The chief damage being caused by Brexit is social. As the Leavers get steadily madder and more paranoid in response to developing problems, the social damage gets worse. No surprise that the public believes Britain to be unhappier, more divided and more racist than a year ago.
Instead of wasting time sniffing out and then flaying Remainers for lacking conviction in Brexit, their priority should be a Brexit plan. But not only is there no plan, the government gives no indication of having any ability to draw up and implement a workable plan.
The problem the government has is a simple one: it is irreconcilably split on how to handle Brexit
Evidence? The recent murmurings suggest May's approach of doing it by Cabinet committee may be bringing some of the unlikelier ministers along with it - for example Fox's comments pre-Xmas on the Customs Union.
Or has your hatred of May blinded you to any suggestions of progress?
I don't hate May. I just think that she is a very poor Prime Minister and that it is not in the UK's national interest that she is running things at this time.
Who would you rather have as PM?
The choice is limited - as we can see from the cabinet talent in the Conservative party is in very short supply; and let's not even go there with Labour's front bench. Specifically on Brexit I would be very comfortable with things being run by people like George Osborne and Peter Mandelson.
And what would you highlight as the biggest legislative achievement of either of these towering figures?
As opposed to the towering legislative achievements of those who will be doing the negotiating, you mean?
I think people like Osborne and Mandelson are pragmatists who know their way around a negotiation.
Socially, the UK is much as it was on 4th January 2016.
On the three points I named, an absolute majority of poll respondents think things have got worse in the last year.
What the f*** do they know?
Anyway, let's get back to lamenting how the poor, unlistened-to punter has been let down by successive manifestations of the establishment.
As I recall it, that's exactly the argument you and your chums made in the Indyref. Delightful how you and the establishment seem to have patched things up so well. http://www.dictionary.com/browse/hypocrite
I was fairly undecided on Lammy: he speaks a lot of sense on some issues, especially the troubles faced by black communities. But his 'white smoke' gaffe and others showed a very different, and not particularly endearing, side to him.
Since the referendum, I've decided that he's an educated idiot.
I met him once and he is quite a nice guy, but obviously I disagree with almost everything he says politically.
Osborne I would welcome with open arms, but Mandy is a EUphile traitor in waiting. Completely and utterly untrustworthy.
If some oracle told him that the UK getting a good Brexit deal would lead to the eventual break up of the EU I think Mandy would sabotage the deal, Osborne wouldn't.
People who lost the referendum are refusing to accept the result, delaying the process of leaving, agitating for a 2nd referendum and doing down anything the referendum winners do... then saying "look how divided brexit has made the country"
Laughable lack of self awareness.
Try being a good sport, accepting you lost, and muck in.
Do you want the process to leave to begin:
a) when we are ready; b) when we are not ready; or c) you don't give a stuff - "Freedom"?
When we are ready.
But the agitators and moaners aren't agitating and moaning to help, their aim is for us not to leave, if they are someone with any influence, or to make it look like it is going badly because they called it wrong, if they are someone who posts on here.
There is a difference between not wanting us to leave (fair enough), wanting to ignore the referendum result (not fair enough), and making comments about the process of leaving and its intricacies and challenges (fair enough).
In an endlessly used example, would you have expected Labour Party voters, on May 8th 2015, to have thrown their hands up and become Conservatives?
That endlessly used example is not a good comparison, unless we are to have fixed term EU referendums.
We are all leavers now, it is time to accept that and build a new consensus together. I honestly never expected for a moment that, if Leave won, the people who voted Remain would act like this, it is pitifully embarrassing to watch.
Shame on you, Nigel would be horrified at such abject surrender. Thank goodness you weren't advising him in 1993.
People who lost the referendum are refusing to accept the result, delaying the process of leaving, agitating for a 2nd referendum and doing down anything the referendum winners do... then saying "look how divided brexit has made the country"
Laughable lack of self awareness.
Try being a good sport, accepting you lost, and muck in.
Do you want the process to leave to begin:
a) when we are ready; b) when we are not ready; or c) you don't give a stuff - "Freedom"?
All three are entirely subjective. You've done quite well in your career apparently. When did you apply for a new job? When you were ready, or when you weren't ready? You could wait your whole life to be 'ready'. It doesn't work like that.
I think you'll look back on your arguments in this period with a feeling of faint embarrassment. If you've been a winner under the current arrangements - good for you. Sadly, many more British people haven't than have. You'll adapt.
Bad analogy ( @kle4? ). If someone offered me a job at GBP50m/year which required me to speak Spanish (I don't speak Spanish) and it was left to me to decide when to begin the job, would I:
a) begin right away, prove my uselessness at Spanish and be sacked; or b) tell them I wanted to wait a while, go and learn Spanish in the meantime, then be a huge success at the job, earn my GBP50m and finally realise what it must be like to be @SeanT?
Or take the Remoaner way and never apply at all. And if and when you do speak Spanish, another 'insurmountable' obstacle will rear its head. It's a recipe for staying in a shit job forever. Just like staying in a shit set of treaty obligations.
The chief damage being caused by Brexit is social. As the Leavers get steadily madder and more paranoid in response to developing problems, the social damage gets worse. No surprise that the public believes Britain to be unhappier, more divided and more racist than a year ago.
Instead of wasting time sniffing out and then flaying Remainers for lacking conviction in Brexit, their priority should be a Brexit plan. But not only is there no plan, the government gives no indication of having any ability to draw up and implement a workable plan.
The problem the government has is a simple one: it is irreconcilably split on how to handle Brexit
Evidence? The recent murmurings suggest May's approach of doing it by Cabinet committee may be bringing some of the unlikelier ministers along with it - for example Fox's comments pre-Xmas on the Customs Union.
Or has your hatred of May blinded you to any suggestions of progress?
I don't hate May. I just think that she is a very poor Prime Minister and that it is not in the UK's national interest that she is running things at this time.
Who would you rather have as PM?
I would be very comfortable with things being run by people like George Osborne and Peter Mandelson.
And do you think any deal 'Punishment budget' Osborne or 'Lord High Eurocrat' Mandelson came up with would be remotely sellable to the 52% who voted Leave?
I do not see the 52% as a single block of voters. I think that they would be best placed to come up with a deal that would be best for the UK and that, as a result, a fair proportion of Leave voters would back it. Obviously, willy-waving Leavers would not be satisfied, but I doubt they are even close to a majority within the 52%.
I agree - which is why I think May will ultimately be able to sell the inevitable compromises as 'fair'.
But Osborne starts off with such atrocious personal ratings I suspect he'd struggle - I also suspect his judgment - at times he was keener on 'putting one over on Labour' than necessarily 'doing the right thing for the country' - something I've yet to hear May accused of......
People who lost the referendum are refusing to accept the result, delaying the process of leaving, agitating for a 2nd referendum and doing down anything the referendum winners do... then saying "look how divided brexit has made the country"
Laughable lack of self awareness.
Try being a good sport, accepting you lost, and muck in.
Do you want the process to leave to begin:
a) when we are ready; b) when we are not ready; or c) you don't give a stuff - "Freedom"?
When we are ready.
But the agitators and moaners aren't agitating and moaning to help, their aim is for us not to leave, if they are someone with any influence, or to make it look like it is going badly because they called it wrong, if they are someone who posts on here.
There is a difference between not wanting us to leave (fair enough), wanting to ignore the referendum result (not fair enough), and making comments about the process of leaving and its intricacies and challenges (fair enough).
