We do have a hapless Prime Minister who just talks rubbish even when she does not need to do it like Trident missile going awry.
She is literally having to eat her words.
True I think how it will effect Ireland will be a major problem. Can not see how you can not have a hard border between the north and south when we leave the EU.
There will have to be a hard border. Otherwise, all this "independence" is a mirage.
Another solution: Northern Ireland joins the Republic.
Has anybody calculated how many extra Border force personnel we will need ?
Not at all. There was a common travel area with Eire long before the EEC. There is no reason why heat should not continue.
The hard border is not about people as such. It is more about goods. How will duties be collected ? I should have said Border force and Customs personnel.
There would be no absolute requirement on the British side to have customs or border force. The imperative for such a border would come entirely from the EU. Perhaps Eire might just find it easier to follow us out.
Now what did the 'near perfect' one forecast in his first Budget:
' Public sector net debt as a share of GDP will be 62 per cent this year, before peaking at 70 per cent in 2013-14. Because of our action today, it then begins to fall, to 69 per cent in 2014-15 and then 67 per cent in 2015-16. '
I have done my share of travelling the world over the last ten years but Theresa May's schedule this week is jaw dropping.
Wednesday - PMQ's
Thursday - meeting congress in Philadelphia
Friday - meeting Trump at the White House
Saturday - meeting with Erdogan in Turkey
Says a lot about how she has her diabetes under control
I once sat to this guy in a transatlantic who revealed to me that his job sent him on the following trip for 5 days every month...with meetings at each stop.
Dublin -> London London -> Miami Miami -> San Francisco San Francisco -> Miami Miami -> London London -> dublin
I didn't like to say to him that I think you might need to get a new job.
The HoL should go not be added to. But it is ours - its existence is a result of our history - and its future is in our hands. The same cannot be said of Commissioners elected by no-one on this country who purport to pass laws affecting me through QMV and think that agreement in some remote Council is a worthwhile substitute for a vote by me for a Parliament answerable to voters here.
I think that the government has been making mistake after mistake ever since the referendum result. But at least I can vote it out. That matters to me.
Europe is our history too. Just as much as the Lords. UK elections happened perfectly happily in the EU.
Westminster is broken. Utterly broken. Just as much as Europe. If not more so. Giving more power to it is like given whisky to an alcoholic.
As such Brexit fixes nothing. Arguably it makes things worse.
The HoL should go not be added to. But it is ours - its existence is a result of our history - and its future is in our hands. The same cannot be said of Commissioners elected by no-one on this country who purport to pass laws affecting me through QMV and think that agreement in some remote Council is a worthwhile substitute for a vote by me for a Parliament answerable to voters here.
I think that the government has been making mistake after mistake ever since the referendum result. But at least I can vote it out. That matters to me.
Europe is our history too. Just as much as the Lords. UK elections happened perfectly happily in the EU.
Westminster is broken. Utterly broken. Just as much as Europe. If not more so. Giving more power to it is like given whisky to an alcoholic.
As such Brexit fixes nothing. Arguably it makes things worse.
I am glad I don't live in your wasteland of a world. Having such a warped bleak outlook on life must be soul destroying.
Serious question: If I as a religous person didn't belive in sex outside marriage ( and therefore against gay sex)
You could easily reconcile those positions by supporting gay marriage?
Not if my religion says marriage is only between a man and woman.
I think your viewpoint is entirely acceptable. It's what you believe. You are free to believe what you like. You may lose friends or be slightly ostracised by liberal metrosexuals, but then we all do this social arithmetic every day: I long ago realised my pretty wild and bohemian life excluded me from certain jobs or careers (like politics!) , and would offend many others, but that was my choice.
Again, what is not right is seeking to impose your views on others, especially via the non democratic diktat of religion, and religious law, and even more if that religious law is inherently bigoted and hateful, which - sorry - I believe sharia law is, towards women.
You start banging on about sharia, then you cross the line. That's when you should leave the country, and go back to Saudi, as the Dutch prime minister put it today.
We are enlightened western nations. We do freedom and equality.
I agree there can only be one law of the land, all must abide by it. End of, no discussion.
We do have the right to peacefully and democratically change the law, including laws anathema to historic British views, including laws on homosexuality, female emancipification and blood sports. All these have changed in my lifetime, and I am sure that further changes to accepted norms will occur over time. It is how societies evolve.
I am completely relaxed about gay marriage. My only grievance about my friends gay marriages is that they seem to be too smug! but Facebook is a great deciever in these things...
But since this is a democracy the laws will only change to what is within cultural norms. So what I said is not a problem for people who believe in western liberal democracy.
"However, Labour hopes one possible amendment to the article 50 bill could be to force the government to return to the EU if the deal is voted down, rather than leaving without an agreement. If that amendment were to attract wide political support, the two-year exit that ministers hope for could prove difficult to achieve."
This will not be against the letter or the spirit of the Brexit vote.
"However, Labour hopes one possible amendment to the article 50 bill could be to force the government to return to the EU if the deal is voted down, rather than leaving without an agreement. If that amendment were to attract wide political support, the two-year exit that ministers hope for could prove difficult to achieve."
This will not be against the letter or the spirit of the Brexit vote.
"However, Labour hopes one possible amendment to the article 50 bill could be to force the government to return to the EU if the deal is voted down, rather than leaving without an agreement. If that amendment were to attract wide political support, the two-year exit that ministers hope for could prove difficult to achieve."
This will not be against the letter or the spirit of the Brexit vote.
"However, Labour hopes one possible amendment to the article 50 bill could be to force the government to return to the EU if the deal is voted down, rather than leaving without an agreement. If that amendment were to attract wide political support, the two-year exit that ministers hope for could prove difficult to achieve."
This will not be against the letter or the spirit of the Brexit vote.
We would be in a hugely weak bargaining position. A50 triggered, and out on our ear but with a democratic mandate to rejoin. Not a hand I would like the UK to hold.
"However, Labour hopes one possible amendment to the article 50 bill could be to force the government to return to the EU if the deal is voted down, rather than leaving without an agreement. If that amendment were to attract wide political support, the two-year exit that ministers hope for could prove difficult to achieve."
This will not be against the letter or the spirit of the Brexit vote.
A belated hurrah for Gina Miller and the Supreme court. It does seem that logic has a place in our governance.
Certainly hurrah for the Supreme Court.
Miller is just a sad Remainer desperate to stop Brexit (it made her sick remember) by any means possible and too thick to realise that in the long run she has probably made it more straightforward.
This result is great as it reduces the power of the executive, neuters the threats from the Scots Parliament and puts no specific restrictions on Brexit beyond quite rightly saying it must be started by Parliament. All round a very good day for democracy.
