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%.
Unilever always has the option to produce their products in the UK rather than outside of it, the devaluation alone has cut labour costs to about the same levels as america's.
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.
It's a partially UK company anyway, this will be politically motivated pressure from the Dutch side to a certain extent, at least the 10% figure. No doubt there needs to be a price rise, but not as much as 10%.
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.
Dave tried (lamely) to address the concerns. The EU told him to bugger off, there's no problem. We voted out accordingly. The EU was not remotely interested in reform. Not even a little bit.
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?
I have always warned that people should check the Demographic breakdown of American polls due to their tendency towards... low quality sample selection .
Plato has managed to pick the one thing that isn't in doubt (more people identify as Dem than Rep in America) as their bone of contention. They've chosen to disregard the polls as they don't reflect their belief that Trump is winning and are looking for an excuse to do so.
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.
Treat it as a vote of confidence. Any Conservative MP who votes against the exercise of Article 50 will be standing as an independent in future.
I believe the ingredients for both of those are sourced from the UK
It looks like Tesco think Unilever are profiteering. If you're right, they might have a point.
It may well be that the supermarkets have been abusing their purchasing oligarcy.
Incidentally we are finding similar problems getting a number of pharmaceuticals. The NHS price was already lower than the price on the continent, and the exchange rate devaluation means that a number of lines are not profitable here, so supplies are prioritised for the mainland. This seems to be particularly true of post-patent drugs marketed as generics.
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.
Our country's history didn't begin in 1973.
It makes no difference whether the referendum was intended to be lost. The people have spoken.
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.
LOL. As ever, I am amused by your reliance on ConHome surveys as proof of anything.
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%.
I suspect they only ever expected 2-3%, and this was a masterful exercise in anchoring.
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.
Plus it also makes any legal challenge by Gatwick go away, there is no way they can take it to court if they get the go ahead as well. At that point any court case would be about restricting a competitor's business which is just ridiculous.
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.
Dave tried (lamely) to address the concerns. The EU told him to bugger off, there's no problem. We voted out accordingly. The EU was not remotely interested in reform. Not even a little bit.
I would dispute that he tried to do anything other than manage the media to create a 'saving the British sausage' moment to kick off the campaign.
What people voted against was his lame and disingenuous brand of politics. Remain would have been much better off if they'd locked Cameron in a room and had Jean-Claude Juncker and Romano Prodi touring the country instead.
Poll last night had Trump 26%, Clinton 26%, McMullin 22% in Utah. Valid or not that will give big momentum to the McMullin campaign, probably compressing the Johnson vote (12%).
Let the word ring forth from this place, Mormons don't vote for fascists
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%.
I suspect they only ever expected 2-3%, and this was a masterful exercise in anchoring.
Yes, they start off by demanding the moon on a stick, before settling for the real deal.
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.
LOL. As ever, I am amused by your reliance on ConHome surveys as proof of anything.
I could say that is what I have also heard from 2 out of every 3 Conservative members I have spoken to this year (approx 100). Do you know a large number of Conservative members?
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%.
I suspect they only ever expected 2-3%, and this was a masterful exercise in anchoring.
Yes, probably but it being made public is probably not good for them and not what they had planned. If Sainsbury's and Asda tell them to get lost then Unilever come out of this looking very bad, to some degree it doesn't matter since they don't sell products under their own brand, but still not 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!
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.
Dave tried (lamely) to address the concerns. The EU told him to bugger off, there's no problem. We voted out accordingly. The EU was not remotely interested in reform. Not even a little bit.
I would dispute that he tried to do anything other than manage the media to create a 'saving the British sausage' moment to kick off the campaign.
What people voted against was his lame and disingenuous brand of politics. Remain would have been much better off if they'd locked Cameron in a room and had Jean-Claude Juncker and Romano Prodi touring the country instead.
Currently watching 8 Out of 10 Cats Does Countdown on my Sky box, but you're coming out with gags funnier than Jimmy Carr ever could ...
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.
The UK minimum wage is already much lower than Germany's thanks to the devaluation. At some point the costs of production in the UK will be so smaller than Germany's, companies will prefer producing in Britain even with WTO tariffs.
That's the whole point of the devaluation, making domestic products cheaper than foreign ones without the need for protectionism.
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.
Dave tried (lamely) to address the concerns. The EU told him to bugger off, there's no problem. We voted out accordingly. The EU was not remotely interested in reform. Not even a little bit.
I would dispute that he tried to do anything other than manage the media to create a 'saving the British sausage' moment to kick off the campaign.
What people voted against was his lame and disingenuous brand of politics. Remain would have been much better off if they'd locked Cameron in a room and had Jean-Claude Juncker and Romano Prodi touring the country instead.
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.
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%.
I suspect they only ever expected 2-3%, and this was a masterful exercise in anchoring.