In an endlessly used example, would you have expected Labour Party voters, on May 8th 2015, to have thrown their hands up and become Conservatives?
That endlessly used example is not a good comparison, unless we are to have fixed term EU referendums.
We are all leavers now, it is time to accept that and build a new consensus together. I honestly never expected for a moment that, if Leave won, the people who voted Remain would act like this, it is pitifully embarrassing to watch.
Shame on you, Nigel would be horrified at such abject surrender. Thank goodness you weren't advising him in 1993.
Did Remain win a referendum in 1993 or were we almost 20 years into being a member?
Socially, the UK is much as it was on 4th January 2016.
On the three points I named, an absolute majority of poll respondents think things have got worse in the last year.
What the f*** do they know?
Anyway, let's get back to lamenting how the poor, unlistened-to punter has been let down by successive manifestations of the establishment.
As I recall it, that's exactly the argument you and your chums made in the Indyref. Delightful how you and the establishment seem to have patched things up so well. http://www.dictionary.com/browse/hypocrite
Another wee kipper boy on fast response alert for my posts. How flattering.
People who lost the referendum are refusing to accept the result, delaying the process of leaving, agitating for a 2nd referendum and doing down anything the referendum winners do... then saying "look how divided brexit has made the country"
Laughable lack of self awareness.
Try being a good sport, accepting you lost, and muck in.
Do you want the process to leave to begin:
a) when we are ready; b) when we are not ready; or c) you don't give a stuff - "Freedom"?
When we are ready.
But the agitators and moaners aren't agitating and moaning to help, their aim is for us not to leave, if they are someone with any influence, or to make it look like it is going badly because they called it wrong, if they are someone who posts on here.
There is a difference between not wanting us to leave (fair enough), wanting to ignore the referendum result (not fair enough), and making comments about the process of leaving and its intricacies and challenges (fair enough).
In an endlessly used example, would you have expected Labour Party voters, on May 8th 2015, to have thrown their hands up and become Conservatives?
That endlessly used example is not a good comparison, unless we are to have fixed term EU referendums.
We are all leavers now, it is time to accept that and build a new consensus together. I honestly never expected for a moment that, if Leave won, the people who voted Remain would act like this, it is pitifully embarrassing to watch.
Shame on you, Nigel would be horrified at such abject surrender. Thank goodness you weren't advising him in 1993.
Did Remain win a referendum in 1993 or were we almost 20 years into being a member?
Who cares? It was the settled will of the British people to be members of the EU or whatever it was then.
People who lost the referendum are refusing to accept the result, delaying the process of leaving, agitating for a 2nd referendum and doing down anything the referendum winners do... then saying "look how divided brexit has made the country"
Laughable lack of self awareness.
Try being a good sport, accepting you lost, and muck in.
Do you want the process to leave to begin:
a) when we are ready; b) when we are not ready; or c) you don't give a stuff - "Freedom"?
When we are ready.
But the agitators and moaners aren't agitating and moaning to help, their aim is for us not to leave, if they are someone with any influence, or to make it look like it is going badly because they called it wrong, if they are someone who posts on here.
There is a difference between not wanting us to leave (fair enough), wanting to ignore the referendum result (not fair enough), and making comments about the process of leaving and its intricacies and challenges (fair enough).
In an endlessly used example, would you have expected Labour Party voters, on May 8th 2015, to have thrown their hands up and become Conservatives?
That endlessly used example is not a good comparison, unless we are to have fixed term EU referendums.
We are all leavers now, it is time to accept that and build a new consensus together. I honestly never expected for a moment that, if Leave won, the people who voted Remain would act like this, it is pitifully embarrassing to watch.
Shame on you, Nigel would be horrified at such abject surrender. Thank goodness you weren't advising him in 1993.
Did Remain win a referendum in 1993 or were we almost 20 years into being a member?
Who cares? It was the settled will of the British people to be members of the EU or whatever it was then.
And Nigel said "Non!"
No I am not having that. If in 2035 things aren't working out having left, I think it would be perfectly fair for a new party to start to agitate for us to rejoin the EU, if it exists.
People who lost the referendum are refusing to accept the result, delaying the process of leaving, agitating for a 2nd referendum and doing down anything the referendum winners do... then saying "look how divided brexit has made the country"
Laughable lack of self awareness.
Try being a good sport, accepting you lost, and muck in.
Do you want the process to leave to begin:
a) when we are ready; b) when we are not ready; or c) you don't give a stuff - "Freedom"?
When we are ready.
But the agitators and moaners aren't agitating and moaning to help, their aim is for us not to leave, if they are someone with any influence, or to make it look like it is going badly because they called it wrong, if they are someone who posts on here.
There is a difference between not wanting us to leave (fair enough), wanting to ignore the referendum result (not fair enough), and making comments about the process of leaving and its intricacies and challenges (fair enough).
In an endlessly used example, would you have expected Labour Party voters, on May 8th 2015, to have thrown their hands up and become Conservatives?
That endlessly used example is not a good comparison, unless we are to have fixed term EU referendums.
We are all leavers now, it is time to accept that and build a new consensus together. I honestly never expected for a moment that, if Leave won, the people who voted Remain would act like this, it is pitifully embarrassing to watch.
Shame on you, Nigel would be horrified at such abject surrender. Thank goodness you weren't advising him in 1993.
Did Remain win a referendum in 1993 or were we almost 20 years into being a member?
Who cares? It was the settled will of the British people to be members of the EU or whatever it was then.
And Nigel said "Non!"
No I am not having that. If in 2035 things aren't working out having left, I think it would be perfectly fair for a new party to start to agitate for us to rejoin the EU, if it exists.
I say tomahto 15minutes you say tomayto 19 years.
Where can we look up the rules?
Edit: so to be clear you think that campaigning to rejoin the EU should be what? Illegal? Officially discouraged? Condemned by Sam? Puh-leeeze.
"There are. However there is also a deeply unpleasant attitude on the other side that anyone with an ugly idea must be stupid and that anyone with a very ugly idea must be very stupid, which is both patronising and complacent. There is also a deeply unpleasant inference in that attitude whereby you get the impression that those putting it forward regard any idea that they do not accept as by definition 'ugly' and that therefore everyone who disagrees with them must be 'stupid'. "
I can't think of another way of describing someone who said they voted 'OUT' because they were telling 'us we had to have straight bananas and you could hear them talking in the street in foreign languages no one could understand'
PS Juxtaposed with the convicted Chelsea supporter who kicked a blackman off a train in Paris bcause he was speaking French 'and I couldn't understand it'
The chief damage being caused by Brexit is social. As the Leavers get steadily madder and more paranoid in response to developing problems, the social damage gets worse. No surprise that the public believes Britain to be unhappier, more divided and more racist than a year ago.
Instead of wasting time sniffing out and then flaying Remainers for lacking conviction in Brexit, their priority should be a Brexit plan. But not only is there no plan, the government gives no indication of having any ability to draw up and implement a workable plan.
The problem the government has is a simple one: it is irreconcilably split on how to handle Brexit
Evidence? The recent murmurings suggest May's approach of doing it by Cabinet committee may be bringing some of the unlikelier ministers along with it - for example Fox's comments pre-Xmas on the Customs Union.
Or has your hatred of May blinded you to any suggestions of progress?
I don't hate May. I just think that she is a very poor Prime Minister and that it is not in the UK's national interest that she is running things at this time.
Who would you rather have as PM?
I would be very comfortable with things being run by people like George Osborne and Peter Mandelson.
