Yes. No deal IS a bad deal (in fact a terrible deal). It's a deal to trade on pretty restrictive WTO terms with a bloc that isn't some trivial backwater, but rather makes up the lion's share of our total trade, both imports and exports.
I'm in a very poor area for UKIP anyway, but my canvassing has not yet yielded a single mention of their name... not even a negative one, which would at least be encouraging for them in the Wildian sense. They simply aren't on the radar.
No deal would be catastrophic. Everyone bar a few right-wing nutters, both here and outside acknowledge this.
May needed to call a snap election because 1. she may well have had to have a mini-election anyway if charges are brought over 2015 election expenses - and may have lost her majority. 2. once it becomes clear what Brexit means she may become rather unpopular. and maybe (hopefully) 3. she wants to be able to compromise with the EU and can't while she's beholden to some extreme Brexiteers for her slim majority.
I'm in a very poor area for UKIP anyway, but my canvassing has not yet yielded a single mention of their name... not even a negative one, which would at least be encouraging for them in the Wildian sense. They simply aren't on the radar.
Job done, innit.
More seriously, they're spent. 80% of their votes will go to Tory.
UKIP turned out to be a brilliant vehicle for this country. De toxing the Tories, then gaining huge traction in ex Lab voters who are now either non-voters or thinking of voting Tory.
Yes, it would be a big mistake for any vanity candidates to target her. Going after Boris Johnson and Michael Gove would make much more sense, and would allow all the dodgy Vote Leave claims to be kept in the public's minds.
Yes. No deal IS a bad deal (in fact a terrible deal). It's a deal to trade on pretty restrictive WTO terms with a bloc that isn't some trivial backwater, but rather makes up the lion's share of our total trade, both imports and exports.
Best get used to the idea, old chap, and plan accordingly if your business takes you into Europe. The powers that be in the EU seem determined to try to punish us for daring to go our own way because, sadly, they are frightened that other countries might do the same.
On the bright side we seem to be able to trade quite successfully with the rest of the world under those same "Pretty restrictive WTO terms" so I doubt we will starve or go bankrupt.
Yes, it would be a big mistake for any vanity candidates to target her. Going after Boris Johnson and Michael Gove would make much more sense, and would allow all the dodgy Vote Leave claims to be kept in the public's minds.
Why a "big mistake"?
Vanity candidates will get derisory votes whoever they stand against. They'll be £500 down, but it's not like MI5 are going to swoop in and take them out. Might as well just enjoy the ride.
Having said that, I expect he'd enjoy Surrey Heath more... at least Gove will probably be at the hustings, as he's not involved in the national campaign. It's also a nice area, whereas Maidenhead is a dump.
Yes, it would be a big mistake for any vanity candidates to target her. Going after Boris Johnson and Michael Gove would make much more sense, and would allow all the dodgy Vote Leave claims to be kept in the public's minds.
Why a "big mistake"?
Vanity candidates will get derisory votes whoever they stand against. They'll be £500 down, but it's not like MI5 are going to swoop in and take them out. Might as well just enjoy the ride.
Having said that, I expect he'd enjoy Surrey Heath more... at least Gove will probably be at the hustings, as he's not involved in the national campaign. It's also a nice area, whereas Maidenhead is a dump.
Because it would be actively counter-productive politically, rather than merely potentially a waste of time and money.
No deal would be catastrophic. Everyone bar a few right-wing nutters, both here and outside acknowledge this.
May needed to call a snap election because 1. she may well have had to have a mini-election anyway if charges are brought over 2015 election expenses - and may have lost her majority. 2. once it becomes clear what Brexit means she may become rather unpopular. and maybe (hopefully) 3. she wants to be able to compromise with the EU and can't while she's beholden to some extreme Brexiteers for her slim majority.
Spot on with point 3 - the surest way to get a deal that isn't too bad is with the May backed by a decent majority.
Strange how Oddschacker in all its constituency markets insists on referring to the LibDems as just plain "Democrats". Do they sense, as I do, that this is just a temporary measure pending a likely further change of name when the 20+ elected MPs from the Yellow Team merge with around half or 80 MPs in number from the centre-left of the Labour Party to become the "Progressive Democrats" and as the second largest party, instantly become Her Majesty's Official Opposition in the HoC?
No deal would be catastrophic. Everyone bar a few right-wing nutters, both here and outside acknowledge this.
May needed to call a snap election because 1. she may well have had to have a mini-election anyway if charges are brought over 2015 election expenses - and may have lost her majority. 2. once it becomes clear what Brexit means she may become rather unpopular. and maybe (hopefully) 3. she wants to be able to compromise with the EU and can't while she's beholden to some extreme Brexiteers for her slim majority.