IMHO Tesco also want to cut the product range down. Unilever may get 2% but lose dozens of lines. Not just from Tesco. Dave Lewis will know the profitability of almost every line Unilever supplies to Tesco since he only left in 2014.
Poll last night had Trump 26%, Clinton 26%, McMullin 22% in Utah. Valid or not that will give big momentum to the McMullin campaign, probably compressing the Johnson vote (12%).
Let the word ring forth from this place, Mormons don't vote for fascists
I think the fascism is less of an issue than the fornication. I can see this being an issue in the bible belt too.
Poll last night had Trump 26%, Clinton 26%, McMullin 22% in Utah. Valid or not that will give big momentum to the McMullin campaign, probably compressing the Johnson vote (12%).
Let the word ring forth from this place, Mormons don't vote for fascists
I know JackW has poopooed it but I feel quite happy with my McMullin 25/1 I took from Will Hill.
3 Govt defeats today in the Lords on the Bus Services Bill.
Pretty low turnout all round - Govt losses were by a margin in the range of 25 to 40. That's now par if Crossbenchers don't break either way which was the case today.
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.
Dave tried (lamely) to address the concerns. The EU told him to bugger off, there's no problem. We voted out accordingly. The EU was not remotely interested in reform. Not even a little bit.
I would dispute that he tried to do anything other than manage the media to create a 'saving the British sausage' moment to kick off the campaign.
What people voted against was his lame and disingenuous brand of politics. Remain would have been much better off if they'd locked Cameron in a room and had Jean-Claude Juncker and Romano Prodi touring the country instead.
That's genuinely funny.
I'm not sure if he's trolling or serious at this point.
Poll last night had Trump 26%, Clinton 26%, McMullin 22% in Utah. Valid or not that will give big momentum to the McMullin campaign, probably compressing the Johnson vote (12%).
Let the word ring forth from this place, Mormons don't vote for fascists
There's a surprising number of Mormons in the North East of America.
3 Govt defeats today in the Lords on the Bus Services Bill.
Pretty low turnout all round - Govt losses were by a margin in the range of 25 to 40. That's now par if Crossbenchers don't break either way which was the case today.
How long until Theresa can find 41 more people to ennoble?
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.
Treat it as a vote of confidence. Any Conservative MP who votes against the exercise of Article 50 will be standing as an independent in future.
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.
Dave tried (lamely) to address the concerns. The EU told him to bugger off, there's no problem. We voted out accordingly. The EU was not remotely interested in reform. Not even a little bit.
I would dispute that he tried to do anything other than manage the media to create a 'saving the British sausage' moment to kick off the campaign.
What people voted against was his lame and disingenuous brand of politics. Remain would have been much better off if they'd locked Cameron in a room and had Jean-Claude Juncker and Romano Prodi touring the country instead.
That's genuinely funny.
I'm not sure if he's trolling or serious at this point.
Poorly prepared joke by Therasa May about Thornberry asking for a second referendum. Strictly speaking, it was a lie ! The Speaker should have asked her to withdraw the remark.
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.
It's way too late for that. Cameron and the other Member States' leader all failed to realise that the Brits voted Leave simply because they were sick and tired of being sh*t upon, despite being mega contributors to the excesses of the EU budget. Our major bargaining chip, although not yet even breathed let alone openly disscussed is the extent to which the UK is prepared to continue to contribute its hitherto net contribution of circa £10 billion per per annum in exchange for agreeing tariff free trading and tightish immigration controls. After all, who else is likely to divi up instead of us - Germany, The Netherlands? Hardly, they consider they're already paying far too much. France, Italy? You're having a laugh!
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.
Do you understand democracy?
william glenn prefers the EU version of democracy through unelected commissioners. Just like the Economist and its teenage/twenties scribblers.
Poll last night had Trump 26%, Clinton 26%, McMullin 22% in Utah. Valid or not that will give big momentum to the McMullin campaign, probably compressing the Johnson vote (12%).
Let the word ring forth from this place, Mormons don't vote for fascists
I think the fascism is less of an issue than the fornication. I can see this being an issue in the bible belt too.
The only way he could be a less attractive proposition to Mormons in Utah would be if he were a lefty
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.
Dave tried (lamely) to address the concerns. The EU told him to bugger off, there's no problem. We voted out accordingly. The EU was not remotely interested in reform. Not even a little bit.
I would dispute that he tried to do anything other than manage the media to create a 'saving the British sausage' moment to kick off the campaign.
What people voted against was his lame and disingenuous brand of politics. Remain would have been much better off if they'd locked Cameron in a room and had Jean-Claude Juncker and Romano Prodi touring the country instead.
Hmm I agree Dave was in essay crisis mode and wanted to bounce us into a state where we said "Oh ok, no fuss, let's stay as we are" a la British sausage so to speak.
