Whether people support Article 50 being invoked or not on 29th March is not really a long term issue. It's going to happen and that part of the process will soon be forgotten. What matters a lot more is how the country reacts to what happens next. Will voters buy the claim that it's all the EU's fault that the UK either has to take a deal that does not deliver a clean break or walk off a cliff edge? If views are as split as the polling indicates that is far from certain.
We may already know the answer:
And do you think the other member states of the European Union will or will not agree to the sort of Brexit deal that Theresa May is proposing? Net agree: -36
Theresa May suggested that Britain would walk away from negotiations if other European Union countries are not prepared to offer a good deal. This would mean Britain leaving the EU without a new trade deal and tariffs being applies to imports and exports between Britain and the EU. Do you think Britain should or should not be prepared to walk away from a bad deal? Walk Away: 55 Get any deal: 24
Of course things can change, but I wouldn't count on a huge swing of sympathy in favour of the EU......
We don't like to be bullied. It brings out our stubborn streak. Plenty of the EU apparatchiks fail to understand this part of our national character, and think it instead might shake us into our senses (as they would see it) to Remain.
They will be sorely disappointed. If the EU is unreasonable, I expect public opinion to unite solidly around Mrs. May.
They will also expect May to find solutions. Walking away is not an end in itself if it essentially means higher prices, lower inward investment, further public service cuts and significant job losses; as well as all the other stuff that will come on top.
Bad budgets and governments mean all those things. So do exogenous events.
I doubt the majority of the public will notice. Or blame the Tories.
The public will blame the government for job losses, falls in living standards and public service cuts. It always does. The link with Brexit may well not be made. But that is by the by.
While that is true, the full economic impact of whatever deal is or isn't agreed is likely to be fully felt only after the next general election (which I'm assuming for now will be in 2020).
If you are here legally you are very welcome to stay.
Let's see if other EU countries return the compliment, either way our stance should be unequivocal. But let's be honest and realistic - there is not a cat in hell's chance that Spain and France are going to deport wealthy ex pats.
And if they say. We'd like to make the same commitment but first you need to agree to this... what do we do?
Not entirely surprised to find that those who expressed an opinion on Brexit, have not changed their minds. What would be interesting to know is who supports the democratic result and now supports implementing A50.
If Brexit does go bad... It won't help the lib Dems to say i told you so.
So its our fault you didn't persuade us?
Not a lot of mileage in that one......
If Brexit does go bad don't you think that the Brexiteers would deserve and get some of the blame?
Certainly - both sides lied horribly 'status quo' vs £350/£250/ £100 million for the NHS - and May has wisely stuck Brexiters in the Brexit ministries - so if it does go tits up they get to own that too.
However, however bad an idea Brexit is, its not as bad an idea as trying to circumvent the result of the referendum.....
If Brexit does turn out to be a really bad idea, think economic hardship, then the idea of 'circumventing the result of the referendum' might become rather popular. The advisory referendum result was after all very close and many thought we would remain in the single market.
Well, that's where we differ. I believe in the people's absolute right to get it wrong. Anything else isn't 'democracy'.
But the people won't blame themselves; that is why we have politicians. As we see from opinion polls that ask people to recollect how they voted in past elections, the people even have the luxury of changing our (recollected) vote in retrospect.
If you are here legally you are very welcome to stay.
Let's see if other EU countries return the compliment, either way our stance should be unequivocal. But let's be honest and realistic - there is not a cat in hell's chance that Spain and France are going to deport wealthy ex pats.
And if they say. We'd like to make the same commitment but first you need to agree to this... what do we do?
I would say that regardless of your stance people are welcome to stay here.
And then say to the public: Do you see why you voted to Leave?
Whether people support Article 50 being invoked or not on 29th March is not really a long term issue. It's going to happen and that part of the process will soon be forgotten. What matters a lot more is how the country reacts to what happens next. Will voters buy the claim that it's all the EU's fault that the UK either has to take a deal that does not deliver a clean break or walk off a cliff edge? If views are as split as the polling indicates that is far from certain.
We may already know the answer:
And do you think the other member states of the European Union will or will not agree to the sort of Brexit deal that Theresa May is proposing? Net agree: -36
Theresa May suggested that Britain would walk away from negotiations if other European Union countries are not prepared to offer a good deal. This would mean Britain leaving the EU without a new trade deal and tariffs being applies to imports and exports between Britain and the EU. Do you think Britain should or should not be prepared to walk away from a bad deal? Walk Away: 55 Get any deal: 24
Of course things can change, but I wouldn't count on a huge swing of sympathy in favour of the EU......
We don't like to be bullied. It brings out our stubborn streak. Plenty of the EU apparatchiks fail to understand this part of our national character, and think it instead might shake us into our senses (as they would see it) to Remain.
They will be sorely disappointed. If the EU is unreasonable, I expect public opinion to unite solidly around Mrs. May.
They will also expect May to find solutions. Walking away is not an end in itself if it essentially means higher prices, lower inward investment, further public service cuts and significant job losses; as well as all the other stuff that will come on top.
Bad budgets and governments mean all those things. So do exogenous events.
I doubt the majority of the public will notice. Or blame the Tories.
The public will blame the government for job losses, falls in living standards and public service cuts. It always does. The link with Brexit may well not be made. But that is by the by.
While that is true, the full economic impact of whatever deal is or isn't agreed is likely to be fully felt only after the next general election (which I'm assuming for now will be in 2020).
It is interesting and slightly odd that there has been so little movement on this. I wonder if there is any underlying churn. The explanation is probably that so little has happened to date. Whilst the claims of immediate disaster have been proven false the response of remainers has been to say, well, we haven't left yet.
I agree that the government, largely made up of former remainers after all, should have tried harder to bring us together again. It is possible that yesterday's outrage might help with this.
It could do, but things quickly move on in politics.
We saw messages of support and acts of solidarity from across Europe yesterday and it looks like a number of non-UK EU citizens were directly caught up in what happened. It would be nice to think that this might also register. Despite last June's vote, there is much more that unites us with our European neighbours than divides us. It would be nice if all those negotiating after next week have that at the front of their minds at all times. But that is very doubtful.
Oh I agree. Personally I would start the negotiations with a unilateral declaration that all EU citizens resident on 23rd June last year have the right to remain in the UK indefinitely. It is an inevitable result of the negotiations anyway and would be a very positive note on which to start.
Barnier has said that an agreement on the status of EU/UK citizens is his first objective from negotiations. Just a shame he didn't take the deal that was offered 6 months ago and release a lot of EU citizens from unnecessary worry
You are quick to criticise others for their negotiating strategy yet expect Barnier to accept a point before negotiations have even begun.
Not entirely surprised to find that those who expressed an opinion on Brexit, have not changed their minds. What would be interesting to know is who supports the democratic result and now supports implementing A50.
If Brexit does go bad... It won't help the lib Dems to say i told you so.
So its our fault you didn't persuade us?
Not a lot of mileage in that one......
If Brexit does go bad don't you think that the Brexiteers would deserve and get some of the blame?
Certainly - both sides lied horribly 'status quo' vs £350/£250/ £100 million for the NHS - and May has wisely stuck Brexiters in the Brexit ministries - so if it does go tits up they get to own that too.
However, however bad an idea Brexit is, its not as bad an idea as trying to circumvent the result of the referendum.....
If Brexit does turn out to be a really bad idea, think economic hardship, then the idea of 'circumventing the result of the referendum' might become rather popular. The advisory referendum result was after all very close and many thought we would remain in the single market.
Well, that's where we differ. I believe in the people's absolute right to get it wrong. Anything else isn't 'democracy'.
In a democracy it's also permissible to rectify perceived mistakes. Voters are allowed to change their minds. In fact, they have been known to.
Certainly - the Lib Dems are welcome to campaign on taking us back into the EU, and if they secure a majority on such a manifesto commitment they should open negotiations.
What would not be acceptable would be to not implement the result of a referendum - which the government had told the electorate would be implemented.....
They will also expect May to find solutions. Walking away is not a sustainable solution if it essentially means higher prices, lower inward investment, further public service cuts and significant job losses; as well as all the other stuff that will come on top.
The mere act of voting Leave was meant to cause all these things yet there is very little sign of any of it so there's little reason to be too concerned
If anything, it appears that voting Leave has repaired the public sector finances and finally killed stagflation/deflation.
A one-off adjustment in the exchange rate won't have changed the fundamentals re. Stagflation. Particularly as I suspect that, after A50 is done, the £ will head back slowly towards $1.4.
I was with some very gloomy fund managers (Ruffer and Newton) the other week, both predicting a very poor medium term outlook. I said to the second guy that it was interesting he agreed with the first when markets were surging upwards, and he told me that they didn't agree at all; Ruffer expects an inflationary surge, bad for shares, whilst Newton expect renewed deflationary pressure, also bad for shares. DYOR etc.
I have been spending quite a lot of time with fund managers recently. The general view was that the FTSE is probably a bit toppy but remains a good way of hedging UK specific risks because so much of its earnings are international. There seemed to be an expectation that bond yields will recover somewhat reducing their capital value but generally helping pension funds such as the one I was being advised on. My perception was that we were not in a market where there were lots of obvious investment opportunities arising which suggests growth is going to be pretty modest going forward.
That doesn't necessarily make it true, of course. F1 teams and drivers are well-versed in the art of expectations management and plain, old-fashioned bullshitting, but it does indicate that Ferrari and Mercedes may well be at a comparable level.
If you are here legally you are very welcome to stay.
Let's see if other EU countries return the compliment, either way our stance should be unequivocal. But let's be honest and realistic - there is not a cat in hell's chance that Spain and France are going to deport wealthy ex pats.
And if they say. We'd like to make the same commitment but first you need to agree to this... what do we do?
We would say that you need to consider very carefully what kind of relationship with a neighbour you want. We have recognised that your citizens are people who deserve to be treated decently and not like bargaining chips. Do you want to be thought of differently?
Aesop's fable of the sun and the wind is how Britain should be approaching this negotiation. But our leaders are being idiotic about this.
If you are here legally you are very welcome to stay.
Let's see if other EU countries return the compliment, either way our stance should be unequivocal. But let's be honest and realistic - there is not a cat in hell's chance that Spain and France are going to deport wealthy ex pats.
And if they say. We'd like to make the same commitment but first you need to agree to this... what do we do?
We say, OK - we do not believe that we should use people as pawns in a negotiation, which is why we have made the decision we have. If you are going to expel British citizens or deny them rights they currently enjoy we will deal with that on a bilateral basis. There are plenty of things we can do that do not involve creating huge anxiety for people who have come to our country to settle perfectly legally and in good faith.
Whether people support Article 50 being invoked or not on 29th March is not really a long term issue. It's going to happen and that part of the process will soon be forgotten. What matters a lot more is how the country reacts to what happens next. Will voters buy the claim that it's all the EU's fault that the UK either has to take a deal that does not deliver a clean break or walk off a cliff edge? If views are as split as the polling indicates that is far from certain.
We may already know the answer:
And do you think the other member states of the European Union will or will not agree to the sort of Brexit deal that Theresa May is proposing? Net agree: -36
Theresa May suggested that Britain would walk away from negotiations if other European Union countries are not prepared to offer a good deal. This would mean Britain leaving the EU without a new trade deal and tariffs being applies to imports and exports between Britain and the EU. Do you think Britain should or should not be prepared to walk away from a bad deal? Walk Away: 55 Get any deal: 24
Of course things can change, but I wouldn't count on a huge swing of sympathy in favour of the EU......
The best template we have for the public's future reaction is the Iraq war. At the beginning there was marginal support as there is here. As it began to unwind the reputation of those supporters (some reluctant) were trashed no matter how late to the party they arrived and for self preservation many jumped ship anyway.
I'm sure the same will apply here. Whether reasonable or not unless it becomes an unmitigated success May's government will pay the same price Blair and Blairism paid. March 29th will go down in infamy and she and her government will be the only ones carrying the baby. As so often the real villains like Farage and UKIP and the Tory Ultras will long be forgotten.
