So where are we at the moment; we’re getting ‘rid’ of the European Court of Justice and ending free movement. Against that we’re having trouble recruiting nurses and fruit and vegetable pickers, looks like there might need to be complex negotiations to stay where we are on licensing and importing medicines, if we can, and there seems to be a good chance of difficulty with importing radio-isotopes for cancer treatment and other issues about nuclear energy. Oh and the money for the NHS was in a unicorns saddllebags! And ‘we didn’t mean it anyway!'
I'd never want to work on a project run by Remainers. What is being changed is legal and consitutional; tasks outstanding are merely staffing.
If I had to choose between legal wrangling and staffing issues, I'd chose the latter every time...
But ending free movement is what’s indicating forthcoming labour crises.
(Note that’s labour with a small l!)
Incidentally, I’m becoming increasingly suspicious of our headline employment statistics. They really don’t seem to be related to what is actually happening.
Really? It explains why cafes and bars are buzzing, and also why certain members of my family who had been long term unemployed (including several single mothers) are so proudly posting of their new jobs. I'm very proud of them. And also of the little changes in the Government's stewardship of the economy that has created the jobs.
It's not perfect, and I wish there was more export activity (and less import activity), but the economy has defied naysayers over the years. How many recessions has Uncle Vince predicted since 2010?
The U.K. Economy has many strengths with its fairly flexible job market. The downside is the massive costs loaded onto fixed capital assets. This creates an economy based mostly on labour. In addition many fixed assets that do exist are owned by foreigners. I estimate that my cost of capital in the U.K. on fixed assets is about 20% while in Switzerland where we have a sister company it is 4%. My average cost of skilled labour is £30k pa in Switzerland it is £60k. If we are to expand our exports this situation needs to change radically. It is easier to move labour than fixed assets. We don't want to end up like the Philippines
Thanks for sharing that. Posts like this one ^ are what makes the comments section of this site so interesting. Strangely, the same cannot be said for astroturfing or reporting Twitter comments/photos of BoJo...
The interesting point is that the Brexit vote hasn't resolved things. You might expect once a vote has been taken a majority would say, let's get on with it. A consensus would be built with just a small fringe of diehards who still hold out. I think there are several reasons why that hasn't happened.
One of which is that we live in a parliamentary democracy. It was constitutionally stupid to risk a referendum on a highly complex issue when a clear majority of MPs wanted to Remain. A Leave result in those circumstances was bound to lead to crisis.
The solution might have been some kind of threshold, so that it was clear that the result was the settled will of the people (a 52-48 result is not the settled will).
Personally, Osborne was right, a referendum was a "crazy idea".
I assume it was thought that getting a majority but losing because of requirements for minimum turnout, or for maj > two thirds or whatever, would just encourage the kipper camp.
My guess is that Remain was assumed likely to win but not by whatever margin would reasonably be introduced for Leave to clear. Hence an attempt to avoid one crisis has led directly to another.
The interesting point is that the Brexit vote hasn't resolved things. You might expect once a vote has been taken a majority would say, let's get on with it. A consensus would be built with just a small fringe of diehards who still hold out. I think there are several reasons why that hasn't happened.
The majority has said let's get on with it. The problems have come about because those in power who should have been getting on with it have dragged their feet and sought at every turn to delay the process.
We are leaving, there is no going back on that. The focus now should be on securing a Brexit deal which safeguards the economy and living standards. That means reining in the fundamentalist incompetents who are currently in charge of the process.
If you're hoping for competent government of any variety then you're in the wrong country.
The interesting point is that the Brexit vote hasn't resolved things. You might expect once a vote has been taken a majority would say, let's get on with it. A consensus would be built with just a small fringe of diehards who still hold out. I think there are several reasons why that hasn't happened.
The main one being just how poorly the Conservative party has handled the whole thing for the last year. It beggars belief that Tory government Brexit-supporting ministers and their newspaper hangers-on can spew out invective against treacherous Remoaners when they are currently engaged in barely concealed civil war with "unloyal" fellow ministers at a time when vital negotiations are taking place. They are contemptible.
Something we've not discussed much: the resolution to the current in-fighting in the Cabinet. There are 5 possibilities:
1. Someone emerges as the dominant figure and subdues everyone else. 2. The squabbling continues indefinitely without resolution. 3. The recess makes everyone calm down and things proceed fairly peacefully. 4. Someone gets fed up and resigns. 5. Ultimately the Tories feel that the disruption of a leadership eleciton is less than the squabbles, and calls one to get a decisive leader.
1 seems unlikely - too many strong personalities who feel inches away from the top. 2 is possible but will ultimately lead to both a very messy Brexit and Tory catastophe. 3 is quite likely in the short term, but the Conference and the Brexit negotiations will reignite everything in Septembet/October. 4 seems plausible. Hammond's comments are brutally outspoken, and if people ignore him and just carry on briefing against him, it's easy to see him quitting. That almost certainly leads to 5. 5 - maybe.
Dunno. What do Conservatives here expect, or do they see other possibilities? Genuine question, with betting implications.
6. Events intervene and everyone has to go quiet for a while.
So far the events are proving distinctly unhelpful, for the Tories pretending to govern.
I thought I might explain a little why UK cost of capital on fixed assets is high. The largest reason is government policy which sees investment primarily as a source of tax income. The taxes we pay include business rates, utility green charges and insurance taxes. To add to this the banks in the UK do not value fixed assets as collateral for loans and instead charge a premium due to the fixed overhead risk. Because many of our customers are international we are charged a further risk premium. This is despite some of our international customers such as Medtronic having a better credit rating than the uk government.
There are no votes in fixed capital. They are mostly owned by institutions or a few rich individuals. They are however a crucial part of a country's ability to generate wealth. Brexit could have been used to restructure the way the economy runs but I was sceptical. As such I was a soft remainer. All the mood music suggests that TM has no interest in improving the fixed asset investment in the U.K. and if anything is about to make it worse. I am now a hard remainer.
It's not silly - and highlights the absence of any serious policy on housing, which is one issue which could readily be addressed outside of any factional warfare.
The interesting point is that the Brexit vote hasn't resolved things. You might expect once a vote has been taken a majority would say, let's get on with it. A consensus would be built with just a small fringe of diehards who still hold out. I think there are several reasons why that hasn't happened.
The majority has said let's get on with it. The problems have come about because those in power who should have been getting on with it have dragged their feet and sought at every turn to delay the process.
Indeed. And those who used to think they were in the majority have now find they're actually in the diehard brigade; and pretty crap at fighting a rearguard action too. I mean, TONY Blair?
If that's your best substitution, the quarter finals of the cup is the limit.
We may argue about a second referendum. We may argue that the first referendum cannot bind after the election of a subsequent parliament. We may argue that the referendum was advisory.
This is all irrelevant.
Article 50 has been submitted, and cannot be withdrawn.
That's simply mistaken. As anyone who knows the EU can confirm, they are hedgers, fudgers and experts at kicking cans down the road - all things you often hear as criticisms rather than compliments. They'll stop the clock, reinterpret the rules, whatever, if there's agreement that it's necessary and desirable.
At present I think they'd be well up for it. After another year of fractious negotiations with an indecisive partner, I'm not sure. There comes a point where someone says "I'm not really sure if I want to be with you" for the 177th time and gets the reply "well, push off then".
Yep - I agree with that. If the UK changed its mind the EU would certainly find a way to facilitate that.
However, the UK won't change its mind. For a start, the Labour leadership team has spent 40 years opposing the UK's membership of the EU and will not now countenance anything less than withdrawal. John McDonnell has made that absolutely clear on a number of occasions. Then, there is the split that a change of mind would cause inside the Conservative party.
WE are much better off focusing on getting a deal that does not damage the UK economy for years to come and which protects living standards.
It's not silly - and highlights the absence of any serious policy on housing, which is one issue which could readily be addressed outside of any factional warfare.
Its central argument is that many people vote Tory for economic competence, to avoid radical upheavals and to otherwise be left alone. Today's Tories offer none of these.
The interesting point is that the Brexit vote hasn't resolved things. You might expect once a vote has been taken a majority would say, let's get on with it. A consensus would be built with just a small fringe of diehards who still hold out. I think there are several reasons why that hasn't happened.
One of which is that we live in a parliamentary democracy. It was constitutionally stupid to risk a referendum on a highly complex issue when a clear majority of MPs wanted to Remain. A Leave result in those circumstances was bound to lead to crisis.
The solution might have been some kind of threshold, so that it was clear that the result was the settled will of the people (a 52-48 result is not the settled will).
Personally, Osborne was right, a referendum was a "crazy idea".
I assume it was thought that getting a majority but losing because of requirements for minimum turnout, or for maj > two thirds or whatever, would just encourage the kipper camp.
You are probably right. This just shows how out of touch Cameron and fellow ministers were with voters. They assumed they would get a narrow win for Remain.
Replace Cameron and fellow ministers with Remainers on here.
You're all stupid, racist liars was all we heard before the Referendum. And now they want another bite of the cherry, tough. At least Cameron had the good grace to accept it and resign.
I thought he was exaggerating at the time, but I now see Dominic Cummings was right when he said most MPs were useless raving egomaniacs during the referendum campaign.
Far too many are interested only in getting their faces on TV, quoted in the press, or issuing unsolicited advice, without actually getting off their arses and doing anything.
He saw much of his job as keeping them well away. And rightly so.
The interesting point is that the Brexit vote hasn't resolved things. You might expect once a vote has been taken a majority would say, let's get on with it. A consensus would be built with just a small fringe of diehards who still hold out. I think there are several reasons why that hasn't happened.
The majority has said let's get on with it. The problems have come about because those in power who should have been getting on with it have dragged their feet and sought at every turn to delay the process.
If those in power had said: right, we're leaving but we need to ensure that it is a Brexit for everyone, and that this means that people on all sides will be disappointed, then they would have had a far greater hand to conduct negotiations.
Trouble is, they went insta-hard Brexit and any row back from that will be tricky, while not all Brexiters (to take PB as an example) particularly want hard Brexit.
The interesting point is that the Brexit vote hasn't resolved things. You might expect once a vote has been taken a majority would say, let's get on with it. A consensus would be built with just a small fringe of diehards who still hold out. I think there are several reasons why that hasn't happened.
The majority has said let's get on with it. The problems have come about because those in power who should have been getting on with it have dragged their feet and sought at every turn to delay the process.
Quite agree.
And if the EU demand anything like 50 billion as a settlement then the sentiment for leaving will get stronger, most people would back Boris on this one.