Spot on with point 3 - the surest way to get a deal that isn't too bad is with the May backed by a decent majority.
I did say 'hopefully'. If that isn't her intention or if her new Tory MPs are predominantly hard line Brexiteers then we're in trouble. I think that my points 1 and 2 are also valid.
Yes, it would be a big mistake for any vanity candidates to target her. Going after Boris Johnson and Michael Gove would make much more sense, and would allow all the dodgy Vote Leave claims to be kept in the public's minds.
Why a "big mistake"?
Vanity candidates will get derisory votes whoever they stand against. They'll be £500 down, but it's not like MI5 are going to swoop in and take them out. Might as well just enjoy the ride.
Having said that, I expect he'd enjoy Surrey Heath more... at least Gove will probably be at the hustings, as he's not involved in the national campaign. It's also a nice area, whereas Maidenhead is a dump.
Because it would be actively counter-productive politically, rather than merely potentially a waste of time and money.
Well, not really. I shouldn't have thought Maidenhead will be in recount territory, so it's not like he's splitting the vote. And people outside Maidenhead and Guido's more head-banging fans don't give a damn about this bloke wherever he stands. Indeed, people inside Maidenhead will struggle to care.
Gina Miller is the only non-politician hardcore Remainer who passes the test of anyone caring about. And she does indeed need to take care she isn't counterproductive in what she does, as there are some Express readers and Twitter warriors out there who might not bother voting, but would do if they thought it would upset her deeply.
Strange how Oddschacker in all its constituency markets insists on referring to the LibDems as just plain "Democrats". Do they sense, as I do, that this is just a temporary measure pending a likely further change of name when the 20+ elected MPs from the Yellow Team merge with around half or 80 MPs in number from the centre-left of the Labour Party to become the "Progressive Democrats" and as the second largest party, instantly become Her Majesty's Official Opposition in the HoC?
I like the idea, Mr. Putney, but 20+ Lib Dems elected on 8th June seems a tad optimistic.
Yes. No deal IS a bad deal (in fact a terrible deal). It's a deal to trade on pretty restrictive WTO terms with a bloc that isn't some trivial backwater, but rather makes up the lion's share of our total trade, both imports and exports.
Best get used to the idea, old chap, and plan accordingly if your business takes you into Europe. The powers that be in the EU seem determined to try to punish us for daring to go our own way because, sadly, they are frightened that other countries might do the same.
On the bright side we seem to be able to trade quite successfully with the rest of the world under those same "Pretty restrictive WTO terms" so I doubt we will starve or go bankrupt.
Yes, that's about right, HL. The UK will certainly not starve or go bankrupt, it will just trade on worse terms than it did within the EU. How much worse depends on how the negotiations go, which of course is in turn partly dependent on how the EU feels about things.
I doubt it will wilfully adopt a punitive attitude but that's up to them. When we signed the Article 50 letter we committed to coming out regardless. Doesn't matter if the EU is reasonable, or knuckle-headed about it. We're coming out whatever.
In practice I expect the EU will be fairly reasonable if only because it will perceive it to be in its interest to be so, but if it perceives that interest to include an element of punishment, we can hardly complain. It's what we voted for, or 52% of us at least.
Theresa May 'a more popular leader than Thatcher or Blair during their best years,' opinion poll reveals EXCLUSIVE: May’s lead matches 1983 landslide which saw Thatcher win a 144-seat majority
Best get used to the idea, old chap, and plan accordingly if your business takes you into Europe. The powers that be in the EU seem determined to try to punish us for daring to go our own way because, sadly, they are frightened that other countries might do the same.
On the bright side we seem to be able to trade quite successfully with the rest of the world under those same "Pretty restrictive WTO terms" so I doubt we will starve or go bankrupt.
Yes, that's about right, HL. The UK will certainly not starve or go bankrupt, it will just trade on worse terms than it did within the EU. How much worse depends on how the negotiations go, which of course is in turn partly dependent on how the EU feels about things.
I doubt it will wilfully adopt a punitive attitude but that's up to them. When we signed the Article 50 letter we committed to coming out regardless. Doesn't matter if the EU is reasonable, or knuckle-headed about it. We're coming out whatever.
In practice I expect the EU will be fairly reasonable if only because it will perceive it to be in its interest to be so, but if it perceives that interest to include an element of punishment, we can hardly complain. It's what we voted for, or 52% of us at least.
.
The EU will do a trade deal that maximises the economic benefit for them and minimises the benefit for the UK. That's the reality of a small country doing a deal with a big one.