And do you think any deal 'Punishment budget' Osborne or 'Lord High Eurocrat' Mandelson came up with would be remotely sellable to the 52% who voted Leave?
I think that would depend. They would need to take Luckyguy's position and make it clear that they were looking for the best deal for the UK, the decision having been made. I think both Osborne and Mandelson would be capable of doing that, they have both negotiated and dealt with the EU for years, they are both extremely smart and politically sophisticated. Subject to the caveat of unequivocally accepting the decision I think they would be the best negotiators the UK has available.
I also think that it will prove a tactical mistake to have a team of Brexiteers doing the negotiation. I appreciate that in May and Hammond the remainers have the whip hand but more effort needs to be made to make it clear that this is a team effort by UK plc and that means involving all strands of opinion, not just the winners.
A case could be made for putting Osborne on the negotiating team. Teamwork rather than leadership might suit him.
Never mind the negotiating team. Make him Sir Ivan's replacement.
People who lost the referendum are refusing to accept the result, delaying the process of leaving, agitating for a 2nd referendum and doing down anything the referendum winners do... then saying "look how divided brexit has made the country"
Laughable lack of self awareness.
Try being a good sport, accepting you lost, and muck in.
Do you want the process to leave to begin:
a) when we are ready; b) when we are not ready; or c) you don't give a stuff - "Freedom"?
When we are ready.
But the agitators and moaners aren't agitating and moaning to help, their aim is for us not to leave, if they are someone with any influence, or to make it look like it is going badly because they called it wrong, if they are someone who posts on here.
In an endlessly used example, would you have expected Labour Party voters, on May 8th 2015, to have thrown their hands up and become Conservatives?
That endlessly used example is not a good comparison, unless we are to have fixed term EU referendums.
We are all leavers now, it is time to accept that and build a new consensus together. I honestly never expected for a moment that, if Leave won, the people who voted Remain would act like this, it is pitifully embarrassing to watch.
Shame on you, Nigel would be horrified at such abject surrender. Thank goodness you weren't advising him in 1993.
Did Remain win a referendum in 1993 or were we almost 20 years into being a member?
Who cares? It was the settled will of the British people to be members of the EU or whatever it was then.
And Nigel said "Non!"
No I am not having that. If in 2035 things aren't working out having left, I think it would be perfectly fair for a new party to start to agitate for us to rejoin the EU, if it exists.
I say tomahto 15minutes you say tomayto 19 years.
Where can we look up the rules?
Edit: so to be clear you think that campaigning to rejoin the EU should be what? Illegal? Officially discouraged? Condemned by Sam? Puh-leeeze.
I say they can do what they want, how clear is that?
But people who whine about how divided we are as a country are the people dividing the country, it isn't hard to see. If they accepted they lost, and tried to be helpful, we would be less divided.
I get the impression that the problem with Sir Ivan was that he regarded 'doing a deal' as the paramount objective (which may be one reason why Cameron came back with such a duff one). It's not; the wrong deal is worse than no deal.
Edit: so to be clear you think that campaigning to rejoin the EU should be what? Illegal? Officially discouraged? Condemned by Sam? Puh-leeeze.
That would be ridiculous. It's a free country, I would just like for ardent remainers to recognise that "remain" is not an option and they should be campaigning to rejoin. Obviously the latter is much more difficult as it means joining the Eurozone and Schengen. That would be respectful of the leave vote.
People who lost the referendum are refusing to accept the result, delaying the process of leaving, agitating for a 2nd referendum and doing down anything the referendum winners do... then saying "look how divided brexit has made the country"
Laughable lack of self awareness.
Try being a good sport, accepting you lost, and muck in.
Do you want the process to leave to begin:
a) when we are ready; b) when we are not ready; or c) you don't give a stuff - "Freedom"?
When we are ready.
But the agitators and moaners aren't agitating and moaning to help, their aim is for us not to leave, if they are someone with any influence, or to make it look like it is going badly because they called it wrong, if they are someone who posts on here.
In an endlessly used example, would you have expected Labour Party voters, on May 8th 2015, to have thrown their hands up and become Conservatives?
That endlessly used example is not a good comparison, unless we are to have fixed term EU referendums.
We are all leavers now, it is time to accept that and build a new consensus together. I honestly never expected for a moment that, if Leave won, the people who voted Remain would act like this, it is pitifully embarrassing to watch.
Shame on you, Nigel would be horrified at such abject surrender. Thank goodness you weren't advising him in 1993.
Did Remain win a referendum in 1993 or were we almost 20 years into being a member?
Who cares? It was the settled will of the British people to be members of the EU or whatever it was then.
And Nigel said "Non!"
No I am not having that. If in 2035 things aren't working out having left, I think it would be perfectly fair for a new party to start to agitate for us to rejoin the EU, if it exists.
I say tomahto 15minutes you say tomayto 19 years.
Where can we look up the rules?
Edit: so to be clear you think that campaigning to rejoin the EU should be what? Illegal? Officially discouraged? Condemned by Sam? Puh-leeeze.
I say they can do what they want, how clear is that?
But people who whine about how divided we are as a country are the people dividing the country, it isn't hard to see. If they accepted they lost, and tried to be helpful, we would be less divided.
Yep on that we agree. If only every Labour supporter and Kipper folded themselves into the Conservative Party family life would be a lot easier.
Edit: so to be clear you think that campaigning to rejoin the EU should be what? Illegal? Officially discouraged? Condemned by Sam? Puh-leeeze.
That would be ridiculous. It's a free country, I would just like for ardent remainers to recognise that "remain" is not an option and they should be campaigning to rejoin. Obviously the latter is much more difficult as it means joining the Eurozone and Schengen. That would be respectful of the leave vote.
Yes I see that but people can campaign for anything they want to. Rejoin, not leave, join NAFTA. Remain is certainly an option, just not one I believe has a snowball's chance in hell of succeeding, not least because they have only two and a bit years to reverse completely the political structures as they are today.
Never mind the negotiating team. Make him Sir Ivan's replacement.
It did flit across my mind, but surely (if he were even to accept) surrounding him with a staff, giving him his own private channels to the main players, and leaving him to his own devices is just asking for trouble. Though it does at least get him out of Parliament.
Make him part of the negotiating team and his success is tied to a successful outcome. Bridges would start to be built. May could dangle a knighthood if he does really well.
As an aside, another Rule of Politics is that "it is impossible for any party representing the working class to continue to do so more than two generations after it has taken power. It will either be captured by the middle class or will form a new and largely exclusive elite."
As an aside, another Rule of Politics is that "it is impossible for any party representing the working class to continue to do so more than two generations after it has taken power. It will either be captured by the middle class or will form a new and largely exclusive elite."
And if they're successful - they then start to vote Tory...
Greetings from Sydney, which increasingly looks like as much a multicultural world city as London. I see however the levels of Brexiteer delusion have not reduced, but I guess I didn't expect anything else.
This ambassador has been telling the Government how difficult this will be to which May and co's response (as many on here) is Pollyanna, Pollyanna, no more no less. Well Folks, this will not get us anywhere, and ignoring people who advise otherwise is both childish and ultimately suicidal for our economy.
@SeanT enjoyed Margaret River greatly, took in a few tastings at inter alia Leeuwin, Voyager, Vasse Felix and had a nice meal at Aravina Estate.
We stayed in MR for 3 nights in a super B&B and the owner, an Aussie with dual UK nationality, couldn't understand what the hell was going on in the UK.
Never mind the negotiating team. Make him Sir Ivan's replacement.