If there was a vote asking if we should pay 50 billion or more to leave, should we pay it yes or no, I reckon no would get 80%.
Once we know what terms the government has negotiated, should there be a second referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU, where voters can choose between leaving under the terms negotiated or remaining in the EU after all?
We are leaving, there is no going back on that. The focus now should be on securing a Brexit deal which safeguards the economy and living standards. That means reining in the fundamentalist incompetents who are currently in charge of the process.
It's a bit hard to to characterise the government as fundamentalist eurosceptics when the Prime Minister supported Remain in the referendum.
There are two questions in choosing what sort of Brexit we have. The first is whether we should stay in the customs union. This is a choice between prioritising goods with EU markets on the one hand or services with emerging economies on the other. Given the world economy is moving to both services and emerging economies, leaving the customs union is clearly the sensible option.
The second is whether we should stay in the single market. The problem with this is that the hardliners on the EU side have demanded a faith-based adhesion to the "fundamentals" of the single market, making clear who are the fundamentalists in this debate. So it is a matter of whether we have slightly restrict trade access or continue the situation where we have to let in anyone with an EU passport, regardless of skills, criminal record or economic contribution. This essentially comes down to choosing between the professional classes or the working classes. Personally, I think the latter have had a hard time of it the last decade or two and it's about time they had a voice in UK politics again.
Scrap HS2 and spend £56bn on fire-resistant housing, is what I'd do. Improving links between London and oop North doesn't revitalise oop North, it just speeds up the brain drain into the capital.
£56bn ???
You're not up to date:
' Campaigners opposed to the HS2 high speed rail network have seized on claims the project will cost double the official estimate.
The claims HS2 will cost £111 billion, twice as much as the official £55.7 billion figure being used by Government and HS2 Ltd, were made in the Sunday Times newspaper.
The claims relate to an estimate prepared by Michael Byng which was commissioned by the Department for Transport. '
Why 111 billion? Who not 200 billion? Or 500? In fact, why not a trillion? What's the next figure the anti's produce out of their backsides?
The anti-HS2 brigade get ever more hysterical. There's a capacity problem. Yes, I know some people try to deny that, but it's there, and every year's passenger growth cements that problem. a 2% growth in journeys from 2014/5 to 2015/6. A 129% increase since privatisation. (*)
HS2 is a reasonable solution to that problem, especially given the experience of the disastrous WCML upgrade ten years ago.
Who exactly is going to call this second referendum ?
A govt of national unity led by Hammond, Soubry, Chukka and Nikkla ? That would be quite a lot of "events"..
If the Brexit deal is defeated in Parliament, what else is the government going to do? Call a General Election?!
Leave without a deal and without paying the bill.
Would be a lot of noise but given we are an ingenious people we would soon adapt.
If we leave without a deal, the economy would take a hit the like of which it will take years to recover from.
Would be smaller than the post 2008 "Gordon Brown legacy" apocalypse - and we are all still here aren't we ? Shape shifting lizards haven't taken over.
So why are the government making such an almighty hash of Brexit?
A) Brexit was always difficult /impossible given the two year process. lack of preparation from Cameron C) Vote Leave made impossible promises to win the vote D) A serious lack of talent at the top of politics E) Fundamental weaknesses in the UK position
All of the above or something else?
There is no hash of Brexit. There is an ongoing negotiation in its very opening stages. The only people who are convinced this is a hash are those that instinctively interpret a comment from an EU diplomat as the gospel truth.
We are leaving, there is no going back on that. The focus now should be on securing a Brexit deal which safeguards the economy and living standards. That means reining in the fundamentalist incompetents who are currently in charge of the process.
If you're hoping for competent government of any variety then you're in the wrong country.
Yep, I get that. It's what makes the next few years such a frightening prospect. I thank God every day that our business is almost exclusively done abroad and online, and that we almost never bill in pounds.
Those criticising the Tory negotiations have a good point but it could be far worse. If Labour had won the GE we'd have Abbott and McDonnell going in to bat for us.
This is the level of politicians we have and yet so many on here put so much faith in them, its ridiculous. We have 650 MPs, I'd wager that less than 10% have achieved anything worthwhile outside of politics.
Scrap HS2 and spend £56bn on fire-resistant housing, is what I'd do. Improving links between London and oop North doesn't revitalise oop North, it just speeds up the brain drain into the capital.
£56bn ???
You're not up to date:
' Campaigners opposed to the HS2 high speed rail network have seized on claims the project will cost double the official estimate.
The claims HS2 will cost £111 billion, twice as much as the official £55.7 billion figure being used by Government and HS2 Ltd, were made in the Sunday Times newspaper.
The claims relate to an estimate prepared by Michael Byng which was commissioned by the Department for Transport. '
One of the most bizarre features of the Right at the moment is their utter obsession with HS2. Really, really odd.
I remember going to a Leave event where I was asked by two people (and they were entirely independent conversations) about HS2 within minutes.
They spat out their drinks when I said I didn't oppose it. In fact, I was strongly in favour. The entirely fact-free invective that followed, to a response they clearly weren't expecting, was both ugly and off-putting.
Many seem to view your views on HS2 as a test of how "sound" you are on the EU, and everything else.
So where are we at the moment; we’re getting ‘rid’ of the European Court of Justice and ending free movement. Against that we’re having trouble recruiting nurses and fruit and vegetable pickers, looks like there might need to be complex negotiations to stay where we are on licensing and importing medicines, if we can, and there seems to be a good chance of difficulty with importing radio-isotopes for cancer treatment and other issues about nuclear energy. Oh and the money for the NHS was in a unicorns saddllebags! And ‘we didn’t mean it anyway!'
I'd never want to work on a project run by Remainers. What is being changed is legal and consitutional; tasks outstanding are merely staffing.
If I had to choose between legal wrangling and staffing issues, I'd chose the latter every time...
But ending free movement is what’s indicating forthcoming labour crises.
(Note that’s labour with a small l!)
Incidentally, I’m becoming increasingly suspicious of our headline employment statistics. They really don’t seem to be related to what is actually happening.
Really? It explains why cafes and bars are buzzing, and also why certain members of my family who had been long term unemployed (including several single mothers) are so proudly posting of their new jobs. I'm very proud of them. And also of the little changes in the Government's stewardship of the economy that has created the jobs.
It's not perfect, and I wish there was more export activity (and less import activity), but the economy has defied naysayers over the years. How many recessions has Uncle Vince predicted since 2010?
The U.K. Economy has many strengths with its fairly flexible job market. The downside is the massive costs loaded onto fixed capital assets. This creates an economy based mostly on labour. In addition many fixed assets that do exist are owned by foreigners. I estimate that my cost of capital in the U.K. on fixed assets is about 20% while in Switzerland where we have a sister company it is 4%. My average cost of skilled labour is £30k pa in Switzerland it is £60k. If we are to expand our exports this situation needs to change radically. It is easier to move labour than fixed assets. We don't want to end up like the Philippines
The member of my family involved in practical exporting..... selling hi tech goods to countries on the Pacific Rim ....... is finding life difficult at the moment.
Who exactly is going to call this second referendum ?
A govt of national unity led by Hammond, Soubry, Chukka and Nikkla ? That would be quite a lot of "events"..
If the Brexit deal is defeated in Parliament, what else is the government going to do? Call a General Election?!
Not calling one would finish the Con party for 20 years. Corbyn would dance with delight at a 2nd referendum being called in such a scenario.
We would leave without a deal and without paying the bill.
Would be a lot of noise but given we are an ingenious people we would soon adapt.
..by throwing out the Conservatives at the first opportunity thereafter. Which is a problem for the people currently in charge.
There was a queue of posters on here saying 2010 was a bad election to win and they would be out of power forever.
You can't cuddle the future for "what ifs" in politics as nothing is certain - and even less so in 2017.
Cons are in government for another 5 years - will take a lot to shift that. Calling a 2nd referendum wouldn't win them any more votes - in fact it would lose them a massive swathe of sleeping Kippers.
I thought he was exaggerating at the time, but I now see Dominic Cummings was right when he said most MPs were useless raving egomaniacs during the referendum campaign.
Far too many are interested only in getting their faces on TV, quoted in the press, or issuing unsolicited advice, without actually getting off their arses and doing anything.
He saw much of his job as keeping them well away. And rightly so.
In all the leaking and sniping there is one major Conservative politician who is staying out of it all. That's Theresa May. This is where all the comparisons with Gordon Brown fall down. Where Brown ruthlessly tried to crush his own colleagues who he was scared of, May simply gets on with the job, serving the party she has served since she was 14.
Speaking of getting on with the job. I'm impressed she is taking the acid attack threat so seriously. Reading about some of the victims it is heartbreaking. I'm glad the government is shrugging off the soft-on-crime brigade and planning to bring in serious sentences. We need to make sure they apply to 16 and 17 year olds too, as they are many of the perpetrators of this evil.
So why are the government making such an almighty hash of Brexit?
A) Brexit was always difficult /impossible given the two year process. lack of preparation from Cameron C) Vote Leave made impossible promises to win the vote D) A serious lack of talent at the top of politics E) Fundamental weaknesses in the UK position
All of the above or something else?
There is no hash of Brexit. There is an ongoing negotiation in its very opening stages. The only people who are convinced this is a hash are those that instinctively interpret a comment from an EU diplomat as the gospel truth.
Seem to be plenty of suckers in the media (and on here) falling for the spin from both sides.
On topic, one of the reasons for these polling figures is that the Brexit that was promised is becoming difficult (if not impossible) to deliver.
Forget the £350m per week to the NHS, it is the promises that Brexit would be easy and painless, that the EU would be desperate to do a deal with us, we could do trade deals really easily, that crashing out on to WTO terms was project fear.
Scrap HS2 and spend £56bn on fire-resistant housing, is what I'd do. Improving links between London and oop North doesn't revitalise oop North, it just speeds up the brain drain into the capital.
£56bn ???
You're not up to date:
' Campaigners opposed to the HS2 high speed rail network have seized on claims the project will cost double the official estimate.
The claims HS2 will cost £111 billion, twice as much as the official £55.7 billion figure being used by Government and HS2 Ltd, were made in the Sunday Times newspaper.
The claims relate to an estimate prepared by Michael Byng which was commissioned by the Department for Transport. '
One of the most bizarre features of the Right at the moment is their utter obsession with HS2. Really, really odd.
I remember going to a Leave event where I was asked by two people (and they were entirely independent conversations) about HS2 within minutes.
They spat out their drinks when I said I didn't oppose it. In fact, I was strongly in favour. The entirely fact-free invective that followed, to a response they clearly weren't expecting, was both ugly and off-putting.
