While we have all been enjoying Dianne Abbott's terminal gormlessness, has anyone in public media actually questioned the basic claim that Labour will deliver 10k new policemen for £300 million?
It seems to be difficult to find in a written down form, however I have seen the claim repeated unquestioned by the BBC News channel reporters this morning.
ISTM that a basic police salary is not far from £30k per annum, and by the time that gold plated pension, overheads, NICs and so on are added, the cost is closer to £60-70k per policeman.
Which makes the cost to Labour approx £600-700 million per annum and the claim as cloud-cuckoo land or not very honest. That swallows there entire purported £2.7bn savings from messing about with CGT on its own, yet they have been claiming it will take 'some of the CGT money'.
Yet not a peep from the press or the factcheckers as far as I know.
Employer NI is net neutral for the treasury. Surely the pensions are DC these days.... surely....
Company's still contribute on top of your salary do they not
Police pension contributions by employer are about 25%. And by year 3 the salary is about 26k just on auto-increment - which is Jezza's average for his new policemen in the first term.
Then someone has to bu the uniform and the space, and the benefits package, and look after police who are injured etc.
Amazing to hear a prominent Labour man talk this way...- I know he's had his differences, but you'd never hear such a visceral full fronted demolition from say Osborne on May.
While we have all been enjoying Dianne Abbott's terminal gormlessness, has anyone in public media actually questioned the basic claim that Labour will deliver 10k new policemen for £300 million?
It seems to be difficult to find in a written down form, however I have seen the claim repeated unquestioned by the BBC News channel reporters this morning.
ISTM that a basic police salary is not far from £30k per annum, and by the time that gold plated pension, overheads, NICs and so on are added, the cost is closer to £60-70k per policeman.
Which makes the cost to Labour approx £600-700 million per annum and the claim as cloud-cuckoo land or not very honest. That swallows there entire purported £2.7bn savings from messing about with CGT on its own, yet they have been claiming it will take 'some of the CGT money'.
Yet not a peep from the press or the factcheckers as far as I know.
Sky pointed out it was a crock of shit.
I believe they also referred to the plans as austerity max as it allowed for no pay increases for four years and of course no budget for training or even equipment
That is Labour to a T - team truth my arse
Though arguing about the cost is like arguing about the size of the brexit bonus from contributions.
Police and fire service cuts over recent years have not been popular, and maintaining rural presence for both is a popular doorstep policy. Saving the Hinckley firestation and Cottage Hospital were central themes to our campaigning last weekend. No one asked how they would be funded.
You underestimate British politeness and the hope that doorknockers will simply go away as quickly as possible.
A very different electoral system though. In a two-horse FPTP race, a 20-point gap with a week to go is surely more secure than a 3-point gap in an electoral college system as complex as the USA's.
Macron can win by piling up the votes on Paris. Doesn't matter elwhere his votes are unlike ourselves and the USA
It will be interesting to see if Le Pen manages to win a few departments. That would be a breakthrough for her and the FN. The north-east and the south-east look the best bets. But it would not be a surprise if she did not win any.
I would be extremely surprised if she did not win the departements where she had more than 30% of the vote in the first round or some of the right-wing strongholds where le pen + dupont iagnan + fillon had around 60%: I would bet on around 20 départements such as: Aisne, Alpes maritimes, Ardennes, Aube, North and South Corsica, Haute Marne, Meuse, Oise, Pas de Calais, Pyrénées orientales, Haut Rhin, Haute Saone, Somme, Var, Vaucluse, Vosges, Yonne + French Polynesia and New Caledonia.
At the regional level, she has a decent chance in 3 metropolitan régions: PACA(Provence Alpes Cotes d'Azur), Hauts de France and Grand Est. However I don't see her winning more than one.
Le Pen will likely win at least 1 region, Provence Alpes Cote d'Azur, where she has had a poll lead in the runoff and some departements in the industrial North East
One of the few joys of current events is the far left holding up a mirror to the anti-BBC right, which can now see how ridiculous it has looked to most people all these years.
Agreed. McDonnell is being pathetic and transparent, a communist trump flailing about blaming the media fir what they don't say and what they say. Corbyns top team really stretch the limits of my civility, I dont like it.
Looks to me like the Tory campaign on Corbyn is just about to open fire. DM has details of a new bombshell poster: "No Bombs for the Army, One big bombshell for your family"
It can only get nastier once the locals are out of the way.
Is the army commonly associated with bombs?
Way things are going, they may have to dig up old stocks of Mills Bombs. That would also provide an authentic tang of a world when a quarter of the map was pink, so vital for the Brexiteers' sense of worth.
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
They are creating a situation in which paying half of 100 billion is seen as a triumph for May.
While we have all been enjoying Dianne Abbott's terminal gormlessness, has anyone in public media actually questioned the basic claim that Labour will deliver 10k new policemen for £300 million?
It seems to be difficult to find in a written down form, however I have seen the claim repeated unquestioned by the BBC News channel reporters this morning.
ISTM that a basic police salary is not far from £30k per annum, and by the time that gold plated pension, overheads, NICs and so on are added, the cost is closer to £60-70k per policeman.
Which makes the cost to Labour approx £600-700 million per annum and the claim as cloud-cuckoo land or not very honest. That swallows there entire purported £2.7bn savings from messing about with CGT on its own, yet they have been claiming it will take 'some of the CGT money'.
Yet not a peep from the press or the factcheckers as far as I know.
Sky pointed out it was a crock of shit.
I believe they also referred to the plans as austerity max as it allowed for no pay increases for four years and of course no budget for training or even equipment
That is Labour to a T - team truth my arse
Though arguing about the cost is like arguing about the size of the brexit bonus from contributions.
Police and fire service cuts over recent years have not been popular, and maintaining rural presence for both is a popular doorstep policy. Saving the Hinckley firestation and Cottage Hospital were central themes to our campaigning last weekend. No one asked how they would be funded.
Costing does eventually matter though, particularly if people don't quite trust you.
While we have all been enjoying Dianne Abbott's terminal gormlessness, has anyone in public media actually questioned the basic claim that Labour will deliver 10k new policemen for £300 million?
It seems to be difficult to find in a written down form, however I have seen the claim repeated unquestioned by the BBC News channel reporters this morning.
ISTM that a basic police salary is not far from £30k per annum, and by the time that gold plated pension, overheads, NICs and so on are added, the cost is closer to £60-70k per policeman.
Which makes the cost to Labour approx £600-700 million per annum and the claim as cloud-cuckoo land or not very honest. That swallows there entire purported £2.7bn savings from messing about with CGT on its own, yet they have been claiming it will take 'some of the CGT money'.
Yet not a peep from the press or the factcheckers as far as I know.
Why bother providing any detailed analysis of a policy that will never be implemented? Resources are finite. They need to be allocated where they matter.
Yes. blindingly obvious yesterday that even at the highest leve3ls no-one in the party foresees any prospect of actually governing.
The fact that this election sprang unexpectedly means that all manifestos are going to be rather half baked. Labour fluffed it yesterday, but the idea of rolling policy announcements each day (today is hospital STP plans and closures) is a good one. Meanwhile the Tories have just a reactive strategy, and a concentration on the Dear Leader.
The Tories are doing exactly what is needed to win: lots of controlled May and plenty of Corbyn & Co triumphantly shooting themselves in the foot. It's a shame that the opposition is not up to the task of getting the government to talk seriously about the biggest peacetime issue this country has faced for many a long year - especially as the Tory right continues to press for the hardest of all Brexits. But we are where we are.
The Labour strategy is right, to concentrate on policy, but the execution and spokespersons are appalling. Executing the spokespersons may be better.
Concentrating on police, hospitals etc is correct for the locals on Thursday. Brexit will follow.
If labour continue to bleat on about Brexit they'll get annihilated.
There's nothing we dislike more than sore losers in this country.
Labour have not been emphasising Brexit yet, except locally in pro Remain seats.
And nor should they.
Despite the wailing of a few on here most people just want it done, any talk of another referendum will be seen as anti democratic and make things even worse, if that's possible.
