Off topic - what happened to the governments "help to save" accounts?
Have they lost interest in the jams?
You can get 2% on a £3000 bond with NSandI. Doesn't that make you feel faint with excitement?
I was hoping doing something for the jams meant the Order of Merit for Bill Drummond.
Interest rates are so flaccid you're probably better off with premium bonds. Not that JAMs tend to have the capital for much bondage. Course Theresa wants the JAMs on the high street spending their limited funds.
The frustrating thing is the help to save accounts were genuinely a good idea for those on UC with no assets and no family/community savings tradition. Personally i'd have gone further - 100% interest on the first £50 you can save every month, 50% on the next £50, 25% on the next, etc, etc. Interest paid monthly, no conditions attached.
Out-compete the payday lenders / loan sharks / catalogue companies who pray upon the desperate.
Norway for now, it's Dave the Quisling! If we crash out on WTO terms and the economy goes tittius verticus do we get some of that tasty foreign aid the big countries dish out? Morning all
London already dishes out quite enough aid to the lotus eaters in the provinces. Judging by the general attitude of provincials to London, that surely counts as foreign.
We don't want money from that London. Norfolk turnip billions will suffice here
Just as soon as you've worked out who's going to pick them.
Robots!
Lots of interesting work being done in the field of AI lawyering right now too. That's a profession which needs to watch its flesh-and-blood back against the rise of the machines.
Programming a machine to waffle on for ages about on the one hand, on the other, estimate nothing at greater likelihood than a 70% probability either way, listing out everything that could possibly go wrong if you take any action whatsoever, and then print out an invoice for the length of time it has been doing it for cannot be that difficult?
Brexit, to coin a phrase, means Brexit. That is the priority. To get out of the undemocratic, bureaucratic cabal that is the EU and no longer have a situation where our elected representatives only make a portion of our laws. Anyone who claims that the vote meant more than that is overreaching.
So everything else is pragmatism and up for grabs. We clearly want a free trade deal. We ideally want to keep passporting. We want to remain involved in some aspects of the single market such as patents, air traffic systems, medicine and scientific research. It makes sense to pay an appropriate rate for this. We clearly still need to encourage the skilled and the enthusiastic to come here. We are a million miles from addressing the chronic inadequacies of our education systems and have obvious skill gaps as a result. We want as little disruption to our trade in the short term as possible. Over time I suspect that the EU and EU trade will play a smaller role in our prosperity but that can take care of itself. Is this really going to be that hard?
The EEA of course means we have less influence over our own laws than as members of the EU. It's going to be a problem if we go down that route.
On another topic you mentioned the CFP as "disastrous". It's much improved these days and actually quite good now. The main damage to North Sea fish stocks took place before we joined the EEC when it was every country for itself. Something to bear in mind should we try to return to that regime.
Sensible Leavers and Remainers should get on this train. Both sides can declare a victory of sorts.
"Sensible" people will be shouted down by the headbangers.
Buy shares in Betrayal.
The only headbangers i see are posters who bang on about how wrong we are on leaving,every day.
We extended the franchise far too far. Country folk should never have been allowed to vote Nor anyone over 70 or with an IQ less than 70. No wonder we're floundering
I believe in one man one vote. I'm the man and I vote.
Some inane thoughts following on from the hamstringing of Luciana Berger by momentum....... How long before one of these take overs results in a deselection? And at that point do the moderates in Labour sense the game is up and split? The Yvettes and Chukas and Cruddases of this world aren't going to wait to be knobbled and don't seem like the quit frontline politics types. Indeed one wonders how many conversations are going on in the bars between their likes and the Soubrys and Heidi Allen's, not to mention Old Father Cable. Brexit and Corbynism broke UNS, will this twin dilemma break the old guard? Brexiteer Tory/UKIP alliance, Brexit light Progressive Centrists headed by Cooper or an ex Tory remainer, Momentum Labour and a rump Liberal party of Scotland? Timing wise....... If we get through the autumn without an election there's maybe 18 months to get up and running before Brexit and a probable election?
Brexit, to coin a phrase, means Brexit. That is the priority. To get out of the undemocratic, bureaucratic cabal that is the EU and no longer have a situation where our elected representatives only make a portion of our laws. Anyone who claims that the vote meant more than that is overreaching.
So everything else is pragmatism and up for grabs. We clearly want a free trade deal. We ideally want to keep passporting. We want to remain involved in some aspects of the single market such as patents, air traffic systems, medicine and scientific research. It makes sense to pay an appropriate rate for this. We clearly still need to encourage the skilled and the enthusiastic to come here. We are a million miles from addressing the chronic inadequacies of our education systems and have obvious skill gaps as a result. We want as little disruption to our trade in the short term as possible. Over time I suspect that the EU and EU trade will play a smaller role in our prosperity but that can take care of itself. Is this really going to be that hard?
You still seem to be aiming for Julie Andrews Brexit (raindrops on noses and whiskers on kittens).
Theresa May has broadly correctly identified the parameters within which Brexit must be carried out, given how the vote was obtained. That is of course catastrophic for Britain but vox populi vox dei.
Not so. I think that what seems to be referred to as a soft Brexit will pass the Commons very easily. If that disappoints the Bill Cash's of this world well, we might just have to live with that. Davis already seems to be moving in this direction as does Boris. Hammond is very much of this view and May no longer has the power to overrule her cabinet.
Brexit will prove less exciting and less disappointing than most of the current media indicates.
Good song though.
You can't ignore the means by which the vote won just because it doesn't personally motivate you. The vote was won by pandering to xenophobia. That can't just be put to one side as an inconvenience.
I have to agree. Personally the Norway model would be fine by me but we have to accept Leave won a majority because of immigration. The Norway model would only be acceptable to most voters if it included some delayed version of the transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries Blair rejected in 2004 but which most EU nations imposed. Otherwise Farage will likely conclude he has enough ammunition to return to the leadership of a resurgent UKIP
Mr. Roger, would you give double votes to everyone with an IQ of over 130?
EU-philes shouldn't get over-excited. People voted to leave, and expect that to happen. A transition is fine. There's a broad range of options available. But trying to undo the result would be extremely unwise, unless done so through democratic means (a referendum, or, potentially, a General Election).
Mr. Meeks, you could equally well cite the fear-mongering of Osborne for millions of votes Remain got. Or Britons who are ashamed of their country and want its governance constrained by the EU, as Sturgeon argued.
Brexit, to coin a phrase, means Brexit. That is the priority. To get out of the undemocratic, bureaucratic cabal that is the EU and no longer have a situation where our elected representatives only make a portion of our laws. Anyone who claims that the vote meant more than that is overreaching.
So everything else is pragmatism and up for grabs. We clearly want a free trade deal. We ideally want to keep passporting. We want to remain involved in some aspects of the single market such as patents, air traffic systems, medicine and scientific research. It makes sense to pay an appropriate rate for this. We clearly still need to encourage the skilled and the enthusiastic to come here. We are a million miles from addressing the chronic inadequacies of our education systems and have obvious skill gaps as a result. We want as little disruption to our trade in the short term as possible. Over time I suspect that the EU and EU trade will play a smaller role in our prosperity but that can take care of itself. Is this really going to be that hard?
