So if a bunch of Belgian communists, and greens can veto a free trade deal between Canada and the EU, then you do have to wonder what sort of deals and with whom would be acceptable? I suspect the answer is essentially no deals with anybody.
But we're going to get a BRILLIANT deal.
Oh, wait...
By QMV you fool.
How do you know that? The Canada deal seemed to require unanimity. In our case, since migration is an issue, it is extremely far from obvious that we can structure a deal so that it sneaks in under QMV. As I've said before, I certainly hope that the UK negotiators are aware of the need to try to do so, but there's no guarantee either that they are aware, or that it can be done.
"A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament."
From the text of the Lisbon treaty.
Sure, so the question is how much you can include under "the arrangements for its withdrawal". For example, if the suggested arrangement was, "Britain will continue to pay its budget contributions, and in return Queen Elizabeth II will reign over all of Europe", you can imagine that other countries that already have monarchs might feel this should be in a separate treaty that they'd have veto power over.
It specifically mentions the future relations between the union and the leaving nation, so one imagines the trade relationship will be a part of the A50 negotiations which will be rammed through by QMV.
Rasmussen actually had Obama ahead in its final 2008 poll
I think the clue is the final three words ....
Oh ... and whilst on the theme of a "clue" .... any clue yet of Trump's path to 270 ??
Above average white working class turnout in Iowa, Pennsylvania and Ohio, Michigan and one of Minnesota and Wisconsin. Florida and Nevada are also not yet out of his reach
PA, MI and WI has Clinton ahead by around 8 on average. So, try again?
if the suggested arrangement was, "Britain will continue to pay its budget contributions, and in return Queen Elizabeth II will reign over all of Europe", you can imagine that other countries that already have monarchs might feel this should be in a separate treaty that they'd have veto power over.
Perhaps they should have thought more about the implications before they signed the European Constitution Lisbon Treaty.
So if a bunch of Belgian communists, and greens can veto a free trade deal between Canada and the EU, then you do have to wonder what sort of deals and with whom would be acceptable? I suspect the answer is essentially no deals with anybody.
Better off out makes more sense by the day.
You're going to have similar problems doing trade deals with *anybody*. Free trade is currently unpopular, and there are people coming at it from both the right and the left. This is why Brexit was able to happen. But it also makes it hard or impossible for a non-destructive Brexit to happen.
So, is the complaint that the EU erodes too much sovereignty or that too many veto-wielding entities make it sclerotic? Because to me, those points seem a bit contradictory.
Not really - they denude nation states of power whilst concentrating it at the unaccountable centre. They know this process is a one-way ratchet and so can be very patient if things don't go 'the project's' way.
The specific text says "taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union". That means at least a Heads of Terms will have to be agreed under Article 50 via QMV, but probably the whole lot.
Frankly it's as clear as mud, but I think the best-informed opinion is that, if it is a 'mixed' agreement, it will require unanimity:
However, if the final agreement cuts across policy areas within the preserve of the member states, such as certain elements of services, transport and investment protection – as many recent EU FTAs have done (for example with Peru and with Columbia) – it will be classed as a ‘mixed agreement’ and require additional ratification by every national parliament in the EU.
So if a bunch of Belgian communists, and greens can veto a free trade deal between Canada and the EU, then you do have to wonder what sort of deals and with whom would be acceptable? I suspect the answer is essentially no deals with anybody.
But we're going to get a BRILLIANT deal.
Oh, wait...
By QMV you fool.
How do you know that? The Canada deal seemed to require unanimity. In our case, since migration is an issue, it is extremely far from obvious that we can structure a deal so that it sneaks in under QMV. As I've said before, I certainly hope that the UK negotiators are aware of the need to try to do so, but there's no guarantee either that they are aware, or that it can be done.
"A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament."
From the text of the Lisbon treaty.
Yes, but that is the exit agreement, terms for leaving (who pays salaries and pensions, how to divide up any assets, etc etc). It's not about the separate deal we'll need to on our post-Brexit relationship with the EU. These two often get conflated, and in practice they will be mixed up, but they are not the same thing:
Rasmussen actually had Obama ahead in its final 2008 poll
I think the clue is the final three words ....
Oh ... and whilst on the theme of a "clue" .... any clue yet of Trump's path to 270 ??
Above average white working class turnout in Iowa, Pennsylvania and Ohio, Michigan and one of Minnesota and Wisconsin. Florida and Nevada are also not yet out of his reach
Wouldn't Iowa, Pennsylvania and Ohio be enough, even if he failed to take every state where Clinton's lead is currently smaller?
Rasmussen actually had Obama ahead in its final 2008 poll
I think the clue is the final three words ....
Oh ... and whilst on the theme of a "clue" .... any clue yet of Trump's path to 270 ??