Whether Brexit is seen as success or failure will mostly (unlike the Iraq war) depend on the underlying values of the people making that judgement. The economic case will never be settled one way or the other.
Not entirely surprised to find that those who expressed an opinion on Brexit, have not changed their minds. What would be interesting to know is who supports the democratic result and now supports implementing A50.
If Brexit does go bad... It won't help the lib Dems to say i told you so.
So its our fault you didn't persuade us?
Not a lot of mileage in that one......
If Brexit does go bad don't you think that the Brexiteers would deserve and get some of the blame?
Certainly - both sides lied horribly 'status quo' vs £350/£250/ £100 million for the NHS - and May has wisely stuck Brexiters in the Brexit ministries - so if it does go tits up they get to own that too.
However, however bad an idea Brexit is, its not as bad an idea as trying to circumvent the result of the referendum.....
If Brexit does turn out to be a really bad idea, think economic hardship, then the idea of 'circumventing the result of the referendum' might become rather popular. The advisory referendum result was after all very close and many thought we would remain in the single market.
Well, that's where we differ. I believe in the people's absolute right to get it wrong. Anything else isn't 'democracy'.
In a democracy it's also permissible to rectify perceived mistakes. Voters are allowed to change their minds. In fact, they have been known to.
Certainly - the Lib Dems are welcome to campaign on taking us back into the EU, and if they secure a majority on such a manifesto commitment they should open negotiations.
What would not be acceptable would be to not implement the result of a referendum - which the government had told the electorate would be implemented.....
The latter is right in principle, but (in unlikely circumstances) could turn into stubborn stupidity if leaving becomes an obviously damaging thing to do. I am not predicting such, but politics is ultimately the art of the pragmatic, and pushing ahead regardless is not pragmatic. To choose an extreme example, if Russia suddenly sent its tanks into eastern Europe does anyone think the leaving process wouldn't be suspended?
"We would say that you need to consider very carefully what kind of relationship with a neighbour you want."
That will depend on which bureaucrat you speak to, Juncker is not keen on one at all.
It could all be bluff, but if the Hawks in Europe take the helm, we'll need all the leverage we can get, because they will use UK ex-pats as negotiating pawns.
If you are here legally you are very welcome to stay.
Let's see if other EU countries return the compliment, either way our stance should be unequivocal. But let's be honest and realistic - there is not a cat in hell's chance that Spain and France are going to deport wealthy ex pats.
And if they say. We'd like to make the same commitment but first you need to agree to this... what do we do?
We say, OK - we do not believe that we should use people as pawns in a negotiation, which is why we have made the decision we have. If you are going to expel British citizens or deny them rights they currently enjoy we will deal with that on a bilateral basis. There are plenty of things we can do that do not involve creating huge anxiety for people who have come to our country to settle perfectly legally and in good faith.
Or we shift all EU migrants into the existing visa structures over 5 years and halt automatic entry of new EU migrants. Goodbye Romanian Big Issue sellers...
Not entirely surprised to find that those who expressed an opinion on Brexit, have not changed their minds. What would be interesting to know is who supports the democratic result and now supports implementing A50.
If Brexit does go bad... It won't help the lib Dems to say i told you so.
So its our fault you didn't persuade us?
Not a lot of mileage in that one......
If Brexit does go bad don't you think that the Brexiteers would deserve and get some of the blame?
Certainly - both sides lied horribly 'status quo' vs £350/£250/ £100 million for the NHS - and May has wisely stuck Brexiters in the Brexit ministries - so if it does go tits up they get to own that too.
However, however bad an idea Brexit is, its not as bad an idea as trying to circumvent the result of the referendum.....
If Brexit does turn out to be a really bad idea, think economic hardship, then the idea of 'circumventing the result of the referendum' might become rather popular. The advisory referendum result was after all very close and many thought we would remain in the single market.
I suspect that whatever shifts in public mood happen at the late stages of the process or immediately after it is concluded, there will be no political will for reversing the referendum.
Theresa May has bet the farm on Brexit. Some would say she didn't actually have much of a choice - she knew whoever got the job she was going for would forever go down in history as the 'Brexit PM' , for better or for worse.
Once Article 50 is invoked, I think it's doubtless that We Are Out. The fantasy of revoking Article 50 is a pipe dream - the national humiliation that would occur if a government, having spent close to two years passing circa 15 laws and negotiating at the European level would be absolute if they simply turned around at the end of the process and said "oh, actually, we've changed our mind - we want back in."
There's also the issue that if we ever want to apply to rejoin the EU, there is no way we will get the concessions and opt-outs we had from our first period of membership. That will mean adopting everything - the Euro, no rebate, an EU army (if that has been established in the interim).. these are all things that are politically unpalatable to this country.
Brexit appears to me to be irreversible, no matter what deal is struck, for the short to medium term. In the long term, who knows, because you don't know how the world will develop in the interim, but we're talking a good few decades, at least, I'd think - assuming the EU still exists and is doing well for itself.
Not entirely surprised to find that those who expressed an opinion on Brexit, have not changed their minds. What would be interesting to know is who supports the democratic result and now supports implementing A50.
If Brexit does go bad... It won't help the lib Dems to say i told you so.
So its our fault you didn't persuade us?
Not a lot of mileage in that one......
If Brexit does go bad don't you think that the Brexiteers would deserve and get some of the blame?
Certainly - both sides lied horribly 'status quo' vs £350/£250/ £100 million for the NHS - and May has wisely stuck Brexiters in the Brexit ministries - so if it does go tits up they get to own that too.
However, however bad an idea Brexit is, its not as bad an idea as trying to circumvent the result of the referendum.....
If Brexit does turn out to be a really bad idea, think economic hardship, then the idea of 'circumventing the result of the referendum' might become rather popular. The advisory referendum result was after all very close and many thought we would remain in the single market.
Well, that's where we differ. I believe in the people's absolute right to get it wrong. Anything else isn't 'democracy'.
In a democracy it's also permissible to rectify perceived mistakes. Voters are allowed to change their minds. In fact, they have been known to.
Certainly - the Lib Dems are welcome to campaign on taking us back into the EU, and if they secure a majority on such a manifesto commitment they should open negotiations.
What would not be acceptable would be to not implement the result of a referendum - which the government had told the electorate would be implemented.....
It would be perfectly acceptable if the electorate no longer wanted it implemented.
Not entirely surprised to find that those who expressed an opinion on Brexit, have not changed their minds. What would be interesting to know is who supports the democratic result and now supports implementing A50.
If Brexit does go bad... It won't help the lib Dems to say i told you so.
So its our fault you didn't persuade us?
Not a lot of mileage in that one......
If Brexit does go bad don't you think that the Brexiteers would deserve and get some of the blame?
Certainly - both sides lied horribly 'status quo' vs £350/£250/ £100 million for the NHS - and May has wisely stuck Brexiters in the Brexit ministries - so if it does go tits up they get to own that too.
However, however bad an idea Brexit is, its not as bad an idea as trying to circumvent the result of the referendum.....
If Brexit does turn out to be a really bad idea, think economic hardship, then the idea of 'circumventing the result of the referendum' might become rather popular. The advisory referendum result was after all very close and many thought we would remain in the single market.
Well, that's where we differ. I believe in the people's absolute right to get it wrong. Anything else isn't 'democracy'.
In a democracy it's also permissible to rectify perceived mistakes. Voters are allowed to change their minds. In fact, they have been known to.
Certainly - the Lib Dems are welcome to campaign on taking us back into the EU, and if they secure a majority on such a manifesto commitment they should open negotiations.
What would not be acceptable would be to not implement the result of a referendum - which the government had told the electorate would be implemented.....
It would be perfectly acceptable if the electorate no longer wanted it implemented.
"We would say that you need to consider very carefully what kind of relationship with a neighbour you want."
That will depend on which bureaucrat you speak to, Juncker is not keen on one at all.
It could all be bluff, but if the Hawks in Europe take the helm, we'll need all the leverage we can get, because they will use UK ex-pats as negotiating pawns.
The question will be (subject to Merkel's re-election) does she rule or Junckers.
I would suggest Merkel and the National leaders will decide the deals
"We would say that you need to consider very carefully what kind of relationship with a neighbour you want."
That will depend on which bureaucrat you speak to, Juncker is not keen on one at all.
It could all be bluff, but if the Hawks in Europe take the helm, we'll need all the leverage we can get, because they will use UK ex-pats as negotiating pawns.
The question will be (subject to Merkel's re-election) does she rule or Junckers.
I would suggest Merkel and the National leaders will decide the deals
If you are here legally you are very welcome to stay.
Let's see if other EU countries return the compliment, either way our stance should be unequivocal. But let's be honest and realistic - there is not a cat in hell's chance that Spain and France are going to deport wealthy ex pats.
And if they say. We'd like to make the same commitment but first you need to agree to this... what do we do?
We would say that you need to consider very carefully what kind of relationship with a neighbour you want. We have recognised that your citizens are people who deserve to be treated decently and not like bargaining chips. Do you want to be thought of differently?
Aesop's fable of the sun and the wind is how Britain should be approaching this negotiation. But our leaders are being idiotic about this.
Yep, so we say:
regardless of your stance re UK citizens, EVERYBODY that is here legally can remain.
It's what those in government do. They take responsibility. Well, unless you are LibDems in Coalition....
Nice try. But governments usually try and pass the buck somewhere else, be it unavoidable global events or onto their predecessor. It doesn't always work.
Not entirely surprised to find that those who expressed an opinion on Brexit, have not changed their minds. What would be interesting to know is who supports the democratic result and now supports implementing A50.
If Brexit does go bad... It won't help the lib Dems to say i told you so.
So its our fault you didn't persuade us?
Not a lot of mileage in that one......
If Brexit does go bad don't you think that the Brexiteers would deserve and get some of the blame?
Certainly - both sides lied horribly 'status quo' vs £350/£250/ £100 million for the NHS - and May has wisely stuck Brexiters in the Brexit ministries - so if it does go tits up they get to own that too.
However, however bad an idea Brexit is, its not as bad an idea as trying to circumvent the result of the referendum.....
If Brexit does turn out to be a really bad idea, think economic hardship, then the idea of 'circumventing the result of the referendum' might become rather popular. The advisory referendum result was after all very close and many thought we would remain in the single market.
Well, that's where we differ. I believe in the people's absolute right to get it wrong. Anything else isn't 'democracy'.
In a democracy it's also permissible to rectify perceived mistakes. Voters are allowed to change their minds. In fact, they have been known to.
Certainly - the Lib Dems are welcome to campaign on taking us back into the EU, and if they secure a majority on such a manifesto commitment they should open negotiations.
What would not be acceptable would be to not implement the result of a referendum - which the government had told the electorate would be implemented.....
It would be perfectly acceptable if the electorate no longer wanted it implemented.
And the process to find that out is to elect political parties who campaign on that basis. Next check is in 2020.
Trackers are all very well but what we do know is that Leave won by a narrow but clear margin, wider in terms of constituencies than the popular vote though and the PM is implementing the will of those voters. They are also largely irrelevant now as May has said there will be no second referendum, only a Labour election victory on a platform of reversing Brexit could do that now.Given Mori last week had over 60% putting immigration control as a vital part of the Brexit negotiations, a figure which obviously included some Remain voters too and was particularly supported by voters from her own party and UKIP, inevitably May will also be pushing that too
Not entirely surprised to find that those who expressed an opinion on Brexit, have not changed their minds. What would be interesting to know is who supports the democratic result and now supports implementing A50.
This is exactly right. Mike's conflating two different things. Indeed, I'm in the category directly affected here. I voted Remain and would rather we'd have stayed in. But we didn't: we as a country voted to leave, so leave we must and Article 50 must therefore be invoked. My guess would be that somewhere close to three-quarters of the country will support invoking Article 50, either because they directly want it done as Leavers, or because they believe the result of the referendum should be respected and implemented.
