I reckon Brexit will, ultimately - in 10 or 20 years - be an obvious success and the clearly correct moral choice and we will wonder why we ever worried, and why we didn't do it before. In that light, Cameron could be seen, if you are so minded, as a "good" prime minister.
But in his own terms he was a disaster. Walking lazily into a catastrophic, career-ending defeat, and an outcome which he apparently views as terrible for the country. A defeat moreover which he did more than anyone to bring on, by overpromising on his renegotiation, then under-delivering in reality, and then by conducting a terrible cackhanded referendum campaign which turned 20-point leads into a loss on the day.
Cameron was a shit campaigner and a shit politician, even if in retrospect we might thank him for his greatest Error.
Historian Niall Ferguson (Remain backer turned Brexit convert) came to two conclusions when he made his volte face - firstly that voters in provincial England and Wales had been justified in voting to leave because of EU's incompetence; and secondly that Cameron should have campaigned for Brexit himself. His career-ending mistake was not to promise the referendum in the first place, but to try to sell his pathetic renegotiation to a disbelieving public.
Since Mr Cameron manifestly believes that the UK's best interest lay in the EU on any terms, no-one can say he "should" have campaigned to leave.
What he should not have done was to make big set-piece speeches saying he was prepared to campaign for leave.
And good evening, everyone.
If Cameron had campaigned for Leave - and he was as hated and mistrusted as much as everyone was saying on the previous thread - then surely Remain would have won.
You are kidding, right? He'd have won it by a landslide.
Stark Dawning has been driven Stark Raving Mad by Brexit.
If Cameron had come out for Brexit, Leave would have won by 60/40 or more.
The great irony is that if David Cameron been more plausibly on the fence in his negotiations with Merkel and co, then he probably would have won greater concessions on benefits, and would therefore have won his referendum.
Cameron might as well have hopped around Brussels on one leg with his arse painted green for all the difference his negotiations made. They were transparently spin. Everyone saw the whole exercise as the contrived theatre that it was. The odd unworldlywise anoraks who took it seriously wouldn't fill a backroom at a trainspotters` convention.
Nor for Sarah Palin, which would have made things even more interesting than it already is.
Palin has already gone off message criticising the Carrier Deal as Crony Capitalism. She's a bit like a globalising Brexiter who thought they could keep control of the mob.
Yes, Palin's Tea Party actually has little in common with Trump's Deplorables. Will be interesting to see if a big fault line develops between these two anti-establishment GOP movements over the coming years.
It will be interesting to see who Trump picks as SCOTUS, no matter who he picks they will never be conservative enough for the base.
There's an increasingly prevalent meme among the frothers that says Article 50 isn't needed and we can just get out now at the stroke of a pen and save the 2 years of contributions that we would have to pay during the negotiation period.
We can unilaterally abrogate any treaty, if we don't mind the international consequences.
Needless to say, these people believe this to be a viable option because an expert has said so.
Which expert? Seriously, I have never heard anyone with a passing knowledge of the EU claim that we can simply repeal the 1972 act and walk away. Of course I have heard lots of ill informed wannabe experts claim it but I assume you are talking about a real expert?
Of course I meant 'expert' ironically but this is the one: Ingrid Detter de Frankopan.
Isn't that the problem with in-working benefits though? Brown used them as a cynical way of addicting the not actually poor to state largesse knowing it would be political suicide to reverse it.
My favoured solution is to raise the minimum wage to £12/h, eliminate in-working benefits and eliminate employer's NI and introduce free childcare for 1-4 year olds. Extending the school day to 9-5 would also be favourable as well, not just for the kids but for working parents as well.
Whats the current "normal" school day ?
I always did 9 - 4.
9-3 according to my mum, who is a teaching assistant. It makes it impossible for a single parent to have a full time job without paying for additional childcare. Also judging by how shit our education system is, 9-5 might make our kids learn a bit more.
It would still be tricky, as most parents would need to get them to and from.
Plus the holidays! Schools are not baybysitters.
No, but just 15 years ago when I was in school it was 8:30-4, now it's 9-3, what happened to that extra hour and a half? Plus I think a longer school day could be used to add a daily hour of physical activity for every child in the country. Not babysitting so much as getting our kids active.
Anecdotally homework seems to have increased, and actual school hours decreased.
In actual fact teaching hours have increased, the standard when I was at school was a 4 hour and 40 minutes day (4 1 hour 10 minute lessons) now it is almost always 5 hours (either 5 1 hour lessons or 6 50 minute lessons) what has changed is the length of breaks much reduced, in some cases to help manage behaviour. As pointed out by other posters a longer school day is unlikely to increase achievement as pupils will lose concentration.