The sovereignty of Parliament is supreme.
What if Parliament through an amendment to the A50 bill says the final deal must be put to a referendum ?
It would rather self defeating given that such a referendum would not prevent Brexit. It would simply mean we left without a deal.
That is where you are wrong. There is no provision in the EU referendum act which says that the result is binding.
Another court case!
Would not go anywhere the Courts. Failing to actually leave the EU would result in a constitutional crisis and civil disobedience.
Now what did the 'near perfect' one forecast in his first Budget:
' Public sector net debt as a share of GDP will be 62 per cent this year, before peaking at 70 per cent in 2013-14. Because of our action today, it then begins to fall, to 69 per cent in 2014-15 and then 67 per cent in 2015-16. '
"However, Labour hopes one possible amendment to the article 50 bill could be to force the government to return to the EU if the deal is voted down, rather than leaving without an agreement. If that amendment were to attract wide political support, the two-year exit that ministers hope for could prove difficult to achieve."
This will not be against the letter or the spirit of the Brexit vote.
We would be in a hugely weak bargaining position. A50 triggered, and out on our ear but with a democratic mandate to rejoin. Not a hand I would like the UK to hold.
We are leaving. We have to leave. To stay now would be a national humiliation as much as anything else. All focus should be on minimising the negatives of what is coming. Hard Brexit is avoidable and should be avoided.
A belated hurrah for Gina Miller and the Supreme court. It does seem that logic has a place in our governance.
Certainly hurrah for the Supreme Court.
Miller is just a sad Remainer desperate to stop Brexit (it made her sick remember) by any means possible and too thick to realise that in the long run she has probably made it more straightforward.
This result is great as it reduces the power of the executive, neuters the threats from the Scots Parliament and puts no specific restrictions on Brexit beyond quite rightly saying it must be started by Parliament. All round a very good day for democracy.
The sovereignty of Parliament is supreme.
What if Parliament through an amendment to the A50 bill says the final deal must be put to a referendum ?
It would rather self defeating given that such a referendum would not prevent Brexit. It would simply mean we left without a deal.
That is where you are wrong. There is no provision in the EU referendum act which says that the result is binding.
Another court case!
Would not go anywhere the Courts. Failing to actually leave the EU would result in a constitutional crisis and civil disobedience.
The United Kingdom will no longer be a member state of the European Union. The referendum will be respected... by dissolving the UK.
Serious question: If I as a religous person didn't belive in sex outside marriage ( and therefore against gay sex)
You could easily reconcile those positions by supporting gay marriage?
Not if my religion says marriage is only between a man and woman.
I think your viewpoint is entirely acceptable. It's what you believe. You are free to believe what you like. You may lose friends or be slightly ostracised by liberal metrosexuals, but then we all do this social arithmetic every day: I long ago realised my pretty wild and bohemian life excluded me from certain jobs or careers (like politics!) , and would offend many others, but that was my choice.
Again, what is not right is seeking to impose your views on others, especially via the non democratic diktat of religion, and religious law, and even more if that religious law is inherently bigoted and hateful, which - sorry - I believe sharia law is, towards women.
You start banging on about sharia, then you cross the line. That's when you should leave the country, and go back to Saudi, as the Dutch prime minister put it today.
We are enlightened western nations. We do freedom and equality.
I agree there can only be one law of the land, all must abide by it. End of, no discussion.
We do have the right to peacefully and democratically change the law, including laws anathema to historic British views, including laws on homosexuality, female emancipification and blood sports. All these have changed in my lifetime, and I am sure that further changes to accepted norms will occur over time. It is how societies evolve.
I am completely relaxed about gay marriage. My only grievance about my friends gay marriages is that they seem to be too smug! but Facebook is a great deciever in these things...
But since this is a democracy the laws will only change to what is within cultural norms. So what I said is not a problem for people who believe in western liberal democracy.
The only person with a problem of having gay friends but thinking them sinners for indulging in sex outside marriage and boycotting their marriage because it conflicts with a religious belief, is you, sweetie.
The HoL should go not be added to. But it is ours - its existence is a result of our history - and its future is in our hands. The same cannot be said of Commissioners elected by no-one on this country who purport to pass laws affecting me through QMV and think that agreement in some remote Council is a worthwhile substitute for a vote by me for a Parliament answerable to voters here.
I think that the government has been making mistake after mistake ever since the referendum result. But at least I can vote it out. That matters to me.
Europe is our history too. Just as much as the Lords. UK elections happened perfectly happily in the EU.
Westminster is broken. Utterly broken. Just as much as Europe. If not more so. Giving more power to it is like given whisky to an alcoholic.
As such Brexit fixes nothing. Arguably it makes things worse.
Europe is our history too. Of course. But this is trite. Our involvement in Europe and our perspective on European history is very different to other nations in Europe. War and occupation affect countries in ways that countries which have not been occupied, which have not seen the total collapse of their political institutions and societies (as Germany and France and Italy and others have) do not understand. Both are valuable and important perspectives but they are different and they affect what countries see as problems and how they see the solutions.
Very shortly (as I must be off) the EU was created in order to solve the failure of Continental Europe to create and sustain liberal democratic nations in the first half of the twentieth century. Britain did not think that its liberal democracy failed in the first half of the twentieth century. On the contrary it survived. Some of this was down to geography but some was down to the political and moral choices Britain made. So deep down it does not accept that the nation state has failed.
Whereas if you were Italian (and I am) the nation state has been a pathetic disaster right from the start. Italians like the EU because it is better than their own corrupt and ineffective polity.
If Westminster is broken we should fix it. Not abandon it. Or seek to shelter in an even more broken, distant institution.
We do have a hapless Prime Minister who just talks rubbish even when she does not need to do it like Trident missile going awry.
She is literally having to eat her words.
True I think how it will effect Ireland will be a major problem. Can not see how you can not have a hard border between the north and south when we leave the EU.
There will have to be a hard border. Otherwise, all this "independence" is a mirage.
Another solution: Northern Ireland joins the Republic.
Has anybody calculated how many extra Border force personnel we will need ?
Not at all. There was a common travel area with Eire long before the EEC. There is no reason why heat should not continue.
Richard I think you are over optimistic on the Irish border problem .
"However, Labour hopes one possible amendment to the article 50 bill could be to force the government to return to the EU if the deal is voted down, rather than leaving without an agreement. If that amendment were to attract wide political support, the two-year exit that ministers hope for could prove difficult to achieve."
This will not be against the letter or the spirit of the Brexit vote.
I thought there was no way back after triggering A50?
Has anyone actually confirmed that ? In any case, this will not be about Remaining in the EU. This will about re-negotiation.