It did flit across my mind, but surely (if he were even to accept) surrounding him with a staff, giving him his own private channels to the main players, and leaving him to his own devices is just asking for trouble. Though it does at least get him out of Parliament.
Make him part of the negotiating team and his success is tied to a successful outcome. Bridges would start to be built. May could dangle a knighthood if he does really well.
Every British 'ambassador' to the EU (Permanent Representative, technically), has been knighted. The KCMG is a gong that goes with the job unless the mandarin's already received it. She could always dangle a GCMG for good behaviour.
It is no surprise that this utterly mediocre government, led by a prime minister whose sole interest is in being prime minister ... [snip]
You keep saying this, with no evidence whatsoever. Have you actually met Theresa May? I have, and I had quite a long chat with her, not long after she became Home Sec. The very strong impression I had was that she is in politics for the old-fashioned reason that she wants to serve her country - the vicar's daughter bit is genuine, not an act.
Her interest in being PM is that she thinks she can do the job better than her predecessors or the alternative candidates. Personally I think she's wrong on the first point but probably right on the second, but, as regards her motives, I think it is you that is wrong.
First Brexiteers assault parliamentary sovereignty, then judicial independence, now civil service impartiality. The tenets of our democracy.
Lammy could not be more wrong.
Civil service impartiality means implementing government policy regardless of whether it is Labour policy or Tory policy.
Sir Ivan is allowed to raise his concerns, but asking his replacement to get on with it is not questioning any of the Civil Service's many vaulted values.
Brexiteers have explicitly called for Sir Ivan's replacement to not be an impartial civil servant, but an avowed Brexiteer
And if the Government had a policy Sir Ivan would have implemented it. His complaint is that they have no policy, and no hope of finding one.
It is no surprise that this utterly mediocre government, led by a prime minister whose sole interest is in being prime minister ... [snip]
You keep saying this, with no evidence whatsoever. Have you actually met Theresa May? I have, and I had quite a long chat with her, not long after she became Home Sec. The very strong impression I had was that she is in politics for the old-fashioned reason that she wants to serve her country - the vicar's daughter bit is genuine, not an act.
Her interest in being PM is that she thinks she can do the job better than her predecessors or the alternative candidates. Personally I think she's wrong on the first point but probably right on the second, but, as regards her motives, I think it is you that is wrong.
Southam's gone all misogynist since he rejoined Labour.
First Brexiteers assault parliamentary sovereignty, then judicial independence, now civil service impartiality. The tenets of our democracy.
Lammy could not be more wrong.
Civil service impartiality means implementing government policy regardless of whether it is Labour policy or Tory policy.
Sir Ivan is allowed to raise his concerns, but asking his replacement to get on with it is not questioning any of the Civil Service's many vaulted values.
Brexiteers have explicitly called for Sir Ivan's replacement to not be an impartial civil servant, but an avowed Brexiteer
And if the Government had a policy Sir Ivan would have implemented it. His complaint is that they have no policy, and no hope of finding one.
What kind of Klutz would call a referendum and not have a plan for both results?
"If the British people vote to leave, there is only one way to bring that about, namely to trigger article 50 of the treaties and begin the process of exit, and the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away"
First Brexiteers assault parliamentary sovereignty, then judicial independence, now civil service impartiality. The tenets of our democracy.
Lammy could not be more wrong.
Civil service impartiality means implementing government policy regardless of whether it is Labour policy or Tory policy.
Sir Ivan is allowed to raise his concerns, but asking his replacement to get on with it is not questioning any of the Civil Service's many vaulted values.
Brexiteers have explicitly called for Sir Ivan's replacement to not be an impartial civil servant, but an avowed Brexiteer
And if the Government had a policy Sir Ivan would have implemented it. His complaint is that they have no policy, and no hope of finding one.
And that final comment is the problem. To say that the govt has no policy is at least arguable - certainly that it has no published or developed policy - but to say that it has no hope of finding one is straying into realms which are not his business.
I keep coming back to the conclusion that the assumptions that Sir Ivan was working from are not the same as those of the government.
A City solicitor accused of lifting up a 27-year-old woman’s skirt, slapping her bottom and calling her an “Australian slut” has been convicted of racially aggravated assault and sexual assault.
First Brexiteers assault parliamentary sovereignty, then judicial independence, now civil service impartiality. The tenets of our democracy.
Lammy could not be more wrong.
Civil service impartiality means implementing government policy regardless of whether it is Labour policy or Tory policy.
Sir Ivan is allowed to raise his concerns, but asking his replacement to get on with it is not questioning any of the Civil Service's many vaulted values.
Brexiteers have explicitly called for Sir Ivan's replacement to not be an impartial civil servant, but an avowed Brexiteer
And if the Government had a policy Sir Ivan would have implemented it. His complaint is that they have no policy, and no hope of finding one.
What kind of Klutz would call a referendum and not have a plan for both results?
"If the British people vote to leave, there is only one way to bring that about, namely to trigger article 50 of the treaties and begin the process of exit, and the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away"
An Oxford klutz
The remain side seem to forget the whole Brexit shtick started with their own men calling the referendum.
A case could be made for putting Osborne on the negotiating team. Teamwork rather than leadership might suit him.
Never mind the negotiating team. Make him Sir Ivan's replacement.
Cameron as NATO SecGen and Osborne as our man in Bruxelles negotiating Brexit, that's something I could live with, but Osborne sees his future at Westminster.
A case could be made for putting Osborne on the negotiating team. Teamwork rather than leadership might suit him.
Never mind the negotiating team. Make him Sir Ivan's replacement.
Cameron as NATO SecGen and Osborne as our man in Bruxelles negotiating Brexit, that's something I could live with, but Osborne sees his future at Westminster.
A City solicitor accused of lifting up a 27-year-old woman’s skirt, slapping her bottom and calling her an “Australian slut” has been convicted of racially aggravated assault and sexual assault.
It is no surprise that this utterly mediocre government, led by a prime minister whose sole interest is in being prime minister ... [snip]
You keep saying this, with no evidence whatsoever. Have you actually met Theresa May? I have, and I had quite a long chat with her, not long after she became Home Sec. The very strong impression I had was that she is in politics for the old-fashioned reason that she wants to serve her country - the vicar's daughter bit is genuine, not an act.
Her interest in being PM is that she thinks she can do the job better than her predecessors or the alternative candidates. Personally I think she's wrong on the first point but probably right on the second, but, as regards her motives, I think it is you that is wrong.
I certainly think she can do the job better than the viable alternatives. But, as I say down-thread, I see her as a Gordon Brown character. In your words: "She thinks she can do the job better than her predecessors." And I am sure that Brown wanted to serve his country, too. There needs to be a lot more than that, though, given what is ahead and I see absolutely no evidence of it.
It is no surprise that this utterly mediocre government, led by a prime minister whose sole interest is in being prime minister ... [snip]
You keep saying this, with no evidence whatsoever. Have you actually met Theresa May? I have, and I had quite a long chat with her, not long after she became Home Sec. The very strong impression I had was that she is in politics for the old-fashioned reason that she wants to serve her country - the vicar's daughter bit is genuine, not an act.
Her interest in being PM is that she thinks she can do the job better than her predecessors or the alternative candidates. Personally I think she's wrong on the first point but probably right on the second, but, as regards her motives, I think it is you that is wrong.
I feel sorry for Sir Ivan but I'm not surprised. The hard Right is in the ascendancy in Britain now, and they demand conformity of thought and utter loyalty. Anyone voicing the slightest misgivings about the hard-Right agenda will be neither trusted nor tolerated. This won't be the end of it by any means. There'll be even deeper purges when Messrs Farage and Banks start enacting their 'drain the swamp' solution. I can't see there being many survivors.
