Worth noting from that graph that the Conservatives are now overwhelmingly a Leavers party.
Yes. Whichever way they might have individually voted they've swung behind the expressed will of the people .... and are now aligned to fight for the country and make a success of Brexit.
Putting Country first. A great thing to see.
Rather, remainers are the votes the Tories have lost, compared to the majority they might have had.
You do have to wonder about the 10% of the electorate that voted Remain and have stuck with the Conservatives. How much more Brexiting are they going to put up with?
I suspect theyre well balanced people who have a life, and Brexit isnt the only thing in it.
Brexit is the only thing in the Conservative party right now. So if they have a life, they would be well-advised to explore it elsewhere.
Brexit seems to be the only thing in your life, which is sad.
However in the wider UK - cost of living, housing, uni fees, infrastructure, are much more important to voters
And in about 3 months time we'll have the annual NHS in crisis crisis
I am intrigued by the idea that Brexit is not related to the cost of living, housing, university fees, infrastructure and the NHS. From where I sit, the kind of Brexit we get will pretty much determine how we are to deal with all of the above, as well as a whole lot more.
Yes, 5% on the price of olives - whatever will we do.
Yep - that's the only price the fall in the value of the pound has affected :-D
If you look at the ONS statement they said the Brexit vote had had absolutely no effect on this trend at all. The trend started more than 5 years ago and did not change with the Brexit vote. The main driver they say has been very large increases in the cost of sugar and cocoa related to supply issues and not exchange rates.
I would prefer a Labour Brexit to a Tory one. It would be one negotiated by Starmer and Jezza would not be so obsessed with immigration, or Free Trade deals that favour US Multinationals. It is not so much a softer Brexit, as a better one.
Oh dear
Mass immigration from the European Union has been used to "destroy" the conditions of British workers, Jeremy Corbyn said today.
Meanwhile
@Jake_Wilde: 1/10 The elephant in the room standing behind Labour's Brexit policy is that it's entirely driven by John McDonnell.
@Jake_Wilde: 5/10 Membership of the Single Market means relinquishing the state's control of both capital & labour, and thus interest rates & wages.
@Jake_Wilde: 6/10 The same for the Customs Union. It's vital for McDonnell's policies that he controls all the levers, including import/export tariffs.
Indeed. The Labour leadership want us out of the EU for much the same reasons that the Tories do - they want no interference with their madcap plans.
The Tories seem hell-bent on reducing rights and probably the Working Time Directive.
Labour want to nationalise everything.
The EU stops the more extreme policies of both parties which is why the extremists on BOTH sides want out
Both sides can only do what they want to do if the people vote for them. It is strange view of democracy you have if you believe a supranational body should be allowed to overrule the choices of the electorate simply because they have a different economic view.
There are fleeting moments when I forget myself and start to feel ever so slightly sorry for the SNP. A mere two years ago, it was untouchable. It might have lost the referendum but it had won the war for hearts and minds.
Scotland had a majority SNP government at Holyrood, 56 Nationalist MPs at Westminster, and a Yes vote in a second referendum was only a matter of time.
In a brutally short space of time, the voters have confiscated its majority, devastated its Commons contingent, and torn its Indyref 2 plans to shreds.
LOL, CCHQ down to quoting the big jessie blubber, how desperate can you get.
Playing the man rather than the ball again Malcolm. Thing is, the points are all accurate, aren't they? The SNP have gone backwards at Holyrood and Westminster and IndyRef2 is off the table.
Dear Dear David, They won Holyrood election , General election and Indyref2 is not off the table , anything but. You seem to be as deluded as the stupid buffoon Daisley. A blubbering self righteous windbag who has no clue and does not seem to understand basic facts.
Worth noting from that graph that the Conservatives are now overwhelmingly a Leavers party.
Yes. Whichever way they might have individually voted they've swung behind the expressed will of the people .... and are now aligned to fight for the country and make a success of Brexit.
Putting Country first. A great thing to see.
Rather, remainers are the votes the Tories have lost, compared to the majority they might have had.
You do have to wonder about the 10% of the electorate that voted Remain and have stuck with the Conservatives. How much more Brexiting are they going to put up with?
I suspect theyre well balanced people who have a life, and Brexit isnt the only thing in it.
Brexit is the only thing in the Conservative party right now. So if they have a life, they would be well-advised to explore it elsewhere.
Brexit seems to be the only thing in your life, which is sad.
However in the wider UK - cost of living, housing, uni fees, infrastructure, are much more important to voters
And in about 3 months time we'll have the annual NHS in crisis crisis
I am intrigued by the idea that Brexit is not related to the cost of living, housing, university fees, infrastructure and the NHS. From where I sit, the kind of Brexit we get will pretty much determine how we are to deal with all of the above, as well as a whole lot more.
Yes, 5% on the price of olives - whatever will we do.
I am growing them here, so we ramp up production and buy British. They are going to go through the roof anyway when xylella fastidiosa gets going on the Spanish trees.
I'm waiting for Remainers to emerge blinking into the sun and reveal to us the kind of Britain (if any) they actually want, beyond finding a supranational body to defer to. Are they in favour of de-regulation, state intervention, low taxes, high taxes, balancing the books, borrowing to invest, rfid chips for all, vegetable alottments for all... I know they're anti-chlorine chicken, but that's about it, and I think that may be a Brexit thing too.
This was the reason I didn't vote in the end: Remain in what? The EU of 2016 has morphed from the EEC to the EC to the EU, and from 7 members to 27, without a vote (when there was a vote, it was re-run if it gave the "wrong" answer, so none of these plebiscites was honest). What therefore might the EU become in the future? What should it become? How would one get a Remainer vision of the future EU implemented, given that its parliament has no Opposition, and that it refuses to reform itself?
I have no sympathy with nationalists either. Nationalists require some third party on whom to fasten their grievance, whether that is the English, Europe, Jews, or whatever. If they ever get what they want, when they find it doesn't work that also will be the fault of the English, Europe, Jews, or whatever. The modus operandi is also, quite often, to make the blamee reciprocate the hate. The IRA wanted the rest of Britain to despise the Irish so we'd want to get rid of them. The SNP playbook appears similar vis-a-vis the English.
So giving nationalists what they imagine they want does not work. Giving Scotland independence would amplify, not reduce, the SNP's demands for English money. Whatever made Leavers vote for Brexit will not be fixed by Brexit - and economic problems will be because the EU continues to stitch us up. Hamburg was only firebombed because Jews.