However, are you entirely serious by suggesting Jean Claude Juncker touring the country would've been a better bet for Remain? Seriously? I mean really seriously? The man would've needed Divine intervention to have been heard. I can just see the cheering crowds of adulation as he pulled into an (ex) Cornish fishing village, or the flower strewn entrance into Boston Lincolnshire.
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.
Dave tried (lamely) to address the concerns. The EU told him to bugger off, there's no problem. We voted out accordingly. The EU was not remotely interested in reform. Not even a little bit.
I would dispute that he tried to do anything other than manage the media to create a 'saving the British sausage' moment to kick off the campaign.
What people voted against was his lame and disingenuous brand of politics. Remain would have been much better off if they'd locked Cameron in a room and had Jean-Claude Juncker and Romano Prodi touring the country instead.
Currently watching 8 Out of 10 Cats Does Countdown on my Sky box, but you're coming out with gags funnier than Jimmy Carr ever could ...
I like Cats do Countdown too - even my mum watches it (though she's more an aficionado of the original daytime version!).
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.
The UK minimum wage is already much lower than Germany's thanks to the devaluation. At some point the costs of production in the UK will be so smaller than Germany's, companies will prefer producing in Britain even with WTO tariffs.
That's the whole point of the devaluation, making domestic products cheaper than foreign ones without the need for protectionism.
Precisely. Imports and foreign travel are discouraged; exports, domestic production and tourism boosted. An essential process if the current account deficit is to be reduced.
As I mentioned the other evening, Brexit is as much the trigger as the cause of the depreciation of Sterling. The country has been living beyond its means for many years. That must end.
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!
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.
Our major bargaining chip, although not yet even breathed let alone openly disscussed is the extent to which the UK is prepared to continue to contribute its hitherto net contribution of circa 10 billion per per annum in exchange for agreeing tariff free trading and tightish immigration controls. After all, who else is likely to divi up instead of us - Germany, The Netherlands? Hardly, they they're already paying far too much. France, Italy? You're having a laugh!
Yes. Cut it down to £4billion and re-label it as overseas aid so it would still be a £10 billion saving pa.
Poll last night had Trump 26%, Clinton 26%, McMullin 22% in Utah. Valid or not that will give big momentum to the McMullin campaign, probably compressing the Johnson vote (12%).
Let the word ring forth from this place, Mormons don't vote for fascists
Yawn, Trump was going to lose Utah since the primaries.
Mormons hate Trump is not news.
The only thing this does is Trump would need a state larger than N.Hampshire, it limits his choices down to 4 states: Colorado, Wisconsin (down 7 pre-debate), Michigan, Pennsylvania.
I think the fascism is less of an issue than the fornication. I can see this being an issue in the bible belt too.
The suggestion I saw today was that because of their history Mormons are hostile to the persecution of religious minorities. Such as banning people from entering the country because of their religion. Sounds plausible enough.
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.
Dave tried (lamely) to address the concerns. The EU told him to bugger off, there's no problem. We voted out accordingly. The EU was not remotely interested in reform. Not even a little bit.
I would dispute that he tried to do anything other than manage the media to create a 'saving the British sausage' moment to kick off the campaign.
What people voted against was his lame and disingenuous brand of politics. Remain would have been much better off if they'd locked Cameron in a room and had Jean-Claude Juncker and Romano Prodi touring the country instead.
Precisely. Imports and foreign travel are discouraged; exports, domestic production and tourism boosted. An essential process if the current account deficit is to be reduced.
As I mentioned the other evening, Brexit is as much the trigger as the cause of the depreciation of Sterling. The country has been living beyond its means for many years. That must end.
We have to learn to live like people did in 1997, the last time we had a balanced economy.
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.
Our major bargaining chip, although not yet even breathed let alone openly disscussed is the extent to which the UK is prepared to continue to contribute its hitherto net contribution of circa 10 billion per per annum in exchange for agreeing tariff free trading and tightish immigration controls. After all, who else is likely to divi up instead of us - Germany, The Netherlands? Hardly, they they're already paying far too much. France, Italy? You're having a laugh!
Yes. Cut it down to £4billion and re-label it as overseas aid so it would still be a £10 billion saving pa.
I suggested at the start of the thread, this is the area where the wiggle room is for both sides.
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.
Our major bargaining chip, although not yet even breathed let alone openly disscussed is the extent to which the UK is prepared to continue to contribute its hitherto net contribution of circa 10 billion per per annum in exchange for agreeing tariff free trading and tightish immigration controls. After all, who else is likely to divi up instead of us - Germany, The Netherlands? Hardly, they they're already paying far too much. France, Italy? You're having a laugh!