You still seem to be aiming for Julie Andrews Brexit (raindrops on noses and whiskers on kittens).
Theresa May has broadly correctly identified the parameters within which Brexit must be carried out, given how the vote was obtained. That is of course catastrophic for Britain but vox populi vox dei.
Not so. I think that what seems to be referred to as a soft Brexit will pass the Commons very easily. If that disappoints the Bill Cash's of this world well, we might just have to live with that. Davis already seems to be moving in this direction as does Boris. Hammond is very much of this view and May no longer has the power to overrule her cabinet.
Brexit will prove less exciting and less disappointing than most of the current media indicates.
Good song though.
You can't ignore the means by which the vote won just because it doesn't personally motivate you. The vote was won by pandering to xenophobia. That can't just be put to one side as an inconvenience.
Why not? Some idiots said idiotic things. And some of the leavers weren't very sensible either. All we have is the result and that needs to be respected. How is for the politicians to sort out but in the way that is best for us is the obvious answer. Listen to Hammond. He is our de facto PM at the moment.
Norway for now, it's Dave the Quisling! If we crash out on WTO terms and the economy goes tittius verticus do we get some of that tasty foreign aid the big countries dish out? Morning all
London already dishes out quite enough aid to the lotus eaters in the provinces. Judging by the general attitude of provincials to London, that surely counts as foreign.
We don't want money from that London. Norfolk turnip billions will suffice here
Just as soon as you've worked out who's going to pick them.
Robots!
Lots of interesting work being done in the field of AI lawyering right now too. That's a profession which needs to watch its flesh-and-blood back against the rise of the machines.
Programming a machine to waffle on for ages about on the one hand, on the other, estimate nothing at greater likelihood than a 70% probability either way, listing out everything that could possibly go wrong if you take any action whatsoever, and then print out an invoice for the length of time it has been doing it for cannot be that difficult?
Good point about time-based invoicing, from the lawyer's POV you would want the expert program on paper tape for running on an an ENIAC.
Sensible Leavers and Remainers should get on this train. Both sides can declare a victory of sorts.
"Sensible" people will be shouted down by the headbangers.
Buy shares in Betrayal.
The only headbangers i see are posters who bang on about how wrong we are on leaving,every day.
We extended the franchise far too far. Country folk should never have been allowed to vote Nor anyone over 70 or with an IQ less than 70. No wonder we're floundering
Roger,if we do have another vote,please can you be the voice of the remain side ;-)
Norway for now, it's Dave the Quisling! If we crash out on WTO terms and the economy goes tittius verticus do we get some of that tasty foreign aid the big countries dish out? Morning all
London already dishes out quite enough aid to the lotus eaters in the provinces. Judging by the general attitude of provincials to London, that surely counts as foreign.
We don't want money from that London. Norfolk turnip billions will suffice here
Just as soon as you've worked out who's going to pick them.
Robots!
Lots of interesting work being done in the field of AI lawyering right now too. That's a profession which needs to watch its flesh-and-blood back against the rise of the machines.
Programming a machine to waffle on for ages about on the one hand, on the other, estimate nothing at greater likelihood than a 70% probability either way, listing out everything that could possibly go wrong if you take any action whatsoever, and then print out an invoice for the length of time it has been doing it for cannot be that difficult?
Mr. Roger, if we remain in the EU we'll be subject to ever more integration, the EU Army and QMV imposing laws upon us.
Short term economic pain is something that can be recovered, unpleasant as it is.
That's the key thing now. The 27 will not let us remain on the same terms and if just one of them refuses we crash out. Article 50 can't be stopped unilaterally, it's a fact now, we are leaving, or we accept the combined demands of 27 nations to remain.
Mr. Roger, if we remain in the EU we'll be subject to ever more integration, the EU Army and QMV imposing laws upon us.
Short term economic pain is something that can be recovered, unpleasant as it is.
That's the key thing now. The 27 will not let us remain on the same terms and if just one of them refuses we crash out. Article 50 can't be stopped unilaterally, it's a fact now, we are leaving, or we accept the combined demands of 27 nations to remain.
It's not yet been decided either way if A50 is retractable.
My suggestion ... Those born in Lincolnshire, being superior people, should get three votes each. The commoners (those born outside Lincolnshire), zero votes, and those born in Norfolk, minus one vote.
Ah, you might say, wouldn't that give Norfolk people more influence as they could cast their minus votes for politicians they dislike?
Ah, I would reply, that is to grossly over-estimate the IQ of Norfolk people.
Mr. Roger, if we remain in the EU we'll be subject to ever more integration, the EU Army and QMV imposing laws upon us.
Short term economic pain is something that can be recovered, unpleasant as it is.
That's the key thing now. The 27 will not let us remain on the same terms and if just one of them refuses we crash out. Article 50 can't be stopped unilaterally, it's a fact now, we are leaving, or we accept the combined demands of 27 nations to remain.
It's not yet been decided either way if A50 is retractable.
Well anything can be magic wanded if there is enough suspension of disbelief. Would be very damaging to the EU in terms of all those that want to leave in any country, and all those that object to the terms the UK enjoyed prior to article 50 being waved back into being. Bobby Ewing in the shower moment.
Some inane thoughts following on from the hamstringing of Luciana Berger by momentum....... How long before one of these take overs results in a deselection? And at that point do the moderates in Labour sense the game is up and split? The Yvettes and Chukas and Cruddases of this world aren't going to wait to be knobbled and don't seem like the quit frontline politics types. Indeed one wonders how many conversations are going on in the bars between their likes and the Soubrys and Heidi Allen's, not to mention Old Father Cable. Brexit and Corbynism broke UNS, will this twin dilemma break the old guard? Brexiteer Tory/UKIP alliance, Brexit light Progressive Centrists headed by Cooper or an ex Tory remainer, Momentum Labour and a rump Liberal party of Scotland? Timing wise....... If we get through the autumn without an election there's maybe 18 months to get up and running before Brexit and a probable election?
Only a Blairite like Umunna could lead a new, centrist pro EU party, not a Brownite like Cooper
Mr. Roger, if we remain in the EU we'll be subject to ever more integration, the EU Army and QMV imposing laws upon us.
Short term economic pain is something that can be recovered, unpleasant as it is.
That's the key thing now. The 27 will not let us remain on the same terms and if just one of them refuses we crash out. Article 50 can't be stopped unilaterally, it's a fact now, we are leaving, or we accept the combined demands of 27 nations to remain.
It's not yet been decided either way if A50 is retractable.
If the EU wants us to stay, all these posited hypothetical difficulties will disappear.