Above average white working class turnout in Iowa, Pennsylvania and Ohio, Michigan and one of Minnesota and Wisconsin. Florida and Nevada are also not yet out of his reach
Chortle ....
I'll give you top marks for single minded wishful thinking for increased turnout by just WWC and also a commendation for unintended humour on PB on a dull Monday afternoon.
The specific text says "taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union". That means at least a Heads of Terms will have to be agreed under Article 50 via QMV, but probably the whole lot.
Frankly it's as clear as mud, but I think the best-informed opinion is that, if it is a 'mixed' agreement, it will require unanimity:
However, if the final agreement cuts across policy areas within the preserve of the member states, such as certain elements of services, transport and investment protection – as many recent EU FTAs have done (for example with Peru and with Columbia) – it will be classed as a ‘mixed agreement’ and require additional ratification by every national parliament in the EU.
As I said, it's vital that we do our utmost to try to avoid it being a mixed agreement and sneak it all in under QMV, but is that possible? Who knows?
Yes, I think the first agreement should essentially just be dropping all tariffs between the EU and UK as well as the UK essentially preserving EU goods standards for exports to the EU so there are no NTBs. That's if we dont go for the EFTA/EEA route. We should build a relationship from the ground up, adding to it rather than working backwards from our current position which will require all 36 national and regional partliaments to ratify it.
New post: What can British polling mishaps tell us about the US election?
*This has no place in a sensible article about polling methodology, but I feel I should point out to US readers that in British schoolboy slang when I was a kid – and possibly still today – to Trump is to fart. “Shy Trump” sounds like it should refer to surreptitiously breaking wind and denying it.
Rasmussen actually had Obama ahead in its final 2008 poll
I think the clue is the final three words ....
Oh ... and whilst on the theme of a "clue" .... any clue yet of Trump's path to 270 ??
Above average white working class turnout in Iowa, Pennsylvania and Ohio, Michigan and one of Minnesota and Wisconsin. Florida and Nevada are also not yet out of his reach
Wouldn't Iowa, Pennsylvania and Ohio be enough, even if he failed to take every state where Clinton's lead is currently smaller?
IA,PA and OH account for 44 ECVs he'd still be 20 short of 270.
First round: Juppé 39 % / Le Pen 29% Sarkozy 20% / Le Pen 25% (a decent poll at this stage for Sarkozy)
No second round polling; the status quo is a 55/45 victory for Sarkozy and a 65/35 victory for Juppé.
Some polls have shown Le Pen actually beating Juppe in the first round if Macron runs as a centrist candidate, which he probably will
Yes; Macron takes about 10% of Juppe's vote, leaving Juppe and Le Pen on about 28% apiece.
That being said, it makes no difference to the ultimate outcome, as Le Pen basically picks up no transfers, and he wins 70:30.
The question is: can Sarkozy beat Juppe? It will be fascinating to watch, but if Juppe wins, he is near certain to be the next French President. Anything more than about 1.6 on him looks pretty good value to me*.
* I'm on at evens, at that may be skewing my view.
Bayrou will also likely eat into Juppe's vote. If Le Pen comes first in round 1 it would be an earthquake, beating even her father's second place in 2002. Yes Juppe would likely win round 2 but he is the epitome of the French establishment, even more so than Sarkozy, while Marine Le Pen would position herself as a charismatic outsider and it would likely be closer than Chirac Jean Marie Le Pen was. Juppe is competent but lacks Chirac's charisma
Bayrou has said he won't stand if Juppe is the LR candidate.
First round: Juppé 39 % / Le Pen 29% Sarkozy 20% / Le Pen 25% (a decent poll at this stage for Sarkozy)
No second round polling; the status quo is a 55/45 victory for Sarkozy and a 65/35 victory for Juppé.
Some polls have shown Le Pen actually beating Juppe in the first round if Macron runs as a centrist candidate, which he probably will
Yes; Macron takes about 10% of Juppe's vote, leaving Juppe and Le Pen on about 28% apiece.
That being said, it makes no difference to the ultimate outcome, as Le Pen basically picks up no transfers, and he wins 70:30.
The question is: can Sarkozy beat Juppe? It will be fascinating to watch, but if Juppe wins, he is near certain to be the next French President. Anything more than about 1.6 on him looks pretty good value to me*.
* I'm on at evens, at that may be skewing my view.
Bayrou will also likely eat into Juppe's vote. If Le Pen comes first in round 1 it would be an earthquake, beating even her father's second place in 2002. Yes Juppe would likely win round 2 but he is the epitome of the French establishment, even more so than Sarkozy, while Marine Le Pen would position herself as a charismatic outsider and it would likely be closer than Chirac Jean Marie Le Pen was. Juppe is competent but lacks Chirac's charisma
Bayrou has said he won't stand if Juppe is the LR candidate.