When I was at school in the late 70s early 80s it was 5x 1 hour lessons and school ran from 8.40 to 3.45. So there has been no change in the daily amount of time given to teaching (5 hours) as far as I can see.
I think your school may have been in the minority with that structure then, mine was certainly 4 x 1h10 and I believe the majority were in the 80s,now hardly any are less than 5, but most have 30-40 mins at lunch time instead of an hour +
Blimey, reading the comments about Cameron: never has so much history been rewritten so quickly and so absurdly by so many
It will define how he is remembered quite reasonably, but I think it safe to safe people are wilfully ignoring anything else that happened in the 6 years, with no room for middle ground permissible at the present time.
Cameron was a shit campaigner and a shit politician, even if in retrospect we might thank him for his greatest Error.
Historian Niall Ferguson (Remain backer turned Brexit convert) came to two conclusions when he made his volte face - firstly that voters in provincial England and Wales had been justified in voting to leave because of EU's incompetence; and secondly that Cameron should have campaigned for Brexit himself. His career-ending mistake was not to promise the referendum in the first place, but to try to sell his pathetic renegotiation to a disbelieving public.
Since Mr Cameron manifestly believes that the UK's best interest lay in the EU on any terms, no-one can say he "should" have campaigned to leave.
What he should not have done was to make big set-piece speeches saying he was prepared to campaign for leave.
And good evening, everyone.
If Cameron had campaigned for Leave - and he was as hated and mistrusted as much as everyone was saying on the previous thread - then surely Remain would have won.
You are kidding, right? He'd have won it by a landslide.
Stark Dawning has been driven Stark Raving Mad by Brexit.
If Cameron had come out for Brexit, Leave would have won by 60/40 or more.
The great irony is that if David Cameron been more plausibly on the fence in his negotiations with Merkel and co, then he probably would have won greater concessions on benefits, and would therefore have won his referendum.
Cameron might as well have hopped around Brussels on one leg with his arse painted green for all the difference his negotiations made. They were transparently spin. Everyone saw the whole exercise as the contrived theatre that it was. The odd unworldlywise anoraks who took it seriously wouldn't fill a backroom at a trainspotters` convention.
Mirror, mirror on the wall Who is the saddest one of all?
@Richard_Nabavi That's a very fair point Richard and UKIP have certainly being going down the spluttering route. We'll have to see if Nuttal can hold it together. I still think the plan is for Nigel to come back for 2020. What I don't see is there cultural and demographic base going away. As politics is being reframed in their direction why should they ?
There's an increasingly prevalent meme among the frothers that says Article 50 isn't needed and we can just get out now at the stroke of a pen and save the 2 years of contributions that we would have to pay during the negotiation period.
We can unilaterally abrogate any treaty, if we don't mind the international consequences.
Needless to say, these people believe this to be a viable option because an expert has said so.
Which expert? Seriously, I have never heard anyone with a passing knowledge of the EU claim that we can simply repeal the 1972 act and walk away. Of course I have heard lots of ill informed wannabe experts claim it but I assume you are talking about a real expert?
Of course I meant 'expert' ironically but this is the one: Ingrid Detter de Frankopan.
The immediate problem I see with that article is she fails to understand that one of the mainstays of British diplomacy has always been that we strive to obey the rules and that we do not break treaty obligations. Of course one can walk away from treaties if one is so minded but the ramifications are utterly horrible in both the short and long term.
I would also point out that her comment that "the Lisbon Treaty is not easily accessible as I have learned from scouting around for an official comprehensive copy that includes all modifications" is almost unbelievable coming from a professor of International Law. The whole point of the Lisbon Treaty is that it was designed to be read in conjunction with the earlier treaties. It does not supersede these treaties as such, simply modifies them so it is not meant to be read as a comprehensive treaty on its own. It can only be read alongside the other earlier treaties.
We've not noticed because of their implosion but the new UKIP leader Nutall has already changed policy. He's now saying we shouldn't go down the A50 route but unilaterally repeal the ECA and negotiate a single FTA vum Divorce deal instead from the outside.
The fact this is nuts is irrelevant. Populists will never be satisfied. Brexit will have been too slow, to soft, will have happened in name only. If we get a bad deal things will still be the EU's fault because they wouldn't be reasonable. That's before we get to any transitional deal adding years to it.