Many seem to view your views on HS2 as a test of how "sound" you are on the EU, and everything else.
It's bonkers.
That might be because it is part of the so called 'Integrated European Transport' initiative. That's why its design has been so London Centric (rather than dealing with the cross country routes first), because London is connected to the Continent. The sensible opposition to it should be that its overpriced, in the wrong place, and should be preceded by better Northern Rail linkage to build the Northern Economic Case for linking it to London, rather than simply allowing the speedy leaving of people from the North to London.
So where are we at the moment; we’re getting ‘rid’ of the European Court of Justice and ending free movement. Against that we’re having trouble recruiting nurses and fruit and vegetable pickers, looks like there might need to be complex negotiations to stay where we are on licensing and importing medicines, if we can, and there seems to be a good chance of difficulty with importing radio-isotopes for cancer treatment and other issues about nuclear energy. Oh and the money for the NHS was in a unicorns saddllebags! And ‘we didn’t mean it anyway!'
I'd never want to work on a project run by Remainers. What is being changed is legal and consitutional; tasks outstanding are merely staffing.
If I had to choose between legal wrangling and staffing issues, I'd chose the latter every time...
But ending free movement is what’s indicating forthcoming labour crises.
(Note that’s labour with a small l!)
Incidentally, I’m becoming increasingly suspicious of our headline employment statistics. They really don’t seem to be related to what is actually happening.
Really? It explains why cafes and bars are buzzing, and also why certain members of my family who had been long term unemployed (including several single mothers) are so proudly posting of their new jobs. I'm very proud of them. And also of the little changes in the Government's stewardship of the economy that has created the jobs.
It's not perfect, and I wish there was more export activity (and less import activity), but the economy has defied naysayers over the years. How many recessions has Uncle Vince predicted since 2010?
The U.K. Economy has many strengths with its fairly flexible job market. The downside is the massive costs loaded onto fixed capital assets. This creates an economy based mostly on labour. In addition many fixed assets that do exist are owned by foreigners. I estimate that my cost of capital in the U.K. on fixed assets is about 20% while in Switzerland where we have a sister company it is 4%. My average cost of skilled labour is £30k pa in Switzerland it is £60k. If we are to expand our exports this situation needs to change radically. It is easier to move labour than fixed assets. We don't want to end up like the Philippines
If we want to move away from being such a cheap-labour based economy, we need to make sure our population is much more skilled than it is now. Having open doors to unskilled migration from Eastern Europe is not a good way to do this.
The interesting point is that the Brexit vote hasn't resolved things. You might expect once a vote has been taken a majority would say, let's get on with it. A consensus would be built with just a small fringe of diehards who still hold out. I think there are several reasons why that hasn't happened.
The majority has said let's get on with it. The problems have come about because those in power who should have been getting on with it have dragged their feet and sought at every turn to delay the process.
The problem is that those in power did not have the first idea of what they were getting into. This time last year, David Davis was telling us:
So be under no doubt: we can do deals with our trading partners, and we can do them quickly. I would expect the new Prime Minister on September 9th to immediately trigger a large round of global trade deals with all our most favoured trade partners. I would expect that the negotiation phase of most of them to be concluded within between 12 and 24 months. So within two years, before the negotiation with the EU is likely to be complete, and therefore before anything material has changed, we can negotiate a free trade area massively larger than the EU. Trade deals with the US and China alone will give us a trade area almost twice the size of the EU, and of course we will also be seeking deals with Hong Kong, Canada, Australia, India, Japan, the UAE, Indonesia – and many others.
On topic, one of the reasons for these polling figures is that the Brexit that was promised is becoming difficult (if not impossible) to deliver.
Forget the £350m per week to the NHS, it is the promises that Brexit would be easy and painless, that the EU would be desperate to do a deal with us, we could do trade deals really easily, that crashing out on to WTO terms was project fear.
Do you have Liam Fox's actual words? Tom Newton-Dunn is another one of those Remainers with a tendency to paraphrase things in a pro-EU direction to entirely miss the point.
Scrap HS2 and spend £56bn on fire-resistant housing, is what I'd do. Improving links between London and oop North doesn't revitalise oop North, it just speeds up the brain drain into the capital.
£56bn ???
You're not up to date:
' Campaigners opposed to the HS2 high speed rail network have seized on claims the project will cost double the official estimate.
The claims HS2 will cost £111 billion, twice as much as the official £55.7 billion figure being used by Government and HS2 Ltd, were made in the Sunday Times newspaper.
The claims relate to an estimate prepared by Michael Byng which was commissioned by the Department for Transport. '
Why 111 billion? Who not 200 billion? Or 500? In fact, why not a trillion? What's the next figure the anti's produce out of their backsides?
The anti-HS2 brigade get ever more hysterical. There's a capacity problem. Yes, I know some people try to deny that, but it's there, and every year's passenger growth cements that problem. a 2% growth in journeys from 2014/5 to 2015/6. A 129% increase since privatisation. (*)
HS2 is a reasonable solution to that problem, especially given the experience of the disastrous WCML upgrade ten years ago.
I don't understand it. Particularly when erstwhile intelligent people make this fallacious argument that HS2 will somehow "suck" resources into London. It's like saying that new airports in the North will suck business overseas, or a new motorway to Newcastle-upon-Tyne would suck aspiring workers down South.
The logical end-point of those arguments is that the less infrastructure you have, the more local business and wealth you have retained in the locality. On that basis, we should be tearing up existing infrastructure, not adding to it. It's stark raving bonkers.
New physical and communications infrastructure is a win-win. It leads to additional growth at both ends, and allows greater opportunities for investment. Just look at how the M3/M4 and M1 corridors aided development of services "spokes" around London in the 1970s, and thereafter, in the Thames Valley, Surrey, North Hampshire, and Milton Keynes areas. There are several major company HQs there now. Infrastructure makes it more feasible to both live and work there.
The North is very poorly connected to London and the South-East, which is a global hub, and anything which enhances capacity, speed and "hook-in" to this is a very good thing for them, and everyone else.
Scrap HS2 and spend £56bn on fire-resistant housing, is what I'd do. Improving links between London and oop North doesn't revitalise oop North, it just speeds up the brain drain into the capital.
£56bn ???
You're not up to date:
' Campaigners opposed to the HS2 high speed rail network have seized on claims the project will cost double the official estimate.
The claims HS2 will cost £111 billion, twice as much as the official £55.7 billion figure being used by Government and HS2 Ltd, were made in the Sunday Times newspaper.
The claims relate to an estimate prepared by Michael Byng which was commissioned by the Department for Transport. '
One of the most bizarre features of the Right at the moment is their utter obsession with HS2. Really, really odd.
I remember going to a Leave event where I was asked by two people (and they were entirely independent conversations) about HS2 within minutes.
They spat out their drinks when I said I didn't oppose it. In fact, I was strongly in favour. The entirely fact-free invective that followed, to a response they clearly weren't expecting, was both ugly and off-putting.
Many seem to view your views on HS2 as a test of how "sound" you are on the EU, and everything else.
It's bonkers.
That might be because it is part of the so called 'Integrated European Transport' initiative. That's why its design has been so London Centric (rather than dealing with the cross country routes first), because London is connected to the Continent. The sensible opposition to it should be that its overpriced, in the wrong place, and should be preceded by better Northern Rail linkage to build the Northern Economic Case for linking it to London, rather than simply allowing the speedy leaving of people from the North to London.
It's being done London-first because that is where the biggest capacity issue on the WCML is, and will be. Simple.
And improvements to other parts of the network are independent to HS2: there's lots of upgrade work going on in the north atm. It should not be assumed that any money saved by HS2 being scrapped will go into other rail projects. It won't.
Scrap HS2 and spend £56bn on fire-resistant housing, is what I'd do. Improving links between London and oop North doesn't revitalise oop North, it just speeds up the brain drain into the capital.
£56bn ???
You're not up to date:
' Campaigners opposed to the HS2 high speed rail network have seized on claims the project will cost double the official estimate.
The claims HS2 will cost £111 billion, twice as much as the official £55.7 billion figure being used by Government and HS2 Ltd, were made in the Sunday Times newspaper.
The claims relate to an estimate prepared by Michael Byng which was commissioned by the Department for Transport. '
One of the most bizarre features of the Right at the moment is their utter obsession with HS2. Really, really odd.
I remember going to a Leave event where I was asked by two people (and they were entirely independent conversations) about HS2 within minutes.
They spat out their drinks when I said I didn't oppose it. In fact, I was strongly in favour. The entirely fact-free invective that followed, to a response they clearly weren't expecting, was both ugly and off-putting.
Many seem to view your views on HS2 as a test of how "sound" you are on the EU, and everything else.
It's bonkers.
I don't really follow that. Are you saying that pro Leave correlates with anti HS2?
How much support do you think T May would have from the public if she said that HS2 is a good idea but priorities is priorities, vanity projects is vanity projects, and a good stock of flame retardant dwelling places trumps shaving 17 minutes off the Leeds to London travel time?
Scrap HS2 and spend £56bn on fire-resistant housing, is what I'd do. Improving links between London and oop North doesn't revitalise oop North, it just speeds up the brain drain into the capital.
£56bn ???
You're not up to date:
' Campaigners opposed to the HS2 high speed rail network have seized on claims the project will cost double the official estimate.
The claims HS2 will cost £111 billion, twice as much as the official £55.7 billion figure being used by Government and HS2 Ltd, were made in the Sunday Times newspaper.
The claims relate to an estimate prepared by Michael Byng which was commissioned by the Department for Transport. '
One of the most bizarre features of the Right at the moment is their utter obsession with HS2. Really, really odd.
I remember going to a Leave event where I was asked by two people (and they were entirely independent conversations) about HS2 within minutes.
They spat out their drinks when I said I didn't oppose it. In fact, I was strongly in favour. The entirely fact-free invective that followed, to a response they clearly weren't expecting, was both ugly and off-putting.
Many seem to view your views on HS2 as a test of how "sound" you are on the EU, and everything else.
It's bonkers.
It's not a Leave/Remain thing.
As someone who is a frequent train user, you come up to Manchester and try catch any train during the week between 4.30pm and 7pm and explain to people who have been using trains for years and probably have only ever managed to get a seat on fewer than a dozen occasions in that time that spending billions on HS2 is a good idea.
I travel from Manchester to London on a regular basis, it takes around 2 hours or so now to do that journey, can anyone explain why shaving off 20 mins of that journey with HS2 is a good idea.
Spend the HS2 money on improving inter-city train travel.