Yes. Cut it down to £4billion and re-label it as overseas aid so it would still be a £10 billion saving pa.
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.
Isn't there a call on the public purse for infrastructure outside the airport(s) perimeter(s)? If memory serves it is going to amount to about £9bn for Heathrow and about £3bn for Gatwick, not to mention years and years of disruption on an already failed motorway system.
Heathrow and Gatwick are owned by private companies who exist to to make a profit. If their plans are so wonderful then should they not be paying the full cost, including compensating the taxpayer for any disruption during the building works.
Poll last night had Trump 26%, Clinton 26%, McMullin 22% in Utah. Valid or not that will give big momentum to the McMullin campaign, probably compressing the Johnson vote (12%).
Let the word ring forth from this place, Mormons don't vote for fascists
Yawn, Trump was going to lose Utah since the primaries.
Mormons hate Trump is not news.
The only thing this does is Trump would need a state larger than N.Hampshire, it limits his choices down to 4 states: Colorado, Wisconsin (down 7 pre-debate), Michigan, Pennsylvania.
I take it you lumped on the massive odds available on Not Trump in Utah then?
I think the fascism is less of an issue than the fornication. I can see this being an issue in the bible belt too.
The suggestion I saw today was that because of their history Mormons are hostile to the persecution of religious minorities. Such as banning people from entering the country because of their religion. Sounds plausible enough.
I bet his lack of charitable giving doesn't exactly go down well either.
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.
The UK minimum wage is already much lower than Germany's thanks to the devaluation. At some point the costs of production in the UK will be so smaller than Germany's, companies will prefer producing in Britain even with WTO tariffs.
That's the whole point of the devaluation, making domestic products cheaper than foreign ones without the need for protectionism.
Precisely. Imports and foreign travel are discouraged; exports, domestic production and tourism boosted. An essential process if the current account deficit is to be reduced.
As I mentioned the other evening, Brexit is as much the trigger as the cause of the depreciation of Sterling. The country has been living beyond its means for many years. That must end.
If devaluation is such a good idea, shouldn't we make it a permanent policy ?
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.
Our major bargaining chip, although not yet even breathed let alone openly disscussed is the extent to which the UK is prepared to continue to contribute its hitherto net contribution of circa 10 billion per per annum in exchange for agreeing tariff free trading and tightish immigration controls. After all, who else is likely to divi up instead of us - Germany, The Netherlands? Hardly, they they're already paying far too much. France, Italy? You're having a laugh!
Yes. Cut it down to £4billion and re-label it as overseas aid so it would still be a £10 billion saving pa.
The last few days seems like we are re running the referendum and today's debate, dominated by remainers, demonstrates just how far the MP's are losing touch with voters and the result to leave.
There is a very real danger that those MP's trying to subvert the result by subterfuge are going to turn the Country very angry with them and the one person, fighting for the will of the people, Theresa May will become much admired and popular while Parliament trashes it's reputation even more than it already is.
I would be very surprised if the next polls do not demonstrate anger against those who lost and those leading today's demand for the government to reveal it's hand and to have a vote on the serving of A50
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.
Dave tried (lamely) to address the concerns. The EU told him to bugger off, there's no problem. We voted out accordingly. The EU was not remotely interested in reform. Not even a little bit.
I would dispute that he tried to do anything other than manage the media to create a 'saving the British sausage' moment to kick off the campaign.
What people voted against was his lame and disingenuous brand of politics. Remain would have been much better off if they'd locked Cameron in a room and had Jean-Claude Juncker and Romano Prodi touring the country instead.
Hmm I agree Dave was in essay crisis mode and wanted to bounce us into a state where we said "Oh ok, no fuss, let's stay as we are" a la British sausage so to speak.
However, are you entirely serious by suggesting Jean Claude Juncker touring the country would've been a better bet for Remain? Seriously? I mean really seriously? The man would've needed Divine intervention to have been heard. I can just see the cheering crowds of adulation as he pulled into an (ex) Cornish fishing village, or the flower strewn entrance into Boston Lincolnshire.
The only inputs from Mr Juncker that I recall seemed calculated to drive the UK electorate into voting Leave.
Another article Brewailng the wrong sort of Brexit by makes some excellent points. < The Telegraph: Brexit has revealed that Britain is two countries, both getting it wrong. Theresa May needs a Plan B. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIw0Yrg_zE
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.
LOL. As ever, I am amused by your reliance on ConHome surveys as proof of anything.
I could say that is what I have also heard from 2 out of every 3 Conservative members I have spoken to this year (approx 100). Do you know a large number of Conservative members?
Poll last night had Trump 26%, Clinton 26%, McMullin 22% in Utah. Valid or not that will give big momentum to the McMullin campaign, probably compressing the Johnson vote (12%).