I am afraid no vote in Parliament can change the terms of a treaty we have signed up to without the agreement of the other 27 signatories. So you are back where you started. The only way to extend the 2 year limit is to get the agreement if all 27 other members of the EU. If anyone of them disagrees then negotiations cannot be extended.
Question for PBers: which seat do you think Labour is most likely to lose, Copeland or Stoke Central?
Everyone seems to think Copeland so I am going to say Stoke. It is also the seat I would prefer us to lose.
neither
Good chance of it being neither. Labour have already chosen a local candidate in Copeland and look like doing the same in Stoke - just like Oldham West.....
Labour had a local candidate in Sleaford too and came 4th, the court decision today will boost the Tories in Copeland
Comparing the three Stoke constituencies the falls in the Labour vote share between 2005 and 2015 were:
Central -13% North -16% South -8%
Labour's problem in Stoke appears to be one of steady and widespread decline. In 1997 the three constituencies had Labour votes of 66%, 65% and 62% but these had reduced to 39%, 40% and 39% in 2015. Even in the disastrous election of 1983 Labour's vote shares were 48%, 46% and 48%,
"Hi, I'm Hugo Rifkind and I've got some opinions which you should know. And you'll have to pay for them."
Writes in the same paper as Sean Thomas...
Indeed. Which is what makes it a great paper.
Here's a test: try saying "Hi, I'm Hugo Rifkind", or "Hello, I'm Hugo Rifkind", or any variation thereof, and see if you can avoid sounding like a Total C*nt.
I reckon it's impossible. The absolute c*ntishness of the name will always shine through.
it's the "Hugo" really though. Insufferably emerging middle class.
Said Charles.
Charles come from the same root as Carl - working man. Churl is also a derivativr of the same root.
A belated hurrah for Gina Miller and the Supreme court. It does seem that logic has a place in our governance.
Certainly hurrah for the Supreme Court.
Miller is just a sad Remainer desperate to stop Brexit (it made her sick remember) by any means possible and too thick to realise that in the long run she has probably made it more straightforward.
This result is great as it reduces the power of the executive, neuters the threats from the Scots Parliament and puts no specific restrictions on Brexit beyond quite rightly saying it must be started by Parliament. All round a very good day for democracy.
The sovereignty of Parliament is supreme.
What if Parliament through an amendment to the A50 bill says the final deal must be put to a referendum ?
It would rather self defeating given that such a referendum would not prevent Brexit. It would simply mean we left without a deal.
That is where you are wrong. There is no provision in the EU referendum act which says that the result is binding.
Another court case!
Would not go anywhere the Courts. Failing to actually leave the EU would result in a constitutional crisis and civil disobedience.
The United Kingdom will no longer be a member state of the European Union. The referendum will be respected... by dissolving the UK.
A belated hurrah for Gina Miller and the Supreme court. It does seem that logic has a place in our governance.
Certainly hurrah for the Supreme Court.
Miller is just a sad Remainer desperate to stop Brexit (it made her sick remember) by any means possible and too thick to realise that in the long run she has probably made it more straightforward.
This result is great as it reduces the power of the executive, neuters the threats from the Scots Parliament and puts no specific restrictions on Brexit beyond quite rightly saying it must be started by Parliament. All round a very good day for democracy.
The sovereignty of Parliament is supreme.
What if Parliament through an amendment to the A50 bill says the final deal must be put to a referendum ?
It would rather self defeating given that such a referendum would not prevent Brexit. It would simply mean we left without a deal.
That is where you are wrong. There is no provision in the EU referendum act which says that the result is binding.
Another court case!
Would not go anywhere the Courts. Failing to actually leave the EU would result in a constitutional crisis and civil disobedience.
The United Kingdom will no longer be a member state of the European Union. The referendum will be respected... by dissolving the UK.
We do have a hapless Prime Minister who just talks rubbish even when she does not need to do it like Trident missile going awry.
She is literally having to eat her words.
True I think how it will effect Ireland will be a major problem. Can not see how you can not have a hard border between the north and south when we leave the EU.
There will have to be a hard border. Otherwise, all this "independence" is a mirage.
Another solution: Northern Ireland joins the Republic.
Has anybody calculated how many extra Border force personnel we will need ?
Not at all. There was a common travel area with Eire long before the EEC. There is no reason why heat should not continue.
Richard I think you are over optimistic on the Irish border problem .
Solutions can always be found if the two countries are wanting to find them. The only real fly in the ointment yet again will be the EU.
Stupid fuss over article 50. I love Trump because he would just sign an executive order. EU countries have lot more to lose than UK. Fuck 'em, let's leave now, let the bankers leave London for Frankfurt - no one wants them - let the liberal elite cry into their soup.Control the borders, stop accepting narrow minded shite from backward religions and let's believe in ourselves.
Bankers are going nowhere. - higher taxes and Financial Transaction Tax
I know. I work amongst the "bankers" and they are going nowhere. We will keep the chinless wonders, putting up house prices, gumming up our roads with 4 x 4s. Let' em go. Fuck the lot of them. Independence Day, can't come soon enough.
"However, Labour hopes one possible amendment to the article 50 bill could be to force the government to return to the EU if the deal is voted down, rather than leaving without an agreement. If that amendment were to attract wide political support, the two-year exit that ministers hope for could prove difficult to achieve."
This will not be against the letter or the spirit of the Brexit vote.
I thought there was no way back after triggering A50?
Has anyone actually confirmed that ? In any case, this will not be about Remaining in the EU. This will about re-negotiation.
Yes. A50 says we are out 2 years after triggering. Unless (a) there's a deal in place, or (b) all 27 other nations agree an extension (so not under UK control).
Reality is it will be full Brexit or deal; there is no practical way back.
The idea that the EU would spend 2 years negotiating in presumed good faith, and then be interested in "renegotiation" because the British people don't like the outcome is a bit far fetched.
And that's without even factoring in the ratification processes on their side.
"Hi, I'm Hugo Rifkind and I've got some opinions which you should know. And you'll have to pay for them."
Writes in the same paper as Sean Thomas...
Indeed. Which is what makes it a great paper.
Here's a test: try saying "Hi, I'm Hugo Rifkind", or "Hello, I'm Hugo Rifkind", or any variation thereof, and see if you can avoid sounding like a Total C*nt.
I reckon it's impossible. The absolute c*ntishness of the name will always shine through.
it's the "Hugo" really though. Insufferably emerging middle class.
Said Charles.
I think Charles sees himself more as John Cleese than Ronnie Barker.