If there was real desire to overturn the vote the Libs would win 100+ seats but there isn't, so they won't.
The article itself is brilliant - by far the best I've ever read from John Crace. It was a straight down the line factual report and yet much funnier than his sketches.
But it's the comments that are the killer. I don't think this story will have much traction among the general public TBH. Politician is useless moron shock. But the humiliation and despair among Labour members and former diehards is palpable.
This may seriously harm activist motivation and depress turnout among core voters - both of which were off the scale at the bottom already.
Brilliant - but what has she said in past about Scandinavian nurses?
Sounds like some more comedy gold to come from our Diane
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
They are creating a situation in which paying half of 100 billion is seen as a triumph for May.
Only in your mind Joff. Anything over a very reasonable 'pay for what we get' level and we'll have to default to zero. Huge exit payments are not politically acceptable.
While we have all been enjoying Dianne Abbott's terminal gormlessness, has anyone in public media actually questioned the basic claim that Labour will deliver 10k new policemen for £300 million?
It seems to be difficult to find in a written down form, however I have seen the claim repeated unquestioned by the BBC News channel reporters this morning.
ISTM that a basic police salary is not far from £30k per annum, and by the time that gold plated pension, overheads, NICs and so on are added, the cost is closer to £60-70k per policeman.
Which makes the cost to Labour approx £600-700 million per annum and the claim as cloud-cuckoo land or not very honest. That swallows there entire purported £2.7bn savings from messing about with CGT on its own, yet they have been claiming it will take 'some of the CGT money'.
Yet not a peep from the press or the factcheckers as far as I know.
Employer NI is net neutral for the treasury. Surely the pensions are DC these days.... surely....
Company's still contribute on top of your salary do they not
Police pension contributions by employer are about 25%. And by year 3 the salary is about 26k just on auto-increment - which is Jezza's average for his new policemen in the first term.
Then someone has to bu the uniform and the space, and the benefits package, and look after police who are injured etc.
Who was the Home Secretary when police numbers fell? Theresa May wasn't it? This might be cleverer from Labour than it appears. And tbh I'm not really sure diverting the argument onto how much will be raised by reversing CGT cuts is a sure vote-winner either.
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
They are creating a situation in which paying half of 100 billion is seen as a triumph for May.
If that is so and they pull it off it has been a brilliant manoeuvre, but 50 bn is still really hard to sell, I'm not convinced that Is the must likely explanation. It will be to easy for opponents to point out the eu arbitrarily nearly double the bill, and may arguing she argued them down would not be credible.
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
Indeed May will walk with the voters backing if the EU refuse to accept any less than 100 billion euros for farming subsidies etc
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
They are creating a situation in which paying half of 100 billion is seen as a triumph for May.
Only in your mind Joff. Anything over a very reasonable 'pay for what we get' level and we'll have to default to zero. Huge exit payments are not politically acceptable.
The why didn't the bus not say leave the EU and pay billions of Euros??
While we have all been enjoying Dianne Abbott's terminal gormlessness, has anyone in public media actually questioned the basic claim that Labour will deliver 10k new policemen for £300 million?
It seems to be difficult to find in a written down form, however I have seen the claim repeated unquestioned by the BBC News channel reporters this morning.
ISTM that a basic police salary is not far from £30k per annum, and by the time that gold plated pension, overheads, NICs and so on are added, the cost is closer to £60-70k per policeman.
Which makes the cost to Labour approx £600-700 million per annum and the claim as cloud-cuckoo land or not very honest. That swallows there entire purported £2.7bn savings from messing about with CGT on its own, yet they have been claiming it will take 'some of the CGT money'.
Yet not a peep from the press or the factcheckers as far as I know.
Employer NI is net neutral for the treasury. Surely the pensions are DC these days.... surely....
Company's still contribute on top of your salary do they not
Police pension contributions by employer are about 25%. And by year 3 the salary is about 26k just on auto-increment - which is Jezza's average for his new policemen in the first term.
Then someone has to bu the uniform and the space, and the benefits package, and look after police who are injured etc.
Who was the Home Secretary when police numbers fell? Theresa May wasn't it? This might be cleverer from Labour than it appears. And tbh I'm not really sure diverting the argument onto how much will be raised by reversing CGT cuts is a sure vote-winner either.
Going after her police record might be a reasonable tactic, but if the claims of a new policybare laughable it'll be hard to land a blow.
A very different electoral system though. In a two-horse FPTP race, a 20-point gap with a week to go is surely more secure than a 3-point gap in an electoral college system as complex as the USA's.
Macron can win by piling up the votes on Paris. Doesn't matter elwhere his votes are unlike ourselves and the USA
It will be interesting to see if Le Pen manages to win a few departments. That would be a breakthrough for her and the FN. The north-east and the south-east look the best bets. But it would not be a surprise if she did not win any.
If you check out a map of Vichy France it pretty much shows you where she is strongest.
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
Indeed May will walk with the voters backing if the EU refuse to accept any less than 100 billion euros for farming subsidies etc
There are lots of figures floating around. As you say, the UK will not pay Euros 100 billion. No-one has actually asked for that, of course. We have not yet seen the formal EU demands. But if a figure that high gets bandied about all over the place for any amount of time, it does make it politically much easier to pay a lower sum.
That piece for one says Corbyn's team are optimistic, and also refers to Lucy Powell as a senior mp and strong all around media performer. And Richard burgon.
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
They are creating a situation in which paying half of 100 billion is seen as a triumph for May.
If that is so and they pull it off it has been a brilliant manoeuvre, but 50 bn is still really hard to sell, I'm not convinced that Is the must likely explanation. It will be to easy for opponents to point out the eu arbitrarily nearly double the bill, and may arguing she argued them down would not be credible.
Isn't it the old kitchen-refurbishment deal. A salesman offers you a kithcen, says it would be £24,000 but if you sign up then he can do it for £12,000 as he has to meet quota. (This actually happened to me - I threw him out of the house).
Mr. HYUFD, jein. Pre-election period in the UK, Germany and France all at once. It's an electioneering phase. One hopes that when that's done and dusted, compromise and a reasonable agreement is possible.
We shall see.
As for Macron's 'Frexit' wibbling - hahahahaha. We'll see by his approach to our departure whether he really thinks France might leave. If he does, then he'll want good terms for us to set a positive precedent. I am not convinced this will be the case.
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
They are creating a situation in which paying half of 100 billion is seen as a triumph for May.
If that is so and they pull it off it has been a brilliant manoeuvre, but 50 bn is still really hard to sell, I'm not convinced that Is the must likely explanation. It will be to easy for opponents to point out the eu arbitrarily nearly double the bill, and may arguing she argued them down would not be credible.
Would May not get the backing of the British people to pay a sum to avoid a diamond hard Brexit? Who could make political capital from such a move?
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
They are creating a situation in which paying half of 100 billion is seen as a triumph for May.
If that is so and they pull it off it has been a brilliant manoeuvre, but 50 bn is still really hard to sell, I'm not convinced that Is the must likely explanation. It will be to easy for opponents to point out the eu arbitrarily nearly double the bill, and may arguing she argued them down would not be credible.
Isn't it the old kitchen-refurbishment deal. A salesman offers you a kithcen, says it would be £24,000 but if you sign up then he can do it for £12,000 as he has to meet quota. (This actually happened to me - I threw him out of the house).
I had a similar experience buying an electric razor in Tesco. Got it for 'half price' Their 'half price' was actually about £5 cheaper than other retailers.
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
They are creating a situation in which paying half of 100 billion is seen as a triumph for May.
If that is so and they pull it off it has been a brilliant manoeuvre, but 50 bn is still really hard to sell, I'm not convinced that Is the must likely explanation. It will be to easy for opponents to point out the eu arbitrarily nearly double the bill, and may arguing she argued them down would not be credible.
Would May not get the backing of the British people to pay a sum to avoid a diamond hard Brexit? Who could make political capital from such a move?
Ukip, just for starters, and half her party. Even tens of billions might be reasonable depending what we get for it, but there was that polling awhile back that show the public react poorly to any number. You'd think worrying about that should not be an issue if she has a big majority, but experience shows pms never stop worrying about public perception, and the media reaction from areas that usually back her will be vicious.