Nuttal shows the way forward. As soon as UKIP gets what it wants, Brexit, he moves the goal posts and says no A50. Brexit will take too long. I suspect the " all EU migrants can stay " will be next to go. Expect minor exemptions to start creeping in. Even minor criminal offences, the unemployed for over 6 months. Nothing will satisfy them.
Trotskyites call them transitional demands. If Labour does collapse you'll get the same from the far left.
We've not noticed because of their implosion but the new UKIP leader Nutall has already changed policy. He's now saying we shouldn't go down the A50 route but unilaterally repeal the ECA and negotiate a single FTA vum Divorce deal instead from the outside.
The fact this is nuts is irrelevant. Populists will never be satisfied. Brexit will have been too slow, to soft, will have happened in name only. If we get a bad deal things will still be the EU's fault because they wouldn't be reasonable. That's before we get to any transitional deal adding years to it.
Nuttal shows the way forward. As soon as UKIP gets what it wants, Brexit, he moves the goal posts and says no A50. Brexit will take too long. I suspect the " all EU migrants can stay " will be next to go. Expect minor exemptions to start creeping in. Even minor criminal offences, the unemployed for over 6 months. Nothing will satisfy them.
Trotskyites call them transitional demands. If Labour does collapse you'll get the same from the far left.
"Trotskyism is a tool of the Capitalists" - according to the Marxist-Leninists!
A story the BBC or Guardian have curiously yet to cover......
We should certainly take a Front Rank intellectual like Niall Ferguson seriously. But a complete u turn so quickly in the light of scant new evidence ? It snacks of publicity seeking. Though I'd buy and read a book on he writes in the topic.
A story the BBC or Guardian have curiously yet to cover......
We should certainly take a Front Rank intellectual like Niall Ferguson seriously. But a complete u turn so quickly in the light of scant new evidence ? It snacks of publicity seeking. Though I'd buy and read a book on he writes in the topic.
As Nelson points out, the curious thing was Ferguson opposing BREXIT in the first place - which Ferguson ascribes to personal loyalty to Cameron and Osborne.
But Ferguson did get the mood shift to Trump earlier than most pundits - and is chagrined he missed the one to Brexit.
Someone please tell the Daily Mail that yes, of course Time magazine were having a New York joke by showing Trump, their 2016 person of the year, in a similar pose to how they showed their 1938 man of the year, Hitler, on their cover in 1941.
But lest anyone forget, here's the Daily Mail's own famous article from 1934:
A story the BBC or Guardian have curiously yet to cover......
We should certainly take a Front Rank intellectual like Niall Ferguson seriously. But a complete u turn so quickly in the light of scant new evidence ? It snacks of publicity seeking. Though I'd buy and read a book on he writes in the topic.
As Nelson points out, the curious thing was Ferguson opposing BREXIT in the first place - which Ferguson ascribes to personal loyalty to Cameron and Osborne.
But Ferguson did get the mood shift to Trump earlier than most pundits - and is chagrined he missed the one to Brexit.
There's an increasingly prevalent meme among the frothers that says Article 50 isn't needed and we can just get out now at the stroke of a pen and save the 2 years of contributions that we would have to pay during the negotiation period.
We can unilaterally abrogate any treaty, if we don't mind the international consequences.
Such as becoming the laughing-stock of the world and the dictionary definition of a "bunch of self-important silly sods"?
It's reminiscent of Alf Garnett:
"If my bowls club lets in any of those darkies, I'll resign."
(A week later). "But now they've let some in, I'm damned if I'll let a few darkies dictate my reaction! I won't announce I'm resigning - I'll just keep quiet and climb out of the window!"
Quiz Which European territory held an independence referendum in which the result was YES to independence, declared independence four days later, but had the declaration annulled two days later still by the state they were declaring independence from? This happened in the 20th century, and they are still not independent.
A story the BBC or Guardian have curiously yet to cover......
We should certainly take a Front Rank intellectual like Niall Ferguson seriously. But a complete u turn so quickly in the light of scant new evidence ? It snacks of publicity seeking. Though I'd buy and read a book on he writes in the topic.
Ramping up demand for a coming book is probably exactly the reason why he's gobbing off.
Quiz Which European territory held an independence referendum in which the result was YES to independence, declared independence four days later, but had the declaration annulled two days later still by the state they were declaring independence from? This happened in the 20th century, and they are still not independent.
Quiz Which European territory held an independence referendum in which the result was YES to independence, declared independence four days later, but had the declaration annulled two days later still by the state they were declaring independence from? This happened in the 20th century, and they are still not independent.
Faroes?