For me the EU referendum choice was like the choice US voters faced between Trump and Clinton. Both options were unacceptable. I just had better things to do that day than detour to a polling booth and spoil my ballot paper.
....some argue this means we should negotiate to stay inside the European Economic Area (EEA), which would retain the friction-free trade not only in goods but also in services, upon which the bulk of our economy is based.
However, the political price to be paid for such access is correspondingly high, and runs directly counter to the leavers’ four objectives. In the EEA, Britain would be obliged to keep the four freedoms, including the free movement of people, so no regaining control of our borders; align its regulatory regime with the EU’s – so no regaining sovereignty (in fact we would no longer have a seat at the table so there would actually be a reduction of sovereignty); follow ECJ rulings; and still pay into the EU budget.
The UK would technically not be a member of the EU, but we would in effect become a vassal state: obliged to pay into the union’s budget while having even less sovereignty than we do now – no longer able to appoint commissioners, sit on the EU council to have a say in how we determine our regulations and laws, or appoint British judges to the ECJ to adjudicate disputes...
Worth noting from that graph that the Conservatives are now overwhelmingly a Leavers party.
Yes. Whichever way they might have individually voted they've swung behind the expressed will of the people .... and are now aligned to fight for the country and make a success of Brexit.
Putting Country first. A great thing to see.
Rather, remainers are the votes the Tories have lost, compared to the majority they might have had.
You do have to wonder about the 10% of the electorate that voted Remain and have stuck with the Conservatives. How much more Brexiting are they going to put up with?
Surely the bigger question is how many of the 66% of Labour voters who want to remain will continue to support leaving the CU and the SM? The evidence to date is that they don't seem to care enough to switch. Will that change?
It's asymmetric. The Conservatives are the party of Brexit. Labour is not the party of Remain. Many Remain voters turned away from the Conservatives because of Brexit, and then voted for Labour for different reasons. They are unlikely to abandon Labour unless it too positions itself as a party of Brexit. So far it has not done that.
Labour dissembling over its Brexit position will be delicious to follow.
In the unlikely event of Corbyn acceding before we Brexit, he would simply call a second referendum and then cynically comply with 'the will of people', just as May has done.
In that scenario, if we re-voted to Remain, given what the EU has said, would that constitute a mandate to join the euro and Schengen and all the other usual "standard" terms, like higher budget contributions sans rebate?
I think the political opposition to that in the UK would be the likes of what we've never seen before, and make Remoaning look like a picnic.
Well it would work exactly the same as last year's referendum. It would be a straight In/Out choice, with a blank cheque handed to the winning side.
I would prefer a Labour Brexit to a Tory one. It would be one negotiated by Starmer and Jezza would not be so obsessed with immigration, or Free Trade deals that favour US Multinationals. It is not so much a softer Brexit, as a better one.
Oh dear
Mass immigration from the European Union has been used to "destroy" the conditions of British workers, Jeremy Corbyn said today.
Meanwhile
@Jake_Wilde: 1/10 The elephant in the room standing behind Labour's Brexit policy is that it's entirely driven by John McDonnell.
@Jake_Wilde: 5/10 Membership of the Single Market means relinquishing the state's control of both capital & labour, and thus interest rates & wages.
@Jake_Wilde: 6/10 The same for the Customs Union. It's vital for McDonnell's policies that he controls all the levers, including import/export tariffs.
Indeed. The Labour leadership want us out of the EU for much the same reasons that the Tories do - they want no interference with their madcap plans.
The Tories seem hell-bent on reducing rights and probably the Working Time Directive.
Labour want to nationalise everything.
The EU stops the more extreme policies of both parties which is why the extremists on BOTH sides want out
Both sides can only do what they want to do if the people vote for them. It is strange view of democracy you have if you believe a supranational body should be allowed to overrule the choices of the electorate simply because they have a different economic view.
That is not what I said. I said that the EU legislation does not stop UK legislation, but it limits it from being extreme.
By your logic Richard, Westminster should pass all powers to Cardiff, Edinburgh and Belfast as they are independent countries (nations) which makes Westminster a "supranational body" which can "overrule the choices of the electorate simply because they have a different economic view"
You seem to be as deluded as the stupid buffoon Daisley. A blubbering self righteous windbag who has no clue and does not seem to understand basic facts.
There are fleeting moments when I forget myself and start to feel ever so slightly sorry for the SNP. A mere two years ago, it was untouchable. It might have lost the referendum but it had won the war for hearts and minds.
Scotland had a majority SNP government at Holyrood, 56 Nationalist MPs at Westminster, and a Yes vote in a second referendum was only a matter of time.
In a brutally short space of time, the voters have confiscated its majority, devastated its Commons contingent, and torn its Indyref 2 plans to shreds.
LOL, CCHQ down to quoting the big jessie blubber, how desperate can you get.
Playing the man rather than the ball again Malcolm. Thing is, the points are all accurate, aren't they? The SNP have gone backwards at Holyrood and Westminster and IndyRef2 is off the table.
You seem to be as deluded as the stupid buffoon Daisley.
The best reaction came from Glasgow Cathcart MSP James Dornan, who speaks grievance as a first language and English a distant third.
He grunted: ‘Labour have learned nothing because rather than holding the Tories to account, they are still campaigning in Scotland against the SNP, which is odd given the majority of Corbyn’s policies are already being delivered by a progressive SNP Scottish Government. And no one in Scotland should be in any doubt – whether under Kezia Dugdale or Corbyn – Labour are a party that backs an extreme Tory Brexit and policies like Trident renewal, against Scotland’s national interests.’
Mr Dornan’s public statements sometimes read like a shredded dictionary hastily pieced back together so, rest assured, you read that right. There’s no need to vote for Corbyn in Scotland because the SNP is already delivering his policies. Except his policies are extreme and anti-Scottish. But not when the SNP delivers them. Then they’re progressive.
Corbyn has endured two years of vitriol - on here it's clear many dislike him with a healthy passion. Every interview he gives is a "car crash", every time he speaks it's wrong, he doesn't dress well or look the part etc, etc.
My issue with Corbyn is that he always and unfailingly sides with this country's enemies. That's not vitriol; it's a fully-documented fact. He's a friend of murderers, as long as it's British soldiers and civilians who are being murdered. Meanwhile his shadow chancellor thinks that a city council are murderers because they spent £10 million refurbishing a tower block.
The profound moral incompetence he and his cabal exhibit make him and them wholly unfit for office in any capacity whatever.
I get totally the opposite impression: if you are of a like mind then Corbyn would be an amiable fellow. I'm far from sure he's capable of listening to other viewpoints, hence the trouble he has within his own party and the way his politics have remained unchanged for decades.