It's the reason I have a Sheffield to Manchester first class season ticket, is the only way to increase one's chances of a getting a seat.
Those criticising the Tory negotiations have a good point but it could be far worse. If Labour had won the GE we'd have Abbott and McDonnell going in to bat for us.
This is the level of politicians we have and yet so many on here put so much faith in them, its ridiculous. We have 650 MPs, I'd wager that less than 10% have achieved anything worthwhile outside of politics.
Keir Starmer would be leading the negotiations - hamstrung at every turn by Corbyn and McDonnell.
On topic, one of the reasons for these polling figures is that the Brexit that was promised is becoming difficult (if not impossible) to deliver.
Forget the £350m per week to the NHS, it is the promises that Brexit would be easy and painless, that the EU would be desperate to do a deal with us, we could do trade deals really easily, that crashing out on to WTO terms was project fear.
But one things for sure is that what Cameron and Osborne told us would happen, didn't happen:
' Today, we are setting out our assessment of what would happen in the weeks and months after a vote to Leave on June 23.
It is clear that there would be an immediate and profound shock to our economy.
The analysis produced by the Treasury today shows that a vote to leave will push our economy into a recession that would knock 3.6 per cent off GDP and, over two years, put hundreds of thousands of people out of work right across the country, compared to the forecast for continued growth if we vote to remain in the EU.
In a more severe shock scenario, Treasury economists estimate that our economy could be hit by 6 per cent, there would be a deeper recession and unemployment would rise by even more. '
Those criticising the Tory negotiations have a good point but it could be far worse. If Labour had won the GE we'd have Abbott and McDonnell going in to bat for us.
This is the level of politicians we have and yet so many on here put so much faith in them, its ridiculous. We have 650 MPs, I'd wager that less than 10% have achieved anything worthwhile outside of politics.
Yes but they were the ones who stood up and decided to go into politics. It's not a closed shop. You could do it. @Tissue_Price did it.
Those criticising the Tory negotiations have a good point but it could be far worse. If Labour had won the GE we'd have Abbott and McDonnell going in to bat for us.
This is the level of politicians we have and yet so many on here put so much faith in them, its ridiculous. We have 650 MPs, I'd wager that less than 10% have achieved anything worthwhile outside of politics.
Yes but they were the ones who stood up and decided to go into politics. It's not a closed shop. You could do it. @Tissue_Price did it.
Who exactly is going to call this second referendum ?
A govt of national unity led by Hammond, Soubry, Chukka and Nikkla ? That would be quite a lot of "events"..
If the Brexit deal is defeated in Parliament, what else is the government going to do? Call a General Election?!
Leave without a deal and without paying the bill.
Would be a lot of noise but given we are an ingenious people we would soon adapt.
If we leave without a deal, the economy would take a hit the like of which it will take years to recover from.
Would be smaller than the post 2008 "Gordon Brown legacy" apocalypse - and we are all still here aren't we ? Shape shifting lizards haven't taken over.
No, it would be of a completely different order of magnitude. Not only would a cliff-edge Brexit lead to freezes in business and inward investment and increased borrowing costs, but it would also physically prevent the free flow of goods and services. A cliff-edge does not just mean tariffs, it also means the UK's exclusion from literally hundreds of international agreements that have an impact on just about every import and export activity you can imagine.
On topic, one of the reasons for these polling figures is that the Brexit that was promised is becoming difficult (if not impossible) to deliver.
Forget the £350m per week to the NHS, it is the promises that Brexit would be easy and painless, that the EU would be desperate to do a deal with us, we could do trade deals really easily, that crashing out on to WTO terms was project fear.
But one things for sure is that what Cameron and Osborne told us would happen, didn't happen:
' Today, we are setting out our assessment of what would happen in the weeks and months after a vote to Leave on June 23.
It is clear that there would be an immediate and profound shock to our economy.
The analysis produced by the Treasury today shows that a vote to leave will push our economy into a recession that would knock 3.6 per cent off GDP and, over two years, put hundreds of thousands of people out of work right across the country, compared to the forecast for continued growth if we vote to remain in the EU.
In a more severe shock scenario, Treasury economists estimate that our economy could be hit by 6 per cent, there would be a deeper recession and unemployment would rise by even more. '
Those criticising the Tory negotiations have a good point but it could be far worse. If Labour had won the GE we'd have Abbott and McDonnell going in to bat for us.
This is the level of politicians we have and yet so many on here put so much faith in them, its ridiculous. We have 650 MPs, I'd wager that less than 10% have achieved anything worthwhile outside of politics.
Keir Starmer would be leading the negotiations . . .
On topic, one of the reasons for these polling figures is that the Brexit that was promised is becoming difficult (if not impossible) to deliver.
Forget the £350m per week to the NHS, it is the promises that Brexit would be easy and painless, that the EU would be desperate to do a deal with us, we could do trade deals really easily, that crashing out on to WTO terms was project fear.
But one things for sure is that what Cameron and Osborne told us would happen, didn't happen:
' Today, we are setting out our assessment of what would happen in the weeks and months after a vote to Leave on June 23.
It is clear that there would be an immediate and profound shock to our economy.
The analysis produced by the Treasury today shows that a vote to leave will push our economy into a recession that would knock 3.6 per cent off GDP and, over two years, put hundreds of thousands of people out of work right across the country, compared to the forecast for continued growth if we vote to remain in the EU.
In a more severe shock scenario, Treasury economists estimate that our economy could be hit by 6 per cent, there would be a deeper recession and unemployment would rise by even more. '
Who exactly is going to call this second referendum ?
A govt of national unity led by Hammond, Soubry, Chukka and Nikkla ? That would be quite a lot of "events"..
If the Brexit deal is defeated in Parliament, what else is the government going to do? Call a General Election?!
Not calling one would finish the Con party for 20 years. Corbyn would dance with delight at a 2nd referendum being called in such a scenario.
We would leave without a deal and without paying the bill.
Would be a lot of noise but given we are an ingenious people we would soon adapt.
..by throwing out the Conservatives at the first opportunity thereafter. Which is a problem for the people currently in charge.
There was a queue of posters on here saying 2010 was a bad election to win and they would be out of power forever.
You can't cuddle the future for "what ifs" in politics as nothing is certain - and even less so in 2017.
Cons are in government for another 5 years - will take a lot to shift that. Calling a 2nd referendum wouldn't win them any more votes - in fact it would lose them a massive swathe of sleeping Kippers.
I have voted Conservative for every election in which I could vote. This included voting Conservative throughout the UKIP surge in the last two elections. This included voting for them in every European election despite a European policy I completely disagreed with.
That would change if the Conservatives called a second referendum because they didn't get the result they wanted in the first one. We never had a second referendum after we voted to join the EU. We didn't have another referendum when the terms of the EU changed with the Single European Act, with Maastricht, with Amsterdam. The hypocrisy would be too much. It would show the Conservatives would be as bad as the rest of them, seeing democracy as something just to manipulate. They would be taking the EU line of keeping asking the public until they get a pro-EU answer.
Thankfully this is not a situation I will have to be in. We have a Conservative government that believes in democracy and listening to the people.
Those criticising the Tory negotiations have a good point but it could be far worse. If Labour had won the GE we'd have Abbott and McDonnell going in to bat for us.
This is the level of politicians we have and yet so many on here put so much faith in them, its ridiculous. We have 650 MPs, I'd wager that less than 10% have achieved anything worthwhile outside of politics.
Yes but they were the ones who stood up and decided to go into politics. It's not a closed shop. You could do it. @Tissue_Price did it.
I stood in 2015
Then that is admirable. Aren't you proving the point though? The level of politicians we have is a function of the people who put themselves up, together with the public (or associations) who vote for them.
Scrap HS2 and spend £56bn on fire-resistant housing, is what I'd do. Improving links between London and oop North doesn't revitalise oop North, it just speeds up the brain drain into the capital.
£56bn ???
You're not up to date:
' Campaigners opposed to the HS2 high speed rail network have seized on claims the project will cost double the official estimate.
The claims HS2 will cost £111 billion, twice as much as the official £55.7 billion figure being used by Government and HS2 Ltd, were made in the Sunday Times newspaper.
The claims relate to an estimate prepared by Michael Byng which was commissioned by the Department for Transport. '
One of the most bizarre features of the Right at the moment is their utter obsession with HS2. Really, really odd.
I remember going to a Leave event where I was asked by two people (and they were entirely independent conversations) about HS2 within minutes.
They spat out their drinks when I said I didn't oppose it. In fact, I was strongly in favour. The entirely fact-free invective that followed, to a response they clearly weren't expecting, was both ugly and off-putting.
Many seem to view your views on HS2 as a test of how "sound" you are on the EU, and everything else.
It's bonkers.
It's not a Leave/Remain thing.
As someone who is a frequent train user, you come up to Manchester and try catch any train during the week between 4.30pm and 7pm and explain to people who have been using trains for years and probably have only ever managed to get a seat on fewer than a dozen occasions in that time that spending billions on HS2 is a good idea.
I travel from Manchester to London on a regular basis, it takes around 2 hours or so now to do that journey, can anyone explain why shaving off 20 mins of that journey with HS2 is a good idea.
Spend the HS2 money on improving inter-city train travel.
It's the reason I have a Sheffield to Manchester first class season ticket, is the only way to increase one's chances of a getting a seat.
The principal point of HS2 is to relieve capacity on those lines; the high-speed bit is simply that if we have to build a new line it may as well be a modern one.
The reason for Tory obsession is unlikely to have much to do with actual rail policy, anyway. It's car-driving shire Tories who are the most opposed, and, as with overseas aid, the debate focuses upon the money. Perhaps the Brexiters are casting round for a prospective new political obsession?
On topic, one of the reasons for these polling figures is that the Brexit that was promised is becoming difficult (if not impossible) to deliver.
Forget the £350m per week to the NHS, it is the promises that Brexit would be easy and painless, that the EU would be desperate to do a deal with us, we could do trade deals really easily, that crashing out on to WTO terms was project fear.
But one things for sure is that what Cameron and Osborne told us would happen, didn't happen:
' Today, we are setting out our assessment of what would happen in the weeks and months after a vote to Leave on June 23.
It is clear that there would be an immediate and profound shock to our economy.
The analysis produced by the Treasury today shows that a vote to leave will push our economy into a recession that would knock 3.6 per cent off GDP and, over two years, put hundreds of thousands of people out of work right across the country, compared to the forecast for continued growth if we vote to remain in the EU.
In a more severe shock scenario, Treasury economists estimate that our economy could be hit by 6 per cent, there would be a deeper recession and unemployment would rise by even more. '
Last week I met someone on the Leave side who told me his fear that it will turn out that Project Fear low-balled it.