There is plenty of UK business they will have their eye on attracting to the continent and I'm sure they'll negotiate with that in mind.
The euroskeptics have spent years bashing the EU over the head so I'm sure there will be plenty of EU leaders who will approach the deal with a large degree of schadenfreude.
Yes. No deal IS a bad deal (in fact a terrible deal). It's a deal to trade on pretty restrictive WTO terms with a bloc that isn't some trivial backwater, but rather makes up the lion's share of our total trade, both imports and exports.
Best get used to the idea, old chap, and plan accordingly if your business takes you into Europe. The powers that be in the EU seem determined to try to punish us for daring to go our own way because, sadly, they are frightened that other countries might do the same.
On the bright side we seem to be able to trade quite successfully with the rest of the world under those same "Pretty restrictive WTO terms" so I doubt we will starve or go bankrupt.
It is not a matter of punishment. The EU has consistently said that Brexit is punishment enough, and also that Brexit means Brexit. The only Brexit is hard Brexit.
These articles and series of tweets cover the ground well, including a review of all public pronouncements by the EU, who make a policy of open negotiations rather than Mays "pig in a poke" policy:
Theresa May 'a more popular leader than Thatcher or Blair during their best years,' opinion poll reveals EXCLUSIVE: May’s lead matches 1983 landslide which saw Thatcher win a 144-seat majority
My dad is 58 years old, he has three pension pots .
One with Zurich which is worth X amount but he is not making any more contributions with them.
One with his employer that is managed by ageon.
and the third the state pension ofcourse.
Question is he wants to take the 25% tax free lump sum available to people over 55's. Can he get 25% tax free from all three including the government one or only from the zurich and ageon one's. Your help is much appreciated.
After a year of Nicola Sturgeon shouting that Scotland wants to remain as a member of the EU, now her MPs are signing pledges to keep Scotland out of the EU.
"SNP MPs have been accused of “hypocrisy” on Europe after signing a pledge that would protect fishermen by keeping Scotland out of the EU.
Politicians including Mike Weir, the Angus MP and party’s chief whip, and Banff and Buchan MP Eilidh Whiteford backed a campaign to keep the country free of Common Fisheries Policy rules, a cornerstone of Brussels rules."
No deal would be catastrophic. Everyone bar a few right-wing nutters, both here and outside acknowledge this.
May needed to call a snap election because 1. she may well have had to have a mini-election anyway if charges are brought over 2015 election expenses - and may have lost her majority. 2. once it becomes clear what Brexit means she may become rather unpopular. and maybe (hopefully) 3. she wants to be able to compromise with the EU and can't while she's beholden to some extreme Brexiteers for her slim majority.
Spot on with point 3 - the surest way to get a deal that isn't too bad is with the May backed by a decent majority.
I had thought this too but i think it depends on who the new Tory MPs are. It seems as though some remainers are not standing again? And are Tory remainers more vulnerable to lib Dems taking their seats... And will Tories do better in Brexit land? Do we think the new crop will be compromising remainers... Or leavers emboldened by the prospect of Brexit?
My dad is 58 years old, he has three pension pots .
One with Zurich which is worth X amount but he is not making any more contributions with them.
One with his employer that is managed by ageon.
and the third the state pension ofcourse.
Question is he wants to take the 25% tax free lump sum available to people over 55's. Can he get 25% tax free from all three including the government one or only from the zurich and ageon one's. Your help is much appreciated.
There is no tax free lump sum with the state pension. He can get the lump sum from the others (assuming they are defined contribution/money purchase) by going into flexible drawdown (or by buying an annuity) at age 55, or later.
He will however need to talk to his employer (or their managers) about that scheme, since it will depend on its normal retirement age and what rules it has about early payment.
Best get used to the idea, old chap, and plan accordingly if your business takes you into Europe. The powers that be in the EU seem determined to try to punish us for daring to go our own way because, sadly, they are frightened that other countries might do the same.
On the bright side we seem to be able to trade quite successfully with the rest of the world under those same "Pretty restrictive WTO terms" so I doubt we will starve or go bankrupt.
Yes, that's about right, HL. The UK will certainly not starve or go bankrupt, it will just trade on worse terms than it did within the EU. How much worse depends on how the negotiations go, which of course is in turn partly dependent on how the EU feels about things.
I doubt it will wilfully adopt a punitive attitude but that's up to them. When we signed the Article 50 letter we committed to coming out regardless. Doesn't matter if the EU is reasonable, or knuckle-headed about it. We're coming out whatever.