"However, Labour hopes one possible amendment to the article 50 bill could be to force the government to return to the EU if the deal is voted down, rather than leaving without an agreement. If that amendment were to attract wide political support, the two-year exit that ministers hope for could prove difficult to achieve."
This will not be against the letter or the spirit of the Brexit vote.
I thought there was no way back after triggering A50?
Has anyone actually confirmed that ? In any case, this will not be about Remaining in the EU. This will about re-negotiation.
Yes. A50 says we are out 2 years after triggering. Unless (a) there's a deal in place, or (b) all 27 other nations agree an extension (so not under UK control).
Reality is it will be full Brexit or deal; there is no practical way back.
Some folk (Jolyon Maugham et al) are looking at whether article 50 is unilaterally revocable:
Question for PBers: which seat do you think Labour is most likely to lose, Copeland or Stoke Central?
Everyone seems to think Copeland so I am going to say Stoke. It is also the seat I would prefer us to lose.
Stoke. Without question.
The midlands are not going to be kind to Mr Corbyn's party...
That said, the tories have a much better chance of taking Copeland than stoke.
The demographics in Stoke Central are the best for Labour of the three Stoke seats - lowest number of White British, owner occupiers and retired people:
There were also 14% in full time education in 2011 for those who expect Labour to do well among students.
The idea that the EU would spend 2 years negotiating in presumed good faith, and then be interested in "renegotiation" because the British people don't like the outcome is a bit far fetched.
And that's without even factoring in the ratification processes on their side.
People like to quote all manner of 'Negotiation 101s', but it's axiomatic that you do not sit down to negotiate anything without ascertaining that your counterparties are empowered to conclude an agreement.
"However, Labour hopes one possible amendment to the article 50 bill could be to force the government to return to the EU if the deal is voted down, rather than leaving without an agreement. If that amendment were to attract wide political support, the two-year exit that ministers hope for could prove difficult to achieve."
This will not be against the letter or the spirit of the Brexit vote.
I thought there was no way back after triggering A50?
Has anyone actually confirmed that ? In any case, this will not be about Remaining in the EU. This will about re-negotiation.
Yes. A50 says we are out 2 years after triggering. Unless (a) there's a deal in place, or (b) all 27 other nations agree an extension (so not under UK control).
Reality is it will be full Brexit or deal; there is no practical way back.
Some folk (Jolyon Maugham et al) are looking at whether article 50 is unilaterally revocable:
"However, Labour hopes one possible amendment to the article 50 bill could be to force the government to return to the EU if the deal is voted down, rather than leaving without an agreement. If that amendment were to attract wide political support, the two-year exit that ministers hope for could prove difficult to achieve."
This will not be against the letter or the spirit of the Brexit vote.
I thought there was no way back after triggering A50?
Has anyone actually confirmed that ? In any case, this will not be about Remaining in the EU. This will about re-negotiation.
Yes. A50 says we are out 2 years after triggering. Unless (a) there's a deal in place, or (b) all 27 other nations agree an extension (so not under UK control).
Reality is it will be full Brexit or deal; there is no practical way back.
Some folk (Jolyon Maugham et al) are looking at whether article 50 is unilaterally revocable:
Would this case delay A50? Or can the government press on regardless.
They can press on regardless. (The case is being pursued via the Irish courts.) However it would change the political dynamics because then parliament would have the option of backing remain if the deal is a dud.
"However, Labour hopes one possible amendment to the article 50 bill could be to force the government to return to the EU if the deal is voted down, rather than leaving without an agreement. If that amendment were to attract wide political support, the two-year exit that ministers hope for could prove difficult to achieve."
This will not be against the letter or the spirit of the Brexit vote.
I thought there was no way back after triggering A50?
Has anyone actually confirmed that ? In any case, this will not be about Remaining in the EU. This will about re-negotiation.
Yes. A50 says we are out 2 years after triggering. Unless (a) there's a deal in place, or (b) all 27 other nations agree an extension (so not under UK control).
Reality is it will be full Brexit or deal; there is no practical way back.
Some folk (Jolyon Maugham et al) are looking at whether article 50 is unilaterally revocable:
Would this case delay A50? Or can the government press on regardless.
It's tangential to A50 invocation. However, it really is the ardent Remainers last hope of derailing Brexit (barring 'events' ofc). Their hope is that the UK economy will go into the shitter sometime between now and April 2019, and that the electorate will change their minds.
Those who push the argument that Article 50 is revocable if the UK doesn't get a decent deal, are making a bad deal more likely. Because if the EU are encouraged to think that they can play hardball because the UK might change their mind if they don't get a satisfactory outcome, then they will quite likely miscalculate and try to go down that route. But the UK will still league - the politics will make it unavoidable.
Stupid fuss over article 50. I love Trump because he would just sign an executive order. EU countries have lot more to lose than UK. Fuck 'em, let's leave now, let the bankers leave London for Frankfurt - no one wants them - let the liberal elite cry into their soup.Control the borders, stop accepting narrow minded shite from backward religions and let's believe in ourselves.
Bankers are going nowhere. - higher taxes and Financial Transaction Tax
I know. I work amongst the "bankers" and they are going nowhere. We will keep the chinless wonders, putting up house prices, gumming up our roads with 4 x 4s. Let' em go. Fuck the lot of them. Independence Day, can't come soon enough.
Incidentally having last month derided the ONS for having to revise down borrowing this year by ONE BILLION POUNDS, I checked this month's figures. It has been revised down by £2.6bn. Pocket money!!
The idea that the EU would spend 2 years negotiating in presumed good faith, and then be interested in "renegotiation" because the British people don't like the outcome is a bit far fetched.
And that's without even factoring in the ratification processes on their side.
People like to quote all manner of 'Negotiation 101s', but it's axiomatic that you do not sit down to negotiate anything without ascertaining that your counterparties are empowered to conclude an agreement.
Stalin unpicked the usefulness of that Anglo-French mission in August1939.
I was thinking the other day that Dave was unlucky with his timing. Had the referendum been conducted post-Trump he would probably have won it. Europe looks a lot more wholesome and appealing now; the US, in contrast, suddenly looks very dark and strange. Who in Britain is enjoying the fact that we're now beholden to that Trump guy? Trump would have given vague Leavers enough of the willies to swing it.
"However, Labour hopes one possible amendment to the article 50 bill could be to force the government to return to the EU if the deal is voted down, rather than leaving without an agreement. If that amendment were to attract wide political support, the two-year exit that ministers hope for could prove difficult to achieve."
This will not be against the letter or the spirit of the Brexit vote.
I thought there was no way back after triggering A50?
Has anyone actually confirmed that ? In any case, this will not be about Remaining in the EU. This will about re-negotiation.