I suspect, like many other conversations, it would depend on how it was conducted and on which subjects. I would be happy to hear Corbyn's thoughts on housing, healthcare, transport and his take on some of the big London issues. I find aspects of what he says on Brexit intriguing and would like to discuss them further.
I wouldn't storm in and say "You're a Communist, Socialism is evil. Only Conservatives have the answers" because that probably wouldn't be conducive to a civilised discussion.
WRT your last paragraph: I wouldn't do that, and I guess neither would many Conservatives. However the key is in what you say: he'd be happy to let you hear what he thought: heck, most of us are happy to let others hear what we think. Politicians thrive on it.
The problem comes in the 'discuss them further'. That's where I fear Corbyn will end up having a tin ear. He's very set in his ways, and I'm not sure he's used to debating them. This is why so many of his party are set against him.
As it happens, I can imagine having a rather detailed conversation with Corbyn on the way municipal organisations helped build our country. But I can't imagine him having much time for my description of my parents' struggles in starting a business when I was a kid.
Think your imagination might be a bit array .He talks a lot about the self employed and their concerns surely many of his constituents are small business .My father was jobbing builder and I remember very well the Tories putting VAt on extensions but none on new housing.Hardly helpful at the time to gain work in a recession.
My imagination is generally good, but even then I cannot imagine Corbyn being anything other than a disaster for business, large or small.
Care to elucidate on how he'd be good for the self-employed and small businesses?
Hopefully by giving the self employed and small businesses more protection in areas such as payment and rights at work in this new economy.
Worth noting from that graph that the Conservatives are now overwhelmingly a Leavers party.
Yes. Whichever way they might have individually voted they've swung behind the expressed will of the people .... and are now aligned to fight for the country and make a success of Brexit.
Putting Country first. A great thing to see.
Rather, remainers are the votes the Tories have lost, compared to the majority they might have had.
You do have to wonder about the 10% of the electorate that voted Remain and have stuck with the Conservatives. How much more Brexiting are they going to put up with?
Surely the bigger question is how many of the 66% of Labour voters who want to remain will continue to support leaving the CU and the SM? The evidence to date is that they don't seem to care enough to switch. Will that change?
It's asymmetric. The Conservatives are the party of Brexit. Labour is not the party of Remain. Many Remain voters turned away from the Conservatives because of Brexit, and then voted for Labour for different reasons. They are unlikely to abandon Labour unless it too positions itself as a party of Brexit. So far it has not done that.
Labour dissembling over its Brexit position will be delicious to follow.
In the unlikely event of Corbyn acceding before we Brexit, he would simply call a second referendum and then cynically comply with 'the will of people', just as May has done.
No, I do not think he will. I think Corbyn is a Leaver and since his MPs cannot get rid of him then Labour is stuck. As for Labour voters, voting Labour is a religious article of faith for many and they will vote Labour even if the proverbial monkey is put in a suit with a red rosette and pronounced leader.
Labour will just let Brexit happen and then blame the Tories. Thatcher has faded but she provided a stick that Labour used to beat the Tories with for 40 years. Brexit is the new stick...
In 18 months or so, the Government will present the final deal to Parliament. The LDs will vote against whatever it is, as will the SNP. Labour will also do so - no matter what it will be.
The Tories and the DUP will vote for, apart from the rebels. The Government way well lose.
But we'll then leave the EU and each faction wil then blame the other for what they will both describe as the worst possible option.
Can we fast-forward and do away with the politicking in between?
I agree up to "we'll then leave the EU". I think if the government cannot get a Brexit bill through the House of Commons, then Mrs May will have no choice but to go to the Palace and request a dissolution.
There will then be an election over the terms of the Brexit deal, with the Labour Party promising to renegotiate with the EU, and the LibDems promising we'll stay in.
I don't know what the result of the election will be.
I would prefer a Labour Brexit to a Tory one. It would be one negotiated by Starmer and Jezza would not be so obsessed with immigration, or Free Trade deals that favour US Multinationals. It is not so much a softer Brexit, as a better one.
Oh dear
Mass immigration from the European Union has been used to "destroy" the conditions of British workers, Jeremy Corbyn said today.
Meanwhile
@Jake_Wilde: 1/10 The elephant in the room standing behind Labour's Brexit policy is that it's entirely driven by John McDonnell.
@Jake_Wilde: 5/10 Membership of the Single Market means relinquishing the state's control of both capital & labour, and thus interest rates & wages.
@Jake_Wilde: 6/10 The same for the Customs Union. It's vital for McDonnell's policies that he controls all the levers, including import/export tariffs.
Indeed. The Labour leadership want us out of the EU for much the same reasons that the Tories do - they want no interference with their madcap plans.
The Tories seem hell-bent on reducing rights and probably the Working Time Directive.
Labour want to nationalise everything.
The EU stops the more extreme policies of both parties which is why the extremists on BOTH sides want out
Both sides can only do what they want to do if the people vote for them. It is strange view of democracy you have if you believe a supranational body should be allowed to overrule the choices of the electorate simply because they have a different economic view.
That is not what I said. I said that the EU legislation does not stop UK legislation, but it limits it from being extreme.
By your logic Richard, Westminster should pass all powers to Cardiff, Edinburgh and Belfast as they are independent countries (nations) which makes Westminster a "supranational body" which can "overrule the choices of the electorate simply because they have a different economic view"
I think it misreads him to think that he's dogmatically opposed to the EU - he sees advantages and drawbacks, and is mildly in favour - I'm not sure why people don't believe him on that when his track record is to be quite unafraid of saying what he thinks.
Nick - probably people don't believe him because his track record on votes relating to the EU is to oppose further integration, because many tenets of socialist economics (exchange and capital controls) are illegal inside the EU, and because his opposition to freedom of movement is incompatible with membership of the EU. For all these doctrinal reasons he's obviously a Leaver.
I would prefer a Labour Brexit to a Tory one. It would be one negotiated by Starmer and Jezza would not be so obsessed with immigration, or Free Trade deals that favour US Multinationals. It is not so much a softer Brexit, as a better one.
Oh dear
Mass immigration from the European Union has been used to "destroy" the conditions of British workers, Jeremy Corbyn said today.
Meanwhile
@Jake_Wilde: 1/10 The elephant in the room standing behind Labour's Brexit policy is that it's entirely driven by John McDonnell.
@Jake_Wilde: 5/10 Membership of the Single Market means relinquishing the state's control of both capital & labour, and thus interest rates & wages.