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
They are creating a situation in which paying half of 100 billion is seen as a triumph for May.
If that is so and they pull it off it has been a brilliant manoeuvre, but 50 bn is still really hard to sell, I'm not convinced that Is the must likely explanation. It will be to easy for opponents to point out the eu arbitrarily nearly double the bill, and may arguing she argued them down would not be credible.
Would May not get the backing of the British people to pay a sum to avoid a diamond hard Brexit? Who could make political capital from such a move?
Nobody seems to have worked out in detail what the absolute delta in economic terms would be between Diamond Brexit/Hard Brexit/Soft Brexit/Brexit in name only. There could be no political justification for paying any more than the delta between Diamond and Soft. But, given that the WTO exists for a reason and has been incredibly successful, the 'pain' of an exit to WTO tariffing is really quite minimal. I'd guess that E15-20 bn tops is what we might agree to bear. Spread over many years and much of it 'contingent' rather than cash in advance. The overall deal has to be more attractive to us than just walking.
Mr. Observer, it looks like capitulation. A £50bn bill following this £100bn chatter makes it worse, not better, because the hiking of the whispered demand looks like bullying if genuine, or an obvious attempt to gouge the original demand by making an unreasonable one and then being 'persuaded' to accept a mere £50bn.
Of course, this is only one part of any possible deal.
As an aside, it amuses me that people speak of this as a divorce when referring to the 'exit bill'. And yet, in divorces it's the wealthier partner that pays money to the poorer one. If the EU economy is so much larger than ours, why they are not giving us a divorce settlement? [Tongue in cheek... but only just].
'Would May not get the backing of the British people to pay a sum to avoid a diamond hard Brexit? Who could make political capital from such a move?'
Not now as everyone can see that the EU & Junker in particular can't be trusted & the entire exercise is a scam.
If we were to agree to any payment up front then the so called trade deal afterwards would be pitiful with every conceivable barrier put in our way & probably more payments demanded.
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
They are creating a situation in which paying half of 100 billion is seen as a triumph for May.
If that is so and they pull it off it has been a brilliant manoeuvre, but 50 bn is still really hard to sell, I'm not convinced that Is the must likely explanation. It will be to easy for opponents to point out the eu arbitrarily nearly double the bill, and may arguing she argued them down would not be credible.
It was fairly clear in the Irish Government documents yesterday that they are mainly looking for us to honour the seven year cycle on the budget Cameron agreed back in 2013.
The expiry date is December 2020. The Irish are actively pushing for orderly withdrawal incorporating a transition period which sounds remarkably like May's implementation phase. December 2020 seems to fit nicely.
It all points to March 2019 we leave, April 2019-December 2020 we enter a transition/implementation phase.
June 2016-December 2020 is longer than the first world war.
It is also worth noting that the Irish referred to legal and budgetary financial commitments, which implicitly acknowledges that they have no legal grounds for seeking payment on at least some of our perceived obligations.
Mr. HYUFD, jein. Pre-election period in the UK, Germany and France all at once. It's an electioneering phase. One hopes that when that's done and dusted, compromise and a reasonable agreement is possible.
We shall see.
As for Macron's 'Frexit' wibbling - hahahahaha. We'll see by his approach to our departure whether he really thinks France might leave. If he does, then he'll want good terms for us to set a positive precedent. I am not convinced this will be the case.
It smacks of Tim Farron Eurosceptic Man and his sincerely held views on the EU that will expire when the polls close.
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
They are creating a situation in which paying half of 100 billion is seen as a triumph for May.
If that is so and they pull it off it has been a brilliant manoeuvre, but 50 bn is still really hard to sell, I'm not convinced that Is the must likely explanation. It will be to easy for opponents to point out the eu arbitrarily nearly double the bill, and may arguing she argued them down would not be credible.
It was fairly clear in the Irish Government documents yesterday that they are mainly looking for us to honour the seven year cycle on the budget Cameron agreed back in 2013.
The expiry date is December 2020. The Irish are actively pushing for orderly withdrawal incorporating a transition period which sounds remarkably like May's implementation phase. December 2020 seems to fit nicely.
It all points to March 2019 we leave, April 2019-December 2020 we enter a transition/implementation phase.
June 2016-December 2020 is longer than the first world war.
The Irish are not the only party to consider and what they want may not happen either.
On topic, it's incredible that Macron is still available at 1.11 on Betfair.
That's simply a gift.
Agreed. I think it's because the volume of money at current prices is just too big. Incidentally, Betfair STILL hasn't settled the "year of next General Election" market.
Cheeky, but strictly speaking they could justify not doing so until the morning of the 9th June.
Try dropping them an email. That's what I did last year when May became PM.
If the bet is with Betfair Sportsbook I think they should pay up now. If it's on the exchange then it's another customers money they would be handing over so I think they are right to hold on to be 100% certain.
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
They are creating a situation in which paying half of 100 billion is seen as a triumph for May.
If that is so and they pull it off it has been a brilliant manoeuvre, but 50 bn is still really hard to sell, I'm not convinced that Is the must likely explanation. It will be to easy for opponents to point out the eu arbitrarily nearly double the bill, and may arguing she argued them down would not be credible.
It was fairly clear in the Irish Government documents yesterday that they are mainly looking for us to honour the seven year cycle on the budget Cameron agreed back in 2013.
The expiry date is December 2020. The Irish are actively pushing for orderly withdrawal incorporating a transition period which sounds remarkably like May's implementation phase. December 2020 seems to fit nicely.
It all points to March 2019 we leave, April 2019-December 2020 we enter a transition/implementation phase.
June 2016-December 2020 is longer than the first world war.
The Irish are not the only party to consider and what they want may not happen either.
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
They are creating a situation in which paying half of 100 billion is seen as a triumph for May.
If that is so and they pull it off it has been a brilliant manoeuvre, but 50 bn is still really hard to sell, I'm not convinced that Is the must likely explanation. It will be to easy for opponents to point out the eu arbitrarily nearly double the bill, and may arguing she argued them down would not be credible.
Isn't it the old kitchen-refurbishment deal. A salesman offers you a kithcen, says it would be £24,000 but if you sign up then he can do it for £12,000 as he has to meet quota. (This actually happened to me - I threw him out of the house).
Is it like the old Osborne and Cameron deal?
"Britain will only pay half of the £1.7bn demanded by the EU, George Osborne said today.
The UK will pay £850m in two instalments after next year's election after a deal was struck to offset the payment against Britain's annual rebate from Brussels."
"Britain quietly settled its latest altercation over the European Union budget by paying a 1.7 billion-pound ($2.6 billion) bill that Prime Minister David Cameron originally derided as “appalling.”
Britain transferred the money in two installments on July 1 and Sept. 1, the Brussels-based European Commission said in a statement on Thursday. "
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
They are creating a situation in which paying half of 100 billion is seen as a triumph for May.
If that is so and they pull it off it has been a brilliant manoeuvre, but 50 bn is still really hard to sell, I'm not convinced that Is the must likely explanation. It will be to easy for opponents to point out the eu arbitrarily nearly double the bill, and may arguing she argued them down would not be credible.
It was fairly clear in the Irish Government documents yesterday that they are mainly looking for us to honour the seven year cycle on the budget Cameron agreed back in 2013.
The expiry date is December 2020. The Irish are actively pushing for orderly withdrawal incorporating a transition period which sounds remarkably like May's implementation phase. December 2020 seems to fit nicely.
It all points to March 2019 we leave, April 2019-December 2020 we enter a transition/implementation phase.
June 2016-December 2020 is longer than the first world war.
The Irish are not the only party to consider and what they want may not happen either.
Are the EU going to throw them under a bus?
The EU will delightedly throw under a bus any country that gets in the way of the Project.
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
They are creating a situation in which paying half of 100 billion is seen as a triumph for May.
If that is so and they pull it off it has been a brilliant manoeuvre, but 50 bn is still really hard to sell, I'm not convinced that Is the must likely explanation. It will be to easy for opponents to point out the eu arbitrarily nearly double the bill, and may arguing she argued them down would not be credible.