The clever thing to do would be to find something small to offer as an extra benefit (like some extra temporary control on internal free movement, which is likely to happen anyway) and invite us to stay, near the end of the process. If they time it right and the trend away from Brexit in public opinion continues, calls for a vote on the EU offer would be irresistible.
A transitional arrangement could be a good way of reducing some of the pressure and divisiveness in politics. Reneging upon a referendum result would not result in sweetness and light reigning.
That sort of condescension and contempt is part of the reason the referendum and the result went the rather surprising way they did. I still recall the giggling glee of many here as Obama said we'd be at the 'back of the queue' and Cameron referred to 'Little Englanders'. Such lines may get applause and mirth in metropolitan quarters but they merely annoy or anger most people.
Thanks Alastair. I think some of the Scottish Conservative MPs must be genuinely surprised to have ended up in Westminster, a bit like their SNP predecessors in 2015. I think this will make it difficult for them and there has to be a risk that at least one decides it is not for them. With a minority government the pressure to hang in there will be huge of course.
I don't agree with those who claim they owe their seats to Brexit unless that is in the very technical sense that it triggered the election which they won. Brexit only figured in Scotland to the extent that it was used to demonstrate the absurdity of the SNP position, desperate to get out of one Union and yet supposedly desperate to be in another.
For Scotland the election and the Tory success was all about the Union. The key question going forward is whether the formative ideas of the Scottish party becoming independent bear fruit. There is no guarantee that all of the MPs share Ruth's views on this of course but it is possible that by the next election we will have a CDU/CSU relationship. It's an important call for Ruth should that by election come around and she is tempted to the bigger stage.
I think you benefitted in the North East and Borders by being the party of Brexit, as well as the party of the Union.
The SNP lost a massive amount of Brexit voters. It is clear brexiters switched to the only Brexit party in Scotland.
Mr. Roger, if we remain in the EU we'll be subject to ever more integration, the EU Army and QMV imposing laws upon us.
Short term economic pain is something that can be recovered, unpleasant as it is.
That's the key thing now. The 27 will not let us remain on the same terms and if just one of them refuses we crash out. Article 50 can't be stopped unilaterally, it's a fact now, we are leaving, or we accept the combined demands of 27 nations to remain.
I would expect the EU to keep membership conditions and opt outs the same, bar the subscription rebate. Not least because several key players have said so. If we wanted to go down that route all we have to do is ask and then take a decision whether the requirements are acceptable.
I'm not pushing for it, just pointing out there's no impediment.
Some inane thoughts following on from the hamstringing of Luciana Berger by momentum....... How long before one of these take overs results in a deselection? And at that point do the moderates in Labour sense the game is up and split? The Yvettes and Chukas and Cruddases of this world aren't going to wait to be knobbled and don't seem like the quit frontline politics types. Indeed one wonders how many conversations are going on in the bars between their likes and the Soubrys and Heidi Allen's, not to mention Old Father Cable. Brexit and Corbynism broke UNS, will this twin dilemma break the old guard? Brexiteer Tory/UKIP alliance, Brexit light Progressive Centrists headed by Cooper or an ex Tory remainer, Momentum Labour and a rump Liberal party of Scotland? Timing wise....... If we get through the autumn without an election there's maybe 18 months to get up and running before Brexit and a probable election?
Momentum would have it in for Luciana Berger especially. She is Jewish, they are pro-Hamas and hence they see her as the personification of the enemy.
I am not so sure the "moderates" will depart. There are no real moderates in Labour and never really have been. There is no real ideological opposition in Labour to having a Marxist chancellor either. The issue is that these made the party unelectable. As that now appears to be untrue, the moderates will all feel comfortable letting the mask slip.
Anything other than an off the shelf model means drawn out negotiations. Drawn out negotiations means the EU stonewalling us until the deadline. May needed that landslide so that she could walk away from an 11th hour sub-par deal for us, and survive the crashing out backlash because of her personal authority and majority, painting it as the plucky brits against the huns and the frogs. Without that majority, there is simply no way the government will accept a no deal solution - because it will not be walking away from a position of strength but one of weakness, and there will be no landslide majority cushion in the next election. No deal brexit now means Corbyn as PM. So we will fold at the 11th hour just like Greece did.
This means it is in our interest to keep negotiations to a minimum, take an off the shelf solution, and not play further into the EUs hands.
a need for all EU imports of animals and animal products to be tested at borders.
Presumably the U.K. will have the same need for testing? Quite a lot of friction for EU agricultural exports....
One would wonder how we can ever find New Zealand Lamb in every supermarket..... not to mention fruit and veg and any number of any other products from all over the world.
A transitional arrangement could be a good way of reducing some of the pressure and divisiveness in politics. Reneging upon a referendum result would not result in sweetness and light reigning.
That sort of condescension and contempt is part of the reason the referendum and the result went the rather surprising way they did. I still recall the giggling glee of many here as Obama said we'd be at the 'back of the queue' and Cameron referred to 'Little Englanders'. Such lines may get applause and mirth in metropolitan quarters but they merely annoy or anger most people.
As you've been told many times it was vision of 'the little England of Nigel Farage' but you keep denying the truth.
Iirc you wanted Farage locked away for the duration of the campaign.
Some inane thoughts following on from the hamstringing of Luciana Berger by momentum....... How long before one of these take overs results in a deselection? And at that point do the moderates in Labour sense the game is up and split? The Yvettes and Chukas and Cruddases of this world aren't going to wait to be knobbled and don't seem like the quit frontline politics types. Indeed one wonders how many conversations are going on in the bars between their likes and the Soubrys and Heidi Allen's, not to mention Old Father Cable. Brexit and Corbynism broke UNS, will this twin dilemma break the old guard? Brexiteer Tory/UKIP alliance, Brexit light Progressive Centrists headed by Cooper or an ex Tory remainer, Momentum Labour and a rump Liberal party of Scotland? Timing wise....... If we get through the autumn without an election there's maybe 18 months to get up and running before Brexit and a probable election?
Momentum would have it in for Luciana Berger especially. She is Jewish, they are pro-Hamas and hence they see her as the personification of the enemy.
I am not so sure the "moderates" will depart. There are no real moderates in Labour and never really have been. There is no real ideological opposition in Labour to having a Marxist chancellor either. The issue is that these made the party unelectable. As that now appears to be untrue, the moderates will all feel comfortable letting the mask slip.
She certainly received a lot of abuse of an unpleasant nature.
Mr. Roger, if we remain in the EU we'll be subject to ever more integration, the EU Army and QMV imposing laws upon us.
Short term economic pain is something that can be recovered, unpleasant as it is.
If it's as hard to leave now as the remoaners claim then it'd have been impossible in just a few years.
We've been so lucky, looking back on it.
Heath's corpse should be dug up and, rather like Pope Formosus and the Cadaver Synod, upon inevitable conviction for treason be dismembered and thrown in the nearest convenient river.
Apart from his weaselly cremation trick, obviously. The coward even thought ahead enough to plan how to escape his own certain posthumous execution. Typical.