@Jake_Wilde: 6/10 The same for the Customs Union. It's vital for McDonnell's policies that he controls all the levers, including import/export tariffs.
Indeed. The Labour leadership want us out of the EU for much the same reasons that the Tories do - they want no interference with their madcap plans.
The Tories seem hell-bent on reducing rights and probably the Working Time Directive.
Labour want to nationalise everything.
The EU stops the more extreme policies of both parties which is why the extremists on BOTH sides want out
Both sides can only do what they want to do if the people vote for them. It is strange view of democracy you have if you believe a supranational body should be allowed to overrule the choices of the electorate simply because they have a different economic view.
That is not what I said. I said that the EU legislation does not stop UK legislation, but it limits it from being extreme.
By your logic Richard, Westminster should pass all powers to Cardiff, Edinburgh and Belfast as they are independent countries (nations) which makes Westminster a "supranational body" which can "overrule the choices of the electorate simply because they have a different economic view"
I think the economic policies pursued by the Attlee government were extreme.
But, I absolutely believe that his government had the right to pursue them, after receiving a mandate to do so from the voters. It would have been odious had some supranational body prevented them from doing so.
I would prefer a Labour Brexit to a Tory one. It would be one negotiated by Starmer and Jezza would not be so obsessed with immigration, or Free Trade deals that favour US Multinationals. It is not so much a softer Brexit, as a better one.
Oh dear
Mass immigration from the European Union has been used to "destroy" the conditions of British workers, Jeremy Corbyn said today.
Meanwhile
@Jake_Wilde: 1/10 The elephant in the room standing behind Labour's Brexit policy is that it's entirely driven by John McDonnell.
@Jake_Wilde: 5/10 Membership of the Single Market means relinquishing the state's control of both capital & labour, and thus interest rates & wages.
@Jake_Wilde: 6/10 The same for the Customs Union. It's vital for McDonnell's policies that he controls all the levers, including import/export tariffs.
Indeed. The Labour leadership want us out of the EU for much the same reasons that the Tories do - they want no interference with their madcap plans.
The Tories seem hell-bent on reducing rights and probably the Working Time Directive.
Labour want to nationalise everything.
The EU stops the more extreme policies of both parties which is why the extremists on BOTH sides want out
Both sides can only do what they want to do if the people vote for them. It is strange view of democracy you have if you believe a supranational body should be allowed to overrule the choices of the electorate simply because they have a different economic view.
That is not what I said. I said that the EU legislation does not stop UK legislation, but it limits it from being extreme.
By your logic Richard, Westminster should pass all powers to Cardiff, Edinburgh and Belfast as they are independent countries (nations) which makes Westminster a "supranational body" which can "overrule the choices of the electorate simply because they have a different economic view"
Except that Wales, Scotland and N Ireland are clearly *not* independent countries.
In any case, 'limiting' UK legislation is exactly the same as stopping it in those circumstances.
I agree up to "we'll then leave the EU". I think if the government cannot get a Brexit bill through the House of Commons, then Mrs May will have no choice but to go to the Palace and request a dissolution.
There will then be an election over the terms of the Brexit deal, with the Labour Party promising to renegotiate with the EU, and the LibDems promising we'll stay in.
I don't know what the result of the election will be.
Since the option of renegotiating won't be available, and it's quite likely that the option of staying in won't be either, that would be an, err, interesting election.
Worth noting from that graph that the Conservatives are now overwhelmingly a Leavers party.
Yes. Whichever way they might have individually voted they've swung behind the expressed will of the people .... and are now aligned to fight for the country and make a success of Brexit.
Putting Country first. A great thing to see.
Rather, remainers are the votes the Tories have lost, compared to the majority they might have had.
You do have to wonder about the 10% of the electorate that voted Remain and have stuck with the Conservatives. How much more Brexiting are they going to put up with?
Surely the bigger question is how many of the 66% of Labour voters who want to remain will continue to support leaving the CU and the SM? The evidence to date is that they don't seem to care enough to switch. Will that change?
It's asymmetric. The Conservatives are the party of Brexit. Labour is not the party of Remain. Many Remain voters turned away from the Conservatives because of Brexit, and then voted for Labour for different reasons. They are unlikely to abandon Labour unless it too positions itself as a party of Brexit. So far it has not done that.
Labour dissembling over its Brexit position will be delicious to follow.
In the unlikely event of Corbyn acceding before we Brexit, he would simply call a second referendum and then cynically comply with 'the will of people', just as May has done.
No, I do not think he will. I think Corbyn is a Leaver and since his MPs cannot get rid of him then Labour is stuck. As for Labour voters, voting Labour is a religious article of faith for many and they will vote Labour even if the proverbial monkey is put in a suit with a red rosette and pronounced leader.
Labour will just let Brexit happen and then blame the Tories. Thatcher has faded but she provided a stick that Labour used to beat the Tories with for 40 years. Brexit is the new stick...
In 18 months or so, the Government will present the final deal to Parliament. The LDs will vote against whatever it is, as will the SNP. Labour will also do so - no matter what it will be.
The Tories and the DUP will vote for, apart from the rebels. The Government way well lose.
But we'll then leave the EU and each faction wil then blame the other for what they will both describe as the worst possible option.
Can we fast-forward and do away with the politicking in between?
I agree up to "we'll then leave the EU". I think if the government cannot get a Brexit bill through the House of Commons, then Mrs May will have no choice but to go to the Palace and request a dissolution.
There will then be an election over the terms of the Brexit deal, with the Labour Party promising to renegotiate with the EU, and the LibDems promising we'll stay in.
I don't know what the result of the election will be.
Shouldn't Con + DUP + Labour Leavers (Field, Hoey, etc) but able to win the vote?
It will probably be very narrow vote though. We'll probably LEAVE with the same Commons majority we JOINED all those years ago...
There are two factors working here. One is the likelihood that the incoherence of Labour's positions on virtually every issue will gradually undermine Corbyn's popularity with some voters; he was very lucky in the last election that there was so little scrutiny of the absurdities, but the media are now getting bored with bashing Theresa May, and are beginning to turn their attention to Labour.
The second factor is, obviously, Brexit. I don't subscribe to the view that the next election (assuming it takes place post March 2019) will be all about Brexit; Brexit will be a fait accompli, the electorate will be bored with it, there will probably be some kind of deal with the EU27 and economic armageddon* probably won't happen. Those rubbing their hands in glee (well represented in the comments upthread) at the prospect of it being a disaster for which the Tories will get massive blame should think back to 2010, when they were saying the same thing about the measures needed to pull back from the fiscal crisis.