Let the word ring forth from this place, Mormons don't vote for fascists
I think the fascism is less of an issue than the fornication. I can see this being an issue in the bible belt too.
I think that Mormons have an unusual combination of being very strongly committed to their religion, while being socially tolerant. Trump would offend them on both counts.
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?
I have always warned that people should check the Demographic breakdown of American polls due to their tendency towards... low quality sample selection .
Plato has managed to pick the one thing that isn't in doubt (more people identify as Dem than Rep in America) as their bone of contention. They've chosen to disregard the polls as they don't reflect their belief that Trump is winning and are looking for an excuse to do so.
The question there is how many registered democrats are behaving like the usually Labour voters in Northern England who have voted UKIP in fairly large numbers.
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.
The UK minimum wage is already much lower than Germany's thanks to the devaluation. At some point the costs of production in the UK will be so smaller than Germany's, companies will prefer producing in Britain even with WTO tariffs.
That's the whole point of the devaluation, making domestic products cheaper than foreign ones without the need for protectionism.
Precisely. Imports and foreign travel are discouraged; exports, domestic production and tourism boosted. An essential process if the current account deficit is to be reduced.
As I mentioned the other evening, Brexit is as much the trigger as the cause of the depreciation of Sterling. The country has been living beyond its means for many years. That must end.
IIRC, our entry into the Common Market seemed to be the signal for all sorts of shortages. Wine lakes, butter mountains, etc, but none available in the shops.
It'd be amusing if our exit had the same effect.
Although, come to think of it, maybe it was the prevalence of strike action that caused shortages of bread, loo-paper, etc.
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.
OGH/TSE/RCS We now know that Beth@Sky reads PB !
Me at 7.07pm above.
Beth Rigby ✔ @BethRigby at 7.54pm What's fascinating about #Unilever/Tesco row is that #Tesco boss (Dave Lewis) worked at Unilever for 27 years. Poacher turned gamekeeper
This tallies with the rumours I've been hearing within the industry.
A sensible decision, albeit a bit hostile to those that live nearby. They knew the risks though.
Boris-island-airport still ticks all the boxes though.
One of the interesting things from the NCE report linked downthread is that passenger numbers have increased massively over what was predicted by the Airports Commission.
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.
We now know that Beth/Sky reads PB OGH/TSE/RCS!
Me at 7.07pm above.
Beth Rigby ✔ @BethRigby at 7.54pm What's fascinating about #Unilever/Tesco row is that #Tesco boss (Dave Lewis) worked at Unilever for 27 years. Poacher turned gamekeeper
Everybody give her a wave....oh and Hi Dave, how's retirement?
I would dispute that he tried to do anything other than manage the media to create a 'saving the British sausage' moment to kick off the campaign.
What people voted against was his lame and disingenuous brand of politics. Remain would have been much better off if they'd locked Cameron in a room and had Jean-Claude Juncker and Romano Prodi touring the country instead.
Hmm I agree Dave was in essay crisis mode and wanted to bounce us into a state where we said "Oh ok, no fuss, let's stay as we are" a la British sausage so to speak.
However, are you entirely serious by suggesting Jean Claude Juncker touring the country would've been a better bet for Remain? Seriously? I mean really seriously? The man would've needed Divine intervention to have been heard. I can just see the cheering crowds of adulation as he pulled into an (ex) Cornish fishing village, or the flower strewn entrance into Boston Lincolnshire.
Imagine the rapturous crowds whooping and cheering as he told them that deserters would face consequences!
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?
I have always warned that people should check the Demographic breakdown of American polls due to their tendency towards... low quality sample selection .
Plato has managed to pick the one thing that isn't in doubt (more people identify as Dem than Rep in America) as their bone of contention. They've chosen to disregard the polls as they don't reflect their belief that Trump is winning and are looking for an excuse to do so.
The question there is how many registered democrats are behaving like the usually Labour voters in Northern England who have voted UKIP in fairly large numbers.
It doesn't matter how they are behaving if the complaint about the polls that there are too many of them. Indeed if Plato's complaint is that they are oversampling Dems and Dems are actually going Trump then then that should mean higher Trump figures not lower.
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2 UK foreign aid to india (2015) was £279 million but our net contribution to the EU for 2015 was £8.5 BILLION #brexit 12:40 AM - 14 May 2016
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.
Dave tried (lamely) to address the concerns. The EU told him to bugger off, there's no problem. We voted out accordingly. The EU was not remotely interested in reform. Not even a little bit.
I would dispute that he tried to do anything other than manage the media to create a 'saving the British sausage' moment to kick off the campaign.
What people voted against was his lame and disingenuous brand of politics. Remain would have been much better off if they'd locked Cameron in a room and had Jean-Claude Juncker and Romano Prodi touring the country instead.
OGH: "What is it about the London Mayoralty that gives incumbents good ratings?"