First round: Juppé 39 % / Le Pen 29% Sarkozy 20% / Le Pen 25% (a decent poll at this stage for Sarkozy)
No second round polling; the status quo is a 55/45 victory for Sarkozy and a 65/35 victory for Juppé.
Some polls have shown Le Pen actually beating Juppe in the first round if Macron runs as a centrist candidate, which he probably will
Yes; Macron takes about 10% of Juppe's vote, leaving Juppe and Le Pen on about 28% apiece.
That being said, it makes no difference to the ultimate outcome, as Le Pen basically picks up no transfers, and he wins 70:30.
The question is: can Sarkozy beat Juppe? It will be fascinating to watch, but if Juppe wins, he is near certain to be the next French President. Anything more than about 1.6 on him looks pretty good value to me*.
* I'm on at evens, at that may be skewing my view.
Bayrou will also likely eat into Juppe's vote. If Le Pen comes first in round 1 it would be an earthquake, beating even her father's second place in 2002. Yes Juppe would likely win round 2 but he is the epitome of the French establishment, even more so than Sarkozy, while Marine Le Pen would position herself as a charismatic outsider and it would likely be closer than Chirac Jean Marie Le Pen was. Juppe is competent but lacks Chirac's charisma
Bayrou is a strong supporter of Juppé and will not challenge him.
There's no likely about it. Bayrou has said he'll support Juppé if he is the LR nominee.
Rasmussen actually had Obama ahead in its final 2008 poll
I think the clue is the final three words ....
Oh ... and whilst on the theme of a "clue" .... any clue yet of Trump's path to 270 ??
Above average white working class turnout in Iowa, Pennsylvania and Ohio, Michigan and one of Minnesota and Wisconsin. Florida and Nevada are also not yet out of his reach
Wouldn't Iowa, Pennsylvania and Ohio be enough, even if he failed to take every state where Clinton's lead is currently smaller?
No. If Clinton wins Florida it's finished. Remember it's FOP or bust for Trump.
New post: What can British polling mishaps tell us about the US election?
*This has no place in a sensible article about polling methodology, but I feel I should point out to US readers that in British schoolboy slang when I was a kid – and possibly still today – to Trump is to fart. “Shy Trump” sounds like it should refer to surreptitiously breaking wind and denying it.
Rasmussen actually had Obama ahead in its final 2008 poll
I think the clue is the final three words ....
Oh ... and whilst on the theme of a "clue" .... any clue yet of Trump's path to 270 ??
Above average white working class turnout in Iowa, Pennsylvania and Ohio, Michigan and one of Minnesota and Wisconsin. Florida and Nevada are also not yet out of his reach
Wouldn't Iowa, Pennsylvania and Ohio be enough, even if he failed to take every state where Clinton's lead is currently smaller?
No. If Clinton wins Florida it's finished. Remember it's FOP or bust for Trump.
Oh yes, I agree he needs Florida. But if he had Pennsylvania, I don't think he would need to take absolutely all the others with a smaller Clinton lead. It looks as though he could do without one of the smaller ones - Nevada, Arizona or North Carolina.
the obvious thing is to take CETA, agree a UK modified version with Canada and make it effective day one of Brexit
This would also have the huge advantage of pissing juncker and schulz off.
We could probably go better than CETA on a bilateral basis as the EU refused to open up financial services iirc, I'm sure the UK wouldn't.
I think we'd probably use the EFTA-Canada trade deal tbh
Maybe not for Canada given our historic ties. I think we'd go for bespoke rather than off the shelf. The government will want to show why leaving the EU has positives using an existing deal which isn't an ideal fit might not be a politically viable option.
the obvious thing is to take CETA, agree a UK modified version with Canada and make it effective day one of Brexit
This would also have the huge advantage of pissing juncker and schulz off.
We could probably go better than CETA on a bilateral basis as the EU refused to open up financial services iirc, I'm sure the UK wouldn't.
I think we'd probably use the EFTA-Canada trade deal tbh
Maybe not for Canada given our historic ties. I think we'd go for bespoke rather than off the shelf. The government will want to show why leaving the EU has positives using an existing deal which isn't an ideal fit might not be a politically viable option.
bespoke means starting from scratch, a redraft is quicker and more useful in political terms
I've read why, but ensconced in the care of the NHS I haven't access to all my notes. Is there a reason why Rasmussen is so far away from everyone else?
the obvious thing is to take CETA, agree a UK modified version with Canada and make it effective day one of Brexit
This would also have the huge advantage of pissing juncker and schulz off.
We could probably go better than CETA on a bilateral basis as the EU refused to open up financial services iirc, I'm sure the UK wouldn't.