A case could be made for putting Osborne on the negotiating team. Teamwork rather than leadership might suit him.
Never mind the negotiating team. Make him Sir Ivan's replacement.
Cameron as NATO SecGen and Osborne as our man in Bruxelles negotiating Brexit, that's something I could live with, but Osborne sees his future at Westminster.
I feel sorry for Sir Ivan but I'm not surprised. The hard Right is in the ascendancy in Britain now, and they demand conformity of thought and utter loyalty. Anyone voicing the slightest misgivings about the hard-Right agenda will be neither trusted nor tolerated. This won't be the end of it by any means. There'll be even deeper purges when Messrs Farage and Banks start enacting their 'drain the swamp' solution. I can't see there being many survivors.
The people who gave us political correctness complain about conforrmity
I feel sorry for Sir Ivan but I'm not surprised. The hard Right is in the ascendancy in Britain now, and they demand conformity of thought and utter loyalty. Anyone voicing the slightest misgivings about the hard-Right agenda will be neither trusted nor tolerated. This won't be the end of it by any means. There'll be even deeper purges when Messrs Farage and Banks start enacting their 'drain the swamp' solution. I can't see there being many survivors.
The hard right are not in the ascendancy, they have never been less popular,
House of Commons 0/650 House of Lords 0/809 European Parliament 0/73 Scottish Parliament 0/129 Welsh Assembly 0/60 London Assembly 0/25 Local government 1/20,565 Police & Crime Commissioners 0/41
I feel sorry for Sir Ivan but I'm not surprised. The hard Right is in the ascendancy in Britain now, and they demand conformity of thought and utter loyalty. Anyone voicing the slightest misgivings about the hard-Right agenda will be neither trusted nor tolerated. This won't be the end of it by any means. There'll be even deeper purges when Messrs Farage and Banks start enacting their 'drain the swamp' solution. I can't see there being many survivors.
I'll get Trafalgar Square ready with a decently sized pyre and stake, you call Sky and we can start burning remainers ASAP.
It is no surprise that this utterly mediocre government, led by a prime minister whose sole interest is in being prime minister ... [snip]
You keep saying this, with no evidence whatsoever. Have you actually met Theresa May? I have, and I had quite a long chat with her, not long after she became Home Sec. The very strong impression I had was that she is in politics for the old-fashioned reason that she wants to serve her country - the vicar's daughter bit is genuine, not an act.
Her interest in being PM is that she thinks she can do the job better than her predecessors or the alternative candidates. Personally I think she's wrong on the first point but probably right on the second, but, as regards her motives, I think it is you that is wrong.
Name one thing she has actually done please
Blimmin' heck I mean there are plenty of flaws with May but she did just pick up the mother of all hospital passes. Had she paused a few more moments, she would likely and preferably have pushed out triggering A50 a year rather than six months, but all this is designed to give the government some breathing space to work out which way is up.
As I wrote to @DavidL above, there is a huge workload to be faced, including taking input from stakeholders, devising a strategy, and staffing up to implement that strategy. In Civil Service terms, six months is like a fleeting heartbeat for such a task. That "nothing has happened" is not surprising.
As we all agreed on June 24th, Brexit will proceed more in geological, than rolling 24-hour news time. Much to the chagrin of many red-cheeked Brexiters.
It is no surprise that this utterly mediocre government, led by a prime minister whose sole interest is in being prime minister ... [snip]
You keep saying this, with no evidence whatsoever. Have you actually met Theresa May? I have, and I had quite a long chat with her, not long after she became Home Sec. The very strong impression I had was that she is in politics for the old-fashioned reason that she wants to serve her country - the vicar's daughter bit is genuine, not an act.
Her interest in being PM is that she thinks she can do the job better than her predecessors or the alternative candidates. Personally I think she's wrong on the first point but probably right on the second, but, as regards her motives, I think it is you that is wrong.
Name one thing she has actually done please
Blimmin' heck I mean there are plenty of flaws with May but she did just pick up the mother of all hospital passes. Had she paused a few more moments, she would likely and preferably have pushed out triggering A50 a year rather than six months, but all this is designed to give the government some breathing space to work out which way is up.
As I wrote to @DavidL above, there is a huge workload to be faced, including taking input from stakeholders, devising a strategy, and staffing up to implement that strategy. In Civil Service terms, six months is like a fleeting heartbeat for such a task. That nothing has happened is not surprising.
As we all agreed on June 24th, Brexit will proceed more in geological, than rolling 24-hour news time. Much to the chagrin of many red-cheeked Brexiters.
She was also the "Remain" candidate, and she won.
Do I hear the referendum winners banging on that Leadsom should be PM?
A case could be made for putting Osborne on the negotiating team. Teamwork rather than leadership might suit him.
Never mind the negotiating team. Make him Sir Ivan's replacement.
Cameron as NATO SecGen and Osborne as our man in Bruxelles negotiating Brexit, that's something I could live with, but Osborne sees his future at Westminster.
So could Vladimir Putin
In case you missed it, this The Daily Mail front page from the 1st of January 1973, the day we joined the EC.
Whilst the focus is on the top of the front page, the story at the bottom shocked me, Martin McGuinness involved in an IRA story, say it ain't so.
In my industry we have had contact with the relevant Ministry through three trade channels that I am aware of (and therefore there will be other contact, as I don't know much!). They acknowledge the concerns of the Industry but have not made any firm commitments, which is reasonable, as they are information gathering mode.
Probably a last reminder, but if you got an Amazon gift certificate and are hunting for things to spend it on, do consider Kingdom Asunder, which has a splendid 5* rating and is written by me (shorthand description would be a more concise Game of Thrones type fantasy, although it's still only part one of a trilogy): https://www.amazon.co.uk/Kingdom-Asunder-Bloody-Crown-Trilogy-ebook/dp/B01N8UF799/
Going to start work on the paperback either this week or next.
Depending how other things go, I may also start work on an F1 book. Unsure about that. Think it'd be fun to write (which makes things easier, of course) but no idea what sort of market there'd be for it (betting focus, as you'd expect).
A case could be made for putting Osborne on the negotiating team. Teamwork rather than leadership might suit him.
Never mind the negotiating team. Make him Sir Ivan's replacement.
Cameron as NATO SecGen and Osborne as our man in Bruxelles negotiating Brexit, that's something I could live with, but Osborne sees his future at Westminster.
So could Vladimir Putin
In case you missed it, this The Daily Mail front page from the 1st of January 1973, the day we joined the EC.
Whilst the focus is on the top of the front page, the story at the bottom shocked me, Martin McGuinness involved in an IRA story, say it ain't so.
As a former remainer, I now fall in the category of "let's get this done safely and seize the opportunities".
In a former life, we would advise organisations about the complexity of big changes they were attempting: mergers, divestments, factory closures, that sort of thing.
We would use a checklist to assess complexity: how many parties involved, how diverse their interest might be, how stable their aims, whether the change had ever been done successfully, whether the team making the change had worked successfully together, how well understood and stable the end game requirements might be, how critical the change was to the organisation's survival, etc.
Very complex change is prone to become chaotic unless it is managed by people highly experienced with a successful track record in complex change. Obvious, but a point often missed.
Using the checklist, Brexit is off the scale for complexity. Has there been a more complex endeavour undertaken by a modern state?