Yes. A50 says we are out 2 years after triggering. Unless (a) there's a deal in place, or (b) all 27 other nations agree an extension (so not under UK control).
Reality is it will be full Brexit or deal; there is no practical way back.
Some folk (Jolyon Maugham et al) are looking at whether article 50 is unilaterally revocable:
As I've said before (although I'm no lawyer), I cannot see how A50 can be revocable, as that would render the whole "2 year" rule redundant. Since presumably it has a purpose, A50 is irrevocable. Any ambiguity must be cleared up to still make sense of the rest of the rules.
Incidentally having last month derided the ONS for having to revise down borrowing this year by ONE BILLION POUNDS, I checked this month's figures. It has been revised down by £2.6bn. Pocket money!!
Wonder if Hammond purred down the line when he was told?
I was thinking the other day that Dave was unlucky with his timing. Had the referendum been conducted post-Trump he would probably have won it. Europe looks a lot more wholesome and appealing now; the US, in contrast, suddenly looks very dark and strange. Who in Britain is enjoying the fact that we're now beholden to that Trump guy? Trump would have given vague Leavers enough of the willies to swing it.
I don't know, my view of the EU has got worse. But true, I'm no fan of Trump. Though in all honesty if we'd held it now I probably would still have voted remain; it's most the response to our vote that has put me off the EU.
Now what did the 'near perfect' one forecast in his first Budget:
' Public sector net debt as a share of GDP will be 62 per cent this year, before peaking at 70 per cent in 2013-14. Because of our action today, it then begins to fall, to 69 per cent in 2014-15 and then 67 per cent in 2015-16. '
How is the country surviving under such 'austerity'.
The Tories have borrowed than all Labour governments put together several times.
However, in the 1950s, the PSBR was considerably higher, partly to build all those council houses that don't get built now.
There was less worry about debt and there was much more worry about the current account deficit. I don't think that it was then as high as it is today. That seems staggering, given what the UK went through from 1979 onwards, to allegedly slaughter 'lame ducks' and enable UK industry to compete on world markets.
In all of this the dynamic in Europe has changed dramatically this week with the election of Trump on a pro UK and pro UK trade deal while at the same time marginalising the EU.
His recent statements confirmed that he will only do deals with Germany, France etc on a Country by Country basis and will not trade with the EU as a block.
I do believe that this has opened an opportunity for a sensible deal between tbe EU and the UK and now we are going ahead we need as a nation to be confident and outgoing and to stop the sniping
Notice that Trump has no meeting planned with Merkel until the G7 in May
"However, Labour hopes one possible amendment to the article 50 bill could be to force the government to return to the EU if the deal is voted down, rather than leaving without an agreement. If that amendment were to attract wide political support, the two-year exit that ministers hope for could prove difficult to achieve."
This will not be against the letter or the spirit of the Brexit vote.
I thought there was no way back after triggering A50?
Has anyone actually confirmed that ? In any case, this will not be about Remaining in the EU. This will about re-negotiation.
Yes. A50 says we are out 2 years after triggering. Unless (a) there's a deal in place, or (b) all 27 other nations agree an extension (so not under UK control).
Reality is it will be full Brexit or deal; there is no practical way back.
Some folk (Jolyon Maugham et al) are looking at whether article 50 is unilaterally revocable:
Would this case delay A50? Or can the government press on regardless.
They can press on regardless. (The case is being pursued via the Irish courts.) However it would change the political dynamics because then parliament would have the option of backing remain if the deal is a dud.
REMAIN would be politically impossible. Mrs May seems to be preparing the ground for us to crash out into a WTO regime. But she has also said she does not want a cliff edge exit. It's all rather obscure really.
I was thinking the other day that Dave was unlucky with his timing. Had the referendum been conducted post-Trump he would probably have won it. Europe looks a lot more wholesome and appealing now; the US, in contrast, suddenly looks very dark and strange. Who in Britain is enjoying the fact that we're now beholden to that Trump guy? Trump would have given vague Leavers enough of the willies to swing it.
If Cameron couldn't win with a lunatic like Thomas Mair intervening, there's no way that putting the relatively pro-UK Trump in would have helped him instead of Obama.
Leave/Remain was fundamentally 70-30 without the influence of economic fear according to the polling Cummings revealed recently.
Tomorrow papers will split on their known positions. I hope that the Mail has the grace to accept the verdict and does not have a go at the judges. I hope the same for the Express.
But I expect they in common with the voters will just demand Parliament gets on with quickly
@Tory_Tartan: Let's be fair to Nicola Sturgeon. In 2014, the SNP wanted the pound, the Queen, the Bank of England, the BBC, the NHS. You know, a soft Indy
Incidentally having last month derided the ONS for having to revise down borrowing this year by ONE BILLION POUNDS, I checked this month's figures. It has been revised down by £2.6bn. Pocket money!!
Wonder if Hammond purred down the line when he was told?
Possibly the better news for the Chancellor is that the OBR's forecast for the full financial year looks pessimistic. Net borrowing for the last four months of last year was something like £1bn (because January returns a surplus).
Borrowing in the year so far has been £63.8 billion (subject to revision!). If we add £1bn that gives us £64.8bn against OBR forecast £68.2 billion. Now of course that is a rough and ready calculation.
That might not be optimistic enough - although sometimes these revision only come to light after the headline figures have been announced. Tax receipts are up far more than spending is down - that is to say, barely at all. Therefore it's January's receipts that could surprise on the upside.
I was thinking the other day that Dave was unlucky with his timing. Had the referendum been conducted post-Trump he would probably have won it. Europe looks a lot more wholesome and appealing now; the US, in contrast, suddenly looks very dark and strange. Who in Britain is enjoying the fact that we're now beholden to that Trump guy? Trump would have given vague Leavers enough of the willies to swing it.
Arguably Trump would not have won without Brexit. It led to his team focusing relentlessly on white working class voters in the Midwest which was enough for him to win narrow victories in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania and the Presidency. The same anti immigration and anti globalisation forces are driving Le Pen and Wilders too
I was thinking the other day that Dave was unlucky with his timing. Had the referendum been conducted post-Trump he would probably have won it. Europe looks a lot more wholesome and appealing now; the US, in contrast, suddenly looks very dark and strange. Who in Britain is enjoying the fact that we're now beholden to that Trump guy? Trump would have given vague Leavers enough of the willies to swing it.
That would also have given time for a proper renegotiation - see Charles's anecdote for details.
His recent statements confirmed that he will only do deals with Germany, France etc on a Country by Country basis and will not trade with the EU as a block.
In the WTO the EU acts as a single country so Trump can't avoid trading with it. The grand trade deal between the EU and USA was already dead.