Interesting article in Newstatesman by Robert Tombs, saying that some economics bods at Cambridge have rerun the Treasury brexit model again using actual trade figures in recent years and not the trade figures the Treasury used to game the numbers. Nowhere near as bad an outcome.
I have no idea who is right, just a general feeling that chaos awaits.
On topic, one of the reasons for these polling figures is that the Brexit that was promised is becoming difficult (if not impossible) to deliver.
Forget the £350m per week to the NHS, it is the promises that Brexit would be easy and painless, that the EU would be desperate to do a deal with us, we could do trade deals really easily, that crashing out on to WTO terms was project fear.
But one things for sure is that what Cameron and Osborne told us would happen, didn't happen:
' Today, we are setting out our assessment of what would happen in the weeks and months after a vote to Leave on June 23.
It is clear that there would be an immediate and profound shock to our economy.
The analysis produced by the Treasury today shows that a vote to leave will push our economy into a recession that would knock 3.6 per cent off GDP and, over two years, put hundreds of thousands of people out of work right across the country, compared to the forecast for continued growth if we vote to remain in the EU.
In a more severe shock scenario, Treasury economists estimate that our economy could be hit by 6 per cent, there would be a deeper recession and unemployment would rise by even more. '
Those criticising the Tory negotiations have a good point but it could be far worse. If Labour had won the GE we'd have Abbott and McDonnell going in to bat for us.
This is the level of politicians we have and yet so many on here put so much faith in them, its ridiculous. We have 650 MPs, I'd wager that less than 10% have achieved anything worthwhile outside of politics.
Keir Starmer would be leading the negotiations . . .
I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
He could not do a worse job than the one currently being done and may have actually done a bit of preparatory work in advance, which would certainly have been an improvement on the current incumbent.
Those criticising the Tory negotiations have a good point but it could be far worse. If Labour had won the GE we'd have Abbott and McDonnell going in to bat for us.
This is the level of politicians we have and yet so many on here put so much faith in them, its ridiculous. We have 650 MPs, I'd wager that less than 10% have achieved anything worthwhile outside of politics.
Yes but they were the ones who stood up and decided to go into politics. It's not a closed shop. You could do it. @Tissue_Price did it.
I stood in 2015
Then that is admirable. Aren't you proving the point though? The level of politicians we have is a function of the people who put themselves up, together with the public (or associations) who vote for them.
In effect local parties decide who will be MPs, most seats don't change hands, get selected and you've got a job for life - most of them cruise through it.
fwiw under PR I would now be an MP, irrelevant as that is.
Scrap HS2 and spend £56bn on fire-resistant housing, is what I'd do. Improving links between London and oop North doesn't revitalise oop North, it just speeds up the brain drain into the capital.
£56bn ???
You're not up to date:
' Campaigners opposed to the HS2 high speed rail network have seized on claims the project will cost double the official estimate.
The claims HS2 will cost £111 billion, twice as much as the official £55.7 billion figure being used by Government and HS2 Ltd, were made in the Sunday Times newspaper.
The claims relate to an estimate prepared by Michael Byng which was commissioned by the Department for Transport. '
One of the most bizarre features of the Right at the moment is their utter obsession with HS2. Really, really odd.
I remember going to a Leave event where I was asked by two people (and they were entirely independent conversations) about HS2 within minutes.
They spat out their drinks when I said I didn't oppose it. In fact, I was strongly in favour. The entirely fact-free invective that followed, to a response they clearly weren't expecting, was both ugly and off-putting.
Many seem to view your views on HS2 as a test of how "sound" you are on the EU, and everything else.
It's bonkers.
It's not a Leave/Remain thing.
As someone who is a frequent train user, you come up to Manchester and try catch any train during the week between 4.30pm and 7pm and explain to people who have been using trains for years and probably have only ever managed to get a seat on fewer than a dozen occasions in that time that spending billions on HS2 is a good idea.
I travel from Manchester to London on a regular basis, it takes around 2 hours or so now to do that journey, can anyone explain why shaving off 20 mins of that journey with HS2 is a good idea.
Spend the HS2 money on improving inter-city train travel.
It's the reason I have a Sheffield to Manchester first class season ticket, is the only way to increase one's chances of a getting a seat.
The principal point of HS2 is to relieve capacity on those lines; the high-speed bit is simply that if we have to build a new line it may as well be a modern one.
The reason for Tory obsession is unlikely to have much to do with actual rail policy, anyway. It's car-driving shire Tories who are the most opposed, and, as with overseas aid, the debate focuses upon the money. Perhaps the Brexiters are casting round for a prospective new political obsession?
Primary school factionalism at its finest; don't argue the merits of a claim, just attribute it to The Other. Job done.
On topic, one of the reasons for these polling figures is that the Brexit that was promised is becoming difficult (if not impossible) to deliver.
Forget the £350m per week to the NHS, it is the promises that Brexit would be easy and painless, that the EU would be desperate to do a deal with us, we could do trade deals really easily, that crashing out on to WTO terms was project fear.
But one things for sure is that what Cameron and Osborne told us would happen, didn't happen:
' Today, we are setting out our assessment of what would happen in the weeks and months after a vote to Leave on June 23.
It is clear that there would be an immediate and profound shock to our economy.
The analysis produced by the Treasury today shows that a vote to leave will push our economy into a recession that would knock 3.6 per cent off GDP and, over two years, put hundreds of thousands of people out of work right across the country, compared to the forecast for continued growth if we vote to remain in the EU.
In a more severe shock scenario, Treasury economists estimate that our economy could be hit by 6 per cent, there would be a deeper recession and unemployment would rise by even more. '
It's perfectly clear that the immensely privileged establishment Tories who led both the Leave and Remain campaigns spent months telling lies to the British electorate.
Who exactly is going to call this second referendum ?
A govt of national unity led by Hammond, Soubry, Chukka and Nikkla ? That would be quite a lot of "events"..
If the Brexit deal is defeated in Parliament, what else is the government going to do? Call a General Election?!
Leave without a deal and without paying the bill.
Would be a lot of noise but given we are an ingenious people we would soon adapt.
If we leave without a deal, the economy would take a hit the like of which it will take years to recover from.
Would be smaller than the post 2008 "Gordon Brown legacy" apocalypse - and we are all still here aren't we ? Shape shifting lizards haven't taken over.
No, it would be of a completely different order of magnitude. Not only would a cliff-edge Brexit lead to freezes in business and inward investment and increased borrowing costs, but it would also physically prevent the free flow of goods and services. A cliff-edge does not just mean tariffs, it also means the UK's exclusion from literally hundreds of international agreements that have an impact on just about every import and export activity you can imagine.
Depends if you believe that the EU countries will put the project before their own narrow interests. There is a first time for everything I suppose.
On topic, one of the reasons for these polling figures is that the Brexit that was promised is becoming difficult (if not impossible) to deliver.
Forget the £350m per week to the NHS, it is the promises that Brexit would be easy and painless, that the EU would be desperate to do a deal with us, we could do trade deals really easily, that crashing out on to WTO terms was project fear.
But one things for sure is that what Cameron and Osborne told us would happen, didn't happen:
' Today, we are setting out our assessment of what would happen in the weeks and months after a vote to Leave on June 23.
It is clear that there would be an immediate and profound shock to our economy.
The analysis produced by the Treasury today shows that a vote to leave will push our economy into a recession that would knock 3.6 per cent off GDP and, over two years, put hundreds of thousands of people out of work right across the country, compared to the forecast for continued growth if we vote to remain in the EU.
In a more severe shock scenario, Treasury economists estimate that our economy could be hit by 6 per cent, there would be a deeper recession and unemployment would rise by even more. '
Last week I met someone on the Leave side who told me his fear that it will turn out that Project Fear low-balled it.
We will have to see and at some point the UK economy will have to be rebalanced into something sustainable while will likely involve a deep recession and hardship for many millions.
But what I find interesting is how little affected the economy has been so far, that does give me some hope that things can be changed with minimal disruption.
On topic, one of the reasons for these polling figures is that the Brexit that was promised is becoming difficult (if not impossible) to deliver.
Forget the £350m per week to the NHS, it is the promises that Brexit would be easy and painless, that the EU would be desperate to do a deal with us, we could do trade deals really easily, that crashing out on to WTO terms was project fear.
But one things for sure is that what Cameron and Osborne told us would happen, didn't happen:
' Today, we are setting out our assessment of what would happen in the weeks and months after a vote to Leave on June 23.
It is clear that there would be an immediate and profound shock to our economy.
The analysis produced by the Treasury today shows that a vote to leave will push our economy into a recession that would knock 3.6 per cent off GDP and, over two years, put hundreds of thousands of people out of work right across the country, compared to the forecast for continued growth if we vote to remain in the EU.
In a more severe shock scenario, Treasury economists estimate that our economy could be hit by 6 per cent, there would be a deeper recession and unemployment would rise by even more. '
It's perfectly clear that the immensely privileged establishment Tories who led both the Leave and Remain campaigns spent months telling lies to the British electorate.
You really need a break mate, you're sounding like a student at a Corbyn rally
Tezza presented her plan for "getting on with it" and the majority of the electorate said "No"
As I said earlier this is a consequence of calling a referendum in a parliamentary democracy when it is clear the majority of MPs don't agree with the result.
Those criticising the Tory negotiations have a good point but it could be far worse. If Labour had won the GE we'd have Abbott and McDonnell going in to bat for us.
This is the level of politicians we have and yet so many on here put so much faith in them, its ridiculous. We have 650 MPs, I'd wager that less than 10% have achieved anything worthwhile outside of politics.
Yes but they were the ones who stood up and decided to go into politics. It's not a closed shop. You could do it. @Tissue_Price did it.
I stood in 2015
Then that is admirable. Aren't you proving the point though? The level of politicians we have is a function of the people who put themselves up, together with the public (or associations) who vote for them.
In effect local parties decide who will be MPs, most seats don't change hands, get selected and you've got a job for life - most of them cruise through it.
fwiw under PR I would now be an MP, irrelevant as that is.
Yes, local parties; I did say associations. You've got to win over those as you are very well aware. And love them or hate them, the associations consist of the people who, analagously to candidates, have bothered to get involved and turn up and make those decisions.
I take your point about jobs for life, but that doesn't mean that you don't have to fight to get one of them or that there aren't many incongruities along the way.
Sorry that you didn't get in; I'm sure you would have done a great job. I hope you try again.