Sir Ivan may be the wrong person to be at the centre of the team managing Brexit. It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
In my industry we have had contact with the relevant Ministry through three trade channels that I am aware of (and therefore there will be other contact, as I don't know much!). They acknowledge the concerns of the Industry but have not made any firm commitments, which is reasonable, as they are information gathering mode.
A case could be made for putting Osborne on the negotiating team. Teamwork rather than leadership might suit him.
Never mind the negotiating team. Make him Sir Ivan's replacement.
Cameron as NATO SecGen and Osborne as our man in Bruxelles negotiating Brexit, that's something I could live with, but Osborne sees his future at Westminster.
So could Vladimir Putin
In case you missed it, this The Daily Mail front page from the 1st of January 1973, the day we joined the EC.
Whilst the focus is on the top of the front page, the story at the bottom shocked me, Martin McGuinness involved in an IRA story, say it ain't so.
A case could be made for putting Osborne on the negotiating team. Teamwork rather than leadership might suit him.
Never mind the negotiating team. Make him Sir Ivan's replacement.
Cameron as NATO SecGen and Osborne as our man in Bruxelles negotiating Brexit, that's something I could live with, but Osborne sees his future at Westminster.
So could Vladimir Putin
In case you missed it, this The Daily Mail front page from the 1st of January 1973, the day we joined the EC.
Whilst the focus is on the top of the front page, the story at the bottom shocked me, Martin McGuinness involved in an IRA story, say it ain't so.
"There are. However there is also a deeply unpleasant attitude on the other side that anyone with an ugly idea must be stupid and that anyone with a very ugly idea must be very stupid, which is both patronising and complacent. There is also a deeply unpleasant inference in that attitude whereby you get the impression that those putting it forward regard any idea that they do not accept as by definition 'ugly' and that therefore everyone who disagrees with them must be 'stupid'. "
I can't think of another way of describing someone who said they voted 'OUT' because they were telling 'us we had to have straight bananas and you could hear them talking in the street in foreign languages no one could understand'
PS Juxtaposed with the convicted Chelsea supporter who kicked a blackman off a train in Paris bcause he was speaking French 'and I couldn't understand it'
It must be so awful in rogerworld as you look downon the dysfunctional wvms of the UK from your provencal chateau and it slowly dawns on you that without their votes you are totally f****d.
A case could be made for putting Osborne on the negotiating team. Teamwork rather than leadership might suit him.
Never mind the negotiating team. Make him Sir Ivan's replacement.
Cameron as NATO SecGen and Osborne as our man in Bruxelles negotiating Brexit, that's something I could live with, but Osborne sees his future at Westminster.
There's always 2020. Brexit should be complete by then and he ought to be able to find a seat - there are usually late retirements from long-serving members in safe seats. Beefing up the foreign affairs aspect of his CV won't do him any harm and if he does see himself as a future leader, then he'd be better off doing something useful for his country than picking up hundreds of thousands for speaking to Goldman Sachs and the like.
In case you missed it, this The Daily Mail front page from the 1st of January 1973, the day we joined the EC...
Ha! That is a brilliant find. Turns out it's all the Mail's fault that we were embroiled in the European Project. So much for the claim that the public were hoodwinked about the political ambitions of the then EEC:
Men as epic in their statesmanship as the American founding fathers - men like Jean Monnet, Robert Schumann and Paul-Henri Spaak - worked through coal and steel and tariffs to give the Europan idea substance...
First Brexiteers assault parliamentary sovereignty, then judicial independence, now civil service impartiality. The tenets of our democracy.
Lammy could not be more wrong.
Civil service impartiality means implementing government policy regardless of whether it is Labour policy or Tory policy.
Sir Ivan is allowed to raise his concerns, but asking his replacement to get on with it is not questioning any of the Civil Service's many vaulted values.
Brexiteers have explicitly called for Sir Ivan's replacement to not be an impartial civil servant, but an avowed Brexiteer
And if the Government had a policy Sir Ivan would have implemented it. His complaint is that they have no policy, and no hope of finding one.
And that final comment is the problem. To say that the govt has no policy is at least arguable - certainly that it has no published or developed policy - but to say that it has no hope of finding one is straying into realms which are not his business.
I keep coming back to the conclusion that the assumptions that Sir Ivan was working from are not the same as those of the government.
Unfortunately for Sir Ivan - despite how clever he is supposed to be - has totally shafted himself by making clear in the leaked e-mail an agenda which is at odds with the settled will of the people. His duty as a civil servant was to keep those views private and retire from the field beaten but still honourable.
A case could be made for putting Osborne on the negotiating team. Teamwork rather than leadership might suit him.
Never mind the negotiating team. Make him Sir Ivan's replacement.
Cameron as NATO SecGen and Osborne as our man in Bruxelles negotiating Brexit, that's something I could live with, but Osborne sees his future at Westminster.
There's always 2020. Brexit should be complete by then and he ought to be able to find a seat - there are usually late retirements from long-serving members in safe seats. Beefing up the foreign affairs aspect of his CV won't do him any harm and if he does see himself as a future leader, then he'd be better off doing something useful for his country than picking up hundreds of thousands for speaking to Goldman Sachs and the like.
My view is that Mrs May might be forced hold to an early election whether she wants to or not.
I'll explain this weekend why, but I'll give a slight spoiler, it is based on Brexit being the People's Budget de nos jours with a recalcitrant House of Lords
It is no surprise that this utterly mediocre government, led by a prime minister whose sole interest is in being prime minister ... [snip]
You keep saying this, with no evidence whatsoever. Have you actually met Theresa May? I have, and I had quite a long chat with her, not long after she became Home Sec. The very strong impression I had was that she is in politics for the old-fashioned reason that she wants to serve her country - the vicar's daughter bit is genuine, not an act.
Her interest in being PM is that she thinks she can do the job better than her predecessors or the alternative candidates. Personally I think she's wrong on the first point but probably right on the second, but, as regards her motives, I think it is you that is wrong.
Name one thing she has actually done please
Blimmin' heck I mean there are plenty of flaws with May but she did just pick up the mother of all hospital passes. Had she paused a few more moments, she would likely and preferably have pushed out triggering A50 a year rather than six months, but all this is designed to give the government some breathing space to work out which way is up.
As I wrote to @DavidL above, there is a huge workload to be faced, including taking input from stakeholders, devising a strategy, and staffing up to implement that strategy. In Civil Service terms, six months is like a fleeting heartbeat for such a task. That "nothing has happened" is not surprising.
As we all agreed on June 24th, Brexit will proceed more in geological, than rolling 24-hour news time. Much to the chagrin of many red-cheeked Brexiters.
However , no-one seeing her appoint the 3 amigos as teh top negotiators on Brexit coudl have been filled with confidence that she had any clue as to what she was doing. It has been a deafening silence since she took over.
I feel sorry for Sir Ivan but I'm not surprised. The hard Right is in the ascendancy in Britain now, and they demand conformity of thought and utter loyalty. Anyone voicing the slightest misgivings about the hard-Right agenda will be neither trusted nor tolerated. This won't be the end of it by any means. There'll be even deeper purges when Messrs Farage and Banks start enacting their 'drain the swamp' solution. I can't see there being many survivors.
The hard right are not in the ascendancy, they have never been less popular,
House of Commons 0/650 House of Lords 0/809 European Parliament 0/73 Scottish Parliament 0/129 Welsh Assembly 0/60 London Assembly 0/25 Local government 1/20,565 Police & Crime Commissioners 0/41
A case could be made for putting Osborne on the negotiating team. Teamwork rather than leadership might suit him.