I think we'd probably use the EFTA-Canada trade deal tbh
Maybe not for Canada given our historic ties. I think we'd go for bespoke rather than off the shelf. The government will want to show why leaving the EU has positives using an existing deal which isn't an ideal fit might not be a politically viable option.
I would have thought speed would be the primary concern.
Interesting to note that the UK is 40% of Canada's EU export market, while the UK is the EU's second biggest exporter to Canada with 16% of the exports.
Interesting to note that the UK is 40% of Canada's EU export market, while the UK is the EU's second biggest exporter to Canada with 16% of the exports.
New post: What can British polling mishaps tell us about the US election?
*This has no place in a sensible article about polling methodology, but I feel I should point out to US readers that in British schoolboy slang when I was a kid – and possibly still today – to Trump is to fart. “Shy Trump” sounds like it should refer to surreptitiously breaking wind and denying it.
I've read why, but ensconced in the care of the NHS I haven't access to all my notes. Is there a reason why Rasmussen is so far away from everyone else?
They have reported Trump scores with African Americans of anywhere from 17 to 24%
Should a Muslim baker be legally obliged to bake Cakes with " Ban new Mosque building " on them ? Is " 9/11 is a lie " a political belief ? If it is would a bereaved relative of a victim have to bake a cake with it on ? And so on and so on.
In Northern Ireland at least, the Muslim baker or bereaved relative would just have to suck it up.
Seems to be a very odd law. One imagines it would repealed if a Muslim baker was targeted.
Rubbish.
I'm sure you thought the police turning a blind eye to the gang rapes in Rotherham was also "rubbish" when The Times reported it all those years ago.
And what about Jimmy savvile et al is he Muslim too?
Different case and both have the same root cause of being a protected class. Muslims, celebrities and, until recently, the clergy got away with rape and sexual abuse because they are a protected class. Same as Trump, Bill Clinton and Bill Cosby in the US.
Muslims are not a protected class, I can tell u that for nothing.
Rotherham?
That was wanting not to be racist not islamophic.
Which means Muslims are a protected class.
Go tell my local bus driver or butcher Muslims he's ppwerful. Lol A joke.
Comments
There is a theory about that Rasmussen enjoy a little fun and games prior to trending to the result in their last offering.
That might be the case but I couldn't possibly comment ....
However, if the final agreement cuts across policy areas within the preserve of the member states, such as certain elements of services, transport and investment protection – as many recent EU FTAs have done (for example with Peru and with Columbia) – it will be classed as a ‘mixed agreement’ and require additional ratification by every national parliament in the EU.
http://openeurope.org.uk/today/blog/the-mechanics-of-leaving-the-eu-explaining-article-50/
Individual Member States ratify the fnal new agreement nationally if it is a mixed agreement
Page 11, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/504216/The_process_for_withdrawing_from_the_EU_print_ready.pdf
Note also that this document makes the distinction between the exit agreement (page 10) and the replacement (page 11).
As I said, it's vital that we do our utmost to try to avoid it being a mixed agreement and sneak it all in under QMV, but is that possible? Who knows?
Obama +6 (final)
Obama +5
Obama +7
Obama +6
Obama +5
Obama +5
Obama +6
Takes us back to the end of September.
I am quite clear that Rasmussen have since fallen off the wagon but in 2008 I think that's a pretty damn good position.
I'll give you top marks for single minded wishful thinking for increased turnout by just WWC and also a commendation for unintended humour on PB on a dull Monday afternoon.
Keep up the good work.
New post: What can British polling mishaps tell us about the US election?
*This has no place in a sensible article about polling methodology, but I feel I should point out to US readers that in British schoolboy slang when I was a kid – and possibly still today – to Trump is to fart. “Shy Trump” sounds like it should refer to surreptitiously breaking wind and denying it.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/9772
http://www.europe1.fr/politique/bayrou-un-soutien-a-double-tranchant-pour-juppe-2856832
He has to flip FL OH and PA and keep NC AZ.
http://www.270towin.com/maps/r7evr
1) one who ignores the massive inroads that D. Trump is making with blacks, Hispanics, gays and women despite the disgusting bias of the MSM.
2) one who dealt it, smellled it then disowned it.
This would also have the huge advantage of pissing juncker and schulz off.
Clinton 41 .. Trump 43
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/white_house_watch_oct24
The fact that we have these choices (and no one else in the EU does), is precisely why Brexit is the right decision.
http://us.cnn.com/2016/10/24/politics/election-2016-donald-trump-hillary-clinton/index.html
We are 27% of the EU's total trade with Canada.
Germans berating Europe: http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/europa-im-wuergegriff-der-wallonen-das-ceta-drama-geht-weiter-14494651.html
new thread
Maybe they should have been a bit more pragmatic.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/clinton-trump-election-countdown-polls-230212
A joke.