I love this. Having a female is important in negotiations? and quoting celebrity philosophers on twitter? Talk about clutching at straws when things aren't going your way.
Presumably you're far more qualified than Mr Robbins and Mr Case!
Scrap HS2 and spend £56bn on fire-resistant housing, is what I'd do. Improving links between London and oop North doesn't revitalise oop North, it just speeds up the brain drain into the capital.
£56bn ???
You're not up to date:
' Campaigners opposed to the HS2 high speed rail network have seized on claims the project will cost double the official estimate.
The claims HS2 will cost £111 billion, twice as much as the official £55.7 billion figure being used by Government and HS2 Ltd, were made in the Sunday Times newspaper.
The claims relate to an estimate prepared by Michael Byng which was commissioned by the Department for Transport. '
One of the most bizarre features of the Right at the moment is their utter obsession with HS2. Really, really odd.
I remember going to a Leave event where I was asked by two people (and they were entirely independent conversations) about HS2 within minutes.
They spat out their drinks when I said I didn't oppose it. In fact, I was strongly in favour. The entirely fact-free invective that followed, to a response they clearly weren't expecting, was both ugly and off-putting.
Many seem to view your views on HS2 as a test of how "sound" you are on the EU, and everything else.
It's bonkers.
Aren't you some kind of transport consultant? It's clearly interfering with your patriotism
I think HS2 is a misallocation of resources compared with other railway projects which would benefit just as many people, but if that's the only infrastructure investment on offer I'll take it.
This is the level of politicians we have and yet so many on here put so much faith in them, its ridiculous. We have 650 MPs, I'd wager that less than 10% have achieved anything worthwhile outside of politics.
You'd probably lose your wager. If you have a look at the Wikipedia links on TheyWorkForYou you'll probably be pleasantly surprised. Many have been fairly successful at other careers. But that doesn't guarantee being any good at politics, which is actually a difficult, multifaceted job. Most people are quite good at one aspect - May is a competent administrator, Boris is good at putting up a cheerful front, Corbyn is good at campaigning, and so on. But not many are good at everything.
On topic, one of the reasons for these polling figures is that the Brexit that was promised is becoming difficult (if not impossible) to deliver.
Forget the £350m per week to the NHS, it is the promises that Brexit would be easy and painless, that the EU would be desperate to do a deal with us, we could do trade deals really easily, that crashing out on to WTO terms was project fear.
But one things for sure is that what Cameron and Osborne told us would happen, didn't happen:
' Today, we are setting out our assessment of what would happen in the weeks and months after a vote to Leave on June 23.
It is clear that there would be an immediate and profound shock to our economy.
The analysis produced by the Treasury today shows that a vote to leave will push our economy into a recession that would knock 3.6 per cent off GDP and, over two years, put hundreds of thousands of people out of work right across the country, compared to the forecast for continued growth if we vote to remain in the EU.
In a more severe shock scenario, Treasury economists estimate that our economy could be hit by 6 per cent, there would be a deeper recession and unemployment would rise by even more. '
It's perfectly clear that the immensely privileged establishment Tories who led both the Leave and Remain campaigns spent months telling lies to the British electorate.
You really need a break mate, you're sounding like a student at a Corbyn rally
SO and the wet Cons on here have Stockholm syndrome - or "battered wife". Or both.
"The EU - he's not a bad lad, he only slaps us around because he cares and he wants me to stay..."
On topic, one of the reasons for these polling figures is that the Brexit that was promised is becoming difficult (if not impossible) to deliver.
Forget the £350m per week to the NHS, it is the promises that Brexit would be easy and painless, that the EU would be desperate to do a deal with us, we could do trade deals really easily, that crashing out on to WTO terms was project fear.
But one things for sure is that what Cameron and Osborne told us would happen, didn't happen:
' Today, we are setting out our assessment of what would happen in the weeks and months after a vote to Leave on June 23.
It is clear that there would be an immediate and profound shock to our economy.
The analysis produced by the Treasury today shows that a vote to leave will push our economy into a recession that would knock 3.6 per cent off GDP and, over two years, put hundreds of thousands of people out of work right across the country, compared to the forecast for continued growth if we vote to remain in the EU.
In a more severe shock scenario, Treasury economists estimate that our economy could be hit by 6 per cent, there would be a deeper recession and unemployment would rise by even more. '
We are leaving, there is no going back on that. The focus now should be on securing a Brexit deal which safeguards the economy and living standards. That means reining in the fundamentalist incompetents who are currently in charge of the process.
It's a bit hard to to characterise the government as fundamentalist eurosceptics when the Prime Minister supported Remain in the referendum.
There are two questions in choosing what sort of Brexit we have. The first is whether we should stay in the customs union. This is a choice between prioritising goods with EU markets on the one hand or services with emerging economies on the other. Given the world economy is moving to both services and emerging economies, leaving the customs union is clearly the sensible option.
The second is whether we should stay in the single market. The problem with this is that the hardliners on the EU side have demanded a faith-based adhesion to the "fundamentals" of the single market, making clear who are the fundamentalists in this debate. So it is a matter of whether we have slightly restrict trade access or continue the situation where we have to let in anyone with an EU passport, regardless of skills, criminal record or economic contribution. This essentially comes down to choosing between the professional classes or the working classes. Personally, I think the latter have had a hard time of it the last decade or two and it's about time they had a voice in UK politics again.
We can grow our exports to emerging markets without leaving the customs union.
We do not have to let anyone with an EU passport stay more than three months if they cannot support themselves.
Theresa May has the support of the majority of the Conservative party if she chooses to sack ministers and enforce discipline on her feuding cabinet, after a weekend of leadership manoeuvres and poisonous leaks.
A message has been sent to the prime minister by the executive of the 1922 committee, which represents the parliamentary party, saying she has its support to stay on and deliver Brexit in March 2019.
“The PM has the strong support of Tory MPs — she can enforce cabinet discipline however she thinks is appropriate,” said one senior Conservative. “We will be cheering her on.”
Mrs May has shown little sign of gaining control in the wake of the June election, and in the past 48 hours Philip Hammond, the chancellor, has become the target of two hostile briefings to the media over comments he allegedly made in cabinet that public sector workers are “overpaid” and that “even” women could drive modern trains.
The almost verbatim leaking of cabinet discussions with the intention of wounding the chancellor is rare in British politics and highly corrosive, but the Sunday Times claimed no fewer than five ministers had contributed to its account.
On topic, one of the reasons for these polling figures is that the Brexit that was promised is becoming difficult (if not impossible) to deliver.
Forget the £350m per week to the NHS, it is the promises that Brexit would be easy and painless, that the EU would be desperate to do a deal with us, we could do trade deals really easily, that crashing out on to WTO terms was project fear.
But one things for sure is that what Cameron and Osborne told us would happen, didn't happen:
' Today, we are setting out our assessment of what would happen in the weeks and months after a vote to Leave on June 23.
It is clear that there would be an immediate and profound shock to our economy.
The analysis produced by the Treasury today shows that a vote to leave will push our economy into a recession that would knock 3.6 per cent off GDP and, over two years, put hundreds of thousands of people out of work right across the country, compared to the forecast for continued growth if we vote to remain in the EU.
In a more severe shock scenario, Treasury economists estimate that our economy could be hit by 6 per cent, there would be a deeper recession and unemployment would rise by even more. '
Last week I met someone on the Leave side who told me his fear that it will turn out that Project Fear low-balled it.
We will have to see and at some point the UK economy will have to be rebalanced into something sustainable while will likely involve a deep recession and hardship for many millions.
But what I find interesting is how little affected the economy has been so far, that does give me some hope that things can be changed with minimal disruption.
To quote someone famous, I forget who, "But, nothing has changed".
We haven't left yet, nor is there any sign of the shape of the deal.
Those criticising the Tory negotiations have a good point but it could be far worse. If Labour had won the GE we'd have Abbott and McDonnell going in to bat for us.
This is the level of politicians we have and yet so many on here put so much faith in them, its ridiculous. We have 650 MPs, I'd wager that less than 10% have achieved anything worthwhile outside of politics.
Keir Starmer would be leading the negotiations . . .
I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
I wanted Mr Starmer involved but despite his qualifications he seems to mess up almost everytime he's in the spotlight. Problem is I don't think Labour have anyone better.
I love this. Having a female is important in negotiations? and quoting celebrity philosophers on twitter? Talk about clutching at straws when things aren't going your way.
Presumably you're far more qualified than Mr Robbins and Mr Case!
It would be nice to have someone leading the negotiations - man or woman - who read briefing and position papers. If Davis had done some reading previously, he might have realised that the UK was never going to have a string of trade deals lined up on the day we leave the European Union, for example.
“We concluded that the gravity model approach lacks the degree of precision needed to make a definitive estimate of the impact of EU membership on trade. In particular, estimates need to focus on the UK itself if they are to have relevance to the Brexit negotiations. A smaller economic impact is in line with our view that the small average external tariff of the EU, together with the fact that most UK firms are already compliant with EU regulations, will mean that the impact will be more limited than the Treasury estimated.”
Indeed. A bit more attention to Patrick Minford's views before the 2016 vote would have paid off.
Those criticising the Tory negotiations have a good point but it could be far worse. If Labour had won the GE we'd have Abbott and McDonnell going in to bat for us.
This is the level of politicians we have and yet so many on here put so much faith in them, its ridiculous. We have 650 MPs, I'd wager that less than 10% have achieved anything worthwhile outside of politics.
Yes but they were the ones who stood up and decided to go into politics. It's not a closed shop. You could do it. @Tissue_Price did it.
I stood in 2015
Then that is admirable. Aren't you proving the point though? The level of politicians we have is a function of the people who put themselves up, together with the public (or associations) who vote for them.
In effect local parties decide who will be MPs, most seats don't change hands, get selected and you've got a job for life - most of them cruise through it.
fwiw under PR I would now be an MP, irrelevant as that is.
Yes, local parties; I did say associations. You've got to win over those as you are very well aware. And love them or hate them, the associations consist of the people who, analagously to candidates, have bothered to get involved and turn up and make those decisions.
I take your point about jobs for life, but that doesn't mean that you don't have to fight to get one of them or that there aren't many incongruities along the way.
Sorry that you didn't get in; I'm sure you would have done a great job. I hope you try again.
That's very nice of you but its highly unlikely for several reasons.
Scrap HS2 and spend £56bn on fire-resistant housing, is what I'd do. Improving links between London and oop North doesn't revitalise oop North, it just speeds up the brain drain into the capital.
£56bn ???
You're not up to date:
' Campaigners opposed to the HS2 high speed rail network have seized on claims the project will cost double the official estimate.