It was fairly clear in the Irish Government documents yesterday that they are mainly looking for us to honour the seven year cycle on the budget Cameron agreed back in 2013.
The expiry date is December 2020. The Irish are actively pushing for orderly withdrawal incorporating a transition period which sounds remarkably like May's implementation phase. December 2020 seems to fit nicely.
It all points to March 2019 we leave, April 2019-December 2020 we enter a transition/implementation phase.
June 2016-December 2020 is longer than the first world war.
The Irish are not the only party to consider and what they want may not happen either.
Are the EU going to throw them under a bus?
If they feel they have to and it won't cause the Irish to want to leave, of course they would - needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Will it happen? I have no idea.
A very different electoral system though. In a two-horse FPTP race, a 20-point gap with a week to go is surely more secure than a 3-point gap in an electoral college system as complex as the USA's.
Macron can win by piling up the votes on Paris. Doesn't matter elwhere his votes are unlike ourselves and the USA
It will be interesting to see if Le Pen manages to win a few departments. That would be a breakthrough for her and the FN. The north-east and the south-east look the best bets. But it would not be a surprise if she did not win any.
If you check out a map of Vichy France it pretty much shows you where she is strongest.
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
They are creating a situation in which paying half of 100 billion is seen as a triumph for May.
If that is so and they pull it off it has been a brilliant manoeuvre, but 50 bn is still really hard to sell, I'm not convinced that Is the must likely explanation. It will be to easy for opponents to point out the eu arbitrarily nearly double the bill, and may arguing she argued them down would not be credible.
Isn't it the old kitchen-refurbishment deal. A salesman offers you a kithcen, says it would be £24,000 but if you sign up then he can do it for £12,000 as he has to meet quota. (This actually happened to me - I threw him out of the house).
Is it like the old Osborne and Cameron deal?
"Britain will only pay half of the £1.7bn demanded by the EU, George Osborne said today.
The UK will pay £850m in two instalments after next year's election after a deal was struck to offset the payment against Britain's annual rebate from Brussels."
"Britain quietly settled its latest altercation over the European Union budget by paying a 1.7 billion-pound ($2.6 billion) bill that Prime Minister David Cameron originally derided as “appalling.”
Britain transferred the money in two installments on July 1 and Sept. 1, the Brussels-based European Commission said in a statement on Thursday. "
Am I missing something? When have Labour's sums ever added up?
Haven't Labour governments run surplusses more often than con governments?
I believe the standard Tory line on that is 'because Tories leave a good economy to labour, who mess it up, and Tories then fix it'.
But any truth to that or not, there's not adding up and then there's Abbott.
Nevertheless the Tories are taking us for fools moving the debate onto taxes and debt.
Even at steady state most commentators expect that taxes will have to rise, since further spending cuts look decreasingly possible given the growing pressures on health, pensions, schools and social care.
In an environment when a cyclical dip in the economy is overdue and we have the rocky transition of Brexit to navigate, rising taxes and greater debt look pretty much nailed on.
If the Tories do win big this time, the backlash they could face in a few years time, when people realise they have been duped, could be considerable.
Morning all. Some anecdotal gubbins for you. Had the Green local candidate at the door yesterday. Won't bore you with our conversation about my ward in the locals but he was gloomy about their prospects in Norwich South for the GE and felt Clive Lewis would lose to the Tories on June 8.
Mr. HYUFD, jein. Pre-election period in the UK, Germany and France all at once. It's an electioneering phase. One hopes that when that's done and dusted, compromise and a reasonable agreement is possible.
We shall see.
As for Macron's 'Frexit' wibbling - hahahahaha. We'll see by his approach to our departure whether he really thinks France might leave. If he does, then he'll want good terms for us to set a positive precedent. I am not convinced this will be the case.
It smacks of Tim Farron Eurosceptic Man and his sincerely held views on the EU that will expire when the polls close.
It's perfectly possible to be eurosceptic and want to remain in the EU. Too many leavers on here take their own extreme europhobic position and see it as a eurosceptic one, pushing real eurosceptics into an imagined broad europhile camp.
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
They are creating a situation in which paying half of 100 billion is seen as a triumph for May.
If that is so and they pull it off it has been a brilliant manoeuvre, but 50 bn is still really hard to sell, I'm not convinced that Is the must likely explanation. It will be to easy for opponents to point out the eu arbitrarily nearly double the bill, and may arguing she argued them down would not be credible.
Would May not get the backing of the British people to pay a sum to avoid a diamond hard Brexit? Who could make political capital from such a move?
Nobody seems to have worked out in detail what the absolute delta in economic terms would be between Diamond Brexit/Hard Brexit/Soft Brexit/Brexit in name only. There could be no political justification for paying any more than the delta between Diamond and Soft. But, given that the WTO exists for a reason and has been incredibly successful, the 'pain' of an exit to WTO tariffing is really quite minimal. I'd guess that E15-20 bn tops is what we might agree to bear. Spread over many years and much of it 'contingent' rather than cash in advance. The overall deal has to be more attractive to us than just walking.
Agreed - I'd like to see proper forecasting of what happens to jobs in companies that currently rely on European supply chains and/or have strong European sales should we leave precipitously and move to WTO rules. What happens to tax rates and takes with a diamond hard Brexit? What about spending on public services? To what extent would air and sea travel be affected? What happens if a lot of EU nationals leave and a lot of UK nationals return - what's the net affect? And so on. These are vitally important things to know. Hopefully, the government has been doing the sums.
Am I missing something? When have Labour's sums ever added up?
Haven't Labour governments run surplusses more often than con governments?
I believe the standard Tory line on that is 'because Tories leave a good economy to labour, who mess it up, and Tories then fix it'.
But any truth to that or not, there's not adding up and then there's Abbott.
Nevertheless the Tories are taking a chance moving the debate onto taxes and debt.
Even at steady state most commentators expect that taxes will have to rise, given that further spending cuts look decreasingly possible given the pressures on health, pensions, schools and social care.
In an environment when a cyclical dip in the economy is overdue and we have the rocky transition of Brexit to navigate, rising taxes and greater debt look pretty much nailed on.
If the Tories do win big this time, the backlash they could face in a few years time, when people realise they have been duped, could be considerable.
Perhaps, but dont people always say they will be a backlash, and there rarely is. Plus if they win big they'll be so far ahead it'll take more than just that to overturn their lead. Brexit is key there of course, as you say.
And fundamentally the point might be do you trust Corbyn to raise and spend taxes, and while people would be mad if May did, they could accept it. It's like how labour can get away with proposing things on the NHS as it is their issue.
Far be it from me to correct you on matters historical but no, not really.
Areas of Le Pen strength in the north east and east lie in areas either directly annexed to Germany at Compiegne or occupied from the start.
Vichy includes areas of Le Pen strength around Marseilles and Toulon.
Much of Macron's strongholds in the west and north west were also occupied by the Germans and became submarine bases such as at Lorient which held out until the very end of the war (along with Dunkirk oddly enough) and were the areas fortified as part of the Atlantic Wall.
To more serious matters and any thoughts on the 2000 Guineas ? CHURCHILL is very short - I can't help but remember what happened to AIR FORCE BLUE who was the big Ballydoyle talking horse last year but was well beaten.
Hard not to be impressed by AL WUKAIR, ELEMENT and BARNEY ROY who have all won trials and won them well. That said, I thought ELEMENT was ready for the Craven and I'm not sure how much more there is while BARNEY ROY was all over the place at Newbury and AL WUKAIR might struggle on the fast ground and the undulations.
Sir Lynton Crosby would like to thank the well known comedy duo 'Abbott and McDonnell' for making the Conseravative's advertising campaign (AKA me me me me me me and A Bloody Difficult Woman) such a ripper!
Mr. Chestnut, not so sure. As someone here (sorry, forget whom) posted, that would mean they'd feel, perhaps, like they were siding with the UK over the EU. Not only that, the pain of austerity to remain in the eurozone would've been for nothing.