Mr. Roger, if we remain in the EU we'll be subject to ever more integration, the EU Army and QMV imposing laws upon us.
Short term economic pain is something that can be recovered, unpleasant as it is.
I agree. We've made a total horlicks of it and all we can do now is prostate ourselves in front of the 27 and ask for understanding. Many of those countries have issues with their own right wing so they should show some mercy but I agree we have forfeited the privileged status we had before. As for accepting unnecessary economic pain there is no chance. The country is divided and going apoplectic as it is.
Mr. Roger, if we remain in the EU we'll be subject to ever more integration, the EU Army and QMV imposing laws upon us.
Short term economic pain is something that can be recovered, unpleasant as it is.
That's the key thing now. The 27 will not let us remain on the same terms and if just one of them refuses we crash out. Article 50 can't be stopped unilaterally, it's a fact now, we are leaving, or we accept the combined demands of 27 nations to remain.
Surely Germany and France have hinted that Article 50 can be stopped. As any hardore Brexiteer will tell you, the EU is a German racket whose policies are dictated from Berlin. Ergo, we can cancel Brexit.
FWIW a personal comment - I know Bob Seely because he stood against me in Broxtowe. He's a nice guy - obviously he was critical of various things but there wasn't anything nasty in it. At a personal level I hope he does well.
Isn't he still rumoured to still live up your way?
Mr. Eagles, because the addition is meaningless. Farage wasn't in the official campaign. He wasn't leading the campaign. He wasn't in the TV debates. He wasn't in line to negotiate anything. He wasn't in the Cabinet.
Using Farage as a bogeyman was ridiculous because the referendum wasn't Do You Like Nigel Farage? It was about staying in or leaving the EU.
That sort of idiotic approach was specifically condemned in this video I linked to previously (for the preceding majority) at around 26.30-40s.
Mr. Roger, if we remain in the EU we'll be subject to ever more integration, the EU Army and QMV imposing laws upon us.
Short term economic pain is something that can be recovered, unpleasant as it is.
What's wrong with an EU army? NATO is looking like a concept whose time has passed so the UK is probably going to end up contributing to some European security apparatus anyway.
Mr. Roger, if we remain in the EU we'll be subject to ever more integration, the EU Army and QMV imposing laws upon us.
Short term economic pain is something that can be recovered, unpleasant as it is.
I agree. We've made a total horlicks of it and all we can do now is prostate ourselves in front of the 27 and ask for understanding. Many of those countries have issues with their own right wing so they should show some mercy but I agree we have forfeited the privileged status we had before. As for accepting unnecessary economic pain there is no chance. The country is divided and going apoplectic as it is.
Roger - the country's been divided for years. It hasn't become any more divided just because the wrong side won.
O/T Wimbledon tennis today: I fancy Andrey RUBLEV to beat Albert Ramos-Vinolas for the second time in a month. Ramos-Vinolas is a typical Spanish claycourter who isn't comfortable on grass and although is seeded is ripe for taking on. Crucially the young Russian RUBLEV beat Ramos-Vinolas 2-1 in sets on the grass courts of Halle only a couple of weeks back in their only meeting. Grass is such a rare and unfamiliar surface on the tennis tour that match-ups on grass are a really good guide. To have a match so recently is even better.
What impressed me is that when they played, RUBLEV came from a set down when he beat his higher ranked opponent 6/7 7/5 6/4 and will go into this match with a good deal of confidence. I'd certainly make him the 8/13 favourite and not the 5/4 that's available with Paddy Power.
My second bet is in the match between BAGHDATIS and Dimitrov. BAGHDATIS is a big price to win the match but I fancy the price on him to win the opening set. He impressed me in his opening match with some stunning service matches. He won 98% of his first serves and hit 17 aces with only 2 double faults. BAGHDATIS loves the big occasion and grand slams. The veteran Cypriot might not have enough in the tank to defeat Dimitrov in a best of five sets match but I've seen him come out of the traps and play some outstanding first sets (before dropping off a little). Dimitrov had a slow start in his first set of his opening match at Wimbledon which he won 7/6 but only won 25% of second serves and hit as many double faults as aces (5) in that set. There's every chance BAGHDATIS will come out on fire and take a surprise first set lead.
BAGHDATIS is 65 in the world and Dimitrov is at 11 - there's no denying who the 'better' player is. But 3/1 with bet365 for BAGHDATIS to win the opening set in these circumstances and with his form is value and should be 6/4 or at 13/8 at most.
Yesterday FOGNINI did the business in straight sets winning at 8/11.
All the talk of food checks at borders etc. It is of course the knee jerk of a cartel being broken up. We are getting a view of just how unpleasant it is to be an outsider trading with a superpower and how greedily they defend their advantages. It might be practical to be a part of such things but it's sure as hell not anything to be proud of.
Mr. Roger, if we remain in the EU we'll be subject to ever more integration, the EU Army and QMV imposing laws upon us.
Short term economic pain is something that can be recovered, unpleasant as it is.
Our armed forces no longer have the strength or capacity for any significant independent action. In practical terms they will be deployed either as subordinate to a US force or in conjunction with other EU nations. If this is the choice, the latter seems to me to be the option that preserves more of our influence than the former.
Mr. Roger, if we remain in the EU we'll be subject to ever more integration, the EU Army and QMV imposing laws upon us.
Short term economic pain is something that can be recovered, unpleasant as it is.
Our armed forces no longer have the strength or capacity for any significant independent action. In practical terms they will be deployed either as subordinate to a US force or in conjunction with other EU nations. If this is the choice, the latter seems to me to be the option that preserves more of our influence than the former.
That's not quite true. We managed Sierra Leone ok.
Mr. Roger, if we remain in the EU we'll be subject to ever more integration, the EU Army and QMV imposing laws upon us.
Short term economic pain is something that can be recovered, unpleasant as it is.
What's wrong with an EU army? NATO is looking like a concept whose time has passed so the UK is probably going to end up contributing to some European security apparatus anyway.
The number of countries that can realistically stand up to Russia is two: America and China. We need to be in an alliance with one of them. NATO fits the bill. The EU does not.
Mr. Ace, NATO is about multi-lateral co-operation between nation states. The EU is about dragging power from nation states to a central bureaucracy that is not and cannot be accountable to the people because there is no demos, no unifying identity that applies to people across the EU.
What would the purpose be? Would the EU Army run to the rescue if the Falklands were invaded? How would the command structure work? Where would the accountability be? How would the funding work? What problem would an EU Army be solving that could not be addressed by NATO?
The British people just voted to leave the EU. The idea they'd be happy at having their armed forces become a military wing under the command of Brussels is, shall we say, optimistic.
Mr. Roger, if we remain in the EU we'll be subject to ever more integration, the EU Army and QMV imposing laws upon us.
Short term economic pain is something that can be recovered, unpleasant as it is.
What's wrong with an EU army? NATO is looking like a concept whose time has passed so the UK is probably going to end up contributing to some European security apparatus anyway.