The claims HS2 will cost £111 billion, twice as much as the official £55.7 billion figure being used by Government and HS2 Ltd, were made in the Sunday Times newspaper.
The claims relate to an estimate prepared by Michael Byng which was commissioned by the Department for Transport. '
One of the most bizarre features of the Right at the moment is their utter obsession with HS2. Really, really odd.
I remember going to a Leave event where I was asked by two people (and they were entirely independent conversations) about HS2 within minutes.
They spat out their drinks when I said I didn't oppose it. In fact, I was strongly in favour. The entirely fact-free invective that followed, to a response they clearly weren't expecting, was both ugly and off-putting.
Many seem to view your views on HS2 as a test of how "sound" you are on the EU, and everything else.
It's bonkers.
It's not a Leave/Remain thing.
As someone who is a frequent train user, you come up to Manchester and try catch any train during the week between 4.30pm and 7pm and explain to people who have been using trains for years and probably have only ever managed to get a seat on fewer than a dozen occasions in that time that spending billions on HS2 is a good idea.
I travel from Manchester to London on a regular basis, it takes around 2 hours or so now to do that journey, can anyone explain why shaving off 20 mins of that journey with HS2 is a good idea.
Spend the HS2 money on improving inter-city train travel.
It's the reason I have a Sheffield to Manchester first class season ticket, is the only way to increase one's chances of a getting a seat.
Isn't the quickest road from where you live to Manchester the Winnats Pass - a road that involves driving over a cattle grid ?
Better communications within the North would be a far cheaper and quicker encouragement to investment.
Finally putting in the link-road from the M18 to Doncaster airport has freed up huge amounts of land for business and housing development.
Building new roads in South Yorkshire has certainly been something which has improved from 2010 onwards.
On topic, one of the reasons for these polling figures is that the Brexit that was promised is becoming difficult (if not impossible) to deliver.
Forget the £350m per week to the NHS, it is the promises that Brexit would be easy and painless, that the EU would be desperate to do a deal with us, we could do trade deals really easily, that crashing out on to WTO terms was project fear.
But one things for sure is that what Cameron and Osborne told us would happen, didn't happen:
' Today, we are setting out our assessment of what would happen in the weeks and months after a vote to Leave on June 23.
It is clear that there would be an immediate and profound shock to our economy.
The analysis produced by the Treasury today shows that a vote to leave will push our economy into a recession that would knock 3.6 per cent off GDP and, over two years, put hundreds of thousands of people out of work right across the country, compared to the forecast for continued growth if we vote to remain in the EU.
In a more severe shock scenario, Treasury economists estimate that our economy could be hit by 6 per cent, there would be a deeper recession and unemployment would rise by even more. '
It's perfectly clear that the immensely privileged establishment Tories who led both the Leave and Remain campaigns spent months telling lies to the British electorate.
You really need a break mate, you're sounding like a student at a Corbyn rally
Who exactly is going to call this second referendum ?
A govt of national unity led by Hammond, Soubry, Chukka and Nikkla ? That would be quite a lot of "events"..
If the Brexit deal is defeated in Parliament, what else is the government going to do? Call a General Election?!
Leave without a deal and without paying the bill.
Would be a lot of noise but given we are an ingenious people we would soon adapt.
If we leave without a deal, the economy would take a hit the like of which it will take years to recover from.
Would be smaller than the post 2008 "Gordon Brown legacy" apocalypse - and we are all still here aren't we ? Shape shifting lizards haven't taken over.
No, it would be of a completely different order of magnitude. Not only would a cliff-edge Brexit lead to freezes in business and inward investment and increased borrowing costs, but it would also physically prevent the free flow of goods and services. A cliff-edge does not just mean tariffs, it also means the UK's exclusion from literally hundreds of international agreements that have an impact on just about every import and export activity you can imagine.
Depends if you believe that the EU countries will put the project before their own narrow interests. There is a first time for everything I suppose.
If we walk out without a deal, that will be our decision not the EU27's.
Theresa May has the support of the majority of the Conservative party if she chooses to sack ministers and enforce discipline on her feuding cabinet, after a weekend of leadership manoeuvres and poisonous leaks.
A message has been sent to the prime minister by the executive of the 1922 committee, which represents the parliamentary party, saying she has its support to stay on and deliver Brexit in March 2019.
“The PM has the strong support of Tory MPs — she can enforce cabinet discipline however she thinks is appropriate,” said one senior Conservative. “We will be cheering her on.”
Mrs May has shown little sign of gaining control in the wake of the June election, and in the past 48 hours Philip Hammond, the chancellor, has become the target of two hostile briefings to the media over comments he allegedly made in cabinet that public sector workers are “overpaid” and that “even” women could drive modern trains.
The almost verbatim leaking of cabinet discussions with the intention of wounding the chancellor is rare in British politics and highly corrosive, but the Sunday Times claimed no fewer than five ministers had contributed to its account.
Tezza presented her plan for "getting on with it" and the majority of the electorate said "No"
Rubbish. All the polls show people were and are in favour of getting on with Brexit even those who supported Remain.
Of course dishonest Remaniacs like yourself try to portray the election as being a vote against Brexit when it is nothing of the sort.
In the days when all the main parties had manifestos committed to the EU, I don't remember any Brexiteers proclaiming each GE as an affirmation of our membership.
When, from time to time, a major party veered towards hostility to Europe, like Foot in 83 or Hague in 01, they were invariably sent packing by the electorate.
Scrap HS2 and spend £56bn on fire-resistant housing, is what I'd do. Improving links between London and oop North doesn't revitalise oop North, it just speeds up the brain drain into the capital.
£56bn ???
You're not up to date:
' Campaigners opposed to the HS2 high speed rail network have seized on claims the project will cost double the official estimate.
The claims HS2 will cost £111 billion, twice as much as the official £55.7 billion figure being used by Government and HS2 Ltd, were made in the Sunday Times newspaper.
The claims relate to an estimate prepared by Michael Byng which was commissioned by the Department for Transport. '
Why 111 billion? Who not 200 billion? Or 500? In fact, why not a trillion? What's the next figure the anti's produce out of their backsides?
The anti-HS2 brigade get ever more hysterical. There's a capacity problem. Yes, I know some people try to deny that, but it's there, and every year's passenger growth cements that problem. a 2% growth in journeys from 2014/5 to 2015/6. A 129% increase since privatisation. (*)
HS2 is a reasonable solution to that problem, especially given the experience of the disastrous WCML upgrade ten years ago.
I don't understand it. Particularly when erstwhile intelligent people make this fallacious argument that HS2 will somehow "suck" resources into London. It's like saying that new airports in the North will suck business overseas, or a new motorway to Newcastle-upon-Tyne would suck aspiring workers down South.
The argument is not fallacious at all. It is based on studies done of high speed rail links around Europe, particularly France, which show that high speed rail links did not result in growth in the regions but caused more business to move from the regions to Paris. Just because the studies do not agree with what you would like to happen does not mean they are not accurate.
I love this. Having a female is important in negotiations? and quoting celebrity philosophers on twitter? Talk about clutching at straws when things aren't going your way.
Presumably you're far more qualified than Mr Robbins and Mr Case!
It would be nice to have someone leading the negotiations - man or woman - who read briefing and position papers. If Davis had done some reading previously, he might have realised that the UK was never going to have a string of trade deals lined up on the day we leave the European Union, for example.
Tezza presented her plan for "getting on with it" and the majority of the electorate said "No"
Rubbish. All the polls show people were and are in favour of getting on with Brexit even those who supported Remain.
Of course dishonest Remaniacs like yourself try to portray the election as being a vote against Brexit when it is nothing of the sort.
In the days when all the main parties had manifestos committed to the EU, I don't remember any Brexiteers proclaiming each GE as an affirmation of our membership.
When, from time to time, a major party veered towards hostility to Europe, like Foot in 83 or Hague in 01, they were invariably sent packing by the electorate.
Another pointless interjection from William which adds nothing to the discussion.
I love this. Having a female is important in negotiations? and quoting celebrity philosophers on twitter? Talk about clutching at straws when things aren't going your way.
Presumably you're far more qualified than Mr Robbins and Mr Case!
It would be nice to have someone leading the negotiations - man or woman - who read briefing and position papers. If Davis had done some reading previously, he might have realised that the UK was never going to have a string of trade deals lined up on the day we leave the European Union, for example.
Why won't we?
Because we are not able to engage in any negotiations before we leave the European Union.
It's unlikely the Conservatives will call a second referendum. They are completely passive in the face of Brexit - doing nothing to stop it and nothing to prepare for it either. They aren't interested in what a divided country thinks about it, only what their supporters think and their party is where most of the Leavers are. A second referendum would only happen if they lost power.
The clamour for a second referendum is growing but can someone suggest how and when it could be legislated, on what basis would the question/s be put and how would we unwind A50 and on what terms we would remain/rejoin the EU.
Without pragmatic and realistic answers to all these questions how does anyone think it is even remotely going to happen
When the final deal is clear in 2019, and has probably just been defeated in the 'meaningful vote' in parliament, by parliament (or indeed the government, as the only way out of the mess they will then be in), the choice would be the deal, or remain on the same terms as now
Nope. Remain on the same terms as now dies on June 23rd last year. The sooner everyone accepts this, the sooner we can all move forward.
Comments
Its interesting to see those old sci-fi programs.
They expected great progress in space exploration but with only minor IT improvements.
There are no votes in fixed capital. They are mostly owned by institutions or a few rich individuals. They are however a crucial part of a country's ability to generate wealth. Brexit could have been used to restructure the way the economy runs but I was sceptical. As such I was a soft remainer. All the mood music suggests that TM has no interest in improving the fixed asset investment in the U.K. and if anything is about to make it worse. I am now a hard remainer.
If that's your best substitution, the quarter finals of the cup is the limit.
However, the UK won't change its mind. For a start, the Labour leadership team has spent 40 years opposing the UK's membership of the EU and will not now countenance anything less than withdrawal. John McDonnell has made that absolutely clear on a number of occasions. Then, there is the split that a change of mind would cause inside the Conservative party.
WE are much better off focusing on getting a deal that does not damage the UK economy for years to come and which protects living standards.
We would leave without a deal and without paying the bill.
Would be a lot of noise but given we are an ingenious people we would soon adapt.
You're all stupid, racist liars was all we heard before the Referendum. And now they want another bite of the cherry, tough. At least Cameron had the good grace to accept it and resign.
Far too many are interested only in getting their faces on TV, quoted in the press, or issuing unsolicited advice, without actually getting off their arses and doing anything.