In practice I expect the EU will be fairly reasonable if only because it will perceive it to be in its interest to be so, but if it perceives that interest to include an element of punishment, we can hardly complain. It's what we voted for, or 52% of us at least.
.
The EU will do a trade deal that maximises the economic benefit for them and minimises the benefit for the UK. That's the reality of a small country doing a deal with a big one.
There is plenty of UK business they will have their eye on attracting to the continent and I'm sure they'll negotiate with that in mind.
The euroskeptics have spent years bashing the EU over the head so I'm sure there will be plenty of EU leaders who will approach the deal with a large degree of schadenfreude.
A small country that pays €12bn into its budget each year, is its second largest economy, its second largest defence spender and which hosts its biggest financial centre. Yup, we've no leverage at all.
Fair go, Doc, I have long taken the view that leaving the EU would mean a reversion to WTO terms (as it has now become) and have never felt frightened by that fact. For me this is a political not an economic decision. Others, maybe including yourself, will disagree.
How many see the original vs how many see the correction? How many care? How many votes would change as a result of the 'exposure'?
Maybe a mistake, maybe not.
Tell it as it is Calum, usual blatant Tory lies , they are not the NASTY party for nothing. They would steal their grannies false teeth and blame it on someone else. You just cannot trust them on anything other than they will try to take every penny you have by foul means.
Best get used to the idea, old chap, and plan accordingly if your business takes you into Europe. The powers that be in the EU seem determined to try to punish us for daring to go our own way because, sadly, they are frightened that other countries might do the same.
On the bright side we seem to be able to trade quite successfully with the rest of the world under those same "Pretty restrictive WTO terms" so I doubt we will starve or go bankrupt.
Yes, that's about right, HL. The UK will certainly not starve or go bankrupt, it will just trade on worse terms than it did within the EU. How much worse depends on how the negotiations go, which of course is in turn partly dependent on how the EU feels about things.
I doubt it will wilfully adopt a punitive attitude but that's up to them. When we signed the Article 50 letter we committed to coming out regardless. Doesn't matter if the EU is reasonable, or knuckle-headed about it. We're coming out whatever.
In practice I expect the EU will be fairly reasonable if only because it will perceive it to be in its interest to be so, but if it perceives that interest to include an element of punishment, we can hardly complain. It's what we voted for, or 52% of us at least.
.
The EU will do a trade deal that maximises the economic benefit for them and minimises the benefit for the UK. That's the reality of a small country doing a deal with a big one.
There is plenty of UK business they will have their eye on attracting to the continent and I'm sure they'll negotiate with that in mind.
The euroskeptics have spent years bashing the EU over the head so I'm sure there will be plenty of EU leaders who will approach the deal with a large degree of schadenfreude.
That may be so, David, or maybe not. We just don't know and we won't know for a while yet.
What we do know is that whatever they offer, our Government will take it, because it feels obliged to enact the result of the referendum. Whether that is wise is another question, but it is going to happen.
How many see the original vs how many see the correction? How many care? How many votes would change as a result of the 'exposure'?
Maybe a mistake, maybe not.
Tell it as it is Calum, usual blatant Tory lies , they are not the NASTY party for nothing. They would steal their grannies false teeth and blame it on someone else. You just cannot trust them on anything other than they will try to take every penny you have by foul means.
Comments
From Bouattia to this. Frying pans and fires come to mind.
1. she may well have had to have a mini-election anyway if charges are brought over 2015 election expenses - and may have lost her majority.
2. once it becomes clear what Brexit means she may become rather unpopular.
and maybe (hopefully)
3. she wants to be able to compromise with the EU and can't while she's beholden to some extreme Brexiteers for her slim majority.
More seriously, they're spent. 80% of their votes will go to Tory.
UKIP turned out to be a brilliant vehicle for this country. De toxing the Tories, then gaining huge traction in ex Lab voters who are now either non-voters or thinking of voting Tory.
On the bright side we seem to be able to trade quite successfully with the rest of the world under those same "Pretty restrictive WTO terms" so I doubt we will starve or go bankrupt.
Martin Baxter article.
Vanity candidates will get derisory votes whoever they stand against. They'll be £500 down, but it's not like MI5 are going to swoop in and take them out. Might as well just enjoy the ride.
Having said that, I expect he'd enjoy Surrey Heath more... at least Gove will probably be at the hustings, as he's not involved in the national campaign. It's also a nice area, whereas Maidenhead is a dump.
https://twitter.com/AngrySalmond/status/857147572451987456
"... there is more territory on the map representing a Conservative majority above 400 than there is for a Labour majority government."
