cases, be signing their own deselection warrant. Following a 550-100 vote in the Commons, and a referendum victory the Lords would not stand in the way. .......The biggest threat to Brexit is not the government not invoking Article 50, it is of the government falling between invocation and Brexit, and being replaced - in a General Election - by pro-Europeans. ..
I agree. The alternative is an early GE in March just to give the voters a chance to endorse Mrs May's Govt. All she needs is a vote on something in the HoC or Lords that goes against her to overturn her intention to wait until GE2020. Better still if by then Labour's NEC reduce the minimum number of MPs required for a Leadership candidate thus ensuring that a hard leftie gets back on the slate for Corbyn's replacement.
Personally, I think Mrs May is making a major tactical blunder by not forcing the Commons to endorse Brexit.
Labour MPs, whose areas voted overwhelmingly for Brexit, will be faced with a dilemma: back their constituents, and back democracy, or back the EU.
They will - I guarantee - back democracy,
And aside from a few Remainers who won't be standing in 2020, who will oppose it in the Conservative Party? Opposing the will of the people would, in all but a very few cases, be signing their own deselection warrant.
Following a 550-100 vote in the Commons, and a referendum victory the Lords would not stand in the way. Even Paddy Ashdown and Vince Cable say they peoples' voice must be respected.
If there is no vote, and if we run into serious economic problems in 2017 or 2018 (and ones that might be nothing to do with Brexit), then the decision will have been widely taken. People will not be able to complain that they would have opposed it.
The biggest threat to Brexit is not the government not invoking Article 50, it is of the government falling between invocation and Brexit, and being replaced - in a General Election - by pro-Europeans. This eliminates that risk.
Wouldn't a Commons vote on the Repeal Bill do basically the same thing?
I can see the attraction, though. And if the Commons did vote down Article 50, then call an election.
I think it should be tied directly to endorsing the referendum vote. Make people stand up and say they've listened to the voice of the people. A straight-up, straight-down motion with no amendments.
This isn't about executive privilege, this about making sure that no-one can later walk away from the decision to leave.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
48% of people want to stay in the EU. You can't ignore that number.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
48% of people want to stay in the EU. You can't ignore that number.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
One of the most irritating recent theories is that somehow, the votes of 18-24 year olds count for more than everyone elses'.
Yeah I know that deeply pisses me off. Just like my generation did, they'll age and their views will alter. Freedom to live in Rome, or Paris or whatever and live in Corbyn's la la land might look attractive at 20, but by 35 95%+ of them will be in the UK and freedom of movement will look different as they compete for jobs, as will Corbyn's views on the economy ( welcome to the real world!), security and foreign policy. 'twas ever thus.
I don't know about votes counting more than others. But the thing that makes this politically salient (if not, yet, politically decisive) is the real evidence of intergenerational inequality, eg Fraser Nelson's recent thing on pension provision (or lack of).
Willets, I think, wrote a book on this a while back.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
48% of people want to stay in the EU. You can't ignore that number.
Why not ?
The europhiles ignored the wishes of a majority of brits for decades.
If the result had been the other way round you'd be happily ignoring the 48% of Leavers and saying a win is a win we march on.
Personally, I think Mrs May is making a major tactical blunder by not forcing the Commons to endorse Brexit.
Labour MPs, whose areas voted overwhelmingly for Brexit, will be faced with a dilemma: back their constituents, and back democracy, or back the EU.
They will - I guarantee - back democracy,
And aside from a few Remainers who won't be standing in 2020, who will oppose it in the Conservative Party? Opposing the will of the people would, in all but a very few cases, be signing their own deselection warrant.
Following a 550-100 vote in the Commons, and a referendum victory the Lords would not stand in the way. Even Paddy Ashdown and Vince Cable say they peoples' voice must be respected.
If there is no vote, and if we run into serious economic problems in 2017 or 2018 (and ones that might be nothing to do with Brexit), then the decision will have been widely taken. People will not be able to complain that they would have opposed it.
The biggest threat to Brexit is not the government not invoking Article 50, it is of the government falling between invocation and Brexit, and being replaced - in a General Election - by pro-Europeans. This eliminates that risk.
Wouldn't a Commons vote on the Repeal Bill do basically the same thing?
I can see the attraction, though. And if the Commons did vote down Article 50, then call an election.
I think it should be tied directly to endorsing the referendum vote. Make people stand up and say they've listened to the voice of the people. A straight-up, straight-down motion with no amendments.