Things move on. The next election will be fought on different gound, with (probably) a shiny new Conservative leader and quite possibly a new Labour leader. Who knows what will happen?
* Assuming we avoid a cliff-edge, which is likely but not certain, any economic damage from Brexit will be spread over a longish period and hard to disentangle from other effects.
Brexit will be done to death by the time of the next election and neither major party will want to refight old battles. It will be the Economy, stupid, that will be the basis of the battle. The new Tory leader will need to find some positive messages, hope that Corbyn, McDonnell and Milne are still in place and that people are generally feeling OK about things. If all those things fall into place, then the Tories have every chance of coming out on top once more. Rumours of the party's death have been greatly exaggerated.
True they will never die with support of big business,the conservatives will always be in the game and usually in first place.However that support comes with conditions and one will be the Brexit that they demand not what Fox and his cronies dream of.
Worth noting from that graph that the Conservatives are now overwhelmingly a Leavers party.
Yes. Whichever way they might have individually voted they've swung behind the expressed will of the people .... and are now aligned to fight for the country and make a success of Brexit.
Putting Country first. A great thing to see.
Rather, remainers are the votes the Tories have lost, compared to the majority they might have had.
You do have to wonder about the 10% of the electorate that voted Remain and have stuck with the Conservatives. How much more Brexiting are they going to put up with?
Surely the bigger question is how many of the 66% of Labour voters who want to remain will continue to support leaving the CU and the SM? The evidence to date is that they don't seem to care enough to switch. Will that change?
It's asymmetric. The Conservatives are the party of Brexit. Labour is not the party of Remain. Many Remain voters turned away from the Conservatives because of Brexit, and then voted for Labour for different reasons. They are unlikely to abandon Labour unless it too positions itself as a party of Brexit. So far it has not done that.
Labour dissembling over its Brexit position will be delicious to follow.
In the unlikely event of Corbyn acceding before we Brexit, he would simply call a second referendum and then cynically comply with 'the will of people', just as May has done.
In that scenario, if we re-voted to Remain, given what the EU has said, would that constitute a mandate to join the euro and Schengen and all the other usual "standard" terms, like higher budget contributions sans rebate?
I think the political opposition to that in the UK would be the likes of what we've never seen before, and make Remoaning look like a picnic.
I don't see that the political opposition would be qualitatively different to the opposition to remaining on the same terms.
We're joining the Euro, and it couldn't have been done without the help of people who voted to destroy the status quo last June.
There are fleeting moments when I forget myself and start to feel ever so slightly sorry for the SNP. A mere two years ago, it was untouchable. It might have lost the referendum but it had won the war for hearts and minds.
Scotland had a majority SNP government at Holyrood, 56 Nationalist MPs at Westminster, and a Yes vote in a second referendum was only a matter of time.
In a brutally short space of time, the voters have confiscated its majority, devastated its Commons contingent, and torn its Indyref 2 plans to shreds.
LOL, CCHQ down to quoting the big jessie blubber, how desperate can you get.
Playing the man rather than the ball again Malcolm. Thing is, the points are all accurate, aren't they? The SNP have gone backwards at Holyrood and Westminster and IndyRef2 is off the table.
Dear Dear David, They won Holyrood election , General election and Indyref2 is not off the table , anything but. You seem to be as deluded as the stupid buffoon Daisley. A blubbering self righteous windbag who has no clue and does not seem to understand basic facts.
The basic facts, as you put it, are that the SNP lost MSPs, lost MPs and that Sturgeon was forced to withdraw her early IndyRef2 proposal.
It's usually the case that when a government loses seats from one election to the next, the forces that drive that loss - tiredness, division, ineptitude, or whatever - will increase and force further losses in the future until such point as the party ends in opposition. The SNP might have the votes to push IndyRef2 through but the land has changed very considerably now that Brexit's been voted for and the realities of what international divorce looks like are being played out for real - and that just within a confederation of less than 50 years' standing (in the UK's case); not a country that was largely a unitary state for 300+ years.
Worth noting from that graph that the Conservatives are now overwhelmingly a Leavers party.
Yes. Whichever way they might have individually voted they've swung behind the expressed will of the people .... and are now aligned to fight for the country and make a success of Brexit.
Putting Country first. A great thing to see.
Rather, remainers are the votes the Tories have lost, compared to the majority they might have had.
You do have to wonder about the 10% of the electorate that voted Remain and have stuck with the Conservatives. How much more Brexiting are they going to put up with?
Surely the bigger question is how many of the 66% of Labour voters who want to remain will continue to support leaving the CU and the SM? The evidence to date is that they don't seem to care enough to switch. Will that change?
It's asymmetric. The Conservatives are the party of Brexit. Labour is not the party of Remain. Many Remain voters turned away from the Conservatives because of Brexit, and then voted for Labour for different reasons. They are unlikely to abandon Labour unless it too positions itself as a party of Brexit. So far it has not done that.
Labour dissembling over its Brexit position will be delicious to follow.
In the unlikely event of Corbyn acceding before we Brexit, he would simply call a second referendum and then cynically comply with 'the will of people', just as May has done.
In that scenario, if we re-voted to Remain, given what the EU has said, would that constitute a mandate to join the euro and Schengen and all the other usual "standard" terms, like higher budget contributions sans rebate?
I think the political opposition to that in the UK would be the likes of what we've never seen before, and make Remoaning look like a picnic.
I don't see that the political opposition would be qualitatively different to the opposition to remaining on the same terms.
We're joining the Euro, and it couldn't have been done without the help of people who voted to destroy the status quo last June.
There is certainly a case for the EU, but I'd wager your case isn't it.
Worth noting from that graph that the Conservatives are now overwhelmingly a Leavers party.
Yes. Whichever way they might have individually voted they've swung behind the expressed will of the people .... and are now aligned to fight for the country and make a success of Brexit.
Putting Country first. A great thing to see.
Rather, remainers are the votes the Tories have lost, compared to the majority they might have had.
You do have to wonder about the 10% of the electorate that voted Remain and have stuck with the Conservatives. How much more Brexiting are they going to put up with?
Surely the bigger question is how many of the 66% of Labour voters who want to remain will continue to support leaving the CU and the SM? The evidence to date is that they don't seem to care enough to switch. Will that change?
It's asymmetric. The Conservatives are the party of Brexit. Labour is not the party of Remain. Many Remain voters turned away from the Conservatives because of Brexit, and then voted for Labour for different reasons. They are unlikely to abandon Labour unless it too positions itself as a party of Brexit. So far it has not done that.