It is interesting and slightly odd that there has been so little movement on this. I wonder if there is any underlying churn. The explanation is probably that so little has happened to date. Whilst the claims of immediate disaster have been proven false the response of remainers has been to say, well, we haven't left yet.
I agree that the government, largely made up of former remainers after all, should have tried harder to bring us together again. It is possible that yesterday's outrage might help with this.
It could do, but things quickly move on in politics.
We saw messages of support and acts of solidarity from across Europe yesterday and it looks like a number of non-UK EU citizens were directly caught up in what happened. It would be nice to think that this might also register. Despite last June's vote, there is much more that unites us with our European neighbours than divides us. It would be nice if all those negotiating after next week have that at the front of their minds at all times. But that is very doubtful.
Oh I agree. Personally I would start the negotiations with a unilateral declaration that all EU citizens resident on 23rd June last year have the right to remain in the UK indefinitely. It is an inevitable result of the negotiations anyway and would be a very positive note on which to start.
Barnier has said that an agreement on the status of EU/UK citizens is his first objective from negotiations. Just a shame he didn't take the deal that was offered 6 months ago and release a lot of EU citizens from unnecessary worry
You are quick to criticise others for their negotiating strategy yet expect Barnier to accept a point before negotiations have even begun.
The status of existing legal migrants should not even be a negotiating strategy. Both sides are at fault here and it angers me that May has decided to make this a bargaining point. But Barnier is equally as guilty. Both should have made clear that this was an issue that did not need to be part of negotiations.
The response to Juncker's threats in the Metro letters section was very telling yesterday. Almost all of them were highly critical of him, some defiantly so.
We don't like to be bullied. It brings out our stubborn streak. Plenty of the EU apparatchiks fail to understand this part of our national character, and think it instead might shake us into our senses (as they would see it) to Remain.
They will be sorely disappointed. If the EU is unreasonable, I expect public opinion to unite solidly around Mrs. May.
If Juncker and his pals have any doubts about how the British respond to threats they can take a look at today's papers and find the answer.
Whether people support Article 50 being invoked or not on 29th March is not really a long term issue. It's going to happen and that part of the process will soon be forgotten. What matters a lot more is how the country reacts to what happens next. Will voters buy the claim that it's all the EU's fault that the UK either has to take a deal that does not deliver a clean break or walk off a cliff edge? If views are as split as the polling indicates that is far from certain.
We may already know the answer:
And do you think the other member states of the European Union will or will not agree to the sort of Brexit deal that Theresa May is proposing? Net agree: -36
Theresa May suggested that Britain would walk away from negotiations if other European Union countries are not prepared to offer a good deal. This would mean Britain leaving the EU without a new trade deal and tariffs being applies to imports and exports between Britain and the EU. Do you think Britain should or should not be prepared to walk away from a bad deal? Walk Away: 55 Get any deal: 24
Of course things can change, but I wouldn't count on a huge swing of sympathy in favour of the EU......
The best template we have for the public's future reaction is the Iraq war. At the beginning there was marginal support as there is here. As it began to unwind the reputation of those supporters (some reluctant) were trashed no matter how late to the party they arrived and for self preservation many jumped ship anyway.
I'm sure the same will apply here. Whether reasonable or not unless it becomes an unmitigated success May's government will pay the same price Blair and Blairism paid. March 29th will go down in infamy and she and her government will be the only ones carrying the baby. As so often the real villains like Farage and UKIP and the Tory Ultras will long be forgotten.
Whether Brexit is seen as success or failure will mostly (unlike the Iraq war) depend on the underlying values of the people making that judgement. The economic case will never be settled one way or the other.
I really can't see that. The first hint of rising food prices hospital waiting lists out of control petrol prices going up unemployment rising car plants closing another sterling crisis....the sort of thing that can happen on anyone's watch. It will all be blamed on Brexit. The 'experts' who predicted just such failures are simply gagging to say 'we told you so. And they did.
Whether people support Article 50 being invoked or not on 29th March is not really a long term issue. It's going to happen and that part of the process will soon be forgotten. What matters a lot more is how the country reacts to what happens next. Will voters buy the claim that it's all the EU's fault that the UK either has to take a deal that does not deliver a clean break or walk off a cliff edge? If views are as split as the polling indicates that is far from certain.
We may already know the answer:
And do you think the other member states of the European Union will or will not agree to the sort of Brexit deal that Theresa May is proposing? Net agree: -36
Theresa May suggested that Britain would walk away from negotiations if other European Union countries are not prepared to offer a good deal. This would mean Britain leaving the EU without a new trade deal and tariffs being applies to imports and exports between Britain and the EU. Do you think Britain should or should not be prepared to walk away from a bad deal? Walk Away: 55 Get any deal: 24
Of course things can change, but I wouldn't count on a huge swing of sympathy in favour of the EU......
The best template we have for the public's future reaction is the Iraq war. At the beginning there was marginal support as there is here. As it began to unwind the reputation of those supporters (some reluctant) were trashed no matter how late to the party they arrived and for self preservation many jumped ship anyway.
I'm sure the same will apply here. Whether reasonable or not unless it becomes an unmitigated success May's government will pay the same price Blair and Blairism paid. March 29th will go down in infamy and she and her government will be the only ones carrying the baby. As so often the real villains like Farage and UKIP and the Tory Ultras will long be forgotten.
It's unlikely that the cost of the Brexit vote will be well over 100,000 dead. The case for the Iraq War being more than a mistake will always be rather easier to make.
Whether people support Article 50 being invoked or not on 29th March is not really a long term issue. It's going to happen and that part of the process will
We may already know the answer:
And do you think the other member states of the European Union will or will not agree to the sort of Brexit deal that Theresa May is proposing? Net agree: -36
Theresa May suggested that Britain would walk away from negotiations if other European Union countries are not prepared to offer a good deal. This would mean Britain leaving the EU without a new trade deal and tariffs being applies to imports and exports between Britain and the EU. Do you think Britain should or should not be prepared to walk away from a bad deal? Walk Away: 55 Get any deal: 24
Of course things can change, but I wouldn't count on a huge swing of sympathy in favour of the EU......
The response to Juncker's threats in the Metro letters section was very telling yesterday. Almost all of them were highly critical of him,
They will also expect May to find solutions. Walking away is not an end in itself if it essentially means higher prices, lower inward investment, further public service cuts and significant job losses; as well as all the other stuff that will come on top.
If if if, its almost like you are hoping for your predicted Brexopalypse.
Let's face it, most people on either side will never admit to being wrong
Why would I want my country and its population to be impoverished? I have a family, friends and a business here, as well as deep affection for the the UK and its citizens, I am not sure why you'd think I would want all of them to suffer just to be proved right on an internet message board.
The whole reason we were able to walk away in the first place was because we would not be impoverished as the EU is now a destination for only about 44% of our exports, it will be difficult yes but that is not quite the same. At the moment I expect a sort of US-EU relationship for the UK ie outside the single market and no Free Trade deal on the horizon but a few bilateral agreements in some key areas (in our case with limited EU budget contributions) and work permits required for EU migrants coming to the UK
Not entirely surprised to find that those who expressed an opinion on Brexit, have not changed their minds. What would be interesting to know is who supports the democratic result and now supports implementing A50.
If Brexit does go bad... It won't help the lib Dems to say i told you so.
So its our fault you didn't persuade us?
Not a lot of mileage in that one......
I think that's sort of the point I'm trying to make? In longer terms... Voters aren't going to admit they got the decision wrong. Better to blame the govt for messing up a workable idea (brexit) and say how our breixit would have been much better.
That's probably about right. Who's going to admit it was a mistake to cross the rubicon? Not many, I'd guess.
Whether people support Article 50 being invoked or not on 29th March is not really a long term issue. It's going to happen and that part of the process will soon be forgotten. What matters a lot more is how the country reacts to what happens next. Will voters buy the claim that it's all the EU's fault that the UK either has to take a deal that does not deliver a clean break or walk off a cliff edge? If views are as split as the polling indicates that is far from certain.
We may already know the answer:
And do you think the other member states of the European Union will or will not agree to the sort of Brexit deal that Theresa May is proposing? Net agree: -36
Theresa May suggested that Britain would walk away from negotiations if other European Union countries are not prepared to offer a good deal. This would mean Britain leaving the EU without a new trade deal and tariffs being applies to imports and exports between Britain and the EU. Do you think Britain should or should not be prepared to walk away from a bad deal? Walk Away: 55 Get any deal: 24
Of course things can change, but I wouldn't count on a huge swing of sympathy in favour of the EU......
The best template we have for the public's future reaction is the Iraq war. At the beginning there was marginal support as there is here. As it began to unwind the reputation of those supporters (some reluctant) were trashed no matter how late to the party they arrived and for self preservation many jumped ship anyway.
I'm sure the same will apply here. Whether reasonable or not unless it becomes an unmitigated success May's government will pay the same price Blair and Blairism paid. March 29th will go down in infamy and she and her government will be the only ones carrying the baby. As so often the real villains like Farage and UKIP and the Tory Ultras will long be forgotten.
Whether Brexit is seen as success or failure will mostly (unlike the Iraq war) depend on the underlying values of the people making that judgement. The economic case will never be settled one way or the other.
I really can't see that. The first hint of rising food prices hospital waiting lists out of control petrol prices going up unemployment rising car plants closing another sterling crisis....the sort of thing that can happen on anyone's watch. It will all be blamed on Brexit. The 'experts' who predicted just such failures are simply gagging to say 'we told you so. And they did.
inflation is up a bit all over the EU, we're not anything special in that regard.
Not entirely surprised to find that those who expressed an opinion on Brexit, have not changed their minds. What would be interesting to know is who supports the democratic result and now supports implementing A50.
If Brexit does go bad... It won't help the lib Dems to say i told you so.
So its our fault you didn't persuade us?
Not a lot of mileage in that one......
If Brexit does go bad don't you think that the Brexiteers would deserve and get some of the blame?
Certainly - both sides lied horribly 'status quo' vs £350/£250/ £100 million for the NHS - and May has wisely stuck Brexiters in the Brexit ministries - so if it does go tits up they get to own that too.
However, however bad an idea Brexit is, its not as bad an idea as trying to circumvent the result of the referendum.....
If Brexit does turn out to be a really bad idea, think economic hardship, then the idea of 'circumventing the result of the referendum' might become rather popular. The advisory referendum result was after all very close and many thought we would remain in the single market.
Well, that's where we differ. I believe in the people's absolute right to get it wrong. Anything else isn't 'democracy'.
In a democracy it's also permissible to rectify perceived mistakes. Voters are allowed to change their minds. In fact, they have been known to.
Yes of course. The idea it would be impossible for us to change our minds is simply wrong, and it would not be an affront to democracy to do so. I cannot see it happening, but in theory it could happen.
Whether people support Article 50 being invoked or not on 29th March is not really a long term issue. It's going to happen and that part of the process will soon be forgotten. What matters a lot more is how the country reacts to what happens next. Will voters buy the claim that it's all the EU's fault that the UK either has to take a deal that does not deliver a clean break or walk off a cliff edge? If views are as split as the polling indicates that is far from certain.
We may already know the answer:
And do you think the other member states of the European Union will or will not agree to the sort of Brexit deal that Theresa May is proposing? Net agree: -36
Theresa May suggested that Britain would walk away from negotiations if other European Union countries are not prepared to offer a good deal. This would mean Britain leaving the EU without a new trade deal and tariffs being applies to imports and exports between Britain and the EU. Do you think Britain should or should not be prepared to walk away from a bad deal? Walk Away: 55 Get any deal: 24
Of course things can change, but I wouldn't count on a huge swing of sympathy in favour of the EU......
The best template we have for the public's future reaction is the Iraq war. At the beginning there was marginal support as there is here. As it began to unwind the reputation of those supporters (some reluctant) were trashed no matter how late to the party they arrived and for self preservation many jumped ship anyway.