Might be wrong, but it seemed a compelling argument to me.
Mr. Jessop, even accepting that, would you agree that Farron's claim to be a sceptic is not necessarily persuasive?
Am I missing something? When have Labour's sums ever added up?
Haven't Labour governments run surplusses more often than con governments?
I believe the standard Tory line on that is 'because Tories leave a good economy to labour, who mess it up, and Tories then fix it'.
But any truth to that or not, there's not adding up and then there's Abbott.
Nevertheless the Tories are taking a chance moving the debate onto taxes and debt.
Even at steady state most commentators expect that taxes will have to rise, given that further spending cuts look decreasingly possible given the pressures on health, pensions, schools and social care.
In an environment when a cyclical dip in the economy is overdue and we have the rocky transition of Brexit to navigate, rising taxes and greater debt look pretty much nailed on.
If the Tories do win big this time, the backlash they could face in a few years time, when people realise they have been duped, could be considerable.
Perhaps, but dont people always say they will be a backlash, and there rarely is. Plus if they win big they'll be so far ahead it'll take more than just that to overturn their lead. Brexit is key there of course, as you say.
And fundamentally the point might be do you trust Corbyn to raise and spend taxes, and while people would be mad if May did, they could accept it. It's like how labour can get away with proposing things on the NHS as it is their issue.
Almost every government faces a backlash. This one is unusual in that Labour is hated even more.
Mr. HYUFD, jein. Pre-election period in the UK, Germany and France all at once. It's an electioneering phase. One hopes that when that's done and dusted, compromise and a reasonable agreement is possible.
We shall see.
As for Macron's 'Frexit' wibbling - hahahahaha. We'll see by his approach to our departure whether he really thinks France might leave. If he does, then he'll want good terms for us to set a positive precedent. I am not convinced this will be the case.
It smacks of Tim Farron Eurosceptic Man and his sincerely held views on the EU that will expire when the polls close.
It's perfectly possible to be eurosceptic and want to remain in the EU. Too many leavers on here take their own extreme europhobic position and see it as a eurosceptic one, pushing real eurosceptics into an imagined broad europhile camp.
Sir Lynton Crosby would like to thank the well known comedy duo 'Abbott and McDonnell' for making the Conseravative's advertising campaign (AKA me me me me me me and A Bloody Difficult Woman) such a ripper!
How long before the Labour poster: "Don't vote for That Bloody Difficult Woman - remember Fatcha!"
That piece for one says Corbyn's team are optimistic, and also refers to Lucy Powell as a senior mp and strong all around media performer. And Richard burgon.
The absolute state of Labour...... Burgon and Powell = "strong all-round media performers."
Mr. HYUFD, jein. Pre-election period in the UK, Germany and France all at once. It's an electioneering phase. One hopes that when that's done and dusted, compromise and a reasonable agreement is possible.
We shall see.
As for Macron's 'Frexit' wibbling - hahahahaha. We'll see by his approach to our departure whether he really thinks France might leave. If he does, then he'll want good terms for us to set a positive precedent. I am not convinced this will be the case.
It smacks of Tim Farron Eurosceptic Man and his sincerely held views on the EU that will expire when the polls close.
It's perfectly possible to be eurosceptic and want to remain in the EU. Too many leavers on here take their own extreme europhobic position and see it as a eurosceptic one, pushing real eurosceptics into an imagined broad europhile camp.
You're right, but Farron's claim is still ridiculous without details to justify it. He boiled scepticism down to being willing to challenge it, which is something even europhiles should do at times. Without explanation that claim is not convincing as everybody is a sceptic by that measure.
Mr. Observer, it looks like capitulation. A £50bn bill following this £100bn chatter makes it worse, not better, because the hiking of the whispered demand looks like bullying if genuine, or an obvious attempt to gouge the original demand by making an unreasonable one and then being 'persuaded' to accept a mere £50bn.
Of course, this is only one part of any possible deal.
As an aside, it amuses me that people speak of this as a divorce when referring to the 'exit bill'. And yet, in divorces it's the wealthier partner that pays money to the poorer one. If the EU economy is so much larger than ours, why they are not giving us a divorce settlement? [Tongue in cheek... but only just].
I know it is not a popular view, but fighting them on the beaches and never surrendering only gets you to a certain point. What happens then? Are we really prepared to accept long-term economic pain and lower living standards for millions of people over a few billion quid? In abstract terms, perhaps. When it comes to the reality, I wonder. My view is that we want to avoid getting to a point where such choices are necessary. I suspect that despite the rhetoric, all parties in the negotiation do, too. There are wild fantasists on both sides. They need to be ignored. In WW2 we were fighting a genocidal fascist dictatorship that wanted to invade us. We really aren't in the same situation now, honestly.
Mr. HYUFD, jein. Pre-election period in the UK, Germany and France all at once. It's an electioneering phase. One hopes that when that's done and dusted, compromise and a reasonable agreement is possible.
We shall see.
As for Macron's 'Frexit' wibbling - hahahahaha. We'll see by his approach to our departure whether he really thinks France might leave. If he does, then he'll want good terms for us to set a positive precedent. I am not convinced this will be the case.
It smacks of Tim Farron Eurosceptic Man and his sincerely held views on the EU that will expire when the polls close.
It's perfectly possible to be eurosceptic and want to remain in the EU. Too many leavers on here take their own extreme europhobic position and see it as a eurosceptic one, pushing real eurosceptics into an imagined broad europhile camp.
Eurosceptic Remainers have a fundamental credibility issue. I'm looking at you, Mr Farron. And you, Mr Cameron....
Agreed - I'd like to see proper forecasting of what happens to jobs in companies that currently rely on European supply chains and/or have strong European sales should we leave precipitously and move to WTO rules. What happens to tax rates and takes with a diamond hard Brexit? What about spending on public services? To what extent would air and sea travel be affected? What happens if a lot of EU nationals leave and a lot of UK nationals return - what's the net affect? And so on. These are vitally important things to know. Hopefully, the government has been doing the sums.
The challenge will be doing this apolitically. Ask businesses what they would actually do if we imposed a £15 tariff on EU washing machines. The risk will be people like Nick Clegg who say 'If we leave the EU immediately 3 million jobs will go' or similar bullshit. It needs to be a cold, clinical, dispassionate analysis. That's hard to get on such a loaded question. What if, for example, they conclude we're actually better off just walking? Would May rock up at the next negotiating session and say 'sorry boys - we're done'? Doubt it. The whole 'disastrous hard Brexit' vs 'no deal better than bad deal' argument is based on nothing much at all right now. It's politicians tetlling bullshit stories to push their own preferred outcome. Bending 'facts' to suit the ideology.
It's perfectly possible to be eurosceptic and want to remain in the EU. Too many leavers on here take their own extreme europhobic position and see it as a eurosceptic one, pushing real eurosceptics into an imagined broad europhile camp.
Very true. The problem is those of us who desperately wanted the EU to reform itself grew tired of waiting for that to happen.
Of course, no one should have expected the EU to reform just because Britain says it should but we weren't (and aren't) alone among countries unhappy with the current institution.
The other problem was there was no broad agreement on the scope and nature of that reform. Some argued the perfectly credible position that reform should mean full political and economic union which was the inevitable direction of the common currency.
That wasn't a position Britain could ever support.
Sir Lynton Crosby would like to thank the well known comedy duo 'Abbott and McDonnell' for making the Conseravative's advertising campaign (AKA me me me me me me and A Bloody Difficult Woman) such a ripper!
How long before the Labour poster: "Don't vote for That Bloody Difficult Woman - remember Fatcha!"
Mr. Observer, it looks like capitulation. A £50bn bill following this £100bn chatter makes it worse, not better, because the hiking of the whispered demand looks like bullying if genuine, or an obvious attempt to gouge the original demand by making an unreasonable one and then being 'persuaded' to accept a mere £50bn.
Of course, this is only one part of any possible deal.
As an aside, it amuses me that people speak of this as a divorce when referring to the 'exit bill'. And yet, in divorces it's the wealthier partner that pays money to the poorer one. If the EU economy is so much larger than ours, why they are not giving us a divorce settlement? [Tongue in cheek... but only just].