This isn't about executive privilege, this about making sure that no-one can later walk away from the decision to leave.
They have a perfect right to walk away from the decision if they believe it to be wrong. A referendum doesn't oblige anyone to change their mind or take a vow of silence.
Your plan would compound your initial mistake in thinking that Brexit would be in the control of people who think like you.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
One of the most irritating recent theories is that somehow, the votes of 18-24 year olds count for more than everyone elses'.
Yeah I know that deeply pisses me off. Just like my generation did, they'll age and their views will alter. Freedom to live in Rome, or Paris or whatever and live in Corbyn's la la land might look attractive at 20, but by 35 95%+ of them will be in the UK and freedom of movement will look different as they compete for jobs, as will Corbyn's views on the economy ( welcome to the real world!), security and foreign policy. 'twas ever thus.
I'm about to turn 41, but in my 20s I remember being fanatically pro-EU.
Following a 550-100 vote in the Commons, and a referendum victory the Lords would not stand in the way. Even Paddy Ashdown and Vince Cable say they peoples' voice must be respected.
I don't know... you'd probably be proven right on the Lords, but I don't trust them. Lack of elections + militant pro-EU cheerleaders = trouble. It also occurs to me that May could be concerned about attempts to prevaricate on Brexit: she might discover that Labour and the rebel Tories respect the will of the people - honest - but that they don't consider the timing of A50 to be right. And that they will continue to argue that it's not right. For a very long time.
I think you make a very good argument for putting A50 to the Commons, but if Mrs May - for her own good reasons - is really determined to avoid going to the country, then this would explain why she therefore does not wish to have a vote on A50 in Parliament. She may feel that the risk of a crisis which would force a dissolution is too great.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
She's a very poor loser. Quite unwise.
Many politicians seem to struggle with the result of the referendum. I think the government have recognised that signing article 50 really does deliver on that result, and then we can go from there.
Anyone that rebels against what is an obvious result of the referendum is wrong-headed.
What happens after that signing is much harder to work out. You can't just unsign, but if you so choose you can re-negotiate you can restore much of the framework that leaving the EU will take away.
It's clearly impossible to find anything that the EU has done that we couldn't have done ourselves. Just a question of better from the EU or worse. Most EU policy would be worse for the UK rather than a carefully tailored product, but the wonderful tailoring that we're now allowed as a result of the EU would have been beyond our wildest dreams in the past.
Will the £350M a week for the NHS cover the increased cost of Marmite?
No, as every household will definitely be £4,300/year worse off, equating to 2,606 125g jars of Marmite at £1.65 each from Tesco.
The Business interest in this Tesco vs Unilever matter is that Tesco is headed up by Dave Lewis who worked for Unilever for 27 years and understands Unilever better than most of its employees. If he thinks he can hold off Unilever I would back him. One other factor IMHO is that Tesco carry far too many product lines. Dave Lewis when at Unilever reduced one division from circa 1,600 to 400 product lines.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
48% of people want to stay in the EU. You can't ignore that number.
Why not ?
The europhiles ignored the wishes of a majority of brits for decades.
If the result had been the other way round you'd be happily ignoring the 48% of Leavers and saying a win is a win we march on.
It depends on what the agreement we can reach will look like. If we can find an absolute majority (through polling) that would support one solution or another, that would help to give it a bit of sticking power and remove some of the controversy from the whole process.
Following a 550-100 vote in the Commons, and a referendum victory the Lords would not stand in the way. Even Paddy Ashdown and Vince Cable say they peoples' voice must be respected.
I don't know... you'd probably be proven right on the Lords, but I don't trust them. Lack of elections + militant pro-EU cheerleaders = trouble. It also occurs to me that May could be concerned about attempts to prevaricate on Brexit: she might discover that Labour and the rebel Tories respect the will of the people - honest - but that they don't consider the timing of A50 to be right. And that they will continue to argue that it's not right. For a very long time.
I think you make a very good argument for putting A50 to the Commons, but if Mrs May - for her own good reasons - is really determined to avoid going to the country, then this would explain why she therefore does not wish to have a vote on A50 in Parliament. She may feel that the risk of a crisis which would force a dissolution is too great.
Mrs May should table a simple motion of support in the Commons - "This house recognises the vote taken on x June, and calls upon the government to invoke Article 50 as soon as is practicable." As it would not be an Act of parliament, merely a motion, there would be no need for it to go through the Lords.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
48% of people want to stay in the EU. You can't ignore that number.
Why not ?
The europhiles ignored the wishes of a majority of brits for decades.