The number of countries that can realistically stand up to Russia is two: America and China. We need to be in an alliance with one of them. NATO fits the bill. The EU does not.
That really depends. Russia lacks the ability to complete a conventional military invasion of Western Europe, and in truth Moscow would be lit up like a Christmas tree in nuclear oblivion long before Russian troops reached the Rhine, along with all the unpleasant, apocalyptic consequences of that for us all as the missiles fly. There's little point being allied with either or any of them. If Russian ships are docking in British ports it's game over anyway.
Brexit won the referendum, but there lurked in many the belief that the Establishment would never accept it. Most voters have done, but the fanatics (head-bangers if you like), decided their last chance was to string it our for as long as possible and claim it was all too difficult. Cue - laughter as the head-bangers complained "You won, why aren't you celebrating?" the answer was as above.
So far all going as expected ... But like the last frantic gyrations of a trapped and dying rats, the head-bangers will probably ramp up their efforts.
All to no avail, the boat has sailed, it's too late. The head-bangers efforts are too transparent, and even if they succeeded, the lasting effect on the voters' view of democracy would be Pyrrhic. That's why Remain won't happen.
That's not quite true. We managed Sierra Leone ok.
That was 17 years ago, we couldn't do it now. Today, there is not one surface combatant vessel in what's left of the RN that has a full complement of crew.
Mr. Roger, if we remain in the EU we'll be subject to ever more integration, the EU Army and QMV imposing laws upon us.
Short term economic pain is something that can be recovered, unpleasant as it is.
What's wrong with an EU army? NATO is looking like a concept whose time has passed so the UK is probably going to end up contributing to some European security apparatus anyway.
I don't think Norway fully knew what it wanted when it voted 52/48% against, 1994. The political class said Yes. Some oldies thought the EU was a threat to the country's Lutheranism and said No.
With adjustments to fudge freedom of movement of 'labour' vs. that of 'people', Norway-like terms seem the answer to dissatisfy the fewest possible people for an almost indefinite future.
If there isn't a decent compromise, I'd want to Remain and move full speed ahead to Ever Closer Union, in which case f*** the 'loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists. Many are on the Tory right; a few are in the cabinet.
Mr. Ace, NATO is about multi-lateral co-operation between nation states. The EU is about dragging power from nation states to a central bureaucracy that is not and cannot be accountable to the people because there is no demos, no unifying identity that applies to people across the EU.
What would the purpose be? Would the EU Army run to the rescue if the Falklands were invaded? How would the command structure work? Where would the accountability be? How would the funding work? What problem would an EU Army be solving that could not be addressed by NATO?
The British people just voted to leave the EU. The idea they'd be happy at having their armed forces become a military wing under the command of Brussels is, shall we say, optimistic.
William Glenn apart, Remainers never attempt explain why this shift power from nation States to a central bureaucracy is a good thing. They just say either it's not happening, or that the EU is crap but they'll do horrible things to us if we leave.
My suggestion ... Those born in Lincolnshire, being superior people, should get three votes each. The commoners (those born outside Lincolnshire), zero votes, and those born in Norfolk, minus one vote.
Ah, you might say, wouldn't that give Norfolk people more influence as they could cast their minus votes for politicians they dislike?
Ah, I would reply, that is to grossly over-estimate the IQ of Norfolk people.
Didn't we fight tooth and nail to prevent prisoners having the right to vote? It's not as though we'd be breaking new ground here.
The British people just voted to leave the EU. The idea they'd be happy at having their armed forces become a military wing under the command of Brussels is, shall we say, optimistic.
NATO isn't going to exist in 20 years in anything like its current form. The US is turning inward and isn't going to be that interested in defending Europe. So the choice isn't EU Army vs NATO it's EU Army or Dad's Army.
A large proportion of the British Armed Forces already take their orders from Belgium. It's just they're issued by (mostly) US 2 and 3 stars at SHAPE in Mons.
"Some elements of our media would rather see the UK fail than Brexit succeed" - Liam Fox in the Commons
Liam Fox trying Donald Trump's tactics.
When Kier Starmer lies openly about the Euratom agreement over the last few days, and not one National Paper or Broadcaster calls him out on it, I'd say Dr Fox has a bloody good case. If not for talking the UK down directly, certainly for being totally bloody ignorant of any facts and acting as a mouthpiece for liars or incompetents.
Look at the Volvo story - apparently abandoning fossil fuels from 2019. It was absolute rubbish, repeated on Sky and BBC. What they're doing is designing hybrids from 2019. Hardly a good record on facts either.
Mr. Roger, if we remain in the EU we'll be subject to ever more integration, the EU Army and QMV imposing laws upon us.
Short term economic pain is something that can be recovered, unpleasant as it is.
What's wrong with an EU army? NATO is looking like a concept whose time has passed so the UK is probably going to end up contributing to some European security apparatus anyway.
The number of countries that can realistically stand up to Russia is two: America and China. We need to be in an alliance with one of them. NATO fits the bill. The EU does not.
That really depends. Russia lacks the ability to complete a conventional military invasion of Western Europe, and in truth Moscow would be lit up like a Christmas tree in nuclear oblivion long before Russian troops reached the Rhine, along with all the unpleasant, apocalyptic consequences of that for us all as the missiles fly. There's little point being allied with either or any of them. If Russian ships are docking in British ports it's game over anyway.
Why would Russia want to reach the Rhine or Grimsby? Some of the old iron curtain countries, at a stretch; former Soviet republics, more likely. The only likely immediate change is a higher RAF fuel bill as the Russian Air Force buzzes the EU Army's border defences.
My suggestion ... Those born in Lincolnshire, being superior people, should get three votes each. The commoners (those born outside Lincolnshire), zero votes, and those born in Norfolk, minus one vote.
Ah, you might say, wouldn't that give Norfolk people more influence as they could cast their minus votes for politicians they dislike?
Ah, I would reply, that is to grossly over-estimate the IQ of Norfolk people.
Didn't we fight tooth and nail to prevent prisoners having the right to vote? It's not as though we'd be breaking new ground here.
Enough of the Norfolk bashing from you foreign folk. Lincolnshire, south of the Wash, is like Norfolk if someone ironed it. The most soulless, flat expanse of land in the UK. Pretend northerners that serve only as a human shield against the incursion of Brummies and Whippet botherers. It will serve as a useful farm colony for the kingdom of the Wuffingas once we secede.
Mr. Ace, NATO is about multi-lateral co-operation between nation states. The EU is about dragging power from nation states to a central bureaucracy that is not and cannot be accountable to the people because there is no demos, no unifying identity that applies to people across the EU.
What would the purpose be? Would the EU Army run to the rescue if the Falklands were invaded? How would the command structure work? Where would the accountability be? How would the funding work? What problem would an EU Army be solving that could not be addressed by NATO?