In all of this the dynamic in Europe has changed dramatically this week with the election of Trump on a pro UK and pro UK trade deal while at the same time marginalising the EU.
His recent statements confirmed that he will only do deals with Germany, France etc on a Country by Country basis and will not trade with the EU as a block.
I do believe that this has opened an opportunity for a sensible deal between tbe EU and the UK and now we are going ahead we need as a nation to be confident and outgoing and to stop the sniping
Notice that Trump has no meeting planned with Merkel until the G7 in May
From RTE ,British Prime Minister Theresa May has declined an invitation from Enda Kenny to address the Dail while on an official visit to Ireland .Why would she do that ?
A belated hurrah for Gina Miller and the Supreme court. It does seem that logic has a place in our governance.
Certainly hurrah for the Supreme Court.
Miller is just a sad Remainer desperate to stop Brexit (it made her sick remember) by any means possible and too thick to realise that in the long run she has probably made it more straightforward.
This result is great as it reduces the power of the executive, neuters the threats from the Scots Parliament and puts no specific restrictions on Brexit beyond quite rightly saying it must be started by Parliament. All round a very good day for democracy.
The sovereignty of Parliament is supreme.
What if Parliament through an amendment to the A50 bill says the final deal must be put to a referendum ?
It would rather self defeating given that such a referendum would not prevent Brexit. It would simply mean we left without a deal.
That is where you are wrong. There is no provision in the EU referendum act which says that the result is binding.
Another court case!
Would not go anywhere the Courts. Failing to actually leave the EU would result in a constitutional crisis and civil disobedience.
By civil disobedience, do you mean rowdy marches or something violent with pitchforks? If the latter, they'll be treated as rioting and put down with exemplary jail sentences.
His recent statements confirmed that he will only do deals with Germany, France etc on a Country by Country basis and will not trade with the EU as a block.
In the WTO the EU acts as a single country so Trump can't avoid trading with it. The grand trade deal between the EU and USA was already dead.
Lets see what he says this week re trade deal with UK and whether he refers to the EU
"However, Labour hopes one possible amendment to the article 50 bill could be to force the government to return to the EU if the deal is voted down, rather than leaving without an agreement. If that amendment were to attract wide political support, the two-year exit that ministers hope for could prove difficult to achieve."
This will not be against the letter or the spirit of the Brexit vote.
I thought there was no way back after triggering A50?
Has anyone actually confirmed that ? In any case, this will not be about Remaining in the EU. This will about re-negotiation.
Yes. A50 says we are out 2 years after triggering. Unless (a) there's a deal in place, or (b) all 27 other nations agree an extension (so not under UK control).
Reality is it will be full Brexit or deal; there is no practical way back.
Some folk (Jolyon Maugham et al) are looking at whether article 50 is unilaterally revocable:
Would this case delay A50? Or can the government press on regardless.
They can press on regardless. (The case is being pursued via the Irish courts.) However it would change the political dynamics because then parliament would have the option of backing remain if the deal is a dud.
REMAIN would be politically impossible. Mrs May seems to be preparing the ground for us to crash out into a WTO regime. But she has also said she does not want a cliff edge exit. It's all rather obscure really.
It's not really - "crashing out into a WTO regime" is the only option that we can guarantee without EU co-operation. It's not what she wants, but it she has to show she is prepared to go down that route so that the EU genuinely seek out a mutually beneficial agreement.
Incidentally having last month derided the ONS for having to revise down borrowing this year by ONE BILLION POUNDS, I checked this month's figures. It has been revised down by £2.6bn. Pocket money!!
Wonder if Hammond purred down the line when he was told?
Possibly the better news for the Chancellor is that the OBR's forecast for the full financial year looks pessimistic. Net borrowing for the last four months of last year was something like £1bn (because January returns a surplus).
Borrowing in the year so far has been £63.8 billion (subject to revision!). If we add £1bn that gives us £64.8bn against OBR forecast £68.2 billion. Now of course that is a rough and ready calculation.
That might not be optimistic enough - although sometimes these revision only come to light after the headline figures have been announced. Tax receipts are up far more than spending is down - that is to say, barely at all. Therefore it's January's receipts that could surprise on the upside.
That sounds likely.
It will be a rare event for government borrowing to come in below forecast.
Incidentally having last month derided the ONS for having to revise down borrowing this year by ONE BILLION POUNDS, I checked this month's figures. It has been revised down by £2.6bn. Pocket money!!
Wonder if Hammond purred down the line when he was told?
Possibly the better news for the Chancellor is that the OBR's forecast for the full financial year looks pessimistic. Net borrowing for the last four months of last year was something like £1bn (because January returns a surplus).
Borrowing in the year so far has been £63.8 billion (subject to revision!). If we add £1bn that gives us £64.8bn against OBR forecast £68.2 billion. Now of course that is a rough and ready calculation.
That might not be optimistic enough - although sometimes these revision only come to light after the headline figures have been announced. Tax receipts are up far more than spending is down - that is to say, barely at all. Therefore it's January's receipts that could surprise on the upside.
Sounds like steady as she goes. A bit of extra breathing room is no bad thing, although let's hope the downward trajectory continues.
In all of this the dynamic in Europe has changed dramatically this week with the election of Trump on a pro UK and pro UK trade deal while at the same time marginalising the EU.
His recent statements confirmed that he will only do deals with Germany, France etc on a Country by Country basis and will not trade with the EU as a block.
I do believe that this has opened an opportunity for a sensible deal between tbe EU and the UK and now we are going ahead we need as a nation to be confident and outgoing and to stop the sniping
Notice that Trump has no meeting planned with Merkel until the G7 in May
From RTE ,British Prime Minister Theresa May has declined an invitation from Enda Kenny to address the Dail while on an official visit to Ireland .Why would she do that ?
She has apologised but her diary is full which when you think she is in Philadelphia on Thursday, the White House on Friday and meeting with Erdogan in Turkey on Saturday and a visit to China rather underlines it
I think Theresa May will be travelling extensively over the coming months as she meets leaders of Countries, not just in Europe, but worldwide
Incidentally having last month derided the ONS for having to revise down borrowing this year by ONE BILLION POUNDS, I checked this month's figures. It has been revised down by £2.6bn. Pocket money!!
Wonder if Hammond purred down the line when he was told?
Possibly the better news for the Chancellor is that the OBR's forecast for the full financial year looks pessimistic. Net borrowing for the last four months of last year was something like £1bn (because January returns a surplus).
Borrowing in the year so far has been £63.8 billion (subject to revision!). If we add £1bn that gives us £64.8bn against OBR forecast £68.2 billion. Now of course that is a rough and ready calculation.