If the result had been the other way round you'd be happily ignoring the 48% of Leavers and saying a win is a win we march on.
Where's the evidence that there would have been a majority for leaving the EU at any point between 1975 and 2015? There wouldn't.
I am staggered at the basis of some polls in the USA. Perhaps those who attacked Plato over querying some of the USA polls, should re-consider their past comments?
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
48% of people want to stay in the EU. You can't ignore that number.
Why not ?
The europhiles ignored the wishes of a majority of brits for decades.
If the result had been the other way round you'd be happily ignoring the 48% of Leavers and saying a win is a win we march on.
Where's the evidence that there would have been a majority for leaving the EU at any point between 1975 and 2015? There wouldn't.
I doubt I am the only one to have mentioned it but Ihave not yet read the comments. Pray precisely what has Khan actually done since being elected? I cannot think of anything significant.
Give the guy a chance? He's had less than 5 months, including the summer.
If you had read the head e r you would have realized it was in response to OGH saying voters thought he was doing well ... g having done approx Zippo so far.
Except deliver the small matter of the Night Tube – yes it was Boris's project but so badly mismanaged was his launch it was eventually actually delivered under Sadiq. And the new mayor has won the credit of the public for bringing it forward.
Has he?
Certainly we know that Boris proposed it, the unions blocked it and when Khan came in it finally went ahead. It looks like Khan caved to the unions.
That's before we mention the fare freeze he promised which will disappoint a lot of people in January when it doesn't happen.
I agree. The alternative is an early GE in March just to give the voters a chance to endorse Mrs May's Govt. All she needs is a vote on something in the HoC or Lords that goes against her to overturn her intention to wait until GE2020. Better still if by then Labour's NEC reduce the minimum number of MPs required for a Leadership candidate thus ensuring that a hard leftie gets back on the slate for Corbyn's replacement.
I actually think that an early election, especially given Mr Corbyn's total unelectability, is a good idea. It would give the government the chance to set out in their manifesto what the relationship with the EU should look like, and then get overwhelming support for that from the country.
The downsides are: (a) it would set back new constituencies two years; (b) it would mean that Labour in 2022 would likely have a more electable leader.
But I believe the advantages - to the country, not just to the Conservative Party - outweigh the disadvantages.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
48% of people want to stay in the EU. You can't ignore that number.
Why not ?
The europhiles ignored the wishes of a majority of brits for decades.
If the result had been the other way round you'd be happily ignoring the 48% of Leavers and saying a win is a win we march on.
Where's the evidence that there would have been a majority for leaving the EU at any point between 1975 and 2015? There wouldn't.
Firstly how would you know since you never tested opnion
scondly opinion polls regularly showed majorities for leaving the EU, heres one from 4 years ago
Thirdly I note you wont answer the point about having your own rules played back on you. I dont think for a moment you would give a rats shit about the wishes of a large minority of leavers if they had lost.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
One of the most irritating recent theories is that somehow, the votes of 18-24 year olds count for more than everyone elses'.
Ageism is very fashionable amongst some sections of the population nowadays (usually the same people who hypocritically wail about tidal waves of xenophobia and such like supposedly having been triggered by the referendum vote.) They maintain the pretence of being democrats, but in truth would rather than that electorate consisted entirely of those people who agree with them about everything.
Of course, the votes of the young would have a bit more weight when measured against those of the old, if only the young could be bothered to go out and vote in the same proportions.
Spot on - the Tories look after their voters very well. The young should learn from that.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
48% of people want to stay in the EU. You can't ignore that number.
Why not ?
The europhiles ignored the wishes of a majority of brits for decades.
If the result had been the other way round you'd be happily ignoring the 48% of Leavers and saying a win is a win we march on.
Where's the evidence that there would have been a majority for leaving the EU at any point between 1975 and 2015? There wouldn't.
But there was one in 2016...
You may think that it's worth sacrificing the entire country's history on the altar of David Cameron's incompetence but I don't. He messed up; the referendum was not intended to be lost, and the responsible thing would be to play for time while addressing some of the underlying concerns of the people who voted for Leave, before having a rerun in better circumstances.
Will the £350M a week for the NHS cover the increased cost of Marmite?
No, as every household will definitely be £4,300/year worse off, equating to 2,606 125g jars of Marmite at £1.65 each from Tesco.
The Business interest in this Tesco vs Unilever matter is that Tesco is headed up by Dave Lewis who worked for Unilever for 27 years and understands Unilever better than most of its employees. If he thinks he can hold off Unilever I would back him. One other factor IMHO is that Tesco carry far too many product lines. Dave Lewis when at Unilever reduced one division from circa 1,600 to 400 product lines.