Never mind the negotiating team. Make him Sir Ivan's replacement.
Cameron as NATO SecGen and Osborne as our man in Bruxelles negotiating Brexit, that's something I could live with, but Osborne sees his future at Westminster.
So could Vladimir Putin
In case you missed it, this The Daily Mail front page from the 1st of January 1973, the day we joined the EC.
Had we had a hand in the 11 then, the Europe we now belong to would be more to our democratic taste and we would not have to suffer the full economic absurdities of the Common Agricultural Policy
I think that might count as 'writing on the wall'......
It is no surprise that this utterly mediocre government, led by a prime minister whose sole interest is in being prime minister ... [snip]
You keep saying this, with no evidence whatsoever. Have you actually met Theresa May? I have, and I had quite a long chat with her, not long after she became Home Sec. The very strong impression I had was that she is in politics for the old-fashioned reason that she wants to serve her country - the vicar's daughter bit is genuine, not an act.
Her interest in being PM is that she thinks she can do the job better than her predecessors or the alternative candidates. Personally I think she's wrong on the first point but probably right on the second, but, as regards her motives, I think it is you that is wrong.
Name one thing she has actually done please
Blimmin' heck I mean there are plenty of flaws with May but she did just pick up the mother of all hospital passes. Had she paused a few more moments, she would likely and preferably have pushed out triggering A50 a year rather than six months, but all this is designed to give the government some breathing space to work out which way is up.
As I wrote to @DavidL above, there is a huge workload to be faced, including taking input from stakeholders, devising a strategy, and staffing up to implement that strategy. In Civil Service terms, six months is like a fleeting heartbeat for such a task. That "nothing has happened" is not surprising.
As we all agreed on June 24th, Brexit will proceed more in geological, than rolling 24-hour news time. Much to the chagrin of many red-cheeked Brexiters.
However , no-one seeing her appoint the 3 amigos as teh top negotiators on Brexit coudl have been filled with confidence that she had any clue as to what she was doing. It has been a deafening silence since she took over.
May is a well-known micro-manager. Appointing those three, which I agree went beyond farce (although DD is proving himself a better operator than expected), perhaps gave her every reason to ride roughshod over and ignore their eventual recommendations. Perhaps. Plus not 100% sure she could steamroll DD.
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
I feel sorry for Sir Ivan but I'm not surprised. The hard Right is in the ascendancy in Britain now, and they demand conformity of thought and utter loyalty. Anyone voicing the slightest misgivings about the hard-Right agenda will be neither trusted nor tolerated. This won't be the end of it by any means. There'll be even deeper purges when Messrs Farage and Banks start enacting their 'drain the swamp' solution. I can't see there being many survivors.
The people who gave us political correctness complain about conforrmity
lol
It really is beyond parody. ONE civil servant resigns a few months before his proposed retirement, after decades of soft-left pro-EU bias saturating the entire system, and they're screaming about witch hunts and Orwell.
Brexiteers have explicitly called for Sir Ivan's replacement to not be an impartial civil servant, but an avowed Brexiteer
And if the Government had a policy Sir Ivan would have implemented it. His complaint is that they have no policy, and no hope of finding one.
And that final comment is the problem. To say that the govt has no policy is at least arguable - certainly that it has no published or developed policy - but to say that it has no hope of finding one is straying into realms which are not his business.
I keep coming back to the conclusion that the assumptions that Sir Ivan was working from are not the same as those of the government.
Unfortunately for Sir Ivan - despite how clever he is supposed to be - has totally shafted himself by making clear in the leaked e-mail an agenda which is at odds with the settled will of the people. His duty as a civil servant was to keep those views private and retire from the field beaten but still honourable.
David Davis is the only one of the three brexiteers that isn't either thick as a brick or terminally lazy. His main fault is self agrandisement, but that is shared by both his peers anyway... His court case to frustrate the snooper's charter was welcomed by yours truly anyhow.
A case could be made for putting Osborne on the negotiating team. Teamwork rather than leadership might suit him.
Never mind the negotiating team. Make him Sir Ivan's replacement.
Cameron as NATO SecGen and Osborne as our man in Bruxelles negotiating Brexit, that's something I could live with, but Osborne sees his future at Westminster.
There's always 2020. Brexit should be complete by then and he ought to be able to find a seat - there are usually late retirements from long-serving members in safe seats. Beefing up the foreign affairs aspect of his CV won't do him any harm and if he does see himself as a future leader, then he'd be better off doing something useful for his country than picking up hundreds of thousands for speaking to Goldman Sachs and the like.
My view is that Mrs May might be forced hold to an early election whether she wants to or not.
I'll explain this weekend why, but I'll give a slight spoiler, it is based on Brexit being the People's Budget de nos jours with a recalcitrant House of Lords
I doubt it, and am on the other side of this on Betfair.
David Davis is the only one of the three brexiteers that isn't either thick as a brick or terminally lazy. His main fault is self agrandisement, but that is shared by both his peers anyway... His court case to frustrate the snooper's charter was welcomed by yours truly anyhow.
The irony of David Davis taking his case to the CJEU is truly amusing.
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
"Brexiteers have explicitly called for Sir Ivan's replacement to not be an impartial civil servant, but an avowed Brexiteer"
Again a complete misdirection of impartiality. Impartiality is not neutrality, it is the requirement to implement government policy of any colour and express concerns only within that framework.
Now I have no idea if Sir Ivan's personal views hindered his ability to do that, but it is certainly plausible.
Again a complete misdirection of impartiality. Impartiality is not neutrality, it is the requirement to implement government policy of any colour and express concerns only within that framework.
And again a complete misdirection of Sir Ivan's complaint.
He did not say he did not like the policy, or that he could not implement the policy. He said there is no policy and no evidence of a mechanism to reveal a policy.
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
If Brexit is completed competently, the professionals involved will be much in demand - we shouldn't begrudge them this as the alternative would not be to our advantage.
It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
Brexit means remuneration! Brexit Ltd could become the world leader in managing exits from from the EU.
Yep, the metropolitan elite is going to do pretty well out of it. See lawyers, also.
... and the working poor if it is managed properly
"He did not say he did not like the policy, or that he could not implement the policy. He said there is no policy and no evidence of a mechanism to reveal a policy."
He has a number of concerns, some of which I share, about the nature of the process.
But there is nothing wrong in debating his role and it is not an attack on civil service impartiality to do so, which was the claim made.
Comments
I think people like Osborne and Mandelson are pragmatists who know their way around a negotiation.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/hypocrite
If some oracle told him that the UK getting a good Brexit deal would lead to the eventual break up of the EU I think Mandy would sabotage the deal, Osborne wouldn't.
But Osborne starts off with such atrocious personal ratings I suspect he'd struggle - I also suspect his judgment - at times he was keener on 'putting one over on Labour' than necessarily 'doing the right thing for the country' - something I've yet to hear May accused of......
How flattering.
And Nigel said "Non!"
Where can we look up the rules?
Edit: so to be clear you think that campaigning to rejoin the EU should be what? Illegal? Officially discouraged? Condemned by Sam? Puh-leeeze.