That might not be optimistic enough - although sometimes these revision only come to light after the headline figures have been announced. Tax receipts are up far more than spending is down - that is to say, barely at all. Therefore it's January's receipts that could surprise on the upside.
Sounds like steady as she goes. A bit of extra breathing room is no bad thing, although let's hope the downward trajectory continues.
I wonder if Hammond will manage not to spend it. I hope so; if there is an Article 50 shcok it would be best if the public finances were otherwise in order.
She has apologised but her diary is full which when you think she is in Philadelphia on Thursday, the White House on Friday and meeting with Erdogan in Turkey on Saturday and a visit to China rather underlines it
I think Theresa May will be travelling extensively over the coming months as she meets leaders of Countries, not just in Europe, but worldwide
The story says she will be in Ireland, just doesn't want to address the Dail.
I think that's more than balanced compared to the millions Presdients spend putting their mistresses up in official accommodation/protection. I'm not even kidding.
Where I would disagree slightly is with regard to the LD messaging. Attacking Labour does not, of itself, provide a reason to vote Lib Dem. It might just as well push voters to UKIP or, less probably, the Tories. The party that benefits - other than where there are ideological boundaries - will be the party best placed to oppose Labour.
It might also help Labour to remind people of their role as the 'Tories' little helpers'.
She has apologised but her diary is full which when you think she is in Philadelphia on Thursday, the White House on Friday and meeting with Erdogan in Turkey on Saturday and a visit to China rather underlines it
I think Theresa May will be travelling extensively over the coming months as she meets leaders of Countries, not just in Europe, but worldwide
The story says she will be in Ireland, just doesn't want to address the Dail.
Question for PBers: which seat do you think Labour is most likely to lose, Copeland or Stoke Central?
Everyone seems to think Copeland so I am going to say Stoke. It is also the seat I would prefer us to lose.
Stoke. Without question.
The midlands are not going to be kind to Mr Corbyn's party...
That said, the tories have a much better chance of taking Copeland than stoke.
The demographics in Stoke Central are the best for Labour of the three Stoke seats - lowest number of White British, owner occupiers and retired people:
There were also 14% in full time education in 2011 for those who expect Labour to do well among students.
She has apologised but her diary is full which when you think she is in Philadelphia on Thursday, the White House on Friday and meeting with Erdogan in Turkey on Saturday and a visit to China rather underlines it
I think Theresa May will be travelling extensively over the coming months as she meets leaders of Countries, not just in Europe, but worldwide
The story says she will be in Ireland, just doesn't want to address the Dail.
In all of this the dynamic in Europe has changed dramatically this week with the election of Trump on a pro UK and pro UK trade deal while at the same time marginalising the EU.
His recent statements confirmed that he will only do deals with Germany, France etc on a Country by Country basis and will not trade with the EU as a block.
I do believe that this has opened an opportunity for a sensible deal between tbe EU and the UK and now we are going ahead we need as a nation to be confident and outgoing and to stop the sniping
Notice that Trump has no meeting planned with Merkel until the G7 in May
From RTE ,British Prime Minister Theresa May has declined an invitation from Enda Kenny to address the Dail while on an official visit to Ireland .Why would she do that ?
She has apologised but her diary is full which when you think she is in Philadelphia on Thursday, the White House on Friday and meeting with Erdogan in Turkey on Saturday and a visit to China rather underlines it
I think Theresa May will be travelling extensively over the coming months as she meets leaders of Countries, not just in Europe, but worldwide
It certainly is an all consuming job .I think the USA system of 8 years as POTUS is correct..Should be similar in Britian .However I do think many people are not taking the Irish border problem seriously enough when we leave the EU.
Hadn't realised that it was the job of the Irish Parliament to scrutinise her!
They probably have some awkward questions about borders...
They are up for negotiation and you cannot have the answer till it has been negotiated. And remainers, with respect, need to get used to no running commentary
A belated hurrah for Gina Miller and the Supreme court. It does seem that logic has a place in our governance.
Certainly hurrah for the Supreme Court.
Miller is just a sad Remainer desperate to stop Brexit (it made her sick remember) by any means possible and too thick to realise that in the long run she has probably made it more straightforward.
This result is great as it reduces the power of the executive, neuters the threats from the Scots Parliament and puts no specific restrictions on Brexit beyond quite rightly saying it must be started by Parliament. All round a very good day for democracy.
The sovereignty of Parliament is supreme.
What if Parliament through an amendment to the A50 bill says the final deal must be put to a referendum ?
It would rather self defeating given that such a referendum would not prevent Brexit. It would simply mean we left without a deal.
That is where you are wrong. There is no provision in the EU referendum act which says that the result is binding.
Another court case!
Would not go anywhere the Courts. Failing to actually leave the EU would result in a constitutional crisis and civil disobedience.
By civil disobedience, do you mean rowdy marches or something violent with pitchforks? If the latter, they'll be treated as rioting and put down with exemplary jail sentences.
More likely is UKIP win the next general election if the Tories fail to implement Brexit but there is almost no chance of that happening bar an Osborne coup
Hadn't realised that it was the job of the Irish Parliament to scrutinise her!
They probably have some awkward questions about borders...
My guess is that the 75% of Irish agri-businesses that rely on EU contributions to stay solvent might be a major concern. After all, they are many billions short, all of a sudden.
Perhaps they are wondering which major EU country will advocate for low corporation taxes?
In all of this the dynamic in Europe has changed dramatically this week with the election of Trump on a pro UK and pro UK trade deal while at the same time marginalising the EU.
His recent statements confirmed that he will only do deals with Germany, France etc on a Country by Country basis and will not trade with the EU as a block.
I do believe that this has opened an opportunity for a sensible deal between tbe EU and the UK and now we are going ahead we need as a nation to be confident and outgoing and to stop the sniping
Notice that Trump has no meeting planned with Merkel until the G7 in May
From RTE ,British Prime Minister Theresa May has declined an invitation from Enda Kenny to address the Dail while on an official visit to Ireland .Why would she do that ?
She has apologised but her diary is full which when you think she is in Philadelphia on Thursday, the White House on Friday and meeting with Erdogan in Turkey on Saturday and a visit to China rather underlines it
I think Theresa May will be travelling extensively over the coming months as she meets leaders of Countries, not just in Europe, but worldwide
It certainly is an all consuming job .I think the USA system of 8 years as POTUS is correct..Should be similar in Britian .However I do think many people are not taking the Irish border problem seriously enough when we leave the EU.