Unilever are just leading where others have to follow. It is a worldwide company, with many products sourced abroad, and many products sourced locally are also dependent on imported ingredients, or imported fertilisers/pesticides etc.
As someone famously pointed out, you cannot buck the markets. Supermarkets have been screwing suppliers for years, it takes a large supplier to stand up to them.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
One of the most irritating recent theories is that somehow, the votes of 18-24 year olds count for more than everyone elses'.
Yeah I know that deeply pisses me off. Just like my generation did, they'll age and their views will alter. Freedom to live in Rome, or Paris or whatever and live in Corbyn's la la land might look attractive at 20, but by 35 95%+ of them will be in the UK and freedom of movement will look different as they compete for jobs, as will Corbyn's views on the economy ( welcome to the real world!), security and foreign policy. 'twas ever thus.
I don't know about votes counting more than others. But the thing that makes this politically salient (if not, yet, politically decisive) is the real evidence of intergenerational inequality, eg Fraser Nelson's recent thing on pension provision (or lack of).
Willets, I think, wrote a book on this a while back.
Yes I'm not saying there are not issues, but the premise that an 18yr old's vote is worth more that a 40yr old is bollocks. That said there are things to address on housing in particular ( we need to stop faffing about and build lots more), pensions ( not that 99.9% of 20 yr olds are thinking about that ), and student debt.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
48% of people want to stay in the EU. You can't ignore that number.
Why not ?
The europhiles ignored the wishes of a majority of brits for decades.
If the result had been the other way round you'd be happily ignoring the 48% of Leavers and saying a win is a win we march on.
Where's the evidence that there would have been a majority for leaving the EU at any point between 1975 and 2015? There wouldn't.
But there was one in 2016...
You may think that it's worth sacrificing the entire country's history on the altar of David Cameron's incompetence but I don't. He messed up; the referendum was not intended to be lost, and the responsible thing would be to play for time while addressing some of the underlying concerns of the people who voted for Leave, before having a rerun in better circumstances.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
48% of people want to stay in the EU. You can't ignore that number.
Why not ?
The europhiles ignored the wishes of a majority of brits for decades.
If the result had been the other way round you'd be happily ignoring the 48% of Leavers and saying a win is a win we march on.
Where's the evidence that there would have been a majority for leaving the EU at any point between 1975 and 2015? There wouldn't.
Here are 3 quickly found.
England 9–16 September 2015, R 40% , L43% DK17% 1,712 YouGov England & Wales 26 June–3 July 2015, R42%, L43% DK15% 956 Panelbase/Sunday Times UK 4–7 November 2014 R40% L43% DK17% 1,707 Opinium/The Observer
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
One of the most irritating recent theories is that somehow, the votes of 18-24 year olds count for more than everyone elses'.
Ageism is very fashionable amongst some sections of the population nowadays (usually the same people who hypocritically wail about tidal waves of xenophobia and such like supposedly having been triggered by the referendum vote.) They maintain the pretence of being democrats, but in truth would rather than that electorate consisted entirely of those people who agree with them about everything.
Of course, the votes of the young would have a bit more weight when measured against those of the old, if only the young could be bothered to go out and vote in the same proportions.
Spot on - the Tories look after their voters very well. The young should learn from that.
Name a successful party of government that doesn't even try to look after their voters.
This Brexit is a bit tricky for Labour. Most of their MPs are Remainers, but some have voters who are mainly Leavers.
What do they do to look involved? Demand to see all the discussion plans - "It's my Parliamentary right." Then what? "Ah, we'll... er ... er... er... delay them."
Goodbye majority.
It's all a political game. The nation has decided we're leaving. The Government will implement it. We'll vote on the job they've done at the next election. No use Labour jumping up and down, shouting "Please, miss, may I look please? I promise I won't get it dirty."
Will the £350M a week for the NHS cover the increased cost of Marmite?
No, as every household will definitely be £4,300/year worse off, equating to 2,606 125g jars of Marmite at £1.65 each from Tesco.
The Business interest in this Tesco vs Unilever matter is that Tesco is headed up by Dave Lewis who worked for Unilever for 27 years and understands Unilever better than most of its employees. If he thinks he can hold off Unilever I would back him. One other factor IMHO is that Tesco carry far too many product lines. Dave Lewis when at Unilever reduced one division from circa 1,600 to 400 product lines.