"There are. However there is also a deeply unpleasant attitude on the other side that anyone with an ugly idea must be stupid and that anyone with a very ugly idea must be very stupid, which is both patronising and complacent. There is also a deeply unpleasant inference in that attitude whereby you get the impression that those putting it forward regard any idea that they do not accept as by definition 'ugly' and that therefore everyone who disagrees with them must be 'stupid'. "
I can't think of another way of describing someone who said they voted 'OUT' because they were telling 'us we had to have straight bananas and you could hear them talking in the street in foreign languages no one could understand'
PS Juxtaposed with the convicted Chelsea supporter who kicked a blackman off a train in Paris bcause he was speaking French 'and I couldn't understand it'
I doubt Osborne would want to get involved. Poisoned chalice and his priorities for brexit are clearly very different to TM.
But people who whine about how divided we are as a country are the people dividing the country, it isn't hard to see. If they accepted they lost, and tried to be helpful, we would be less divided.
Brendan O'Neill on why Labour should ditch the myth that it's a party of the working class.
https://t.co/trenvRFcqA https://t.co/EBd2V8wQT7
Make him part of the negotiating team and his success is tied to a successful outcome. Bridges would start to be built. May could dangle a knighthood if he does really well.
https://leftfootforward.org/2011/10/tories-may-care-deeply-about-europe-but-no-one-else-does/
This ambassador has been telling the Government how difficult this will be to which May and co's response (as many on here) is Pollyanna, Pollyanna, no more no less. Well Folks, this will not get us anywhere, and ignoring people who advise otherwise is both childish and ultimately suicidal for our economy.
@SeanT enjoyed Margaret River greatly, took in a few tastings at inter alia Leeuwin, Voyager, Vasse Felix and had a nice meal at Aravina Estate.
We stayed in MR for 3 nights in a super B&B and the owner, an Aussie with dual UK nationality, couldn't understand what the hell was going on in the UK.
Her interest in being PM is that she thinks she can do the job better than her predecessors or the alternative candidates. Personally I think she's wrong on the first point but probably right on the second, but, as regards her motives, I think it is you that is wrong.
And if the Government had a policy Sir Ivan would have implemented it. His complaint is that they have no policy, and no hope of finding one.
He doesnt agree with women in power :-)
"If the British people vote to leave, there is only one way to bring that about, namely to trigger article 50 of the treaties and begin the process of exit, and the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away"
I keep coming back to the conclusion that the assumptions that Sir Ivan was working from are not the same as those of the government.
The Government assumption is that "Brexit means Brexit" is a credible plan, while Sir Ivan's assumption is that it is meaningless bollocks
"She's a slag"
"Right I'm leaving"
http://www.legalcheek.com/2017/01/city-lawyer-guilty-of-racially-aggravated-assault-at-christmas-party/
Imagine the chaos in government if both that and Brexit had gone through.
The remain side seem to forget the whole Brexit shtick started with their own men calling the referendum.
Cameron as NATO SecGen and Osborne as our man in Bruxelles negotiating Brexit, that's something I could live with, but Osborne sees his future at Westminster.
She has appointed a cabinet.
lol
House of Commons 0/650
House of Lords 0/809
European Parliament 0/73
Scottish Parliament 0/129
Welsh Assembly 0/60
London Assembly 0/25
Local government 1/20,565
Police & Crime Commissioners 0/41
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_National_Party
https://twitter.com/weareoneeu/status/816562092018925568
As I wrote to @DavidL above, there is a huge workload to be faced, including taking input from stakeholders, devising a strategy, and staffing up to implement that strategy. In Civil Service terms, six months is like a fleeting heartbeat for such a task. That "nothing has happened" is not surprising.
As we all agreed on June 24th, Brexit will proceed more in geological, than rolling 24-hour news time. Much to the chagrin of many red-cheeked Brexiters.
But few people can put an Ikea one together
Do I hear the referendum winners banging on that Leadsom should be PM?
Whilst the focus is on the top of the front page, the story at the bottom shocked me, Martin McGuinness involved in an IRA story, say it ain't so.
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/815612463018287105
In my industry we have had contact with the relevant Ministry through three trade channels that I am aware of (and therefore there will be other contact, as I don't know much!). They acknowledge the concerns of the Industry but have not made any firm commitments, which is reasonable, as they are information gathering mode.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Kingdom-Asunder-Bloody-Crown-Trilogy-ebook/dp/B01N8UF799/
Going to start work on the paperback either this week or next.
Depending how other things go, I may also start work on an F1 book. Unsure about that. Think it'd be fun to write (which makes things easier, of course) but no idea what sort of market there'd be for it (betting focus, as you'd expect).
I though the BNP were now on 0 councillors.
In a former life, we would advise organisations about the complexity of big changes they were attempting: mergers, divestments, factory closures, that sort of thing.
We would use a checklist to assess complexity: how many parties involved, how diverse their interest might be, how stable their aims, whether the change had ever been done successfully, whether the team making the change had worked successfully together, how well understood and stable the end game requirements might be, how critical the change was to the organisation's survival, etc.
Very complex change is prone to become chaotic unless it is managed by people highly experienced with a successful track record in complex change. Obvious, but a point often missed.
Using the checklist, Brexit is off the scale for complexity. Has there been a more complex endeavour undertaken by a modern state?
Sir Ivan may be the wrong person to be at the centre of the team managing Brexit. It would be reassuring to know that we do have the serious, experienced, competent people who can make this happen safely. As a guide, such people in the real world earn thousands of pounds per day - we shouldn't be nervous about paying the going rate.
the Mail now wants out and Marty's respectable
who knows Osborne could one day be likeable
Tom Watson: “I am not on his [Corbyn's] strategy committee”
When asked who is: "I don't know
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/04/jeremy-corbyn-doesnt-consult-me-on-strategy-decisions-says-watson?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Men as epic in their statesmanship as the American founding fathers - men like Jean Monnet, Robert Schumann and Paul-Henri Spaak - worked through coal and steel and tariffs to give the Europan idea substance...
Reunification of Germany similarly complicated? Nation building in Iraq by the Coalition?
One worked out rahter better than the other!
I'll explain this weekend why, but I'll give a slight spoiler, it is based on Brexit being the People's Budget de nos jours with a recalcitrant House of Lords
The UK is almost unique in having no history of any significant number or far-left or far-right political representatives at any time in its history.
I think that might count as 'writing on the wall'......
And if the Government had a policy Sir Ivan would have implemented it. His complaint is that they have no policy, and no hope of finding one.
And that final comment is the problem. To say that the govt has no policy is at least arguable - certainly that it has no published or developed policy - but to say that it has no hope of finding one is straying into realms which are not his business.
I keep coming back to the conclusion that the assumptions that Sir Ivan was working from are not the same as those of the government.
Unfortunately for Sir Ivan - despite how clever he is supposed to be - has totally shafted himself by making clear in the leaked e-mail an agenda which is at odds with the settled will of the people. His duty as a civil servant was to keep those views private and retire from the field beaten but still honourable.
Can you point to the relevant lines in the email?
His main fault is self agrandisement, but that is shared by both his peers anyway... His court case to frustrate the snooper's charter was welcomed by yours truly anyhow.
Again a complete misdirection of impartiality. Impartiality is not neutrality, it is the requirement to implement government policy of any colour and express concerns only within that framework.
Now I have no idea if Sir Ivan's personal views hindered his ability to do that, but it is certainly plausible.
He did not say he did not like the policy, or that he could not implement the policy. He said there is no policy and no evidence of a mechanism to reveal a policy.
"He did not say he did not like the policy, or that he could not implement the policy. He said there is no policy and no evidence of a mechanism to reveal a policy."
He has a number of concerns, some of which I share, about the nature of the process.
But there is nothing wrong in debating his role and it is not an attack on civil service impartiality to do so, which was the claim made.