I'm sure the same will apply here. Whether reasonable or not unless it becomes an unmitigated success May's government will pay the same price Blair and Blairism paid. March 29th will go down in infamy and she and her government will be the only ones carrying the baby. As so often the real villains like Farage and UKIP and the Tory Ultras will long be forgotten.
I don't remember 17 million voting for the Iraq War, who knows what would have happened had Saddam been left in.power and of course Blair won the 2005 general election anyway
If you are here legally you are very welcome to stay.
Let's see if other EU countries return the compliment, either way our stance should be unequivocal. But let's be honest and realistic - there is not a cat in hell's chance that Spain and France are going to deport wealthy ex pats.
And if they say. We'd like to make the same commitment but first you need to agree to this... what do we do?
We say we make the commitment anyway, while reminding each state that we can change our mind subsequently were, post Brexit, it to become clear that any particular EU state was imposing significant restrictions on UK nationals. At that point, say 6 months after Brexit, we would review the situation on a case-by-case basis. As by then the UK would be outside of the EU, we would be negotiating with individual states rather than the EU itself.
Feeling pretty gloomy this morning. Lots of talk about yesterday about not being afraid, but of course that's not true, the world we live in is defined in countless ways big and small by our fear of such events and it's a worry that perhaps an admirable attempt to not panic in such occasions has turned into not reacting enough, or in a way other than basic reactive efforts.
Not entirely surprised to find that those who expressed an opinion on Brexit, have not changed their minds. What would be interesting to know is who supports the democratic result and now supports implementing A50.
If Brexit does go bad... It won't help the lib Dems to say i told you so.
So its our fault you didn't persuade us?
Not a lot of mileage in that one......
If Brexit does go bad don't you think that the Brexiteers would deserve and get some of the blame?
Certainly - both sides lied horribly 'status quo' vs £350/£250/ £100 million for the NHS - and May has wisely stuck Brexiters in the Brexit ministries - so if it does go tits up they get to own that too.
However, however bad an idea Brexit is, its not as bad an idea as trying to circumvent the result of the referendum.....
If Brexit does turn out to be a really bad idea, think economic hardship, then the idea of 'circumventing the result of the referendum' might become rather popular. The advisory referendum result was after all very close and many thought we would remain in the single market.
Well, that's where we differ. I believe in the people's absolute right to get it wrong. Anything else isn't 'democracy'.
In a democracy it's also permissible to rectify perceived mistakes. Voters are allowed to change their minds. In fact, they have been known to.
Certainly - the Lib Dems are welcome to campaign on taking us back into the EU, and if they secure a majority on such a manifesto commitment they should open negotiations.
What would not be acceptable would be to not implement the result of a referendum - which the government had told the electorate would be implemented.....
It would be perfectly acceptable if the electorate no longer wanted it implemented.
It is interesting and slightly odd that there has been so little movement on this. I wonder if there is any underlying churn. The explanation is probably that so little has happened to date. Whilst the claims of immediate disaster have been proven false the response of remainers has been to say, well, we haven't left yet.
I agree that the government, largely made up of former remainers after all, should have tried harder to bring us together again. It is possible that yesterday's outrage might help with this.
It could do, but things quickly move on in politics.
We saw messages of support and acts of solidarity from across Europe yesterday and it looks like a number of non-UK EU citizens were directly caught up in what happened. It would be nice to think that this might also register. Despite last June's vote, there is much more that unites us with our European neighbours than divides us. It would be nice if all those negotiating after next week have that at the front of their minds at all times. But that is very doubtful.
Oh I agree. Personally I would start the negotiations with a unilateral declaration that all EU citizens resident on 23rd June last year have the right to remain in the UK indefinitely. It is an inevitable result of the negotiations anyway and would be a very positive note on which to start.
Barnier has said that an agreement on the status of EU/UK citizens is his first objective from negotiations. Just a shame he didn't take the deal that was offered 6 months ago and release a lot of EU citizens from unnecessary worry
You are quick to criticise others for their negotiating strategy yet expect Barnier to accept a point before negotiations have even begun.
The status of existing legal migrants should not even be a negotiating strategy. Both sides are at fault here and it angers me that May has decided to make this a bargaining point. But Barnier is equally as guilty. Both should have made clear that this was an issue that did not need to be part of negotiations.
Sadly both sides (and it is both), have decided so far to play the whole negotiations for narrow political purposes, rather than trying to maximise the size of the pie for all.
I wonder whether we would be seeing these bar charts churned out again and again and again, had Remain rather than Leave secured a narrow victory last June? I think not somehow.
And do you think the other member states of the European Union will or will not agree to the sort of Brexit deal that Theresa May is proposing? Net agree: -36
Theresa May suggested that Britain would walk away from negotiations if other European Union countries are not prepared to offer a good deal. This would mean Britain leaving the EU without a new trade deal and tariffs being applies to imports and exports between Britain and the EU. Do you think Britain should or should not be prepared to walk away from a bad deal? Walk Away: 55 Get any deal: 24
Of course things can change, but I wouldn't count on a huge swing of sympathy in favour of the EU......
The response to Juncker's threats in the Metro letters section was very telling yesterday. Almost all of them were highly critical of him, some defiantly so.
We don't like to be bullied. It brings out our stubborn streak. Plenty of the EU apparatchiks fail to understand this part of our national character, and think it instead might shake us into our senses (as they would see it) to Remain.
They will be sorely disappointed. If the EU is unreasonable, I expect public opinion to unite solidly around Mrs. May.
They will also expect May to find solutions. Walking away is not an end in itself if it essentially means higher prices, lower inward investment, further public service cuts and significant job losses; as well as all the other stuff that will come on top.
If if if, its almost like you are hoping for your predicted Brexopalypse.
Let's face it, most people on either side will never admit to being wrong
Why would I want my country and its population to be impoverished? I have a family, friends and a business here, as well as deep affection for the the UK and its citizens, I am not sure why you'd think I would want all of them to suffer just to be proved right on an internet message board.
On what basis do you THINK your family and friends will be impoverished?
There is no evidence to suggest that is the case, just hyperbole about apocalypse and poverty.
Got it - you did not understand the point I was making.
That's because I'm a stupid Leaver no doubt.
There will eventually come a time, and only you can decide when that is, that you accept we voted for Brexit. Hard, soft, good, bad, its happening, suck it up.
Yes, you are clearly stupid.
intriguing but unfortunately not coherent, There must be some text missing.
There would also be far fewer stories about how divided we are. The political and media (broadcast, anyway) class would be banging on about uniting, the issue is settled etc (UKIP obviously excepted, and perhaps some Conservative backbenchers too).
It is interesting and slightly odd that there has been so little movement on this. I wonder if there is any underlying churn. The explanation is probably that so little has happened to date. Whilst the claims of immediate disaster have been proven false the response of remainers has been to say, well, we haven't left yet.
I agree that the government, largely made up of former remainers after all, should have tried harder to bring us together again. It is possible that yesterday's outrage might help with this.
It could do, but things quickly move on in politics.
We saw messages of support and acts of solidarity from across Europe yesterday and it looks like a number of non-UK EU citizens were directly caught up in what happened. It would be nice to think that this might also register. Despite last June's vote, there is much more that unites us with our European neighbours than divides us. It would be nice if all those negotiating after next week have that at the front of their minds at all times. But that is very doubtful.
Oh I agree. Personally I would start the negotiations with a unilateral declaration that all EU citizens resident on 23rd June last year have the right to remain in the UK indefinitely. It is an inevitable result of the negotiations anyway and would be a very positive note on which to start.
Barnier has said that an agreement on the status of EU/UK citizens is his first objective from negotiations. Just a shame he didn't take the deal that was offered 6 months ago and release a lot of EU citizens from unnecessary worry
You are quick to criticise others for their negotiating strategy yet expect Barnier to accept a point before negotiations have even begun.
The status of existing legal migrants should not even be a negotiating strategy. Both sides are at fault here and it angers me that May has decided to make this a bargaining point. But Barnier is equally as guilty. Both should have made clear that this was an issue that did not need to be part of negotiations.
Sadly both sides (and it is both), have decided so far to play the whole negotiations for narrow political purposes, rather than trying to maximise the size of the pie for all.
I suspect post A50 negotiation will go more smother than the present EU posturing suggests.
I wonder whether we would be seeing these bar charts churned out again and again and again, had Remain rather than Leave secured a narrow victory last June? I think not somehow.
It is interesting and slightly odd that there has been so little movement on this. I wonder if there is any underlying churn. The explanation is probably that so little has happened to date. Whilst the claims of immediate disaster have been proven false the response of remainers has been to say, well, we haven't left yet.
I agree that the government, largely made up of former remainers after all, should have tried harder to bring us together again. It is possible that yesterday's outrage might help with this.
It could do, but things quickly move on in politics.
We saw messages of support and acts of solidarity from across Europe yesterday and it looks like a number of non-UK EU citizens were directly caught up in what happened. It would be nice to think that this might also register. Despite last June's vote, there is much more that unites us with our European neighbours than divides us. It would be nice if all those negotiating after next week have that at the front of their minds at all times. But that is very doubtful.
Oh I agree. Personally I would start the negotiations with a unilateral declaration that all EU citizens resident on 23rd June last year have the right to remain in the UK indefinitely. It is an inevitable result of the negotiations anyway and would be a very positive note on which to start.
Barnier has said that an agreement on the status of EU/UK citizens is his first objective from negotiations. Just a shame he didn't take the deal that was offered 6 months ago and release a lot of EU citizens from unnecessary worry
You are quick to criticise others for their negotiating strategy yet expect Barnier to accept a point before negotiations have even begun.
The status of existing legal migrants should not even be a negotiating strategy. Both sides are at fault here and it angers me that May has decided to make this a bargaining point. But Barnier is equally as guilty. Both should have made clear that this was an issue that did not need to be part of negotiations.
Sadly both sides (and it is both), have decided so far to play the whole negotiations for narrow political purposes, rather than trying to maximise the size of the pie for all.
I suspect post A50 negotiation will go more smother than the present EU posturing suggests.
SimonStClair has been infiltrated by a Brexiteer from Grimsby
It is interesting and slightly odd that there has been so little movement on this. I wonder if there is any underlying churn. The explanation is probably that so little has happened to date. Whilst the claims of immediate disaster have been proven false the response of remainers has been to say, well, we haven't left yet.
I agree that the government, largely made up of former remainers after all, should have tried harder to bring us together again. It is possible that yesterday's outrage might help with this.
It could do, but things quickly move on in politics.
We saw messages of support and acts of solidarity from across Europe yesterday and it looks like a number of non-UK EU citizens were directly caught up in what happened. It would be nice to think that this might also register. Despite last June's vote, there is much more that unites us with our European neighbours than divides us. It would be nice if all those negotiating after next week have that at the front of their minds at all times. But that is very doubtful.
Oh I agree. Personally I would start the negotiations with a unilateral declaration that all EU citizens resident on 23rd June last year have the right to remain in the UK indefinitely. It is an inevitable result of the negotiations anyway and would be a very positive note on which to start.
Barnier has said that an agreement on the status of EU/UK citizens is his first objective from negotiations. Just a shame he didn't take the deal that was offered 6 months ago and release a lot of EU citizens from unnecessary worry
You are quick to criticise others for their negotiating strategy yet expect Barnier to accept a point before negotiations have even begun.
The status of existing legal migrants should not even be a negotiating strategy. Both sides are at fault here and it angers me that May has decided to make this a bargaining point. But Barnier is equally as guilty. Both should have made clear that this was an issue that did not need to be part of negotiations.
Sadly both sides (and it is both), have decided so far to play the whole negotiations for narrow political purposes, rather than trying to maximise the size of the pie for all.
I suspect post A50 negotiation will go more smother than the present EU posturing suggests.
I hope so, but the signs aren't great - at the moment both sides are focusing on political considerations.
It is interesting and slightly odd that there has been so little movement on this. I wonder if there is any underlying churn. The explanation is probably that so little has happened to
I agree that the government, largely made up of former remainers after all, should have tried harder to bring us together again. It is possible that yesterday's outrage might help with this.