Unilever are just leading where others have to follow. It is a worldwide company, with many products sourced abroad, and many products sourced locally are also dependent on imported ingredients, or imported fertilisers/pesticides etc.
As someone famously pointed out, you cannot buck the markets. Supermarkets have been screwing suppliers for years, it takes a large supplier to stand up to them.
Even if all the raw materials had been sourced outside the UK, any products made in UK would justify only a 1% to 2% price rise so far. It looks more like Unilever trying to get the same amount of cash out of its UK division to compensate for the currency fluctuation in what is remitted to Unilever Inc.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
48% of people want to stay in the EU. You can't ignore that number.
Why not ?
The europhiles ignored the wishes of a majority of brits for decades.
If the result had been the other way round you'd be happily ignoring the 48% of Leavers and saying a win is a win we march on.
Where's the evidence that there would have been a majority for leaving the EU at any point between 1975 and 2015? There wouldn't.
But there was one in 2016...
You may think that it's worth sacrificing the entire country's history on the altar of David Cameron's incompetence but I don't. He messed up; the referendum was not intended to be lost, and the responsible thing would be to play for time while addressing some of the underlying concerns of the people who voted for Leave, before having a rerun in better circumstances.
You are Jean Claude Juncker and I claim my five quid.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
One of the most irritating recent theories is that somehow, the votes of 18-24 year olds count for more than everyone elses'.
Ageism is very fashionable amongst some sections of the population nowadays (usually the same people who hypocritically wail about tidal waves of xenophobia and such like supposedly having been triggered by the referendum vote.) They maintain the pretence of being democrats, but in truth would rather than that electorate consisted entirely of those people who agree with them about everything.
Of course, the votes of the young would have a bit more weight when measured against those of the old, if only the young could be bothered to go out and vote in the same proportions.
Spot on - the Tories look after their voters very well. The young should learn from that.
Name a successful party of government that doesn't even try to look after their voters.
Labour 2010 - 2016........ oh sorry I missed the words "successful party of government"
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
48% of people want to stay in the EU. You can't ignore that number.
Why not ?
The europhiles ignored the wishes of a majority of brits for decades.
If the result had been the other way round you'd be happily ignoring the 48% of Leavers and saying a win is a win we march on.
Where's the evidence that there would have been a majority for leaving the EU at any point between 1975 and 2015? There wouldn't.
But there was one in 2016...
You may think that it's worth sacrificing the entire country's history on the altar of David Cameron's incompetence but I don't. He messed up; the referendum was not intended to be lost, and the responsible thing would be to play for time while addressing some of the underlying concerns of the people who voted for Leave, before having a rerun in better circumstances.
Really?
Rerun it - Remain will get the hammering it deserves. Project fear is dead and buried.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
48% of people want to stay in the EU. You can't ignore that number.
Why not ?
The europhiles ignored the wishes of a majority of brits for decades.
If the result had been the other way round you'd be happily ignoring the 48% of Leavers and saying a win is a win we march on.
Where's the evidence that there would have been a majority for leaving the EU at any point between 1975 and 2015? There wouldn't.
Yes but we weren't allowed a say were we? Our birthright was salamied away step by step. The one time we were promised s vote on the Constitution Blair weaseled his way out of it, and put Hain on the box to insult us all by saying it was a "tidying up exercise". If we'd actually been allied a vote we might've modified the "project", but no - not allowed, we plough on. Till one day we got a chance to express the will of the people pent up over decades and pulled the whole house down partly because some of us saw it as the only bloody chance we'd ever ever get to express our opposition riveting sucked bit by bit into a "USE" I was genuinely persuadable but the Europhiles snatched defeat from the jaws of endless possibilities of victory,
Will the £350M a week for the NHS cover the increased cost of Marmite?
No, as every household will definitely be £4,300/year worse off, equating to 2,606 125g jars of Marmite at £1.65 each from Tesco.
The Business interest in this Tesco vs Unilever matter is that Tesco is headed up by Dave Lewis who worked for Unilever for 27 years and understands Unilever better than most of its employees. If he thinks he can hold off Unilever I would back him. One other factor IMHO is that Tesco carry far too many product lines. Dave Lewis when at Unilever reduced one division from circa 1,600 to 400 product lines.
Unilever are just leading where others have to follow. It is a worldwide company, with many products sourced abroad, and many products sourced locally are also dependent on imported ingredients, or imported fertilisers/pesticides etc.