@juliamacfarlane: May quoting lines from the "I like Corbyn but" website, which was endorsed by Diane Abbott twitter.com/paulwaugh/stat…
I think that my points 1 and 2 are also valid.
Unheralded levels of tin-earedness....
Anything without Mrs May is just the also rans.
Gina Miller is the only non-politician hardcore Remainer who passes the test of anyone caring about. And she does indeed need to take care she isn't counterproductive in what she does, as there are some Express readers and Twitter warriors out there who might not bother voting, but would do if they thought it would upset her deeply.
Another gem from the Bunker.
It's a record, beating Mrs May's previous record of 45-minutes, which was set in January and beat David Cameron's record of 40 minutes.
May's bout was nearly twice the length scheduled for Prime Minister's Questions.
http://news.sky.com/story/live-corbyn-v-may-in-last-pmqs-before-election-10851520?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter
https://twitter.com/adambienkov/status/857211534296199168
Labour source just ruled out Corbyn taking part in any TV debates that don't feature Theresa May.
https://twitter.com/DelMody/status/857202418353922048
I doubt it will wilfully adopt a punitive attitude but that's up to them. When we signed the Article 50 letter we committed to coming out regardless. Doesn't matter if the EU is reasonable, or knuckle-headed about it. We're coming out whatever.
In practice I expect the EU will be fairly reasonable if only because it will perceive it to be in its interest to be so, but if it perceives that interest to include an element of punishment, we can hardly complain. It's what we voted for, or 52% of us at least.
Here are two people that most of the country won't be able to vote for or won't be interested in....
Maybe a mistake, maybe not.
Sturgeon: “Turnip”.
Repeat.
Theresa May 'a more popular leader than Thatcher or Blair during their best years,' opinion poll reveals
EXCLUSIVE: May’s lead matches 1983 landslide which saw Thatcher win a 144-seat majority
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tories-with-huge-poll-lead-over-jeremy-corbyns-labour-poll-reveals-a3524136.html
What do voters know, anyway.......
The EU will do a trade deal that maximises the economic benefit for them and minimises the benefit for the UK. That's the reality of a small country doing a deal with a big one.
There is plenty of UK business they will have their eye on attracting to the continent and I'm sure they'll negotiate with that in mind.
The euroskeptics have spent years bashing the EU over the head so I'm sure there will be plenty of EU leaders who will approach the deal with a large degree of schadenfreude.
These articles and series of tweets cover the ground well, including a review of all public pronouncements by the EU, who make a policy of open negotiations rather than Mays "pig in a poke" policy:
https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/857143763105394688
https://twitter.com/christiancalgie/status/857189845365608448
Ruth Davidson: Nicola Sturgeon must reveal her secret indy ref 2 plan before general election
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/26/ruth-davidson-nicola-sturgeon-must-reveal-secret-indy-ref-2/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
https://sluggerotoole.com/2017/04/25/brexit-in-the-short-term-re-engineers-the-environment-around-scotlands-political-trilemma/
That's all that matters.
My dad is 58 years old, he has three pension pots .
One with Zurich which is worth X amount but he is not making any more contributions with them.
One with his employer that is managed by ageon.
and the third the state pension ofcourse.
Question is he wants to take the 25% tax free lump sum available to people over 55's. Can he get 25% tax free from all three including the government one or only from the zurich and ageon one's. Your help is much appreciated.
The Courier - SNP MPs sign fishing pledge that would keep Scotland out of the EU
"SNP MPs have been accused of “hypocrisy” on Europe after signing a pledge that would protect fishermen by keeping Scotland out of the EU.
Politicians including Mike Weir, the Angus MP and party’s chief whip, and Banff and Buchan MP Eilidh Whiteford backed a campaign to keep the country free of Common Fisheries Policy rules, a cornerstone of Brussels rules."
https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/857216218096390146
He will however need to talk to his employer (or their managers) about that scheme, since it will depend on its normal retirement age and what rules it has about early payment.
Fair go, Doc, I have long taken the view that leaving the EU would mean a reversion to WTO terms (as it has now become) and have never felt frightened by that fact. For me this is a political not an economic decision. Others, maybe including yourself, will disagree.
What we do know is that whatever they offer, our Government will take it, because it feels obliged to enact the result of the referendum. Whether that is wise is another question, but it is going to happen.
(Base size 110 - MOE ±12)
Con: 36
Lab: 17
SNP: 41
https://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/Polls/pm-april-2017-tables.pdf
How's that Indyref2 going, Nicky?
https://www.betfair.com/sport/politics
Improbable but delicious to imagine.