I know it is not a popular view, but fighting them on the beaches and never surrendering only gets you to a certain point. What happens then? Are we really prepared to accept long-term economic pain and lower living standards for millions of people over a few billion quid? In abstract terms, perhaps. When it comes to the reality, I wonder. My view is that we want to avoid getting to a point where such choices are necessary. I suspect that despite the rhetoric, all parties in the negotiation do, too. There are wild fantasists on both sides. They need to be ignored. In WW2 we were fighting a genocidal fascist dictatorship that wanted to invade us. We really aren't in the same situation now, honestly.
Except that's not the choice/trade off here. Your apparent dilemma comes from a false premise.
If they throw them under a bus, I wouldn't bet against.
People stay in a club because it benefits them. Germany has its exports and deflated Euro to benefit its economy. France has CAP and a place on a bigger stage. Smaller countries are recipients of EU money.
Britain decided it was no longer getting the benefit of being in the club.
Ireland? Currently:
1. Trade with Britain within the EU. 2. Recipient of EU money. 3. Reduced corp tax to attract EU business HQs.
If they lose 1, and 2 reduces (or even reverses), and 3 gets attacked as the others don't like it, then Ireland will follow Britain out of the EU.
This morning I have an election flyer from the local independents sorry ex-Lib Dems which is about 400mm long and won't even fit in the post box.
There is a whole row of them on display down the street.
One of the dubious benefits of living in London is the lack of local elections this year. Indeed, no sign of any electioneering at all here in East Ham. Given the triumphalism on here, could Stephen Timms be taking his 35,000 majority for granted?
Macron's using a Samsung phone. Those things are death traps.
He should be using an iPhone.
If I lived in France, this would make me consider voting Le Pen this weekend.
Ooh now there's an ideological divide. My wife swears by Apple. I hate Apple and won't buy their phones because they are control freaks and there's something sinister about their corporate ethos. I'm a Samsung man myself. Haven't burnt to death yet. And my Android phone interacts with the world in a way that iPhones don't.
Agreed - I'd like to see proper forecasting of what happens to jobs in companies that currently rely on European supply chains and/or have strong European sales should we leave precipitously and move to WTO rules.
I think the car companies have already done this, hence the special pleading from Nissan
Who is laying Macron at that price? Madness, he should be a 1.01 shot
Traders who backed him at longer odds
I backed him at 22 (thanks @Chris_from_Paris IIRC). I don't see any need to lay off at anything above about 1.02.
That's exactly how I see it, £3.
If you offered me 50/1 Le Pen I might toss a fiver in your direction, but anything less than that and I'd prefer to buy a coffee and a croissant, which is exactly what I'm off to do right now.
Mr. HYUFD, jein. Pre-election period in the UK, Germany and France all at once. It's an electioneering phase. One hopes that when that's done and dusted, compromise and a reasonable agreement is possible.
We shall see.
As for Macron's 'Frexit' wibbling - hahahahaha. We'll see by his approach to our departure whether he really thinks France might leave. If he does, then he'll want good terms for us to set a positive precedent. I am not convinced this will be the case.
It smacks of Tim Farron Eurosceptic Man and his sincerely held views on the EU that will expire when the polls close.
It's perfectly possible to be eurosceptic and want to remain in the EU. Too many leavers on here take their own extreme europhobic position and see it as a eurosceptic one, pushing real eurosceptics into an imagined broad europhile camp.
Eurosceptic Remainers have a fundamental credibility issue. I'm looking at you, Mr Farron. And you, Mr Cameron....
No, they do not. That's just the view from your entrenched viewpoint.
Macron's using a Samsung phone. Those things are death traps.
He should be using an iPhone.
If I lived in France, this would make me consider voting Le Pen this weekend.
Ooh now there's an ideological divide. My wife swears by Apple. I hate Apple and won't buy their phones because they are control freaks and there's something sinister about their corporate ethos. I'm a Samsung man myself. Haven't burnt to death yet. And my Android phone interacts with the world in a way that iPhones don't.
Agreed! Having been an apple addict I'm in the process of converting everything to android. Apples day is done.
Mr. Observer, I agree. There are some who want us to capitulate utterly and grovel to return, and those on the other side who seem to want no compromise whatsoever.
We'll see over the coming months how things progress. Electorally, the situation should improve. EU bureaucrats may prove problematic, however.
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
They are creating a situation in which paying half of 100 billion is seen as a triumph for May.
If that is so and they pull it off it has been a brilliant manoeuvre, but 50 bn is still really hard to sell, I'm not convinced that Is the must likely explanation. It will be to easy for opponents to point out the eu arbitrarily nearly double the bill, and may arguing she argued them down would not be credible.
Would May not get the backing of the British people to pay a sum to avoid a diamond hard Brexit? Who could make political capital from such a move?
@IanDunt: Over & over again May's problems come down to that rash promise she made at Tory conference to pull out the ECJ theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
@IanDunt: Remember that day? How jubilant Brexiters were - even the sensible ones? Everyone else said: She's going to come a cropper on that ECJ bit.
@IanDunt: And now here we are and on issue after issue after issue the ECJ promise is reducing her room to manouvre, increasing the chances of no-deal
@IanDunt: and forcing millions of EU cits in UK to live with uncertainty. All because she needed to placate the lunatic fringe
@IanDunt: of her party on an issue the country didn't give a damn about.
I'm still waiting for some Leavers who last year had thought that negotiating with the EU was going to be a doddle to put their hands up and admit that it's going to be harder than they thought.
Mr. HYUFD, jein. Pre-election period in the UK, Germany and France all at once. It's an electioneering phase. One hopes that when that's done and dusted, compromise and a reasonable agreement is possible.
We shall see.
As for Macron's 'Frexit' wibbling - hahahahaha. We'll see by his approach to our departure whether he really thinks France might leave. If he does, then he'll want good terms for us to set a positive precedent. I am not convinced this will be the case.
Macron will not give the UK a great deal but his comments show he recognises FN will double their voteshare from 2002 and if that happens again they get a majority
While we have all been enjoying Dianne Abbott's terminal gormlessness, has anyone in public media actually questioned the basic claim that Labour will deliver 10k new policemen for £300 million?
It seems to be difficult to find in a written down form, however I have seen the claim repeated unquestioned by the BBC News channel reporters this morning.
ISTM that a basic police salary is not far from £30k per annum, and by the time that gold plated pension, overheads, NICs and so on are added, the cost is closer to £60-70k per policeman.
Which makes the cost to Labour approx £600-700 million per annum and the claim as cloud-cuckoo land or not very honest. That swallows there entire purported £2.7bn savings from messing about with CGT on its own, yet they have been claiming it will take 'some of the CGT money'.
Yet not a peep from the press or the factcheckers as far as I know.
Employer NI is net neutral for the treasury. Surely the pensions are DC these days.... surely....
Company's still contribute on top of your salary do they not
Yes, but the police's "company" is ultimately the government - so NI and PAYE taxes just go on a merry-go-round.
Almost every government faces a backlash. This one is unusual in that Labour is hated even more.
I think it's entirely credible that in three years time the Conservatives will be polling below 30% or lower. The beneficiaries of that temporary disillusionment may be the LDs, Labour, Greens or some other new political grouping.
The midterm local elections will be a bloodbath for the Conservatives starting, I think, with the London local elections next year.
Macron's using a Samsung phone. Those things are death traps.
He should be using an iPhone.
If I lived in France, this would make me consider voting Le Pen this weekend.
Ooh now there's an ideological divide. My wife swears by Apple. I hate Apple and won't buy their phones because they are control freaks and there's something sinister about their corporate ethos. I'm a Samsung man myself. Haven't burnt to death yet. And my Android phone interacts with the world in a way that iPhones don't.
Mrs J and myself have problems with this. I dislike Apple with a passion for some very good reasons. Mrs J dislikes Samsung after she spent several hot, sweaty days trapped in a van with some Samsung engineers in Spain (fnarr, fnarr).