As someone famously pointed out, you cannot buck the markets. Supermarkets have been screwing suppliers for years, it takes a large supplier to stand up to them.
If Sainsbury's and Asda refuse the price rise Unilever will be out of 60% of the UK market. The reason Tesco have leaked this is to clear the way for Sainsbury's and Asda to follow suit. By the end of next week Unilever will have climb down or settle for 2-3%.
This Brexit is a bit tricky for Labour. Most of their MPs are Remainers, but some have voters who are mainly Leavers.
What do they do to look involved? Demand to see all the discussion plans - "It's my Parliamentary right." Then what? "Ah, we'll... er ... er... er... delay them."
Goodbye majority.
It's all a political game. The nation has decided we're leaving. The Government will implement it. We'll vote on the job they've done at the next election. No use Labour jumping up and down, shouting "Please, miss, may I look please? I promise I won't get it dirty."
"No you stupid boy, sit down."
At a time when UKIP are in existential crisis, how nice of Labour MPs to throw them an EU lifeline.
This Brexit is a bit tricky for Labour. Most of their MPs are Remainers, but some have voters who are mainly Leavers.
What do they do to look involved? Demand to see all the discussion plans - "It's my Parliamentary right." Then what? "Ah, we'll... er ... er... er... delay them."
Goodbye majority.
It's all a political game. The nation has decided we're leaving. The Government will implement it. We'll vote on the job they've done at the next election. No use Labour jumping up and down, shouting "Please, miss, may I look please? I promise I won't get it dirty."
"No you stupid boy, sit down."
It's the same but worse situation with Tory MP's. Around 1/3rd are Remainers but their Tory voters are even more overwhelmingly Leavers.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
48% of people want to stay in the EU. You can't ignore that number.
Why not ?
The europhiles ignored the wishes of a majority of brits for decades.
If the result had been the other way round you'd be happily ignoring the 48% of Leavers and saying a win is a win we march on.
Where's the evidence that there would have been a majority for leaving the EU at any point between 1975 and 2015? There wouldn't.
But there was one in 2016...
You may think that it's worth sacrificing the entire country's history on the altar of David Cameron's incompetence but I don't. He messed up; the referendum was not intended to be lost, and the responsible thing would be to play for time while addressing some of the underlying concerns of the people who voted for Leave, before having a rerun in better circumstances.
You williamglenn may think that it's worth sacrificing the entire country's sovereignty on the altar of the federal state of the EU but I don't.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
48% of people want to stay in the EU. You can't ignore that number.
Why not ?
The europhiles ignored the wishes of a majority of brits for decades.
If the result had been the other way round you'd be happily ignoring the 48% of Leavers and saying a win is a win we march on.
Where's the evidence that there would have been a majority for leaving the EU at any point between 1975 and 2015? There wouldn't.
But there was one in 2016...
You may think that it's worth sacrificing the entire country's history on the altar of David Cameron's incompetence but I don't. He messed up; the referendum was not intended to be lost, and the responsible thing would be to play for time while addressing some of the underlying concerns of the people who voted for Leave, before having a rerun in better circumstances.
You are Jean Claude Juncker and I claim my five quid.
And kudos to (I think) Max, who has repeatedly suggested this prospect. Along with some rather political reasoning for it ...
At last some competition.
Urrrm, no.
I believe Max's point (if it was he) is that Gatwick would be given the nod along with Heathrow to placate Gatwick's fans, but they wouldn't be able to raise the funding if Heathrow got the nod as well.
Just heard Anna Soubry's speech at the Brexit debate. Two things really got under my skin, she said, "she hoped the 48% would become the majority" (I presume she means a second referendum?). And she accused older voters of ruining the lives of younger voters.
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
48% of people want to stay in the EU. You can't ignore that number.
Why not ?
The europhiles ignored the wishes of a majority of brits for decades.
If the result had been the other way round you'd be happily ignoring the 48% of Leavers and saying a win is a win we march on.
Where's the evidence that there would have been a majority for leaving the EU at any point between 1975 and 2015? There wouldn't.
But there was one in 2016...
You may think that it's worth sacrificing the entire country's history on the altar of David Cameron's incompetence but I don't. He messed up; the referendum was not intended to be lost, and the responsible thing would be to play for time while addressing some of the underlying concerns of the people who voted for Leave, before having a rerun in better circumstances.
You are Jean Claude Juncker and I claim my five quid.
Here's a Euro instead. We'll be even soon enough.
You're predicting £5 = 1 euro?