It could do, but things quickly move on in politics.
We saw messages of support and acts of solidarity from across Europe yesterday and it looks like a number of non-UK EU citizens were directly caught up in what happened. It would be nice to think that this might also register. Despite last June's vote, there is much more that unites us with our European neighbours than divides us. It would be nice if all those negotiating after next week have that at the front of their minds at all times. But that is very doubtful.
Oh I agree. Personally I would start the negotiations with a unilateral declaration that all EU citizens resident on 23rd June last year have the right to remain in the UK indefinitely. It is an inevitable result of the negotiations anyway and would be a very positive note on which to start.
Barnier has said that an agreement on the status of EU/UK citizens is his first objective from negotiations. Just a shame he didn't take the deal that was offered 6 months ago and release a lot of EU citizens from unnecessary worry
You are quick to criticise others for their negotiating strategy yet expect Barnier to accept a point before negotiations have even begun.
The status of existing legal migrants should not even be a negotiating strategy. Both sides are at fault here and it angers me that May has decided to make this a bargaining point. But Barnier is equally as guilty. Both should have made clear that this was an issue that did not need to be part of negotiations.
Sadly both sides (and it is both), have decided so far to play the whole negotiations for narrow political purposes, rather than trying to maximise the size of the pie for all.
A vote for Brexit was the nuclear bomb option - justified if the threat was great enough but not one to be taken in the expectation of it leading to a nice, amicable and carefully calibrated negotiation that sought to maximise the win-win outcome.
That the two sides couldn't even sort residency rights out suggests the rest of the talks are going to be brutal. There will be no cake and no one will be eating it.
Sadiq Khan giving a good live interview just now on Sky.
While I did not see him on Sky yesterday despite watching it all day I do accept that circumstances may have curtailed his access to some of the media and therefore concede I may have misjudged him yesterday
It is interesting and slightly odd that there has been so little movement on this. I wonder if there is any underlying churn. The explanation is probably that so little has happened to date. Whilst the claims of immediate disaster have been proven false the response of remainers has been to say, well, we haven't left yet.
I agree that the government, largely made up of former remainers after all, should have tried harder to bring us together again. It is possible that yesterday's outrage might help with this.
It could do, but things quickly move on in politics.
We saw messages of support and acts of solidarity from across Europe yesterday and it looks like a number of non-UK EU citizens were directly caught up in what happened. It would be nice to think that this might also register. Despite last June's vote, there is much more that unites us with our European neighbours than divides us. It would be nice if all those negotiating after next week have that at the front of their minds at all times. But that is very doubtful.
Oh I agree. Personally I would start the negotiations with a unilateral declaration that all EU citizens resident on 23rd June last year have the right to remain in the UK indefinitely. It is an inevitable result of the negotiations anyway and would be a very positive note on which to start.
Barnier has said that an agreement on the status of EU/UK citizens is his first objective from negotiations. Just a shame he didn't take the deal that was offered 6 months ago and release a lot of EU citizens from unnecessary worry
You are quick to criticise others for their negotiating strategy yet expect Barnier to accept a point before negotiations have even begun.
The status of existing legal migrants should not even be a negotiating strategy. Both sides are at fault here and it angers me that May has decided to make this a bargaining point. But Barnier is equally as guilty. Both should have made clear that this was an issue that did not need to be part of negotiations.
Sadly both sides (and it is both), have decided so far to play the whole negotiations for narrow political purposes, rather than trying to maximise the size of the pie for all.
I suspect post A50 negotiation will go more smother than the present EU posturing suggests.
SimonStClair has been infiltrated by a Brexiteer from Grimsby
It is interesting and slightly odd that there has been so little movement on this. I wonder if there is any underlying churn. The explanation is probably that so little has happened to
I agree that the government, largely made up of former remainers after all, should have tried harder to bring us together again. It is possible that yesterday's outrage might help with this.
It could do, but things quickly move on in politics.
We saw messages of support and acts of solidarity from across Europe yesterday and it looks like a number of non-UK EU citizens were directly caught up in what happened. It would be nice to think that this might also register. Despite last June's vote, there is much more that unites us with our European neighbours than divides us. It would be nice if all those negotiating after next week have that at the front of their minds at all times. But that is very doubtful.
Oh I agree. Personally I would start the negotiations with a unilateral declaration that all EU citizens resident on 23rd June last year have the right to remain in the UK indefinitely. It is an inevitable result of the negotiations anyway and would be a very positive note on which to start.
Barnier has said that an agreement on the status of EU/UK citizens is his first objective from negotiations. Just a shame he didn't take the deal that was offered 6 months ago and release a lot of EU citizens from unnecessary worry
You are quick to criticise others for their negotiating strategy yet expect Barnier to accept a point before negotiations have even begun.
The status of existing legal migrants should not even be a negotiatingrgaining point. But Barnier is equally as guilty. Both should have made clear that this was an issue that did not need to be part of negotiations.
Sadly both sides (and it is both), have decided so far to play the whole negotiations for narrow political purposes, rather than trying to maximise the size of the pie for all.
A vote for Brexit was the nuclear bomb option - justified if the threat was great enough but not one to be taken in the expectation of it leading to there a nice, amicable and carefully calibrated negotiation that sought to maximise the win-win outcome.
That the two sides couldn't even sort residency rights out suggests the rest of the talks are going to be brutal. There will be no cake and no one will be eating it.
We both still might, it will just be trodden on a bit.
Sadly both sides (and it is both), have decided so far to play the whole negotiations for narrow political purposes, rather than trying to maximise the size of the pie for all.
Radioactive rubble is the only outcome that satisfies the political imperative of both sides. A finessed and technocratic win-win isn't going to slake the emotional atavism that fuelled Leave.
I wonder whether we would be seeing these bar charts churned out again and again and again, had Remain rather than Leave secured a narrow victory last June? I think not somehow.
Yes, we probably would. As others have noted, a narrow remain win would probably have led to UKIP gaining a much higher polling share, and the Europhobes would be banging on about betrayals. It's perfectly possible for more Conservative MPs to have switched over to UKIP. The politics in the country might be much more dominated by our membership of the EU than it was before the referendum.
In such an environment, such charts would be of immense interest to political pundits and bettors.
Oh I agree. Personally I would start the negotiations with a unilateral declaration that all EU citizens resident on 23rd June last year have the right to remain in the UK indefinitely. It is an inevitable result of the negotiations anyway and would be a very positive note on which to start.
Barnier has said that an agreement on the status of EU/UK citizens is his first objective from negotiations. Just a shame he didn't take the deal that was offered 6 months ago and release a lot of EU citizens from unnecessary worry
You are quick to criticise others for their negotiating strategy yet expect Barnier to accept a point before negotiations have even begun.
I don't see this as a negotiating point, but more (as @DavidL) described it an early win to build mutual goodwill on both sides. It's an obvious initial deal to do. I don't think it would have been a concession / "accepting a point" by the EU before negotiations began. Equally, I can understand that it may have been too early - they were still feeling bitter and rejected and not willing to react positively at that stage. Which is why I said it was a "shame" as opposed to condemning them for not accepting it.
As for @AlastairMeeks@SouthamObserver@freetochoose - that path may have made you feel morally superior, but it would have resulted in either (i) British citizens living the EU vulnerable (even if only theoretically) to having their rights restricted, or (ii) the UK having to concede something of value to protect those rights and hence, by definition, ending up with a sub-optimal deal. It would have precisely zero impact on how the EU is perceived by other states. You may not like the world of realpolitik, but that's the world we live in
Whether people support Article 50 being invoked or not on 29th March is not really a long term issue. It's going to happen and that part of the process will soon be forgotten. What matters a lot more is how the country reacts to what happens next. Will voters buy the claim that it's all the EU's fault that the UK either has to take a deal that does not deliver a clean break or walk off a cliff edge? If views are as split as the polling indicates that is far from certain.
We may already know the answer:
And do you think the other member states of the European Union will or will not agree to the sort of Brexit deal that Theresa May is proposing? Net agree: -36
Theresa May suggested that Britain would walk away from negotiations if other European Union countries are not prepared to offer a good deal. This would mean Britain leaving the EU without a new trade deal and tariffs being applies to imports and exports between Britain and the EU. Do you think Britain should or should not be prepared to walk away from a bad deal? Walk Away: 55 Get any deal: 24
Of course things can change, but I wouldn't count on a huge swing of sympathy in favour of the EU......
The best template we have for the public's future reaction is the Iraq war. At the beginning there was marginal support as there is here. As it began to unwind the reputation of those supporters (some reluctant) were trashed no matter how late to the party they arrived and for self preservation many jumped ship anyway.
I'm sure the same will apply here. Whether reasonable or not unless it becomes an unmitigated success May's government will pay the same price Blair and Blairism paid. March 29th will go down in infamy and she and her government will be the only ones carrying the baby. As so often the real villains like Farage and UKIP and the Tory Ultras will long be forgotten.
The best template is the closest equivalent - the decision to join the EU in the first place.
Membership wasn't an unmitigated success nor was it an unmitigated failure and so there were people who thought membership was a good thing and other people who thought membership was a bad thing.
But it took a rare set of circumstances for the UK to have the opportunity to leave the EU and then a surprise decision to do so.
Likewise life after leaving the EU wont be an unmitigated success nor will it be an unmitigated failure and there will remain groups of people who think leaving was the right thing or who think leaving was the wrong thing.
And again it will take a rare set of circumstances for the UK to have the opportunity to rejoin the EU and a surprise decision for it to do so.
I wonder whether we would be seeing these bar charts churned out again and again and again, had Remain rather than Leave secured a narrow victory last June? I think not somehow.
Yes, we probably would. As others have noted, a narrow remain win would probably have led to UKIP gaining a much higher polling share, and the Europhobes would be banging on about betrayals. It's perfectly possible for more Conservative MPs to have switched over to UKIP. The politics in the country might be much more dominated by our membership of the EU than it was before the referendum.
In such an environment, such charts would be of immense interest to political pundits and bettors.
Good point, had we remained Cameron would still be PM and plenty of his backbenchers would be rabid.
I wonder whether we would be seeing these bar charts churned out again and again and again, had Remain rather than Leave secured a narrow victory last June? I think not somehow.
Good that we're back to discussing normal politics. Something that those of us with strong views tend to forget is that most people aren't really following the EU issue that closely (and indeed were often never all that interested in the first place). They were asked to give a view, so they did, now they're largely leaving it to May to get on with it and they're hoping it turns out well. Rightly or wrongly, most people aren't expecfting it to affect them all that much. I wouldn't expect any big shifts in opinion until it's clear that the talks are going well or badly.
But I agree with Southam that if popular opinion shifted sharply, a way would be found to reflect it. That's how politics works, irrespective of the detailed rules.
Whether people support Article 50 being invoked or not on 29th March is not really a long term issue. It's going to happen and that part of the process will soon be forgotten. What matters a lot more is how the country reacts to what happens next. Will voters buy the claim that it's all the EU's fault that the UK either has to take a deal that does not deliver a clean break or walk off a cliff edge? If views are as split as the polling indicates that is far from certain.
We may already know the answer:
And do you think the other member states of the European Union will or will not agree to the sort of Brexit deal that Theresa May is proposing? Net agree: -36
Theresa May suggested that Britain would walk away from negotiations if other European Union countries are not prepared to offer a good deal. This would mean Britain leaving the EU without a new trade deal and tariffs being applies to imports and exports between Britain and the EU. Do you think Britain should or should not be prepared to walk away from a bad deal? Walk Away: 55 Get any deal: 24
Of course things can change, but I wouldn't count on a huge swing of sympathy in favour of the EU......
I'm sure the same will apply here. Whether reasonable or not unless it becomes an unmitigated success May's government will pay the same price Blair and Blairism paid. March 29th will go down in infamy and she and her government will be the only ones carrying the baby. As so often the real villains like Farage and UKIP and the Tory Ultras will long be forgotten.