Fortunately, Mrs J now also dislikes Apple with a passion foe some very good reasons, and she's now firmly a Samsung / Android girl, having converted over from Nokia.
Mr. HYUFD, jein. Pre-election period in the UK, Germany and France all at once. It's an electioneering phase. One hopes that when that's done and dusted, compromise and a reasonable agreement is possible.
We shall see.
As for Macron's 'Frexit' wibbling - hahahahaha. We'll see by his approach to our departure whether he really thinks France might leave. If he does, then he'll want good terms for us to set a positive precedent. I am not convinced this will be the case.
Macron will not give the UK a great deal but his comments show he recognises FN will double their voteshare from 2002 and if that happens again they get a majority
40 -> 80% is a "touch" harder than 20 -> 40% in a 2 horse race.
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
They are creating a situation in which paying half of 100 billion is seen as a triumph for May.
If that is so and they pull it off it has been a brilliant manoeuvre, but 50 bn is still really hard to sell, I'm not convinced that Is the must likely explanation. It will be to easy for opponents to point out the eu arbitrarily nearly double the bill, and may arguing she argued them down would not be credible.
Would May not get the backing of the British people to pay a sum to avoid a diamond hard Brexit? Who could make political capital from such a move?
Amazing to hear a prominent Labour man talk this way...- I know he's had his differences, but you'd never hear such a visceral full fronted demolition from say Osborne on May.
I'm still waiting for some Leavers who last year had thought that negotiating with the EU was going to be a doddle to put their hands up and admit that it's going to be harder than they thought.
This morning I have an election flyer from the local independents sorry ex-Lib Dems which is about 400mm long and won't even fit in the post box.
There is a whole row of them on display down the street.
One of the dubious benefits of living in London is the lack of local elections this year. Indeed, no sign of any electioneering at all here in East Ham. Given the triumphalism on here, could Stephen Timms be taking his 35,000 majority for granted?
There SFA electioneering here, either. And we;ve got locals!!!!
One of the few joys of current events is the far left holding up a mirror to the anti-BBC right, which can now see how ridiculous it has looked to most people all these years.
Well there may be a left-wing 'BBC is alt-right' website highlighting right-wing bias. I suspect, rather like a BBC pro-brexit programme, it doesn't exist, though.
Also there is the entirely valid question of whether hiring 10,000 more policemen is the right thing to do anyway even if wholly costed and affordable.
Annoyingly I can't find it now but some senior retried policeman said yesterday that it was not the best use of funds anyway.
Crime is down loads, as are police numbers. Maybe we should get rid of all of them...
Almost every government faces a backlash. This one is unusual in that Labour is hated even more.
I think it's entirely credible that in three years time the Conservatives will be polling below 30% or lower. The beneficiaries of that temporary disillusionment may be the LDs, Labour, Greens or some other new political grouping.
The midterm local elections will be a bloodbath for the Conservatives starting, I think, with the London local elections next year.
I agree (although it may not come as quickly as 2018, depending partly on what happens to Labour in the autumn). Duping people is sadly an effective way to win an election, but they tend not to like it when they eventually realise.
I'm still waiting for some Leavers who last year had thought that negotiating with the EU was going to be a doddle to put their hands up and admit that it's going to be harder than they thought.
While we have all been enjoying Dianne Abbott's terminal gormlessness, has anyone in public media actually questioned the basic claim that Labour will deliver 10k new policemen for £300 million?
It seems to be difficult to find in a written down form, however I have seen the claim repeated unquestioned by the BBC News channel reporters this morning.
ISTM that a basic police salary is not far from £30k per annum, and by the time that gold plated pension, overheads, NICs and so on are added, the cost is closer to £60-70k per policeman.
Which makes the cost to Labour approx £600-700 million per annum and the claim as cloud-cuckoo land or not very honest. That swallows there entire purported £2.7bn savings from messing about with CGT on its own, yet they have been claiming it will take 'some of the CGT money'.
Yet not a peep from the press or the factcheckers as far as I know.
Employer NI is net neutral for the treasury. Surely the pensions are DC these days.... surely....
Company's still contribute on top of your salary do they not
Yes, but the police's "company" is ultimately the government - so NI and PAYE taxes just go on a merry-go-round.
But it's increased the public sector at the expense of the private sector, so those taxes have been lost from elsewhere. It's still a cost overall.
@IanDunt: Over & over again May's problems come down to that rash promise she made at Tory conference to pull out the ECJ theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
@IanDunt: Remember that day? How jubilant Brexiters were - even the sensible ones? Everyone else said: She's going to come a cropper on that ECJ bit.
@IanDunt: And now here we are and on issue after issue after issue the ECJ promise is reducing her room to manouvre, increasing the chances of no-deal
@IanDunt: and forcing millions of EU cits in UK to live with uncertainty. All because she needed to placate the lunatic fringe
@IanDunt: of her party on an issue the country didn't give a damn about.
Another moron who doesn't understand the importance of being able to make one's own laws . It is amusing how completely bereft of understanding the Eurofanatics are about the importance of leaving the ECJ. It is the fundamental basis of the whole Brexit process. Claiming it is simply some side issue just reveals your utter ignorance.
Macron will certainly win but 40 or even 41% for Le Pen will still be a big shot across the bows of the French and EU establishment and hence even the normally Europhile Macron said that if the EU does not reform even Frexit could soon be on the cards. Meanwhile Merkel and Juncker still have their heads firmly in the sand and as recent statements show are as uncompromising as ever
If they say 'Please give me E100bn' what they are really saying is 'I expect to get E0bn'. Just Walk Theresa.
They are creating a situation in which paying half of 100 billion is seen as a triumph for May.
If that is so and they pull it off it has been a brilliant manoeuvre, but 50 bn is still really hard to sell, I'm not convinced that Is the must likely explanation. It will be to easy for opponents to point out the eu arbitrarily nearly double the bill, and may arguing she argued them down would not be credible.
Would May not get the backing of the British people to pay a sum to avoid a diamond hard Brexit? Who could make political capital from such a move?
UKIP
Are they still a thing?
Half their 2015 vote has gone to the Tories but it could go back
Comments
Then someone has to bu the uniform and the space, and the benefits package, and look after police who are injured etc.
Bring back the Maxim!
While we have all been enjoying Dianne Abbott's terminal gormlessness, has anyone in public media actually questioned the basic claim that Labour will deliver 10k new policemen for £300 million?
It seems to be difficult to find in a written down form, however I have seen the claim repeated unquestioned by the BBC News channel reporters this morning.
ISTM that a basic police salary is not far from £30k per annum, and by the time that gold plated pension, overheads, NICs and so on are added, the cost is closer to £60-70k per policeman.
Which makes the cost to Labour approx £600-700 million per annum and the claim as cloud-cuckoo land or not very honest. That swallows there entire purported £2.7bn savings from messing about with CGT on its own, yet they have been claiming it will take 'some of the CGT money'.
Yet not a peep from the press or the factcheckers as far as I know.
Why bother providing any detailed analysis of a policy that will never be implemented? Resources are finite. They need to be allocated where they matter.
Yes. blindingly obvious yesterday that even at the highest leve3ls no-one in the party foresees any prospect of actually governing.
The fact that this election sprang unexpectedly means that all manifestos are going to be rather half baked. Labour fluffed it yesterday, but the idea of rolling policy announcements each day (today is hospital STP plans and closures) is a good one. Meanwhile the Tories have just a reactive strategy, and a concentration on the Dear Leader.
The Tories are doing exactly what is needed to win: lots of controlled May and plenty of Corbyn & Co triumphantly shooting themselves in the foot. It's a shame that the opposition is not up to the task of getting the government to talk seriously about the biggest peacetime issue this country has faced for many a long year - especially as the Tory right continues to press for the hardest of all Brexits. But we are where we are.
The Labour strategy is right, to concentrate on policy, but the execution and spokespersons are appalling. Executing the spokespersons may be better.
Concentrating on police, hospitals etc is correct for the locals on Thursday. Brexit will follow.
If labour continue to bleat on about Brexit they'll get annihilated.
There's nothing we dislike more than sore losers in this country.