But yes, your comments about 'having a rerun in better circumstances' are exactly what you'd expect from the eurocrats.
This Brexit is a bit tricky for Labour. Most of their MPs are Remainers, but some have voters who are mainly Leavers.
What do they do to look involved? Demand to see all the discussion plans - "It's my Parliamentary right." Then what? "Ah, we'll... er ... er... er... delay them."
Goodbye majority.
It's all a political game. The nation has decided we're leaving. The Government will implement it. We'll vote on the job they've done at the next election. No use Labour jumping up and down, shouting "Please, miss, may I look please? I promise I won't get it dirty."
"No you stupid boy, sit down."
It's the same but worse situation with Tory MP's. Around 1/3rd are Remainers but their Tory voters are even more overwhelmingly Leavers.
2/3 of the Tory members are for LEAVE. (source multiple ConHome surveys). The Remoaning Tory MPs reselections are going to be difficult the more they oppose the Govt.
Comments
firstly theyre cutting their sales, then they're doing it by threatening the end user with a price increase.
Brand trashing.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2016/10/12/paul-oconnell-interview-i-wanted-to-find-alastair-campbell-and-k/
Clinton 44%
Trump 37%
Johnson 9%
Stein 3%
#MULawPoll
With Tesco being massacred by Aldi and Lidl there is no way they will tolerate Unilevers demand.
Whats the back story on Unilever?
Thursday: Trump 41%, Clinton 40%
Friday: Clinton 44%, Trump 38%
Saturday and Sunday: Clinton 49%, Trump 30%
Clinton 47 .. Trump 44
http://opinionsavvy.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/OS-FL-General-10.12.16.pdf
I hope hell freezes over before this awful woman ever gets back on the front bench. Hopefully, she will defect!
This leaves two other, more likely, scenarios. Firstly - and this is what I think is most likely - the courts will throw out the campaigners' attempts to force a Parliamentary vote on A50, in which case the Government will invoke it according to Theresa May's wishes and that will be the end of that. Secondly, if the Government is compelled to ask Parliament for permission, then A50 would almost certainly clear the Commons, but could well be vetoed by the Lords. Were that the case then the Prime Minister would go to the country on a manifesto committing her to Brexit (quite possibly together with the abolition of the Lords or the removal of virtually all of its remaining power,) win a comfortable majority, and then invoke A50 anyway.
I won't be 100% totally convinced that we are leaving until A50 has been triggered. But I'm at about 99.75% at the moment.
* I didn't invent that, BTW!
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/oct/12/tesco-running-low-key-unilever-brands-price-row-supplier-supermarket-falling-pound
Cliffnotes:- Yes increase in costs, but Unilever trying it on. And not the first time Tesco's have told a big firm to go do one, resulting in no product.
Bet they didn't sell much of those...
538 figures the LAT poll is skewed by R+0.6
NYT is suggesting that should be more like R+3.5
Of course, the votes of the young would have a bit more weight when measured against those of the old, if only the young could be bothered to go out and vote in the same proportions.
Labour MPs, whose areas voted overwhelmingly for Brexit, will be faced with a dilemma: back their constituents, and back democracy, or back the EU.
They will - I guarantee - back democracy,
And aside from a few Remainers who won't be standing in 2020, who will oppose it in the Conservative Party? Opposing the will of the people would, in all but a very few cases, be signing their own deselection warrant.
Following a 550-100 vote in the Commons, and a referendum victory the Lords would not stand in the way. Even Paddy Ashdown and Vince Cable say they peoples' voice must be respected.
Most importantly, this ties everyone to Brexit. People cannot walk away from having voted for it in the Commons.
If there is no vote, and if we run into serious economic problems in 2017 or 2018 (and ones that might be nothing to do with Brexit), then the decision will have been widely taken. People will not be able to complain that they would have opposed it.
The biggest threat to Brexit is not the government not invoking Article 50, it is of the government falling between invocation and Brexit, and being replaced - in a General Election - by pro-Europeans. This eliminates that risk.
52% still voted for that.
All that remain love for Keir Starmer. And it turned out he was talking through his ar$e when he said there was no mandate for a hard Brexit.
Still, it was good while is lasted, eh?
I can see the attraction, though. And if the Commons did vote down Article 50, then call an election.
All any politician can do is to try and secure the best deal for the next two decades for the people of the UK, and to try and ensure that such a deal satisfies 70% of the voters.
That means immigration controls, but it also probably means the smallest possible change in our trading arrangements that satisfies the immigration control requirement.