Labour dissembling over its Brexit position will be delicious to follow.
In the unlikely event of Corbyn acceding before we Brexit, he would simply call a second referendum and then cynically comply with 'the will of people', just as May has done.
In that scenario, if we re-voted to Remain, given what the EU has said, would that constitute a mandate to join the euro and Schengen and all the other usual "standard" terms, like higher budget contributions sans rebate?
I think the political opposition to that in the UK would be the likes of what we've never seen before, and make Remoaning look like a picnic.
We're joining the Euro.
I'd put more (any?) water in it, if I were you....
Worth noting from that graph that the Conservatives are now overwhelmingly a Leavers party.
Yes. Whichever way they might have individually voted they've swung behind the expressed will of the people .... and are now aligned to fight for the country and make a success of Brexit.
Putting Country first. A great thing to see.
Rather, remainers are the votes the Tories have lost, compared to the majority they might have had.
You do have to wonder about the 10% of the electorate that voted Remain and have stuck with the Conservatives. How much more Brexiting are they going to put up with?
Surely the bigger question is how many of the 66% of Labour voters who want to remain will continue to support leaving the CU and the SM? The evidence to date is that they don't seem to care enough to switch. Will that change?
It's asymmetric. The Conservatives are the party of Brexit. Labour is not the party of Remain. Many Remain voters turned away from the Conservatives because of Brexit, and then voted for Labour for different reasons. They are unlikely to abandon Labour unless it too positions itself as a party of Brexit. So far it has not done that.
Labour dissembling over its Brexit position will be delicious to follow.
In the unlikely event of Corbyn acceding before we Brexit, he would simply call a second referendum and then cynically comply with 'the will of people', just as May has done.
In that scenario, if we re-voted to Remain, given what the EU has said, would that constitute a mandate to join the euro and Schengen and all the other usual "standard" terms, like higher budget contributions sans rebate?
I think the political opposition to that in the UK would be the likes of what we've never seen before, and make Remoaning look like a picnic.
We're joining the Euro, and it couldn't have been done without the help of people who voted to destroy the status quo last June.
Next you'll tell us we'll be extracting moonbeams from cucumbers.
Jonathan, you keep saying that, but the entire point of both Labour and the Conservatives is to ensure that doesn't change. The electoral system was literally designed to preclude options for change. And both the Big Two parties have repeatedly and consistently resisted any attempt to change that, as the prospect of power is the most fundamental driver of both of them.
Which gives us an electoral system for the politicians rather than the people. To give us a governing class, albeit one in two factions, and we get whatever alternative the "other" faction deigns to give us . Reward bad behaviour and you get more of it.
Which makes your second sentence not only superfluous but misleading. "Corbyn is the only viable alternative. While that remains true, nothing will change" would be more accurate.
In 18 months or so, the Government will present the final deal to Parliament. The LDs will vote against whatever it is, as will the SNP. Labour will also do so - no matter what it will be.
The Tories and the DUP will vote for, apart from the rebels. The Government way well lose.
But we'll then leave the EU and each faction wil then blame the other for what they will both describe as the worst possible option.
Can we fast-forward and do away with the politicking in between?
I agree up to "we'll then leave the EU". I think if the government cannot get a Brexit bill through the House of Commons, then Mrs May will have no choice but to go to the Palace and request a dissolution.
There will then be an election over the terms of the Brexit deal, with the Labour Party promising to renegotiate with the EU, and the LibDems promising we'll stay in.
I don't know what the result of the election will be.
I agree up to '...renegotiate with the EU.'
What makes you think the EU would be willing to do so? It may well be in a take-it-or-leave-it mindset by then. It may alternatively offer to accept withdrawal of the Article 50 letter. We just don't know.
In 18 months or so, the Government will present the final deal to Parliament. The LDs will vote against whatever it is, as will the SNP. Labour will also do so - no matter what it will be.
The Tories and the DUP will vote for, apart from the rebels. The Government way well lose.
But we'll then leave the EU and each faction wil then blame the other for what they will both describe as the worst possible option.
Can we fast-forward and do away with the politicking in between?
I agree up to "we'll then leave the EU". I think if the government cannot get a Brexit bill through the House of Commons, then Mrs May will have no choice but to go to the Palace and request a dissolution.
There will then be an election over the terms of the Brexit deal, with the Labour Party promising to renegotiate with the EU, and the LibDems promising we'll stay in.
I don't know what the result of the election will be.
You assume that the other EU members would in those circumstances unanimously agree an extension to the negotiations. They might but there's no guarantee.
As an aside, unless the FTPA has been repealed, Mrs May wouldn't be going to the Palace unless to resign. If she wanted an early election then she'd be placing a dissolution motion before the Commons.
No, I do not think he will. I think Corbyn is a Leaver and since his MPs cannot get rid of him then Labour is stuck. As for Labour voters, voting Labour is a religious article of faith for many and they will vote Labour even if the proverbial monkey is put in a suit with a red rosette and pronounced leader.
Labour will just let Brexit happen and then blame the Tories. Thatcher has faded but she provided a stick that Labour used to beat the Tories with for 40 years. Brexit is the new stick...
I would prefer a Labour Brexit to a Tory one. It would be one negotiated by Starmer and Jezza would not be so obsessed with immigration, or Free Trade deals that favour US Multinationals. It is not so much a softer Brexit, as a better one.
Oh dear
Mass immigration from the European Union has been used to "destroy" the conditions of British workers, Jeremy Corbyn said today.
Meanwhile
@Jake_Wilde: 1/10 The elephant in the room standing behind Labour's Brexit policy is that it's entirely driven by John McDonnell.
@Jake_Wilde: 5/10 Membership of the Single Market means relinquishing the state's control of both capital & labour, and thus interest rates & wages.
@Jake_Wilde: 6/10 The same for the Customs Union. It's vital for McDonnell's policies that he controls all the levers, including import/export tariffs.
Indeed. The Labour leadership want us out of the EU for much the same reasons that the Tories do - they want no interference with their madcap plans.
The Tories seem hell-bent on reducing rights and probably the Working Time Directive.
Labour want to nationalise everything.
The EU stops the more extreme policies of both parties which is why the extremists on BOTH sides want out
Both sides can only do what they want to do if the people vote for them. It is strange view of democracy you have if you believe a supranational body should be allowed to overrule the choices of the electorate simply because they have a different economic view.
That is not what I said. I said that the EU legislation does not stop UK legislation, but it limits it from being extreme.