The British people just voted to leave the EU. The idea they'd be happy at having their armed forces become a military wing under the command of Brussels is, shall we say, optimistic.
William Glenn apart, Remainers never attempt explain why this shift power from nation States to a central bureaucracy is a good thing. They just say either it's not happening, or that the EU is crap but they'll do horrible things to us if we leave.
They claim it's a choice the UK doesn't have, unlike far smaller successful countries, dominated by far larger ones like Canada and Australia, because Trade.
The other side of that coin is that we can leave, sign up to EEA/EFTA, place ourselves at the mercy of the CJEU, require all job applicants in the UK to have French as a second language, agree to pay £100bn/year to the EU for the hell of it, and...
Mr. Roger, if we remain in the EU we'll be subject to ever more integration, the EU Army and QMV imposing laws upon us.
Short term economic pain is something that can be recovered, unpleasant as it is.
What's wrong with an EU army? NATO is looking like a concept whose time has passed so the UK is probably going to end up contributing to some European security apparatus anyway.
The number of countries that can realistically stand up to Russia is two: America and China. We need to be in an alliance with one of them. NATO fits the bill. The EU does not.
That really depends. Russia lacks the ability to complete a conventional military invasion of Western Europe, and in truth Moscow would be lit up like a Christmas tree in nuclear oblivion long before Russian troops reached the Rhine, along with all the unpleasant, apocalyptic consequences of that for us all as the missiles fly. There's little point being allied with either or any of them. If Russian ships are docking in British ports it's game over anyway.
Why would Russia want to reach the Rhine or Grimsby? Some of the old iron curtain countries, at a stretch; former Soviet republics, more likely. The only likely immediate change is a higher RAF fuel bill as the Russian Air Force buzzes the EU Army's border defences.
Precisely. So we don't need to be allied to anyone against them. They aren't a threat.
There is a lot of piss and wind spoken on both sides of the Brexit debate.
That Barnier statement seems perfectly reasonable to me, and consistent with the EU's position for the last year.
It's funny how "statement of the bleedin obvious" should be a "blow" - the only people who've been rumbled are the peddlers of a mythical "Soft Brexit" - they've been told before it doesn't exist.
"Some elements of our media would rather see the UK fail than Brexit succeed" - Liam Fox in the Commons
Liam Fox trying Donald Trump's tactics.
When Kier Starmer lies openly about the Euratom agreement over the last few days, and not one National Paper or Broadcaster calls him out on it, I'd say Dr Fox has a bloody good case. If not for talking the UK down directly, certainly for being totally bloody ignorant of any facts and acting as a mouthpiece for liars or incompetents.
Look at the Volvo story - apparently abandoning fossil fuels from 2019. It was absolute rubbish, repeated on Sky and BBC. What they're doing is designing hybrids from 2019. Hardly a good record on facts either.
"Look at the Volvo story - apparently abandoning fossil fuels from 2019." It looks like it's you that has the facts wrong, that's not what the BBC or indeed Volvo have said.
"It is also worth asking just how electric we are talking. Volvo said it would introduce a "portfolio of electrified cars across its model range, embracing fully electric cars, plug-in hybrid cars and mild-hybrid cars". That covers a wide range of outcomes." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40511024
Mr. Roger, if we remain in the EU we'll be subject to ever more integration, the EU Army and QMV imposing laws upon us.
Short term economic pain is something that can be recovered, unpleasant as it is.
What's wrong with an EU army? NATO is looking like a concept whose time has passed so the UK is probably going to end up contributing to some European security apparatus anyway.
I don't think Norway fully knew what it wanted when it voted 52/48% against, 1994. The political class said Yes. Some oldies thought the EU was a threat to the country's Lutheranism and said No.
With adjustments to fudge freedom of movement of 'labour' vs. that of 'people', Norway-like terms seem the answer to dissatisfy the fewest possible people for an almost indefinite future.
If there isn't a decent compromise, I'd want to Remain and move full speed ahead to Ever Closer Union, in which case f*** the 'loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists. Many are on the Tory right; a few are in the cabinet.
If you classify those opposing Euro membership and federal governance as 'loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists' then I suspect you would be giving that label to a large majority of the country.
Mr. Ace, NATO is about multi-lateral co-operation between nation states. The EU is about dragging power from nation states to a central bureaucracy that is not and cannot be accountable to the people because there is no demos, no unifying identity that applies to people across the EU.
What would the purpose be? Would the EU Army run to the rescue if the Falklands were invaded? How would the command structure work? Where would the accountability be? How would the funding work? What problem would an EU Army be solving that could not be addressed by NATO?
The British people just voted to leave the EU. The idea they'd be happy at having their armed forces become a military wing under the command of Brussels is, shall we say, optimistic.
William Glenn apart, Remainers never attempt explain why this shift power from nation States to a central bureaucracy is a good thing. They just say either it's not happening, or that the EU is crap but they'll do horrible things to us if we leave.
Its not about power its freedom to move freedom to work freedom to travel freedom to employ people from a pool ten times bigger than our own without restriction. It's about a pooling of resources for the common good. They're not difficult concepts.
Merkel appears to have worked out that she doesn't need to be mates with Trump. Not much of a leap to realise it would be far more beneficial to her to be mates with Putin. Isolate the States. Long overdue.
Would the EU Army run to the rescue if the Falklands were invaded? .
The FI are irrelevant as MPA now has a 9,000ft runway making them much easier to defend. If they get occupied again we won't be getting them back whether the UK is part of NATO, the EU Army or the Guardians of the Galaxy.
Mr. Ace, NATO is about multi-lateral co-operation between nation states. The EU is about dragging power from nation states to a central bureaucracy that is not and cannot be accountable to the people because there is no demos, no unifying identity that applies to people across the EU.
What would the purpose be? Would the EU Army run to the rescue if the Falklands were invaded? How would the command structure work? Where would the accountability be? How would the funding work? What problem would an EU Army be solving that could not be addressed by NATO?
The British people just voted to leave the EU. The idea they'd be happy at having their armed forces become a military wing under the command of Brussels is, shall we say, optimistic.
William Glenn apart, Remainers never attempt explain why this shift power from nation States to a central bureaucracy is a good thing. They just say either it's not happening, or that the EU is crap but they'll do horrible things to us if we leave.
They claim it's a choice the UK doesn't have, unlike far smaller successful countries, dominated by far larger ones like Canada and Australia, because Trade.
Or something.
Which small countries seceded from Canada or Australia and make a success of it? Just curious ...
Mr. Ace, NATO is about multi-lateral co-operation between nation states. The EU is about dragging power from nation states to a central bureaucracy that is not and cannot be accountable to the people because there is no demos, no unifying identity that applies to people across the EU.
What would the purpose be? Would the EU Army run to the rescue if the Falklands were invaded? How would the command structure work? Where would the accountability be? How would the funding work? What problem would an EU Army be solving that could not be addressed by NATO?
The British people just voted to leave the EU. The idea they'd be happy at having their armed forces become a military wing under the command of Brussels is, shall we say, optimistic.