The best template is the closest equivalent - the decision to join the EU in the first place.
Membership wasn't an unmitigated success nor was it an unmitigated failure and so there were people who thought membership was a good thing and other people who thought membership was a bad thing.
But it took a rare set of circumstances for the UK to have the opportunity to leave the EU and then a surprise decision to do so.
Likewise life after leaving the EU wont be an unmitigated success nor will it be an unmitigated failure and there will remain groups of people who think leaving was the right thing or who think leaving was the wrong thing.
And again it will take a rare set of circumstances for the UK to have the opportunity to rejoin the EU and a surprise decision for it to do so.
Good post, rather how I, as a Remainer...... and yes I was out on the street in our little market town ..... feel. I hope for the best but am very fearful that the best won’t happen.
This is the view Europeans have of the British. It's pretty broad brush stuff but why should it be otherwise? It's the same way most on here look at comments from nonentities in the EU though few of them are as ignorant or vulgar.
Whether people support Article 50 being invoked or not on 29th March is not really a long term issue. It's going to happen and that certain.
We may already know the answer:
And do you think the other member states of the European Union will or will not agree to the sort of Brexit deal that Theresa May is proposing? Net agree: -36
Theresa May suggested that Britain would bad deal? Walk Away
Of course things can change, but I wouldn't count on a huge swing of sympathy in favour of the EU......
The best template we have for the public's future
I'm sure the same will apply here. Whether reasonable or not unless it becomes an unmitigated success May's government will pay the same price Blair and Blairism paid. March 29th will go down in infamy and she and her government will be the only ones carrying the baby. As so often the real villains like Farage and UKIP and the Tory Ultras will long be forgotten.
Whether Brexit is seen as success or failure will mostly (unlike the Iraq war) depend on the underlying values of the people making that judgement. The economic case will never be settled one way or the other.
I really can't see that. The first hint of rising food prices hospital waiting lists out of control petrol prices going up unemployment rising car plants closing another sterling crisis....the sort of thing that can happen on anyone's watch. It will all be blamed on Brexit. The 'experts' who predicted just such failures are simply gagging to say 'we told you so. And they did.
They (and you) have completely exaggerated the economic doom. If economic doom does not materialise than they ( and you) will be discredited. But the business cycle hasn't been abolished, which means sooner or later, there will be recession.
At the moment, we have growth at 2-2.5%, inflation is low, unemployment is at it's lowest level for 40 years, and public borrowing at it's lowest for 15 years. Most governments would cheerfully settle for that.
Sadiq Khan giving a good live interview just now on Sky.
While I did not see him on Sky yesterday despite watching it all day I do accept that circumstances may have curtailed his access to some of the media and therefore concede I may have misjudged him yesterday
You're full of bigotry and prejudice. I read your comments on Khan yesterday and rarely have I read anything less appropriate.
Oh I agree. Personally I would start the negotiations with a unilateral declaration that all EU citizens resident on 23rd June last year have the right to remain in the UK indefinitely. It is an inevitable result of the negotiations anyway and would be a very positive note on which to start.
Barnier has said that an agreement on the status of EU/UK citizens is his first objective from negotiations. Just a shame he didn't take the deal that was offered 6 months ago and release a lot of EU citizens from unnecessary worry
You are quick to criticise others for their negotiating strategy yet expect Barnier to accept a point before negotiations have even begun.
I don't see this as a negotiating point, but more (as @DavidL) described it an early win to build mutual goodwill on both sides. It's an obvious initial deal to do. I don't think it would have been a concession / "accepting a point" by the EU before negotiations began. Equally, I can understand that it may have been too early - they were still feeling bitter and rejected and not willing to react positively at that stage. Which is why I said it was a "shame" as opposed to condemning them for not accepting it.
As for @AlastairMeeks@SouthamObserver@freetochoose - that path may have made you feel morally superior, but it would have resulted in either (i) British citizens living the EU vulnerable (even if only theoretically) to having their rights restricted, or (ii) the UK having to concede something of value to protect those rights and hence, by definition, ending up with a sub-optimal deal. It would have precisely zero impact on how the EU is perceived by other states. You may not like the world of realpolitik, but that's the world we live in
We voted to make British citizens living elsewhere in the EU vulnerable.
Realpolitik dictates that if other countries remove rights from British citizens or expel them we have the right and ability to respond. That does not have to involve targeting people who have legally and with goodwill come to settle in the UK.
I wonder whether we would be seeing these bar charts churned out again and again and again, had Remain rather than Leave secured a narrow victory last June? I think not somehow.
Change is more exciting than no change.
I think had REMAIN won, there would have been plenty of change and the world might be as interesting a place as it is in reality.
A few thoughts - politically, Cameron remains Prime Minister with Osborne CoE - the pro-LEAVE dissidents such as Gove and Johnson are removed from Cabinet in a mini-reshuffle.
The question would turn to Cameron's future and whether he will serve out the full term or, as suggested in the 2015 campaign, he would leave in 2018 or 2019 handing over perhaps to Osborne.
One thing that would be constant is Labour's misery so no need to embellish that as the party struggles in the face of a resurgent UKIP - the last poll had the Conservatives on 37%, Labour on 25% and UKIP on 20% with the LDs becalmed on 7%.. Many on PB think UKIP will soon be second as Farage and others continue to call for a second referendum.
The first meeting between Trump and Cameron went fairly well though there's little warmth between the two men.
Oh I agree. Personally I would start the negotiations with a unilateral declaration that all EU citizens resident on 23rd June last year have the right to remain in the UK indefinitely. It is an inevitable result of the negotiations anyway and would be a very positive note on which to start.
Barnier has said that an agreement on the status of EU/UK citizens is his first objective from negotiations. Just a shame he didn't take the deal that was offered 6 months ago and release a lot of EU citizens from unnecessary worry
You are quick to criticise others for their negotiating strategy yet expect Barnier to accept a point before negotiations have even begun.
I don't see this as a negotiating point, but more (as @DavidL) described it an early win to build mutual goodwill on both sides. It's an obvious initial deal to do. I don't think it would have been a concession / "accepting a point" by the EU before negotiations began. Equally, I can understand that it may have been too early - they were still feeling bitter and rejected and not willing to react positively at that stage. Which is why I said it was a "shame" as opposed to condemning them for not accepting it.
As for @AlastairMeeks@SouthamObserver@freetochoose - that path may have made you feel morally superior, but it would have resulted in either (i) British citizens living the EU vulnerable (even if only theoretically) to having their rights restricted, or (ii) the UK having to concede something of value to protect those rights and hence, by definition, ending up with a sub-optimal deal. It would have precisely zero impact on how the EU is perceived by other states. You may not like the world of realpolitik, but that's the world we live in
I have a direct interest in this from the other end of the telescope. My recommendation is not based on piety.
You're confusing realpolitik with machtpolitik. The world we live in is one where we can each choose whether to have transactional relationships or deeper relationships. Britain at present is choosing at every stage to aim for a transactional relationship. It should be trying for precisely the opposite if it wants to get better terms.
This is not a clean break divorce where the parties are arguing over the CD collection. Britain is still going to be living next door to the EU for the foreseeable future (until the ultra-Brexiters have solved the problem of tectonics). Relationships matter.
Not entirely surprised to find that those who expressed an opinion on Brexit, have not changed their minds. What would be interesting to know is who supports the democratic result and now supports implementing A50.
If Brexit does go bad... It won't help the lib Dems to say i told you so.
So its our fault you didn't persuade us?
Not a lot of mileage in that one......
If Brexit does go bad don't you think that the Brexiteers would deserve and get some of the blame?
Certainly - both sides lied horribly 'status quo' vs £350/£250/ £100 million for the NHS - and May has wisely stuck Brexiters in the Brexit ministries - so if it does go tits up they get to own that too.
However, however bad an idea Brexit is, its not as bad an idea as trying to circumvent the result of the referendum.....
If Brexit does turn out to be a really bad idea, think economic hardship, then the idea of 'circumventing the result of the referendum' might become rather popular. The advisory referendum result was after all very close and many thought we would remain in the single market.
Well, that's where we differ. I believe in the people's absolute right to get it wrong. Anything else isn't 'democracy'.
In a democracy it's also permissible to rectify perceived mistakes. Voters are allowed to change their minds. In fact, they have been known to.
Certainly - the Lib Dems are welcome to campaign on taking us back into the EU, and if they secure a majority on such a manifesto commitment they should open negotiations.
What would not be acceptable would be to not implement the result of a referendum - which the government had told the electorate would be implemented.....
It would be perfectly acceptable if the electorate no longer wanted it implemented.
And the process to find that out is to elect political parties who campaign on that basis. Next check is in 2020.
Sadiq Khan giving a good live interview just now on Sky.
While I did not see him on Sky yesterday despite watching it all day I do accept that circumstances may have curtailed his access to some of the media and therefore concede I may have misjudged him yesterday
You're full of bigotry and prejudice. I read your comments on Khan yesterday and rarely have I read anything less appropriate.
I am absolutely not - my comments yesterday were reflected by many but it you cannot accept my comments this morning it is you who is out of order
Sadiq Khan giving a good live interview just now on Sky.
While I did not see him on Sky yesterday despite watching it all day I do accept that circumstances may have curtailed his access to some of the media and therefore concede I may have misjudged him yesterday
You're full of bigotry and prejudice. I read your comments on Khan yesterday and rarely have I read anything less appropriate.
Roger.. look in your own eye.. you are just as prejudiced as the next person, just in a different way.
Mr. Meeks, what do you mean by a 'deeper relationship'?
Britain can choose to deal with the EU as the west used to deal with the Soviet bloc, making occasional exchanges at checkpoint Charlie. Or it can choose to try to establish something closer to friendship.
When relationships end, even the gauchest teenager knows to say "it's not you, it's me" and "let's still be friends". Britain has spent the last 9 months saying "it's not me, it's you" and "get stuffed".
Oh I agree. Personally I would start the negotiations with a unilateral declaration that all EU citizens resident on 23rd June last year have the right to remain in the UK indefinitely. It is an inevitable result of the negotiations anyway and would be a very positive note on which to start.
Barnier has said that an agreement on the status of EU/UK citizens is his first objective from negotiations. Just a shame he didn't take the deal that was offered 6 months ago and release a lot of EU citizens from unnecessary worry
You are quick to criticise others for their negotiating strategy yet expect Barnier to accept a point before negotiations have even begun.
I don't see this as a negotiating point, but more (as @DavidL) described it an early win to build mutual goodwill on both sides. It's an obvious initial deal to do. I don't think it would have been a concession / "accepting a point" by the EU before negotiations began. Equally, I can understand that it may have been too early - they were still feeling bitter and rejected and not willing to react positively at that stage. Which is why I said it was a "shame" as opposed to condemning them for not accepting it.
As for @AlastairMeeks@SouthamObserver@freetochoose - that path may have made you feel morally superior, but it would have resulted in either (i) British citizens living the EU vulnerable (even if only theoretically) to having their rights restricted, or (ii) the UK having to concede something of value to protect those rights and hence, by definition, ending up with a sub-optimal deal. It would have precisely zero impact on how the EU is perceived by other states. You may not like the world of realpolitik, but that's the world we live in
I have a direct interest in this from the other end of the telescope. My recommendation is not based on piety.
You're confusing realpolitik with machtpolitik. The world we live in is one where we can each choose whether to have transactional relationships or deeper relationships. Britain at present is choosing at every stage to aim for a transactional relationship. It should be trying for precisely the opposite if it wants to get better terms.
This is not a clean break divorce where the parties are arguing over the CD collection. Britain is still going to be living next door to the EU for the foreseeable future (until the ultra-Brexiters have solved the problem of tectonics). Relationships matter.
Our relationship with the other EU States was always transactional, which is probably why Brexit eventually happened. We weren't signed up to the same end goals.