By your logic Richard, Westminster should pass all powers to Cardiff, Edinburgh and Belfast as they are independent countries (nations) which makes Westminster a "supranational body" which can "overrule the choices of the electorate simply because they have a different economic view"
Um yes.
You clearly forget I am in favour of Scottish independence and of the absolute principle of powers being exercised atvthe lowest possible level in the system. It is a driving philosophy behind all of my politics.
I have to say I am a bit bemused by these things. They appear unable / unlikely to carry any more aircraft than the ships they replaced, they will need the rest of the navy to protect them, and if the rest of the navy is unavailable for any reason they won't be able to be used.
Wouldn't we have been better off with three smaller ones?
F1: from BBC gossip: "McLaren's Fernando Alonso says the fact there is less reliance on power at the Hungary Grand Prix means the race "presents one of the best opportunities for us this year". (ESPN)"
This has implications at the sharp end too. Ferrari is weaker than Mercedes on power, but better at slower stuff. I do think Vettel is too long. Backed him at 5.2 and tipped earlier around 4.4 (think he's still at that level).
I'll also check Raikkonen's pole (each way) odds.
Also worth recalling Hungary's a difficult place to overtake.
What makes you think the EU would be willing to do so? It may well be in a take-it-or-leave-it mindset by then. It may alternatively offer to accept withdrawal of the Article 50 letter. We just don't know.
Renegotiation will be impossible. There simply won't be time, the final deal will already have been the subject of much wrangling, and getting the EU27 to re-open everything is simply not realistic. It's a non-starter as an idea.
I would prefer a Labour Brexit to a Tory one. It would be one negotiated by Starmer and Jezza would not be so obsessed with immigration, or Free Trade deals that favour US Multinationals. It is not so much a softer Brexit, as a better one.
Oh dear
Mass immigration from the European Union has been used to "destroy" the conditions of British workers, Jeremy Corbyn said today.
Meanwhile
@Jake_Wilde: 1/10 The elephant in the room standing behind Labour's Brexit policy is that it's entirely driven by John McDonnell.
@Jake_Wilde: 5/10 Membership of the Single Market means relinquishing the state's control of both capital & labour, and thus interest rates & wages.
@Jake_Wilde: 6/10 The same for the Customs Union. It's vital for McDonnell's policies that he controls all the levers, including import/export tariffs.
Indeed. The Labour leadership want us out of the EU for much the same reasons that the Tories do - they want no interference with their madcap plans.
The Tories seem hell-bent on reducing rights and probably the Working Time Directive.
Labour want to nationalise everything.
The EU stops the more extreme policies of both parties which is why the extremists on BOTH sides want out
Both sides can only do what they want to do if the people vote for them. It is strange view of democracy you have if you believe a supranational body should be allowed to overrule the choices of the electorate simply because they have a different economic view.
That is not what I said. I said that the EU legislation does not stop UK legislation, but it limits it from being extreme.
By your logic Richard, Westminster should pass all powers to Cardiff, Edinburgh and Belfast as they are independent countries (nations) which makes Westminster a "supranational body" which can "overrule the choices of the electorate simply because they have a different economic view"
Um yes.
You clearly forget I am in favour of Scottish independence and of the absolute principle of powers being exercised atvthe lowest possible level in the system. It is a driving philosophy behind all of my politics.
So in one direction you see no limit to how local government can be, but in the other you draw an absolute red line at the boundary of the nation state and will not countenance any kind of political organisation above it? It's incoherent dogma.
I would prefer a Labour Brexit to a Tory one. It would be one negotiated by Starmer and Jezza would not be so obsessed with immigration, or Free Trade deals that favour US Multinationals. It is not so much a softer Brexit, as a better one.
Oh dear
Mass immigration from the European Union has been used to "destroy" the conditions of British workers, Jeremy Corbyn said today.
Meanwhile
@Jake_Wilde: 1/10 The elephant in the room standing behind Labour's Brexit policy is that it's entirely driven by John McDonnell.
@Jake_Wilde: 5/10 Membership of the Single Market means relinquishing the state's control of both capital & labour, and thus interest rates & wages.
@Jake_Wilde: 6/10 The same for the Customs Union. It's vital for McDonnell's policies that he controls all the levers, including import/export tariffs.
Indeed. The Labour leadership want us out of the EU for much the same reasons that the Tories do - they want no interference with their madcap plans.
The Tories seem hell-bent on reducing rights and probably the Working Time Directive.
Labour want to nationalise everything.
The EU stops the more extreme policies of both parties which is why the extremists on BOTH sides want out
Both sides can only do what they want to do if the people vote for them. It is strange view of democracy you have if you believe a supranational body should be allowed to overrule the choices of the electorate simply because they have a different economic view.
That is not what I said. I said that the EU legislation does not stop UK legislation, but it limits it from being extreme.
By your logic Richard, Westminster should pass all powers to Cardiff, Edinburgh and Belfast as they are independent countries (nations) which makes Westminster a "supranational body" which can "overrule the choices of the electorate simply because they have a different economic view"
Um yes.
You clearly forget I am in favour of Scottish independence and of the absolute principle of powers being exercised atvthe lowest possible level in the system. It is a driving philosophy behind all of my politics.
On that basis, nothing should restrain local councils, schools or scout groups. everyone can set their own rules. I think it is known as anarchy.
If you want to live in a society rather than a yurt then you have to accept that something has to give, and common rules that benefit all mean that you have to agree to some things your do not like in order to get the other things that you do like.
I am not saying the EU will extend the timetable for negotiations in the event of a change of government, or that it might (in the one in a thousand chance that the LDs won the election) be possible to withdraw the Article 50 notification, I am merely positing that an election would be almost inevitable if the government could not get the Brexit Bill through the HoC.
I don't believe that Labour rebels would vote for the Brexit Bill, because they would see the opportunity for Jeremy Corbyn to be elected if the government fell. My - admittedly cynical - view is that even the world's most perfect Brexit settlement, where the EU paid us one trillion pounds per year, would be opposed tooth and nail by Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party, because it wasn't the two trillion pounds Labour would have gotten had they been in power.
It's a great piece of kit, although it seems madness to buy 65,000 tonne aircraft carriers without catapults or angled flight decks.
Yep. The whole point of large carriers is so you don't have to use VTOL aircraft, with all their limitations. If we're going to use those aircraft, we should just have built larger versions of HMS Ocean for a third of the price.
Worth noting from that graph that the Conservatives are now overwhelmingly a Leavers party.
Putting Country first. A great thing to see.