William Glenn apart, Remainers never attempt explain why this shift power from nation States to a central bureaucracy is a good thing. They just say either it's not happening, or that the EU is crap but they'll do horrible things to us if we leave.
Its not about power its freedom to move freedom to work freedom to travel freedom to employ people from a pool ten times bigger than our own without restriction. It's about a pooling of resources for the common good. They're not difficult concepts.
Really though its about pissing on the poor in the rest of the world and growing fat on Cassoulet. Like everything else. The continuing dominance and economic facism of the West. But you know, cheap holidays and a chance to work in Turin.
Would the EU Army run to the rescue if the Falklands were invaded? .
The FI are irrelevant as MPA now has a 9,000ft runway making them much easier to defend. If they get occupied again we won't be getting them back whether the UK is part of NATO, the EU Army or the Guardians of the Galaxy.
My suggestion ... Those born in Lincolnshire, being superior people, should get three votes each. The commoners (those born outside Lincolnshire), zero votes, and those born in Norfolk, minus one vote.
Ah, you might say, wouldn't that give Norfolk people more influence as they could cast their minus votes for politicians they dislike?
Ah, I would reply, that is to grossly over-estimate the IQ of Norfolk people.
Didn't we fight tooth and nail to prevent prisoners having the right to vote? It's not as though we'd be breaking new ground here.
Enough of the Norfolk bashing from you foreign folk. Lincolnshire, south of the Wash, is like Norfolk if someone ironed it. The most soulless, flat expanse of land in the UK. Pretend northerners that serve only as a human shield against the incursion of Brummies and Whippet botherers. It will serve as a useful farm colony for the kingdom of the Wuffingas once we secede.
Norfolk...or Norwich is the perfect place to downsize too. The GT is particularly pleasant, tranquil, easy access to the City. The airport connects you to anywhere via Amsterdam. I'm off to Florence this afternoon and will leave home today at 4.15 in time to get a pizza at my favourite restaurant in Florence before 11.00. All no hassle. The Norfolk coastline is sublime. We are just discovering the pubs, food and culture. It's liberal, and green and chilled.... full of wonderful parks, quirky churches and indie shops. The weather here is better than just about every part of the UK...more sunny days.
Brexit won the referendum, but there lurked in many the belief that the Establishment would never accept it. Most voters have done, but the fanatics (head-bangers if you like), decided their last chance was to string it our for as long as possible and claim it was all too difficult. Cue - laughter as the head-bangers complained "You won, why aren't you celebrating?" the answer was as above.
So far all going as expected ... But like the last frantic gyrations of a trapped and dying rats, the head-bangers will probably ramp up their efforts.
All to no avail, the boat has sailed, it's too late. The head-bangers efforts are too transparent, and even if they succeeded, the lasting effect on the voters' view of democracy would be Pyrrhic. That's why Remain won't happen.
Victory is ours.
Good attempt at turning things on their head.
Not st all. It is a good reflection of reality. The loonies these days are the die hard Euroloons who refuse to accept Brexit in any form.
Would the EU Army run to the rescue if the Falklands were invaded? .
The FI are irrelevant as MPA now has a 9,000ft runway making them much easier to defend. If they get occupied again we won't be getting them back whether the UK is part of NATO, the EU Army or the Guardians of the Galaxy.
Might finish off Thatchers master plan and nuke Buenos Aires. Thatll teach them to chase Jeremy Clarkson.
The British people just voted to leave the EU. The idea they'd be happy at having their armed forces become a military wing under the command of Brussels is, shall we say, optimistic.
NATO isn't going to exist in 20 years in anything like its current form. The US is turning inward and isn't going to be that interested in defending Europe. So the choice isn't EU Army vs NATO it's EU Army or Dad's Army.
A large proportion of the British Armed Forces already take their orders from Belgium. It's just they're issued by (mostly) US 2 and 3 stars at SHAPE in Mons.
I was reading this article about a package that Germany is offering EU countries with smaller militaries. The package consists of a co-operated division where the partner gets access to German equipment, infrastructure, logistics and training and influences how the division gets deployed. Germany which has a military that does a bit of everything with little depth gets more effectiveness and also buy-in from other countries for the German way of doing things. So far the Netherlands, Czech Republic and Romania have signed up.
The main aim of the EU Army, which is another German project, is to bring in countries that are not members of NATO but have useful military resources, in particular Sweden. It is also a political project for the EU which is mainly in a consolidation phase.
It seems to me the Germans are looking for new ways of doing things and are a lot more imaginative on matters military than the Brits right now.
Mr. Ace, NATO is about multi-lateral co-operation between nation states. The EU is about dragging power from nation states to a central bureaucracy that is not and cannot be accountable to the people because there is no demos, no unifying identity that applies to people across the EU.
What would the purpose be? Would the EU Army run to the rescue if the Falklands were invaded? How would the command structure work? Where would the accountability be? How would the funding work? What problem would an EU Army be solving that could not be addressed by NATO?
The British people just voted to leave the EU. The idea they'd be happy at having their armed forces become a military wing under the command of Brussels is, shall we say, optimistic.
William Glenn apart, Remainers never attempt explain why this shift power from nation States to a central bureaucracy is a good thing. They just say either it's not happening, or that the EU is crap but they'll do horrible things to us if we leave.
They claim it's a choice the UK doesn't have, unlike far smaller successful countries, dominated by far larger ones like Canada and Australia, because Trade.
Or something.
Which small countries seceded from Canada or Australia and make a success of it? Just curious ...
The Principality of Hutt River. GDP: $134 (on dole day)
Comments
Out-compete the payday lenders / loan sharks / catalogue companies who pray upon the desperate.
@RupertMyers: @dngbbc Our best bet now seems to be "no deal" followed by a parliamentary defeat for crashing out.
On another topic you mentioned the CFP as "disastrous". It's much improved these days and actually quite good now. The main damage to North Sea fish stocks took place before we joined the EEC when it was every country for itself. Something to bear in mind should we try to return to that regime.
How long before one of these take overs results in a deselection? And at that point do the moderates in Labour sense the game is up and split? The Yvettes and Chukas and Cruddases of this world aren't going to wait to be knobbled and don't seem like the quit frontline politics types.
Indeed one wonders how many conversations are going on in the bars between their likes and the Soubrys and Heidi Allen's, not to mention Old Father Cable.
Brexit and Corbynism broke UNS, will this twin dilemma break the old guard?
Brexiteer Tory/UKIP alliance, Brexit light Progressive Centrists headed by Cooper or an ex Tory remainer, Momentum Labour and a rump Liberal party of Scotland?
Timing wise....... If we get through the autumn without an election there's maybe 18 months to get up and running before Brexit and a probable election?
EU-philes shouldn't get over-excited. People voted to leave, and expect that to happen. A transition is fine. There's a broad range of options available. But trying to undo the result would be extremely unwise, unless done so through democratic means (a referendum, or, potentially, a General Election).