Simples .... the Mayor, irrespective of their party affiliation, is seen by Londoners to be on our side, as opposed to most of the rest of the UK's regions who are happy to take our money, whilst remaining overwhelmingly anti-London.
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.
We now know that Beth/Sky reads PB OGH/TSE/RCS!
Me at 7.07pm above.
Beth Rigby ✔ @BethRigby at 7.54pm What's fascinating about #Unilever/Tesco row is that #Tesco boss (Dave Lewis) worked at Unilever for 27 years. Poacher turned gamekeeper
Everybody give her a wave....oh and Hi Dave, how's retirement?
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.
Our country's history didn't begin in 1973.
It makes no difference whether the referendum was intended to be lost. The people have spoken.
Poorly prepared joke by Therasa May about Thornberry asking for a second referendum. Strictly speaking, it was a lie ! The Speaker should have asked her to withdraw the remark.
T May is very poor with jokes.
Not just TM (Jeez, I didn't realise that TM has the same initials as MT)...all politicians should avoid jokes. Their delivery is toe curlingly ghastly.
It's a skill to tell a joke. I'm terrible too,. hopelessly awful, beyond horrific....
You can hardly imagine the young TM happily rolling off the jokes as a sixth former. Note to our PM...if you didn't do it then, when you were young and vibrant......please do not do it now.....
I would dispute that he tried to do anything other than manage the media to create a 'saving the British sausage' moment to kick off the campaign.
What people voted against was his lame and disingenuous brand of politics. Remain would have been much better off if they'd locked Cameron in a room and had Jean-Claude Juncker and Romano Prodi touring the country instead.
Hmm I agree Dave was in essay crisis mode and wanted to bounce us into a state where we said "Oh ok, no fuss, let's stay as we are" a la British sausage so to speak.
However, are you entirely serious by suggesting Jean Claude Juncker touring the country would've been a better bet for Remain? Seriously? I mean really seriously? The man would've needed Divine intervention to have been heard. I can just see the cheering crowds of adulation as he pulled into an (ex) Cornish fishing village, or the flower strewn entrance into Boston Lincolnshire.
Imagine the rapturous crowds whooping and cheering as he told them that deserters would face consequences!
The last few days seems like we are re running the referendum and today's debate, dominated by remainers, demonstrates just how far the MP's are losing touch with voters and the result to leave.
There is a very real danger that those MP's trying to subvert the result by subterfuge are going to turn the Country very angry with them and the one person, fighting for the will of the people, Theresa May will become much admired and popular while Parliament trashes it's reputation even more than it already is.
I would be very surprised if the next polls do not demonstrate anger against those who lost and those leading today's demand for the government to reveal it's hand and to have a vote on the serving of A50
In terms of those who hope to use parliament to stymie the referendum, I think there are only a handful.
A much larger group simply want proper parliamentary scrutiny of our most momentous policy push since the early 70s. Which is right and proper.
This tallies with the rumours I've been hearing within the industry.
A sensible decision, albeit a bit hostile to those that live nearby. They knew the risks though.
Boris-island-airport still ticks all the boxes though.
One of the interesting things from the NCE report linked downthread is that passenger numbers have increased massively over what was predicted by the Airports Commission.
Great so HAL and GAL must have massively increased profits and therefore can fund the full costs of their expansions by themselves and not cost the taxpayer a penny.
The last few days seems like we are re running the referendum and today's debate, dominated by remainers, demonstrates just how far the MP's are losing touch with voters and the result to leave.
There is a very real danger that those MP's trying to subvert the result by subterfuge are going to turn the Country very angry with them and the one person, fighting for the will of the people, Theresa May will become much admired and popular while Parliament trashes it's reputation even more than it already is.
I would be very surprised if the next polls do not demonstrate anger against those who lost and those leading today's demand for the government to reveal it's hand and to have a vote on the serving of A50
In terms of those who hope to use parliament to stymie the referendum, I think there are only a handful.
A much larger group simply want proper parliamentary scrutiny of our most momentous policy push since the early 70s. Which is right and proper.
There are the few principled who would ask the same whoever won. Then there are the scumbags who did not ask the same of Blair with his CAP deal nor did they pressure Cameron during/before he started his "renegotiation".
Poorly prepared joke by Therasa May about Thornberry asking for a second referendum. Strictly speaking, it was a lie ! The Speaker should have asked her to withdraw the remark.
T May is very poor with jokes.
Not just TM (Jeez, I didn't realise that TM has the same initials as MT)...all politicians should avoid jokes. Their delivery is toe curlingly ghastly.
It's a skill to tell a joke. I'm terrible too,. hopelessly awful, beyond horrific....
You can hardly imagine the young TM happily rolling off the jokes as a sixth former. Note to our PM...if you didn't do it then, when you were young and vibrant......please do not do it now.....