He saw much of his job as keeping them well away. And rightly so.
Trouble is, they went insta-hard Brexit and any row back from that will be tricky, while not all Brexiters (to take PB as an example) particularly want hard Brexit.
And if the EU demand anything like 50 billion as a settlement then the sentiment for leaving will get stronger, most people would back Boris on this one.
If there was a vote asking if we should pay 50 billion or more to leave, should we pay it yes or no, I reckon no would get 80%.
Not an option.
There are two questions in choosing what sort of Brexit we have. The first is whether we should stay in the customs union. This is a choice between prioritising goods with EU markets on the one hand or services with emerging economies on the other. Given the world economy is moving to both services and emerging economies, leaving the customs union is clearly the sensible option.
The second is whether we should stay in the single market. The problem with this is that the hardliners on the EU side have demanded a faith-based adhesion to the "fundamentals" of the single market, making clear who are the fundamentalists in this debate. So it is a matter of whether we have slightly restrict trade access or continue the situation where we have to let in anyone with an EU passport, regardless of skills, criminal record or economic contribution. This essentially comes down to choosing between the professional classes or the working classes. Personally, I think the latter have had a hard time of it the last decade or two and it's about time they had a voice in UK politics again.
The anti-HS2 brigade get ever more hysterical. There's a capacity problem. Yes, I know some people try to deny that, but it's there, and every year's passenger growth cements that problem. a 2% growth in journeys from 2014/5 to 2015/6. A 129% increase since privatisation. (*)
HS2 is a reasonable solution to that problem, especially given the experience of the disastrous WCML upgrade ten years ago.
Now Euston... Euston is HS2's Achilles heel.
(*) http://www.orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/22056/passenger-rail-usage-2015-16-q4.pdf
https://twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/886862243413061635
https://twitter.com/iankatz1000/status/886862705122050048
This is the level of politicians we have and yet so many on here put so much faith in them, its ridiculous. We have 650 MPs, I'd wager that less than 10% have achieved anything worthwhile outside of politics.
I remember going to a Leave event where I was asked by two people (and they were entirely independent conversations) about HS2 within minutes.
They spat out their drinks when I said I didn't oppose it. In fact, I was strongly in favour. The entirely fact-free invective that followed, to a response they clearly weren't expecting, was both ugly and off-putting.
Many seem to view your views on HS2 as a test of how "sound" you are on the EU, and everything else.
It's bonkers.
You can't cuddle the future for "what ifs" in politics as nothing is certain - and even less so in 2017.
Cons are in government for another 5 years - will take a lot to shift that. Calling a 2nd referendum wouldn't win them any more votes - in fact it would lose them a massive swathe of sleeping Kippers.
Speaking of getting on with the job. I'm impressed she is taking the acid attack threat so seriously. Reading about some of the victims it is heartbreaking. I'm glad the government is shrugging off the soft-on-crime brigade and planning to bring in serious sentences. We need to make sure they apply to 16 and 17 year olds too, as they are many of the perpetrators of this evil.
independent thoughts are thin on the ground.
Forget the £350m per week to the NHS, it is the promises that Brexit would be easy and painless, that the EU would be desperate to do a deal with us, we could do trade deals really easily, that crashing out on to WTO terms was project fear.
https://twitter.com/BarristerSecret/status/886832455029805058
So be under no doubt: we can do deals with our trading partners, and we can do them quickly. I would expect the new Prime Minister on September 9th to immediately trigger a large round of global trade deals with all our most favoured trade partners. I would expect that the negotiation phase of most of them to be concluded within between 12 and 24 months.
So within two years, before the negotiation with the EU is likely to be complete, and therefore before anything material has changed, we can negotiate a free trade area massively larger than the EU. Trade deals with the US and China alone will give us a trade area almost twice the size of the EU, and of course we will also be seeking deals with Hong Kong, Canada, Australia, India, Japan, the UAE, Indonesia – and many others.
http://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2016/07/david-davis-trade-deals-tax-cuts-and-taking-time-before-triggering-article-50-a-brexit-economic-strategy-for-britain.html
Turns out he did not know what he was talking about.
Seem to remember it was a referendum not a GE.
The logical end-point of those arguments is that the less infrastructure you have, the more local business and wealth you have retained in the locality. On that basis, we should be tearing up existing infrastructure, not adding to it. It's stark raving bonkers.
New physical and communications infrastructure is a win-win. It leads to additional growth at both ends, and allows greater opportunities for investment. Just look at how the M3/M4 and M1 corridors aided development of services "spokes" around London in the 1970s, and thereafter, in the Thames Valley, Surrey, North Hampshire, and Milton Keynes areas. There are several major company HQs there now. Infrastructure makes it more feasible to both live and work there.
The North is very poorly connected to London and the South-East, which is a global hub, and anything which enhances capacity, speed and "hook-in" to this is a very good thing for them, and everyone else.
And improvements to other parts of the network are independent to HS2: there's lots of upgrade work going on in the north atm. It should not be assumed that any money saved by HS2 being scrapped will go into other rail projects. It won't.
How much support do you think T May would have from the public if she said that HS2 is a good idea but priorities is priorities, vanity projects is vanity projects, and a good stock of flame retardant dwelling places trumps shaving 17 minutes off the Leeds to London travel time?
As someone who is a frequent train user, you come up to Manchester and try catch any train during the week between 4.30pm and 7pm and explain to people who have been using trains for years and probably have only ever managed to get a seat on fewer than a dozen occasions in that time that spending billions on HS2 is a good idea.
I travel from Manchester to London on a regular basis, it takes around 2 hours or so now to do that journey, can anyone explain why shaving off 20 mins of that journey with HS2 is a good idea.
Spend the HS2 money on improving inter-city train travel.
It's the reason I have a Sheffield to Manchester first class season ticket, is the only way to increase one's chances of a getting a seat.
Tezza presented her plan for "getting on with it" and the majority of the electorate said "No"
https://twitter.com/alaindebotton/status/886853927861456897
But one things for sure is that what Cameron and Osborne told us would happen, didn't happen:
' Today, we are setting out our assessment of what would happen in the weeks and months after a vote to Leave on June 23.
It is clear that there would be an immediate and profound shock to our economy.
The analysis produced by the Treasury today shows that a vote to leave will push our economy into a recession that would knock 3.6 per cent off GDP and, over two years, put hundreds of thousands of people out of work right across the country, compared to the forecast for continued growth if we vote to remain in the EU.
In a more severe shock scenario, Treasury economists estimate that our economy could be hit by 6 per cent, there would be a deeper recession and unemployment would rise by even more. '
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/22/david-cameron-and-george-osborne-brexit-would-put-our-economy-in/
That would change if the Conservatives called a second referendum because they didn't get the result they wanted in the first one. We never had a second referendum after we voted to join the EU. We didn't have another referendum when the terms of the EU changed with the Single European Act, with Maastricht, with Amsterdam. The hypocrisy would be too much. It would show the Conservatives would be as bad as the rest of them, seeing democracy as something just to manipulate. They would be taking the EU line of keeping asking the public until they get a pro-EU answer.
Thankfully this is not a situation I will have to be in. We have a Conservative government that believes in democracy and listening to the people.
The reason for Tory obsession is unlikely to have much to do with actual rail policy, anyway. It's car-driving shire Tories who are the most opposed, and, as with overseas aid, the debate focuses upon the money. Perhaps the Brexiters are casting round for a prospective new political obsession?
I have no idea who is right, just a general feeling that chaos awaits.
https://policyexchange.org.uk/publication/defying-gravity-a-critique-of-estimates-of-the-economic-impact-of-brexit/
fwiw under PR I would now be an MP, irrelevant as that is.
But what I find interesting is how little affected the economy has been so far, that does give me some hope that things can be changed with minimal disruption.
I take your point about jobs for life, but that doesn't mean that you don't have to fight to get one of them or that there aren't many incongruities along the way.
Sorry that you didn't get in; I'm sure you would have done a great job. I hope you try again.
Presumably you're far more qualified than Mr Robbins and Mr Case!
I think HS2 is a misallocation of resources compared with other railway projects which would benefit just as many people, but if that's the only infrastructure investment on offer I'll take it.
"The EU - he's not a bad lad, he only slaps us around because he cares and he wants me to stay..."
We should spend the money on the NHS
is a suggestion, not a lie. An organisation campaigning to leave the EU made it.
If I say we should privatise the NHS you may disagree, but it doesn't make me a liar
We do not have to let anyone with an EU passport stay more than three months if they cannot support themselves.
A message has been sent to the prime minister by the executive of the 1922 committee, which represents the parliamentary party, saying she has its support to stay on and deliver Brexit in March 2019.
“The PM has the strong support of Tory MPs — she can enforce cabinet discipline however she thinks is appropriate,” said one senior Conservative. “We will be cheering her on.”
Mrs May has shown little sign of gaining control in the wake of the June election, and in the past 48 hours Philip Hammond, the chancellor, has become the target of two hostile briefings to the media over comments he allegedly made in cabinet that public sector workers are “overpaid” and that “even” women could drive modern trains.
The almost verbatim leaking of cabinet discussions with the intention of wounding the chancellor is rare in British politics and highly corrosive, but the Sunday Times claimed no fewer than five ministers had contributed to its account.
https://www.ft.com/content/31e2193a-6a18-11e7-bfeb-33fe0c5b7eaa
We haven't left yet, nor is there any sign of the shape of the deal.
The EU side looking a bit more serious.
“We concluded that the gravity model approach lacks the degree of precision needed to make a definitive estimate of the impact of EU membership on trade. In particular, estimates need to focus on the UK itself if they are to have relevance to the Brexit negotiations. A smaller economic impact is in line with our view that the small average external tariff of the EU, together with the fact that most UK firms are already compliant with EU regulations, will mean that the impact will be more limited than the Treasury estimated.”
Indeed. A bit more attention to Patrick Minford's views before the 2016 vote would have paid off.
Better communications within the North would be a far cheaper and quicker encouragement to investment.
Finally putting in the link-road from the M18 to Doncaster airport has freed up huge amounts of land for business and housing development.
Building new roads in South Yorkshire has certainly been something which has improved from 2010 onwards.
Of course dishonest Remaniacs like yourself try to portray the election as being a vote against Brexit when it is nothing of the sort.
When, from time to time, a major party veered towards hostility to Europe, like Foot in 83 or Hague in 01, they were invariably sent packing by the electorate.
In Dore, I've gone from having 1 meg landline broadband and 1 bar of 2G in 2012 in Dore to having 80 meg landline broadband and 5 bars of 4G o