Apparently Christian X dissolved the parliament afterwards. Unfortunately he did not give the regional governors direct control
Quiz Which European territory held an independence referendum in which the result was YES to independence, declared independence four days later, but had the declaration annulled two days later still by the state they were declaring independence from? This happened in the 20th century, and they are still not independent.
Faroes?
Apparently Christian X dissolved the parliament afterwards. Unfortunately he did not give the regional governors direct control
Quiz Which European territory held an independence referendum in which the result was YES to independence, declared independence four days later, but had the declaration annulled two days later still by the state they were declaring independence from? This happened in the 20th century, and they are still not independent.
Looking at the past results and the trend prior to the Lib Dem collapse in 2015 this has the potential to deliver a shock. If Labour collapse it could be very close between the Conservatives, Lib Dems and UKIP. Ultimately it may be the awful UKIP candidate that saves the Tories' bacon.
Might help shore up the labour vote. I believe Prescott has also been accusing UKIP of wanting to "privatise the NHS"
I am still expecting a Tory hold of course.
One of the few things pointing away from a 2017 GE is the fact these STP's are on the grid and being launched and leaked across England. With Corbyn it doesn't matter but in a normal year it would stop a government holding an election.
Even predicting the running order of results makes my brain wobble....I think it may be
Cons Lab UKIP LibDem
I dont think there will be much between 2nd, 3rd, 4th, as the poster says it is the Labour vote that makes me wonder. Where will the Remain vote go - if LibDem then i could see them leapfrog to a credible second or v close 3rd. As for the UKIP vote - can anyone give us a feelf rom the ground
Comments
http://moneyweek.com/dont-trigger-article-50-just-leave/
Age 5-7 21 hours
Age 8-11 23.5 hours
Age 12-16 24 hours
Who is the saddest one of all?
I would also point out that her comment that "the Lisbon Treaty is not easily accessible as I have learned from scouting around for an official comprehensive copy that includes all modifications" is almost unbelievable coming from a professor of International Law. The whole point of the Lisbon Treaty is that it was designed to be read in conjunction with the earlier treaties. It does not supersede these treaties as such, simply modifies them so it is not meant to be read as a comprehensive treaty on its own. It can only be read alongside the other earlier treaties.
......https://mobile.twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/806610982860681216/video/1
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/defence-niall-ferguson/
A story the BBC or Guardian have curiously yet to cover......
http://www.cpgb-ml.org/index.php?secName=leaflets&subName=display&leafletId=89
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/07/scottish-labour-new-federal-state-unite-uk-after-brexit-kezia-dugdale-nicola-sturgeon
But Ferguson did get the mood shift to Trump earlier than most pundits - and is chagrined he missed the one to Brexit.
But lest anyone forget, here's the Daily Mail's own famous article from 1934:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/08/02/fishtown-belmont/E7N09IN6y7bS0DVYBY87TO/story.html
It's reminiscent of Alf Garnett:
"If my bowls club lets in any of those darkies, I'll resign."
(A week later). "But now they've let some in, I'm damned if I'll let a few darkies dictate my reaction! I won't announce I'm resigning - I'll just keep quiet and climb out of the window!"
Which European territory held an independence referendum in which the result was YES to independence, declared independence four days later, but had the declaration annulled two days later still by the state they were declaring independence from? This happened in the 20th century, and they are still not independent.
The EU could learn a thing from the Democratic Order of Planet's choice of HQ in New Jersey
http://www.sleafordstandard.co.uk/news/health/tory-by-election-candidate-claims-report-suggesting-options-to-close-grantham-a-e-does-not-correspond-with-what-she-has-been-told-1-7716186
or as tiny url
http://preview.tinyurl.com/h9xc4hc
Might help shore up the labour vote. I believe Prescott has also been accusing UKIP of wanting to "privatise the NHS"
I am still expecting a Tory hold of course.
Looking at the past results and the trend prior to the Lib Dem collapse in 2015 this has the potential to deliver a shock. If Labour collapse it could be very close between the Conservatives, Lib Dems and UKIP. Ultimately it may be the awful UKIP candidate that saves the Tories' bacon.
Cons
Lab
UKIP
LibDem
I dont think there will be much between 2nd, 3rd, 4th, as the poster says it is the Labour vote that makes me wonder. Where will the Remain vote go - if LibDem then i could see them leapfrog to a credible second or v close 3rd. As for the UKIP vote - can anyone give us a feelf rom the ground
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/dec/08/hundreds-police-officers-accused-sex-abuse-inquiry-finds