The joke had the desired effect of people laughing at Thornberry and she taking exemption to it.
This tallies with the rumours I've been hearing within the industry.
A sensible decision, albeit a bit hostile to those that live nearby. They knew the risks though.
Boris-island-airport still ticks all the boxes though.
One of the interesting things from the NCE report linked downthread is that passenger numbers have increased massively over what was predicted by the Airports Commission.
Great so HAL and GAL must have massively increased profits and therefore can fund the full costs of their expansions by themselves and not cost the taxpayer a penny.
You assume then that there are no flow on benefits from the country having thriving airports?
The last few days seems like we are re running the referendum and today's debate, dominated by remainers, demonstrates just how far the MP's are losing touch with voters and the result to leave.
There is a very real danger that those MP's trying to subvert the result by subterfuge are going to turn the Country very angry with them and the one person, fighting for the will of the people, Theresa May will become much admired and popular while Parliament trashes it's reputation even more than it already is.
I would be very surprised if the next polls do not demonstrate anger against those who lost and those leading today's demand for the government to reveal it's hand and to have a vote on the serving of A50
I was, at times, a bit rude to you before the referendum.
I can't say sorry enough: your respect for the result and tenacity in defending it, despite personally not voting for it, shows a level of personal integrity I only wish we all had.
This tallies with the rumours I've been hearing within the industry.
A sensible decision, albeit a bit hostile to those that live nearby. They knew the risks though.
Boris-island-airport still ticks all the boxes though.
One of the interesting things from the NCE report linked downthread is that passenger numbers have increased massively over what was predicted by the Airports Commission.
There's a bloody great big long runway that can take a landing or takeoff from anything at all in Cardiff. However, there's no rail link and there's virtually tumbleweed rolling down it through lack of use. How about Govt guarantees pension funds a rate of return to build a rail link ( it needs about 5 miles only to link to the network) and link to London in about 2hrs 30 on the new electrified line ( they are due to finish electrifying the Severn Tunnel for example in about two weeks time)?
Things aren't going wrong enough quickly enough for the Commons to derail Brexit at the moment. Given Leave win 70% of constituencies the Commons would currently vote for Brexit comfortably. We need a material change of circumstances from June 23rd and some significant buyers remorse in the polls before MP's would delay Brexit. The Brexit devaluation is too ambiguous economically and has todate been too orderly to count. It's certainly a useful start but nowhere near enough. In addition the utterly useless Corbyn has shot his mouth off backing both immeadiate A50 invocation and an early General Election.So even if the current Commons got to the point where it would delay Brexit on current polling May would walk a GE. I do believe Brexit is unravelling but only at the edges and only because Brexit is a crap thing to do. It's not going sufficiently wrong sufficiently quickly yet to derail it. That may of course change but at the moment I feel Brexit is on course.
Poorly prepared joke by Therasa May about Thornberry asking for a second referendum. Strictly speaking, it was a lie ! The Speaker should have asked her to withdraw the remark.
T May is very poor with jokes.
Not just TM (Jeez, I didn't realise that TM has the same initials as MT)...all politicians should avoid jokes. Their delivery is toe curlingly ghastly.
It's a skill to tell a joke. I'm terrible too,. hopelessly awful, beyond horrific....
You can hardly imagine the young TM happily rolling off the jokes as a sixth former. Note to our PM...if you didn't do it then, when you were young and vibrant......please do not do it now.....
The joke had the desired effect of people laughing at Thornberry and she taking exemption to it.
I have to say, that figure of fun, Emily Thornberry was exceptionally good on Radio 5 this morning. One of the most polished political performances that I have heard for some time.
The absence of Flora from supermarket shelves will command rather more attention than any number of reports of currency market movements. I expect the Express will be majoring on Unilever's murky Dutch connections.
Comments
Ruling out a referendum was also one of Miliband's greatest blunders. The Tory majority arose directly from it.
Plato has managed to pick the one thing that isn't in doubt (more people identify as Dem than Rep in America) as their bone of contention. They've chosen to disregard the polls as they don't reflect their belief that Trump is winning and are looking for an excuse to do so.
Incidentally we are finding similar problems getting a number of pharmaceuticals. The NHS price was already lower than the price on the continent, and the exchange rate devaluation means that a number of lines are not profitable here, so supplies are prioritised for the mainland. This seems to be particularly true of post-patent drugs marketed as generics.
It makes no difference whether the referendum was intended to be lost. The people have spoken.
What people voted against was his lame and disingenuous brand of politics. Remain would have been much better off if they'd locked Cameron in a room and had Jean-Claude Juncker and Romano Prodi touring the country instead.
Valid or not that will give big momentum to the McMullin campaign, probably compressing the Johnson vote (12%).