Labour have not been emphasising Brexit yet, except locally in pro Remain seats.
And nor should they.
Despite the wailing of a few on here most people just want it done, any talk of another referendum will be seen as anti democratic and make things even worse, if that's possible.
If there was real desire to overturn the vote the Libs would win 100+ seats but there isn't, so they won't.
Sounds like some more comedy gold to come from our Diane
And overheads, training costs though
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/03/hope-mingles-with-suspicion-as-labours-election-cranks-into-gear?CMP=share_btn_tw
https://kickasshistory.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/eu20_37wwii.jpg
We shall see.
As for Macron's 'Frexit' wibbling - hahahahaha. We'll see by his approach to our departure whether he really thinks France might leave. If he does, then he'll want good terms for us to set a positive precedent. I am not convinced this will be the case.
Got it for 'half price'
Their 'half price' was actually about £5 cheaper than other retailers.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Brexit/status/859647005932609536
Of course, this is only one part of any possible deal.
As an aside, it amuses me that people speak of this as a divorce when referring to the 'exit bill'. And yet, in divorces it's the wealthier partner that pays money to the poorer one. If the EU economy is so much larger than ours, why they are not giving us a divorce settlement? [Tongue in cheek... but only just].
'Would May not get the backing of the British people to pay a sum to avoid a diamond hard Brexit? Who could make political capital from such a move?'
Not now as everyone can see that the EU & Junker in particular can't be trusted & the entire exercise is a scam.
If we were to agree to any payment up front then the so called trade deal afterwards would be pitiful with every conceivable barrier put in our way & probably more payments demanded.
The expiry date is December 2020. The Irish are actively pushing for orderly withdrawal incorporating a transition period which sounds remarkably like May's implementation phase. December 2020 seems to fit nicely.
It all points to March 2019 we leave, April 2019-December 2020 we enter a transition/implementation phase.
June 2016-December 2020 is longer than the first world war.
It is also worth noting that the Irish referred to legal and budgetary financial commitments, which implicitly acknowledges that they have no legal grounds for seeking payment on at least some of our perceived obligations.
But any truth to that or not, there's not adding up and then there's Abbott.
"Britain will only pay half of the £1.7bn demanded by the EU, George Osborne said today.
The UK will pay £850m in two instalments after next year's election after a deal was struck to offset the payment against Britain's annual rebate from Brussels."
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/george-osborne-britains-17bn-eu-bill-halved-and-delayed-9846936.html
"Britain quietly settled its latest altercation over the European Union budget by paying a 1.7 billion-pound ($2.6 billion) bill that Prime Minister David Cameron originally derided as “appalling.”
Britain transferred the money in two installments on July 1 and Sept. 1, the Brussels-based European Commission said in a statement on Thursday. "
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2015-09-03/u-k-settles-eu-bill-once-called-appalling-by-cameron
It was actions like that, that helped Leave win.
Even at steady state most commentators expect that taxes will have to rise, since further spending cuts look decreasingly possible given the growing pressures on health, pensions, schools and social care.
In an environment when a cyclical dip in the economy is overdue and we have the rocky transition of Brexit to navigate, rising taxes and greater debt look pretty much nailed on.
If the Tories do win big this time, the backlash they could face in a few years time, when people realise they have been duped, could be considerable.
There is a whole row of them on display down the street.
And fundamentally the point might be do you trust Corbyn to raise and spend taxes, and while people would be mad if May did, they could accept it. It's like how labour can get away with proposing things on the NHS as it is their issue.
Areas of Le Pen strength in the north east and east lie in areas either directly annexed to Germany at Compiegne or occupied from the start.
Vichy includes areas of Le Pen strength around Marseilles and Toulon.
Much of Macron's strongholds in the west and north west were also occupied by the Germans and became submarine bases such as at Lorient which held out until the very end of the war (along with Dunkirk oddly enough) and were the areas fortified as part of the Atlantic Wall.
To more serious matters and any thoughts on the 2000 Guineas ? CHURCHILL is very short - I can't help but remember what happened to AIR FORCE BLUE who was the big Ballydoyle talking horse last year but was well beaten.
Hard not to be impressed by AL WUKAIR, ELEMENT and BARNEY ROY who have all won trials and won them well. That said, I thought ELEMENT was ready for the Craven and I'm not sure how much more there is while BARNEY ROY was all over the place at Newbury and AL WUKAIR might struggle on the fast ground and the undulations.
Might be wrong, but it seemed a compelling argument to me.
Mr. Jessop, even accepting that, would you agree that Farron's claim to be a sceptic is not necessarily persuasive?
Macron's using a Samsung phone. Those things are death traps.
He should be using an iPhone.
If I lived in France, this would make me consider voting Le Pen this weekend.
Agreed - I'd like to see proper forecasting of what happens to jobs in companies that currently rely on European supply chains and/or have strong European sales should we leave precipitously and move to WTO rules. What happens to tax rates and takes with a diamond hard Brexit? What about spending on public services? To what extent would air and sea travel be affected? What happens if a lot of EU nationals leave and a lot of UK nationals return - what's the net affect? And so on. These are vitally important things to know. Hopefully, the government has been doing the sums.
The challenge will be doing this apolitically. Ask businesses what they would actually do if we imposed a £15 tariff on EU washing machines. The risk will be people like Nick Clegg who say 'If we leave the EU immediately 3 million jobs will go' or similar bullshit. It needs to be a cold, clinical, dispassionate analysis. That's hard to get on such a loaded question. What if, for example, they conclude we're actually better off just walking? Would May rock up at the next negotiating session and say 'sorry boys - we're done'? Doubt it.
The whole 'disastrous hard Brexit' vs 'no deal better than bad deal' argument is based on nothing much at all right now. It's politicians tetlling bullshit stories to push their own preferred outcome. Bending 'facts' to suit the ideology.
https://twitter.com/Swannyg66/status/859669163723325440
Of course, no one should have expected the EU to reform just because Britain says it should but we weren't (and aren't) alone among countries unhappy with the current institution.
The other problem was there was no broad agreement on the scope and nature of that reform. Some argued the perfectly credible position that reform should mean full political and economic union which was the inevitable direction of the common currency.
That wasn't a position Britain could ever support.
Your apparent dilemma comes from a false premise.
Britain decided it was no longer getting the benefit of being in the club.
Ireland? Currently:
1. Trade with Britain within the EU.
2. Recipient of EU money.
3. Reduced corp tax to attract EU business HQs.
If they lose 1, and 2 reduces (or even reverses), and 3 gets attacked as the others don't like it, then Ireland will follow Britain out of the EU.
It depends how much of this happens and when.
https://twitter.com/michaelpdeacon/status/747000584226607104
If you offered me 50/1 Le Pen I might toss a fiver in your direction, but anything less than that and I'd prefer to buy a coffee and a croissant, which is exactly what I'm off to do right now.
A bientot.
We'll see over the coming months how things progress. Electorally, the situation should improve. EU bureaucrats may prove problematic, however.
@IanDunt: Remember that day? How jubilant Brexiters were - even the sensible ones? Everyone else said: She's going to come a cropper on that ECJ bit.
@IanDunt: And now here we are and on issue after issue after issue the ECJ promise is reducing her room to manouvre, increasing the chances of no-deal
@IanDunt: and forcing millions of EU cits in UK to live with uncertainty. All because she needed to placate the lunatic fringe
@IanDunt: of her party on an issue the country didn't give a damn about.
They're all so strangely shy.
The midterm local elections will be a bloodbath for the Conservatives starting, I think, with the London local elections next year.
Fortunately, Mrs J now also dislikes Apple with a passion foe some very good reasons, and she's now firmly a Samsung / Android girl, having converted over from Nokia.
Annoyingly I can't find it now but some senior retried policeman said yesterday that it was not the best use of funds anyway.
Crime is down loads, as are police numbers. Maybe we should get rid of all of them...
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/04/19/vote-leave-sets-out-its-objective-tse-gives-his-robust-interpretation/
But it's increased the public sector at the expense of the private sector, so those taxes have been lost from elsewhere. It's still a cost overall.