This isn't about executive privilege, this about making sure that no-one can later walk away from the decision to leave.
Good. That should teach the a***holes a lesson.
Willets, I think, wrote a book on this a while back.
The europhiles ignored the wishes of a majority of brits for decades.
If the result had been the other way round you'd be happily ignoring the 48% of Leavers and saying a win is a win we march on.
Your plan would compound your initial mistake in thinking that Brexit would be in the control of people who think like you.
I think you make a very good argument for putting A50 to the Commons, but if Mrs May - for her own good reasons - is really determined to avoid going to the country, then this would explain why she therefore does not wish to have a vote on A50 in Parliament. She may feel that the risk of a crisis which would force a dissolution is too great.
Many politicians seem to struggle with the result of the referendum. I think the government have recognised that signing article 50 really does deliver on that result, and then we can go from there.
Anyone that rebels against what is an obvious result of the referendum is wrong-headed.
What happens after that signing is much harder to work out. You can't just unsign, but if you so choose you can re-negotiate you can restore much of the framework that leaving the EU will take away.
It's clearly impossible to find anything that the EU has done that we couldn't have done ourselves. Just a question of better from the EU or worse. Most EU policy would be worse for the UK rather than a carefully tailored product, but the wonderful tailoring that we're now allowed as a result of the EU would have been beyond our wildest dreams in the past.
https://twitter.com/JamesDMorris/status/786253451290374144
If remain had won by a single vote that would have been taken unequivocally by remainers as a vote for ever closer union, forever.
(You really think so?)
Certainly we know that Boris proposed it, the unions blocked it and when Khan came in it finally went ahead. It looks like Khan caved to the unions.
That's before we mention the fare freeze he promised which will disappoint a lot of people in January when it doesn't happen.
However there is a post-debate Florida poll:
Opinion Savvy, Florida
Hillary 47
Trump 44
Johnson 5
Stein 1
http://opinionsavvy.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/OS-FL-General-10.12.16.pdf
So nationally it looks like a Hillary lead of about 5.
The downsides are: (a) it would set back new constituencies two years; (b) it would mean that Labour in 2022 would likely have a more electable leader.
But I believe the advantages - to the country, not just to the Conservative Party - outweigh the disadvantages.
scondly opinion polls regularly showed majorities for leaving the EU, heres one from 4 years ago
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/nov/17/eu-referendum-poll
Thirdly I note you wont answer the point about having your own rules played back on you. I dont think for a moment you would give a rats shit about the wishes of a large minority of leavers if they had lost.
As someone famously pointed out, you cannot buck the markets. Supermarkets have been screwing suppliers for years, it takes a large supplier to stand up to them.
England 9–16 September 2015, R 40% , L43% DK17% 1,712 YouGov
England & Wales 26 June–3 July 2015, R42%, L43% DK15% 956 Panelbase/Sunday Times
UK 4–7 November 2014 R40% L43% DK17% 1,707 Opinium/The Observer
This Brexit is a bit tricky for Labour. Most of their MPs are Remainers, but some have voters who are mainly Leavers.
What do they do to look involved? Demand to see all the discussion plans - "It's my Parliamentary right." Then what? "Ah, we'll... er ... er... er... delay them."
Goodbye majority.
It's all a political game. The nation has decided we're leaving. The Government will implement it. We'll vote on the job they've done at the next election. No use Labour jumping up and down, shouting "Please, miss, may I look please? I promise I won't get it dirty."
"No you stupid boy, sit down."
Rerun it - Remain will get the hammering it deserves. Project fear is dead and buried.
Yes but we weren't allowed a say were we? Our birthright was salamied away step by step. The one time we were promised s vote on the Constitution Blair weaseled his way out of it, and put Hain on the box to insult us all by saying it was a "tidying up exercise". If we'd actually been allied a vote we might've modified the "project", but no - not allowed, we plough on. Till one day we got a chance to express the will of the people pent up over decades and pulled the whole house down partly because some of us saw it as the only bloody chance we'd ever ever get to express our opposition riveting sucked bit by bit into a "USE" I was genuinely persuadable but the Europhiles snatched defeat from the jaws of endless possibilities of victory,
Around 1/3rd are Remainers but their Tory voters are even more overwhelmingly Leavers.
I believe Max's point (if it was he) is that Gatwick would be given the nod along with Heathrow to placate Gatwick's fans, but they wouldn't be able to raise the funding if Heathrow got the nod as well.
But yes, your comments about 'having a rerun in better circumstances' are exactly what you'd expect from the eurocrats.