I think it is one of the big issues along with EU citizens in UK but somehow I cannot see a hard border being the answer in Ireland
The one thing that is lacking is patience but it is understandable as the uncertainty does effect lives. That is why those who want to delay the process are so wrong as we need to get on with it fast
In all of this the dynamic in Europe has changed dramatically this week with the election of Trump on a pro UK and pro UK trade deal while at the same time marginalising the EU.
His recent statements confirmed that he will only do deals with Germany, France etc on a Country by Country basis and will not trade with the EU as a block.
I do believe that this has opened an opportunity for a sensible deal between tbe EU and the UK and now we are going ahead we need as a nation to be confident and outgoing and to stop the sniping
Notice that Trump has no meeting planned with Merkel until the G7 in May
From RTE ,British Prime Minister Theresa May has declined an invitation from Enda Kenny to address the Dail while on an official visit to Ireland .Why would she do that ?
She has apologised but her diary is full which when you think she is in Philadelphia on Thursday, the White House on Friday and meeting with Erdogan in Turkey on Saturday and a visit to China rather underlines it
I think Theresa May will be travelling extensively over the coming months as she meets leaders of Countries, not just in Europe, but worldwide
It certainly is an all consuming job .I think the USA system of 8 years as POTUS is correct..Should be similar in Britian .However I do think many people are not taking the Irish border problem seriously enough when we leave the EU.
I think it is one of the big issues along with EU citizens in UK but somehow I cannot see a hard border being the answer in Ireland
The one thing that is lacking is patience but it is understandable as the uncertainty does effect lives. That is why those who want to delay the process are so wrong as we need to get on with it fast
Ireland - Trump to the left, Brexit to the right...stuck in the middle with EU.
Comments
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/timeseries/hf6x/pusf
Now what did the 'near perfect' one forecast in his first Budget:
' Public sector net debt as a share of GDP will be 62 per cent this year, before peaking at 70 per cent in 2013-14. Because of our action today, it then begins to fall, to 69 per cent in 2014-15 and then 67 per cent in 2015-16. '
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/budget/7846849/Budget-2010-Full-text-of-George-Osbornes-statement.html
I also see that in calendar years 2011 through to 2016 the government borrowed a few million under 600 billion quid.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/timeseries/dzls/pusf
How is the country surviving under such 'austerity'.
Dublin -> London
London -> Miami
Miami -> San Francisco
San Francisco -> Miami
Miami -> London
London -> dublin
I didn't like to say to him that I think you might need to get a new job.
Westminster is broken. Utterly broken. Just as much as Europe. If not more so. Giving more power to it is like given whisky to an alcoholic.
As such Brexit fixes nothing. Arguably it makes things worse.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38734450
http://www.bringitwisconsin.com/how-do-i-get-free-state-id-card
Whatever you do and however easy you make it - someone will complain.
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/745723958620725248
This will not be against the letter or the spirit of the Brexit vote.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/24/what-happens-next-with-article-50-and-brexit
The midlands are not going to be kind to Mr Corbyn's party...
That said, the tories have a much better chance of taking Copeland than stoke.
We would be in a hugely weak bargaining position. A50 triggered, and out on our ear but with a democratic mandate to rejoin. Not a hand I would like the UK to hold.
He won his last election by a 5% margin. If he doesn't stand next time because of ill health the Republicans might have a chance of winning there.
Very shortly (as I must be off) the EU was created in order to solve the failure of Continental Europe to create and sustain liberal democratic nations in the first half of the twentieth century. Britain did not think that its liberal democracy failed in the first half of the twentieth century. On the contrary it survived. Some of this was down to geography but some was down to the political and moral choices Britain made. So deep down it does not accept that the nation state has failed.
Whereas if you were Italian (and I am) the nation state has been a pathetic disaster right from the start. Italians like the EU because it is better than their own corrupt and ineffective polity.
If Westminster is broken we should fix it. Not abandon it. Or seek to shelter in an even more broken, distant institution.
Comparing the three Stoke constituencies the falls in the Labour vote share between 2005 and 2015 were:
Central -13%
North -16%
South -8%
Labour's problem in Stoke appears to be one of steady and widespread decline. In 1997 the three constituencies had Labour votes of 66%, 65% and 62% but these had reduced to 39%, 40% and 39% in 2015. Even in the disastrous election of 1983 Labour's vote shares were 48%, 46% and 48%,
Yes. A50 says we are out 2 years after triggering. Unless (a) there's a deal in place, or (b) all 27 other nations agree an extension (so not under UK control).
Reality is it will be full Brexit or deal; there is no practical way back.
And that's without even factoring in the ratification processes on their side.
https://fullfact.org/law/why-there-brexit-court-case-ireland/
There were also 14% in full time education in 2011 for those who expect Labour to do well among students.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/stoke-on-trentcentral/
As I've said before (although I'm no lawyer), I cannot see how A50 can be revocable, as that would render the whole "2 year" rule redundant. Since presumably it has a purpose, A50 is irrevocable. Any ambiguity must be cleared up to still make sense of the rest of the rules.
There was less worry about debt and there was much more worry about the current account deficit. I don't think that it was then as high as it is today. That seems staggering, given what the UK went through from 1979 onwards, to allegedly slaughter 'lame ducks' and enable UK industry to compete on world markets.
His recent statements confirmed that he will only do deals with Germany, France etc on a Country by Country basis and will not trade with the EU as a block.
I do believe that this has opened an opportunity for a sensible deal between tbe EU and the UK and now we are going ahead we need as a nation to be confident and outgoing and to stop the sniping
Notice that Trump has no meeting planned with Merkel until the G7 in May
Leave/Remain was fundamentally 70-30 without the influence of economic fear according to the polling Cummings revealed recently.
But I expect they in common with the voters will just demand Parliament gets on with quickly
Borrowing in the year so far has been £63.8 billion (subject to revision!). If we add £1bn that gives us £64.8bn against OBR forecast £68.2 billion. Now of course that is a rough and ready calculation.
That might not be optimistic enough - although sometimes these revision only come to light after the headline figures have been announced. Tax receipts are up far more than spending is down - that is to say, barely at all. Therefore it's January's receipts that could surprise on the upside.
Instead it was hubris followed by nemesis.
It will be a rare event for government borrowing to come in below forecast.
I think Theresa May will be travelling extensively over the coming months as she meets leaders of Countries, not just in Europe, but worldwide
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/823998787131740162
Doesn't sound like a diary clash
I think that's more than balanced compared to the millions Presdients spend putting their mistresses up in official accommodation/protection. I'm not even kidding.
Perhaps they are wondering which major EU country will advocate for low corporation taxes?
The one thing that is lacking is patience but it is understandable as the uncertainty does effect lives. That is why those who want to delay the process are so wrong as we need to get on with it fast