Let the word ring forth from this place, Mormons don't vote for fascists
At some point the costs of production in the UK will be so smaller than Germany's, companies will prefer producing in Britain even with WTO tariffs.
That's the whole point of the devaluation, making domestic products cheaper than foreign ones without the need for protectionism.
Pretty low turnout all round - Govt losses were by a margin in the range of 25 to 40. That's now par if Crossbenchers don't break either way which was the case today.
T May is very poor with jokes.
Our major bargaining chip, although not yet even breathed let alone openly disscussed is the extent to which the UK is prepared to continue to contribute its hitherto net contribution of circa £10 billion per per annum in exchange for agreeing tariff free trading and tightish immigration controls.
After all, who else is likely to divi up instead of us - Germany, The Netherlands? Hardly, they consider they're already paying far too much. France, Italy? You're having a laugh!
However, are you entirely serious by suggesting Jean Claude Juncker touring the country would've been a better bet for Remain? Seriously? I mean really seriously? The man would've needed Divine intervention to have been heard. I can just see the cheering crowds of adulation as he pulled into an (ex) Cornish fishing village, or the flower strewn entrance into Boston Lincolnshire.
So dependent on the DUP to some extent.
Leader of House has a job on his hands. Who is that again? Oh shite, it's Lansley!
EDIT as noted below, he retired in 2015
As I mentioned the other evening, Brexit is as much the trigger as the cause of the depreciation of Sterling. The country has been living beyond its means for many years. That must end.
https://youtu.be/mjEcj8KpuJw
Mormons hate Trump is not news.
The only thing this does is Trump would need a state larger than N.Hampshire, it limits his choices down to 4 states: Colorado, Wisconsin (down 7 pre-debate), Michigan, Pennsylvania.
Heathrow and Gatwick are owned by private companies who exist to to make a profit. If their plans are so wonderful then should they not be paying the full cost, including compensating the taxpayer for any disruption during the building works.
So what? India by PPP GDP is richer than the UK these days.
There is a very real danger that those MP's trying to subvert the result by subterfuge are going to turn the Country very angry with them and the one person, fighting for the will of the people, Theresa May will become much admired and popular while Parliament trashes it's reputation even more than it already is.
I would be very surprised if the next polls do not demonstrate anger against those who lost and those leading today's demand for the government to reveal it's hand and to have a vote on the serving of A50
Good evening, everybody.
Boris-island-airport still ticks all the boxes though.
Come home to find Labour has actually plumbed new depths.
They will get slaughtered when the spotlight is on them in an election campaign.
Situation, Favourables among all adults pre-tape, pre-debate:
Hillary 41/55
Trump 33/63
Situation after the tape and debate:
Hillary 40/55
Trump 32/64
http://www.gallup.com/poll/189299/presidential-election-2016-key-indicators.aspx?g_source=ELECTION_2016&g_medium=topic&g_campaign=tiles
It'd be amusing if our exit had the same effect.
Although, come to think of it, maybe it was the prevalence of strike action that caused shortages of bread, loo-paper, etc.
Me at 7.07pm above.
Beth Rigby ✔ @BethRigby at 7.54pm
What's fascinating about #Unilever/Tesco row is that #Tesco boss (Dave Lewis) worked at Unilever for 27 years. Poacher turned gamekeeper
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/20/british-deserters-will-face-the-consequences-warns-eus-juncker/
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2
UK foreign aid to india (2015) was £279 million but our net contribution to the EU for 2015 was £8.5 BILLION #brexit
12:40 AM - 14 May 2016
So it doesn't matter if Trump loses Utah to a 3rd party candidate.
It obviously would matter if Clinton won Utah.
Simples .... the Mayor, irrespective of their party affiliation, is seen by Londoners to be on our side, as opposed to most of the rest of the UK's regions who are happy to take our money, whilst remaining overwhelmingly anti-London.
Excuse me whilst I don my tin hat!
It's a skill to tell a joke. I'm terrible too,. hopelessly awful, beyond horrific....
You can hardly imagine the young TM happily rolling off the jokes as a sixth former. Note to our PM...if you didn't do it then, when you were young and vibrant......please do not do it now.....
We could see panicked mormons rushing to the streets to vote Hillary if Virginia is too close too call in early returns on election night.
Juncker speaks to the masses "Listen very carefully, I shall say 'zis only once!".
A much larger group simply want proper parliamentary scrutiny of our most momentous policy push since the early 70s. Which is right and proper.
Then there are the scumbags who did not ask the same of Blair with his CAP deal nor did they pressure Cameron during/before he started his "renegotiation".
Economics of the madhouse.
I can't say sorry enough: your respect for the result and tenacity in defending it, despite personally not voting for it, shows a level of personal integrity I only wish we all had.