Whether people support Article 50 being invoked or not on 29th March is not really a long term issue. It's going to happen and that part of the process will
We may already know the answer:
And do you think the other member states of the European Union will or will not agree to the sort of Brexit deal that Theresa May is proposing? Net agree: -36
Theresa May suggested that Britain would walk away from negotiations if other European Union countries are not prepared to offer a good deal. This would mean Britain leaving the EU without a new trade deal and tariffs being applies to imports and exports between Britain and the EU. Do you think Britain should or should not be prepared to walk away from a bad deal? Walk Away: 55 Get any deal: 24
Of course things can change, but I wouldn't count on a huge swing of sympathy in favour of the EU......
The response to Juncker's threats in the Metro letters section was very telling yesterday. Almost all of them were highly critical of him,
They will also expect May to find solutions. Walking away is not an end in itself if it essentially means higher prices, lower inward investment, further public service cuts and significant job losses; as well as all the other stuff that will come on top.
If if if, its almost like you are hoping for your predicted Brexopalypse.
Let's face it, most people on either side will never admit to being wrong
Why would I want my country and its population to be impoverished? I have a family, friends and a business here, as well as deep affection for the the UK and its citizens, I am not sure why you'd think I would want all of them to suffer just to be proved right on an internet message board.
The whole reason we were able to walk away in the first place was because we would not be impoverished as the EU is now a destination for only about 44% of our exports, it will be difficult yes but that is not quite the same. At the moment I expect a sort of US-EU relationship for the UK ie outside the single market and no Free Trade deal on the horizon but a few bilateral agreements in some key areas (in our case with limited EU budget contributions) and work permits required for EU migrants coming to the UK
Not being impoverished hardly counts as Brexit "success" ?
This is not a clean break divorce where the parties are arguing over the CD collection. Britain is still going to be living next door to the EU for the foreseeable future (until the ultra-Brexiters have solved the problem of tectonics). Relationships matter.
I wonder whether we would be seeing these bar charts churned out again and again and again, had Remain rather than Leave secured a narrow victory last June? I think not somehow.
Change is more exciting than no change.
I think had REMAIN won, there would have been plenty of change and the world might be as interesting a place as it is in reality.
A few thoughts - politically, Cameron remains Prime Minister with Osborne CoE - the pro-LEAVE dissidents such as Gove and Johnson are removed from Cabinet in a mini-reshuffle.
The question would turn to Cameron's future and whether he will serve out the full term or, as suggested in the 2015 campaign, he would leave in 2018 or 2019 handing over perhaps to Osborne.
One thing that would be constant is Labour's misery so no need to embellish that as the party struggles in the face of a resurgent UKIP - the last poll had the Conservatives on 37%, Labour on 25% and UKIP on 20% with the LDs becalmed on 7%.. Many on PB think UKIP will soon be second as Farage and others continue to call for a second referendum.
The first meeting between Trump and Cameron went fairly well though there's little warmth between the two men.
Without Brexit there may have been no Trump win, it was the Leave vote which led the Trump team to heavily target white working class Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania which he very narrowly won, had Hillary held those states she would have been meeting Cameron
This is the view Europeans have of the British. It's pretty broad brush stuff but why should it be otherwise? It's the same way most on here look at comments from nonentities in the EU though few of them are as ignorant or vulgar.
"Leavers saw themselves like Captain Onedin, majestically standing on the prow surveying the horizons of the open seas, independent, adventurous and enterprising. Meanwhile, the outside world saw posters implying that Turkey was joining the EU and Nigel Farage smugly standing in front of the Breaking Point poster, exactly echoing Nazi propaganda about Jewish immigrants".
Leavers have made zero effort since then to improve the outside world's image of them.
Not entirely surprised to find that those who expressed an opinion on Brexit, have not changed their minds. What would be interesting to know is who supports the democratic result and now supports implementing A50.
If Brexit does go bad... It won't help the lib Dems to say i told you so.
So its our fault you didn't persuade us?
Not a lot of mileage in that one......
If Brexit does go bad don't you think that the Brexiteers would deserve and get some of the blame?
Certainly - both sides lied horribly 'status quo' vs £350/£250/ £100 million for the NHS - and May has wisely stuck Brexiters in the Brexit ministries - so if it does go tits up they get to own that too.
However, however bad an idea Brexit is, its not as bad an idea as trying to circumvent the result of the referendum.....
If Brexit does turn out to be a really bad idea, think economic hardship, then the idea of 'circumventing the result of the referendum' might become rather popular. The advisory referendum result was after all very close and many thought we would remain in the single market.
Well, that's where we differ. I believe in the people's absolute right to get it wrong. Anything else isn't 'democracy'.
In a democracy it's also permissible to rectify perceived mistakes. Voters are allowed to change their minds. In fact, they have been known to.
Certainly - the Lib Dems are welcome to campaign on taking us back into the EU, and if they secure a majority on such a manifesto commitment they should open negotiations.
What would not be acceptable would be to not implement the result of a referendum - which the government had told the electorate would be implemented.....
It would be perfectly acceptable if the electorate no longer wanted it implemented.
And the process to find that out is to elect political parties who campaign on that basis. Next check is in 2020.
Sadiq Khan giving a good live interview just now on Sky.
While I did not see him on Sky yesterday despite watching it all day I do accept that circumstances may have curtailed his access to some of the media and therefore concede I may have misjudged him yesterday
You're full of bigotry and prejudice. I read your comments on Khan yesterday and rarely have I read anything less appropriate.
Roger.. look in your own eye.. you are just as prejudiced as the next person, just in a different way.
I might say that what I find offensive is that no one who knows me, or has ever known me, would identify me as the adjectives used by Roger. My only critism of Khan yesterday was that he had not been seen on tv, a critism that was being made by commentators reporting on the tragic events
Mr. Meeks, I think you're exaggerating a shade. The UK does not view the EU as it did the Soviet Union.
As for tone of the relationship, that will be revealed during the negotiations, and it's a two way street.
Mr. Choose, no, but it may well be a bargaining chip in negotiations.
It's true that one doesn't hear so much about the EUSSR as one used to (possibly a benign side-effect of Russia's support and encouragement for Brexit, who knows?). But one still gets nitwits that compare membership of the EU to slavery. Leavers regularly hope for the demise of the EU. The animus goes beyond a wish to get out of the organisation.
I agree that tone is a two-way street. So far neither side has covered itself with glory on that front. So let's start by sorting Britain's crass errors out, because that's the side that you and I get to influence most.
Oh I agree. Personally I would start the negotiations with a unilateral declaration that all EU citizens resident on 23rd June last year have the right to remain in the UK indefinitely. It is an inevitable result of the negotiations anyway and would be a very positive note on which to start.
Barnier has said that an agreement on the status of EU/UK citizens is his first objective from negotiations. Just a shame he didn't take the deal that was offered 6 months ago and release a lot of EU citizens from unnecessary worry
You are quick to criticise others for their negotiating strategy yet expect Barnier to accept a point before negotiations have even begun.
I don't see this as a negotiating point, but more (as @DavidL) described it an early win to build mutual goodwill on both sides. It's an obvious initial deal to do. I don't think it would have been a concession / "accepting a point" by the EU before negotiations began. Equally, I can understand that it may have been too early - they were still feeling bitter and rejected and not willing to react positively at that stage. Which is why I said it was a "shame" as opposed to condemning them for not accepting it.
As for @AlastairMeeks@SouthamObserver@freetochoose - that path may have made you feel morally superior, but it would have resulted in either (i) British citizens living the EU vulnerable (even if only theoretically) to having their rights restricted, or (ii) the UK having to concede something of value to protect those rights and hence, by definition, ending up with a sub-optimal deal. It would have precisely zero impact on how the EU is perceived by other states. You may not like the world of realpolitik, but that's the world we live in
We voted to make British citizens living elsewhere in the EU vulnerable.
Realpolitik dictates that if other countries remove rights from British citizens or expel them we have the right and ability to respond. That does not have to involve targeting people who have legally and with goodwill come to settle in the UK.
Why should those seeing the guts ripped out of their cities by immigration they never voted for be expected to give a toss for those who pissed off to Provence?
Mr. Meeks, well... if someone (me) believes the EU is doomed and the longer that takes the worse the aftermath (due to increased integration) then wanting the EU to crumble faster means wanting less pain for European nation-states.
Alas, I fear you overestimate my influential powers.
Mr. Choose, then why didn't they simply agree to May's offer to make a simple reciprocal agreement and take the issue off the table?
Anyway, I hope it does come to nothing and such an agreement can be reached, though it was offered some time ago and answer came there none.
Sadiq Khan giving a good live interview just now on Sky.
While I did not see him on Sky yesterday despite watching it all day I do accept that circumstances may have curtailed his access to some of the media and therefore concede I may have misjudged him yesterday
You're full of bigotry and prejudice. I read your comments on Khan yesterday and rarely have I read anything less appropriate.
I am absolutely not - my comments yesterday were reflected by many but it you cannot accept my comments this morning it is you who is out of order
@Roger might have said so much worse .... imagine if he'd have indicated you had .... I can barely say it ....
Oh I agree. Personally I would start the negotiations with a unilateral declaration that all EU citizens resident on 23rd June last year have the right to remain in the UK indefinitely. It is an inevitable result of the negotiations anyway and would be a very positive note on which to start.
Barnier has said that an agreement on the status of EU/UK citizens is his first objective from negotiations. Just a shame he didn't take the deal that was offered 6 months ago and release a lot of EU citizens from unnecessary worry
You are quick to criticise others for their negotiating strategy yet expect Barnier to accept a point before negotiations have even begun.
I don't see this as a negotiating point, but more (as @DavidL) described it an early win to build mutual goodwill on both sides. It's an obvious initial deal to do. I don't think it would have been a concession / "accepting a point" by the EU before negotiations began. Equally, I can understand that it may have been too early - they were still feeling bitter and rejected and not willing to react positively at that stage. Which is why I said it was a "shame" as opposed to condemning them for not accepting it.
As for @AlastairMeeks@SouthamObserver@freetochoose - that path may have made you feel morally superior, but it would have resulted in either (i) Britishalpolitik, but that's the world we live in
I have a direct interest in this from the other end of the telescope. My recommendation is not based on piety.
You're confusing realpolitik with machtpolitik. The world we live in is one where we can each choose whether to have transactional relationships or deeper relationships. Britain at present is choosing at every stage to aim for a transactional relationship. It should be trying for precisely the opposite if it wants to get better terms.
This is not a clean break divorce where the parties are arguing over the CD collection. Britain is still going to be living next door to the EU for the foreseeable future (until the ultra-Brexiters have solved the problem of tectonics). Relationships matter.
Our relationship with the other EU States was always transactional, which is probably why Brexit eventually happened. We weren't signed up to the same end goals.
Our bond with other European countries is more than transactional. We share a whole lot more than trade links.
Oh I agree. Personally I would start the negotiations with a unilateral declaration that all EU citizens resident on 23rd June last year have the right to remain in the UK indefinitely. It is an inevitable result of the negotiations anyway and would be a very positive note on which to start.
Barnier has said that an agreement on the status of EU/UK citizens is his first objective from negotiations. Just a shame he didn't take the deal that was offered 6 months ago and release a lot of EU citizens from unnecessary worry
You are quick to criticise others for their negotiating strategy yet expect Barnier to accept a point before negotiations have even begun.
I don't see this as a negotiating point, but more (as @DavidL) described it an early win to build mutual goodwill on both sides. It's an obvious initial deal to do. I don't think it would have been a concession / "accepting a point" by the EU before negotiations began. Equally, I can understand that it may have been too early - they were still feeling bitter and rejected and not willing to react positively at that stage. Which is why I said it was a "shame" as opposed to condemning them for not accepting it.
As for @AlastairMeeks@SouthamObserver@freetochoose - that path may have made you feel morally superior, but it would have resulted in either (i) British citizens living the EU vulnerable (even if only theoretically) to having their rights restricted, or (ii) the UK having to concede something of value to protect those rights and hence, by definition, ending up with a sub-optimal deal. It would have precisely zero impact on how the EU is perceived by other states. You may not like the world of realpolitik, but that's the world we live in
We voted to make British citizens living elsewhere in the EU vulnerable.