Mr. Meeks, you could equally well cite the fear-mongering of Osborne for millions of votes Remain got. Or Britons who are ashamed of their country and want its governance constrained by the EU, as Sturgeon argued.
https://twitter.com/HistoryatNmpton/status/881799430445436928
Irish passports anyone?
Short term economic pain is something that can be recovered, unpleasant as it is.
My suggestion ... Those born in Lincolnshire, being superior people, should get three votes each. The commoners (those born outside Lincolnshire), zero votes, and those born in Norfolk, minus one vote.
Ah, you might say, wouldn't that give Norfolk people more influence as they could cast their minus votes for politicians they dislike?
Ah, I would reply, that is to grossly over-estimate the IQ of Norfolk people.
Bobby Ewing in the shower moment.
Presumably the U.K. will have the same need for testing? Quite a lot of friction for EU agricultural exports....
The clever thing to do would be to find something small to offer as an extra benefit (like some extra temporary control on internal free movement, which is likely to happen anyway) and invite us to stay, near the end of the process. If they time it right and the trend away from Brexit in public opinion continues, calls for a vote on the EU offer would be irresistible.
A transitional arrangement could be a good way of reducing some of the pressure and divisiveness in politics. Reneging upon a referendum result would not result in sweetness and light reigning.
That sort of condescension and contempt is part of the reason the referendum and the result went the rather surprising way they did. I still recall the giggling glee of many here as Obama said we'd be at the 'back of the queue' and Cameron referred to 'Little Englanders'. Such lines may get applause and mirth in metropolitan quarters but they merely annoy or anger most people.
You'll deny you were Leavers thrice before the cock crows very shortly.
I'm not pushing for it, just pointing out there's no impediment.
I am not so sure the "moderates" will depart. There are no real moderates in Labour and never really have been. There is no real ideological opposition in Labour to having a Marxist chancellor either. The issue is that these made the party unelectable. As that now appears to be untrue, the moderates will all feel comfortable letting the mask slip.
This means it is in our interest to keep negotiations to a minimum, take an off the shelf solution, and not play further into the EUs hands.
Iirc you wanted Farage locked away for the duration of the campaign.
We've been so lucky, looking back on it.
Heath's corpse should be dug up and, rather like Pope Formosus and the Cadaver Synod, upon inevitable conviction for treason be dismembered and thrown in the nearest convenient river.
Apart from his weaselly cremation trick, obviously. The coward even thought ahead enough to plan how to escape his own certain posthumous execution. Typical.
Using Farage as a bogeyman was ridiculous because the referendum wasn't Do You Like Nigel Farage? It was about staying in or leaving the EU.
That sort of idiotic approach was specifically condemned in this video I linked to previously (for the preceding majority) at around 26.30-40s.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_z3pe_OSZrQ
Says nothing about the EU. Or the UK. Or the UK leaving, or staying in, the EU.
What impressed me is that when they played, RUBLEV came from a set down when he beat his higher ranked opponent 6/7 7/5 6/4 and will go into this match with a good deal of confidence. I'd certainly make him the 8/13 favourite and not the 5/4 that's available with Paddy Power.
My second bet is in the match between BAGHDATIS and Dimitrov. BAGHDATIS is a big price to win the match but I fancy the price on him to win the opening set. He impressed me in his opening match with some stunning service matches. He won 98% of his first serves and hit 17 aces with only 2 double faults. BAGHDATIS loves the big occasion and grand slams. The veteran Cypriot might not have enough in the tank to defeat Dimitrov in a best of five sets match but I've seen him come out of the traps and play some outstanding first sets (before dropping off a little). Dimitrov had a slow start in his first set of his opening match at Wimbledon which he won 7/6 but only won 25% of second serves and hit as many double faults as aces (5) in that set. There's every chance BAGHDATIS will come out on fire and take a surprise first set lead.
BAGHDATIS is 65 in the world and Dimitrov is at 11 - there's no denying who the 'better' player is. But 3/1 with bet365 for BAGHDATIS to win the opening set in these circumstances and with his form is value and should be 6/4 or at 13/8 at most.
Yesterday FOGNINI did the business in straight sets winning at 8/11.
I see Scott has gone Tweet crazy this morning...
Mr. Ace, NATO is about multi-lateral co-operation between nation states. The EU is about dragging power from nation states to a central bureaucracy that is not and cannot be accountable to the people because there is no demos, no unifying identity that applies to people across the EU.
What would the purpose be? Would the EU Army run to the rescue if the Falklands were invaded? How would the command structure work? Where would the accountability be? How would the funding work? What problem would an EU Army be solving that could not be addressed by NATO?
The British people just voted to leave the EU. The idea they'd be happy at having their armed forces become a military wing under the command of Brussels is, shall we say, optimistic.
"Some elements of our media would rather see the UK fail than Brexit succeed" - Liam Fox in the Commons
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-17-1922_en.htm
Short version "there is no "Soft Brexit" - there is Brexit or no Brexit"
If Russian ships are docking in British ports it's game over anyway.
With adjustments to fudge freedom of movement of 'labour' vs. that of 'people', Norway-like terms seem the answer to dissatisfy the fewest possible people for an almost indefinite future.
If there isn't a decent compromise, I'd want to Remain and move full speed ahead to Ever Closer Union, in which case f*** the 'loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists. Many are on the Tory right; a few are in the cabinet.
Or six decades?
A large proportion of the British Armed Forces already take their orders from Belgium. It's just they're issued by (mostly) US 2 and 3 stars at SHAPE in Mons.
Look at the Volvo story - apparently abandoning fossil fuels from 2019. It was absolute rubbish, repeated on Sky and BBC. What they're doing is designing hybrids from 2019. Hardly a good record on facts either.
That Barnier statement seems perfectly reasonable to me, and consistent with the EU's position for the last year.
Lincolnshire, south of the Wash, is like Norfolk if someone ironed it. The most soulless, flat expanse of land in the UK. Pretend northerners that serve only as a human shield against the incursion of Brummies and Whippet botherers. It will serve as a useful farm colony for the kingdom of the Wuffingas once we secede.
Or something.
...
...we'd still have left the EU.
I think it's being replaced by "No Brexit".....
It looks like it's you that has the facts wrong, that's not what the BBC or indeed Volvo have said.
"It is also worth asking just how electric we are talking. Volvo said it would introduce a "portfolio of electrified cars across its model range, embracing fully electric cars, plug-in hybrid cars and mild-hybrid cars". That covers a wide range of outcomes."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40511024
Isolate the States. Long overdue.
No adjective.
But you know, cheap holidays and a chance to work in Turin.
The main aim of the EU Army, which is another German project, is to bring in countries that are not members of NATO but have useful military resources, in particular Sweden. It is also a political project for the EU which is mainly in a consolidation phase.
It seems to me the Germans are looking for new ways of doing things and are a lot more imaginative on matters military than the Brits right now.