Realpolitik dictates that if other countries remove rights from British citizens or expel them we have the right and ability to respond. That does not have to involve targeting people who have legally and with goodwill come to settle in the UK.
Why should those seeing the guts ripped out of their cities by immigration they never voted for be expected to give a toss for those who pissed off to Provence?
Indeed. We had our 'noses rubbed in it' a little yesterday did we not?
Sadiq Khan giving a good live interview just now on Sky.
While I did not see him on Sky yesterday despite watching it all day I do accept that circumstances may have curtailed his access to some of the media and therefore concede I may have misjudged him yesterday
You're full of bigotry and prejudice. I read your comments on Khan yesterday and rarely have I read anything less appropriate.
Roger.. look in your own eye.. you are just as prejudiced as the next person, just in a different way.
I might say that what I find offensive is that no one who knows me, or has ever known me, would identify me as the adjectives used by Roger. My only critism of Khan yesterday was that he had not been seen on tv, a critism that was being made by commentators reporting on the tragic events
A maniac drove past the House of Commons mowing down anyone he could get close to maiming disfiguring and killing as many as possible and all you could find to deplore was the length of time Khan had been seen on the media. Are you serious?
Mr. Meeks, I think you're exaggerating a shade. The UK does not view the EU as it did the Soviet Union.
As for tone of the relationship, that will be revealed during the negotiations, and it's a two way street.
Mr. Choose, no, but it may well be a bargaining chip in negotiations.
It's true that one doesn't hear so much about the EUSSR as one used to (possibly a benign side-effect of Russia's support and encouragement for Brexit, who knows?). But one still gets nitwits that compare membership of the EU to slavery. Leavers regularly hope for the demise of the EU. The animus goes beyond a wish to get out of the organisation.
I agree that tone is a two-way street. So far neither side has covered itself with glory on that front. So let's start by sorting Britain's crass errors out, because that's the side that you and I get to influence most.
I think there was a general irritantace about the interference in domestic matters. The UK only really saw the EEC|EC/EU as a common market, outside the nutters on one side who profess themselves as passionate Europeans and those who obsess on how everything wrong in the uk is due to the EU, people were content with our relationship prior to the expansion of the EU easterly. The mass migration of motivated unskilled people competing in the same pool as a massive chunk of the working classes who are not lie,y to ever earn above the minimum wage was the big change.
Oh I agree. Personally I would start the negotiations with a unilateral declaration that all EU citizens resident on 23rd June last year have the right to remain in the UK indefinitely. It is an inevitable result of the negotiations anyway and would be a very positive note on which to start.
Barnier has said that an agreement on the status of EU/UK citizens is his first objective from negotiations. Just a shame he didn't take the deal that was offered 6 months ago and release a lot of EU citizens from unnecessary worry
You are quick to criticise others for their negotiating strategy yet expect Barnier to accept a point before negotiations have even begun.
I don't see this as a negotiating point, but more (as @DavidL) described it an early win to build mutual goodwill on both sides. It's an obvious initial deal to do. I don't think it would have been a concession / "accepting a point" by the EU before negotiations began. Equally, I can understand that it may have been too early - they were still feeling bitter and rejected and not willing to react positively at that stage. Which is why I said it was a "shame" as opposed to condemning them for not accepting it.
As for @AlastairMeeks@SouthamObserver@freetochoose - that path may have made you feel morally superior, but it would have resulted in either (i) British citizens living the EU vulnerable (even if only theoretically) to having their rights restricted, or (ii) the UK having to concede something of value to protect those rights and hence, by definition, ending up with a sub-optimal deal. It would have precisely zero impact on how the EU is perceived by other states. You may not like the world of realpolitik, but that's the world we live in
I have a direct interest in this from the other end of the telescope. My recommendation is not based on piety.
You're confusing realpolitik with machtpolitik. The world we live in is one where we can each choose whether to have transactional relationships or deeper relationships. Britain at present is choosing at every stage to aim for a transactional relationship. It should be trying for precisely the opposite if it wants to get better terms.
This is not a clean break divorce where the parties are arguing over the CD collection. Britain is still going to be living next door to the EU for the foreseeable future (until the ultra-Brexiters have solved the problem of tectonics). Relationships matter.
We extended the hand of friendship. Merkel refused to shake it.
Comments
And then say to the public: Do you see why you voted to Leave?
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/This-island-hub-could-support-100-gigawatts-of-offshore-wind
I can't help thinking this might be a significantly better investment that Hinckley.
What would not be acceptable would be to not implement the result of a referendum - which the government had told the electorate would be implemented.....
And therein lies the reason that Leave won and nobody has since changed their mind, you are incapable of persuasion.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/39359382
That doesn't necessarily make it true, of course. F1 teams and drivers are well-versed in the art of expectations management and plain, old-fashioned bullshitting, but it does indicate that Ferrari and Mercedes may well be at a comparable level.
Aesop's fable of the sun and the wind is how Britain should be approaching this negotiation. But our leaders are being idiotic about this.
"We would say that you need to consider very carefully what kind of relationship with a neighbour you want."
That will depend on which bureaucrat you speak to, Juncker is not keen on one at all.
It could all be bluff, but if the Hawks in Europe take the helm, we'll need all the leverage we can get, because they will use UK ex-pats as negotiating pawns.
Theresa May has bet the farm on Brexit. Some would say she didn't actually have much of a choice - she knew whoever got the job she was going for would forever go down in history as the 'Brexit PM' , for better or for worse.
Once Article 50 is invoked, I think it's doubtless that We Are Out. The fantasy of revoking Article 50 is a pipe dream - the national humiliation that would occur if a government, having spent close to two years passing circa 15 laws and negotiating at the European level would be absolute if they simply turned around at the end of the process and said "oh, actually, we've changed our mind - we want back in."
There's also the issue that if we ever want to apply to rejoin the EU, there is no way we will get the concessions and opt-outs we had from our first period of membership. That will mean adopting everything - the Euro, no rebate, an EU army (if that has been established in the interim).. these are all things that are politically unpalatable to this country.
Brexit appears to me to be irreversible, no matter what deal is struck, for the short to medium term. In the long term, who knows, because you don't know how the world will develop in the interim, but we're talking a good few decades, at least, I'd think - assuming the EU still exists and is doing well for itself.
I would suggest Merkel and the National leaders will decide the deals
regardless of your stance re UK citizens, EVERYBODY that is here legally can remain.
I see no downside in that
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/news/84493/afzal-khan-announced-labours-manchester-gorton
Yougov, via Britain elects;
CON: 41% (-3)
LAB: 25% (-2)
UKIP: 12% (+3)
LDEM: 11% (+1)
GRN: 3% (-1)
Conservative, Labour both down, rebound for UKIP
On what basis do you THINK your family and friends will be impoverished?
There is no evidence to suggest that is the case, just hyperbole about apocalypse and poverty.
Got it - you did not understand the point I was making.
That's because I'm a stupid Leaver no doubt.
There will eventually come a time, and only you can decide when that is, that you accept we voted for Brexit. Hard, soft, good, bad, its happening, suck it up.
Yes, you are clearly stupid.
intriguing but unfortunately not coherent, There must be some text missing.
There would also be far fewer stories about how divided we are. The political and media (broadcast, anyway) class would be banging on about uniting, the issue is settled etc (UKIP obviously excepted, and perhaps some Conservative backbenchers too).
The boiled frog approach has been used to great effect by the EU.
That the two sides couldn't even sort residency rights out suggests the rest of the talks are going to be brutal. There will be no cake and no one will be eating it.
While I did not see him on Sky yesterday despite watching it all day I do accept that circumstances may have curtailed his access to some of the media and therefore concede I may have misjudged him yesterday
In such an environment, such charts would be of immense interest to political pundits and bettors.
As for @AlastairMeeks @SouthamObserver @freetochoose - that path may have made you feel morally superior, but it would have resulted in either (i) British citizens living the EU vulnerable (even if only theoretically) to having their rights restricted, or (ii) the UK having to concede something of value to protect those rights and hence, by definition, ending up with a sub-optimal deal. It would have precisely zero impact on how the EU is perceived by other states. You may not like the world of realpolitik, but that's the world we live in
Membership wasn't an unmitigated success nor was it an unmitigated failure and so there were people who thought membership was a good thing and other people who thought membership was a bad thing.
But it took a rare set of circumstances for the UK to have the opportunity to leave the EU and then a surprise decision to do so.
Likewise life after leaving the EU wont be an unmitigated success nor will it be an unmitigated failure and there will remain groups of people who think leaving was the right thing or who think leaving was the wrong thing.
And again it will take a rare set of circumstances for the UK to have the opportunity to rejoin the EU and a surprise decision for it to do so.
But I agree with Southam that if popular opinion shifted sharply, a way would be found to reflect it. That's how politics works, irrespective of the detailed rules.
I hope for the best but am very fearful that the best won’t happen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bypLwI5AQvY
At the moment, we have growth at 2-2.5%, inflation is low, unemployment is at it's lowest level for 40 years, and public borrowing at it's lowest for 15 years. Most governments would cheerfully settle for that.
Realpolitik dictates that if other countries remove rights from British citizens or expel them we have the right and ability to respond. That does not have to involve targeting people who have legally and with goodwill come to settle in the UK.
A few thoughts - politically, Cameron remains Prime Minister with Osborne CoE - the pro-LEAVE dissidents such as Gove and Johnson are removed from Cabinet in a mini-reshuffle.
The question would turn to Cameron's future and whether he will serve out the full term or, as suggested in the 2015 campaign, he would leave in 2018 or 2019 handing over perhaps to Osborne.
One thing that would be constant is Labour's misery so no need to embellish that as the party struggles in the face of a resurgent UKIP - the last poll had the Conservatives on 37%, Labour on 25% and UKIP on 20% with the LDs becalmed on 7%.. Many on PB think UKIP will soon be second as Farage and others continue to call for a second referendum.
The first meeting between Trump and Cameron went fairly well though there's little warmth between the two men.
You're confusing realpolitik with machtpolitik. The world we live in is one where we can each choose whether to have transactional relationships or deeper relationships. Britain at present is choosing at every stage to aim for a transactional relationship. It should be trying for precisely the opposite if it wants to get better terms.
This is not a clean break divorce where the parties are arguing over the CD collection. Britain is still going to be living next door to the EU for the foreseeable future (until the ultra-Brexiters have solved the problem of tectonics). Relationships matter.
Ignore the fact it could happen, does anybody seriously believe it will?
Cards on the table time
When relationships end, even the gauchest teenager knows to say "it's not you, it's me" and "let's still be friends". Britain has spent the last 9 months saying "it's not me, it's you" and "get stuffed".
As for tone of the relationship, that will be revealed during the negotiations, and it's a two way street.
Mr. Choose, no, but it may well be a bargaining chip in negotiations.
"Leavers saw themselves like Captain Onedin, majestically standing on the prow surveying the horizons of the open seas, independent, adventurous and enterprising. Meanwhile, the outside world saw posters implying that Turkey was joining the EU and Nigel Farage smugly standing in front of the Breaking Point poster, exactly echoing Nazi propaganda about Jewish immigrants".
Leavers have made zero effort since then to improve the outside world's image of them.
Bargaining chip or not its a lot of nonsense, scaremongering by bitter remainers. France and Spain expel our expats? Never
I agree that tone is a two-way street. So far neither side has covered itself with glory on that front. So let's start by sorting Britain's crass errors out, because that's the side that you and I get to influence most.
https://www.clintonfoundation.org/about/contact-us
Alas, I fear you overestimate my influential powers.
Mr. Choose, then why didn't they simply agree to May's offer to make a simple reciprocal agreement and take the issue off the table?
Anyway, I hope it does come to nothing and such an agreement can be reached, though it was offered some time ago and answer came there none.
Gulp ....
Channel 4 News tendencies !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!