Rather, remainers are the votes the Tories have lost, compared to the majority they might have had.
You do have to wonder about the 10% of the electorate that voted Remain and have stuck with the Conservatives. How much more Brexiting are they going to put up with?
Sswitch. Will that change?
I to abandon Labour unless it too positions itself as a party of Brexit. So far it has not done that.
Labour dissembling over its Brexit position will be delicious to follow.
In the unlikely event of Corbyn acceding before we Brexit, he would simply call a second referendum and then cynically comply with 'the will of people', just as May has done.
No, I do not think he will. I think Corbyn is a Leaver and since his MPs cannot get rid of him then Labour is stuck. As for Labour voters, voting Labour is a religious article of faith for many and they will vote Labour even if the proverbial monkey is put in a suit with a red rosette and pronounced leader.
Labour will just let Brexit happen and then blame the Tories. Thatcher has faded but she provided a stick that Labour used to beat the Tories with for 40 years. Brexit is the new stick...
Sometimes, Bev, thinks are as they appear to be.
Corbyn says he is a Remainer, albeit a diffident one. NickP has confirmed that this is so. They may both be lying, but I know Nick and I've never thought him to be a liar. I don't know Corbyn, but for a man in his position he seems fairly honest and consistent. He's entitled to change his mind though, especially over the EU, as I have done over the years, and not least because it has changed radically over the years since it began as a sort of free-trade area for six European countries.
Not all of us Labour voters vote for the monkey with the red rosette every time. I switched to the monkey with the yellow rosette last time, precisely because of Brexit. (John Cryer, my sitting Labour MP, is a Brexiteer.)
Labour has good reason to let Brexit continue to happen for the time being, and indeed for as long as it can blame the Tories for it. It may well become a stick with which Labour can beat the Tories for many years, maybe even 40. Longer, possibly.
Yes. Whichever way they might have individually voted they've swung behind the expressed will of the people .... and are now aligned to fight for the country and make a success of Brexit.
Putting Country first. A great thing to see.
Rather, remainers are the votes the Tories have lost, compared to the majority they might have had.
You do have to wonder about the 10% of the electorate that voted Remain and have stuck with the Conservatives. How much more Brexiting are they going to put up with?
Surely the bigger question is how many of the 66% of Labour voters who want to remain will continue to support leaving the CU and the SM? The evidence to date is that they don't seem to care enough to switch. Will that change?
It's asymmetric. The Conservatives are the party of Brexit. Labour is not the party of Remain. Many Remain voters turned away from the Conservatives because of Brexit, and then voted for Labour for different reasons. They are unlikely to abandon Labour unless it too positions itself as a party of Brexit. So far it has not done that.
Labour dissembling over its Brexit position will be delicious to follow.
In the unlikely event of Corbyn acceding before we Brexit, he would simply call a second referendum and then cynically comply with 'the will of people', just as May has done.
In that scenario, if we re-voted to Remain, given what the EU has said, would that constitute a mandate to join the euro and Schengen and all the other usual "standard" terms, like higher budget contributions sans rebate?
I think the political opposition to that in the UK would be the likes of what we've never seen before, and make Remoaning look like a picnic.
I don't see that the political opposition would be qualitatively different to the opposition to remaining on the same terms.
We're joining the Euro, and it couldn't have been done without the help of people who voted to destroy the status quo last June.
I've seen some 'out there' comments on PB over the years but that really takes the biscuit.
I think the chances of Britain joining the Euro by 2025 are way out into double figures. Say 40/1.
You would need a massive turnaround in public opinion, you'd need the EU to accept the UK back, and you'd need the Euro not to fall apart in the meantime. The second and third parts are probable, either in their own right or in conjunction with the first. That one, however, is for deluded Eurodreamers.
What Jeremy Corbyn gets right about the single market Technically, you can be outside the EU but inside the single market. Philosophically, you're still in the EU.
Jeremy Corbyn did not do really, really well in June’s election. You can tell this by the way he isn’t prime minister. It is a glaring giveaway. Other glaring giveaways include somebody else being prime minister, not him, and the way that all the ministers carrying around red boxes are members of another party, not his
I have to say I am a bit bemused by these things. They appear unable / unlikely to carry any more aircraft than the ships they replaced, they will need the rest of the navy to protect them, and if the rest of the navy is unavailable for any reason they won't be able to be used.
Wouldn't we have been better off with three smaller ones?
No. The planned air wing that each will carry is 40 but could be expanded to over 70 if necessary (and if the planes are available). The Invincible-class carriers held only 22 planes each.
There is, however, a good argument for increased building of frigates and destroyers, not just for carrier group duties but as vessels to serve on solo duties too.
What makes you think the EU would be willing to do so? It may well be in a take-it-or-leave-it mindset by then. It may alternatively offer to accept withdrawal of the Article 50 letter. We just don't know.
Renegotiation will be impossible. There simply won't be time, the final deal will already have been the subject of much wrangling, and getting the EU27 to re-open everything is simply not realistic. It's a non-starter as an idea.
That's my guess, Richard, though like much to do with Brexit, it is a guess. If the political will existed, a way might be found, but I think you are more likely right than not.
On that basis, nothing should restrain local councils, schools or scout groups. everyone can set their own rules. I think it is known as anarchy.
If you want to live in a society rather than a yurt then you have to accept that something has to give, and common rules that benefit all mean that you have to agree to some things your do not like in order to get the other things that you do like.
Not at all. There is a simple hierarchy of authority starting with the individual and extending up to the national government. Only those areas which cannot be dealt with at the lowest possible level should be surrendered up to the next tier of authority. It is not anarchy, it is democracy.
No, I do not think he will. I think Corbyn is a Leaver and since his MPs cannot get rid of him then Labour is stuck. As for Labour voters, voting Labour is a religious article of faith for many and they will vote Labour even if the proverbial monkey is put in a suit with a red rosette and pronounced leader.
Labour will just let Brexit happen and then blame the Tories. Thatcher has faded but she provided a stick that Labour used to beat the Tories with for 40 years. Brexit is the new stick...
So in one direction you see no limit to how local government can be, but in the other you draw an absolute red line at the boundary of the nation state and will not countenance any kind of political organisation above it? It's incoherent dogma.
No it is basic common sense. The lowest boundary for political power is the individual. All; power and governance should be kept as close as possible to the individual. Once you reach the nation state level which is able to agree treaties with other nation states there is no need for a further tier of authority with self amending powers above that. The UN is simply a forum for discussion between nation states. That is perfectly acceptable as long as its power does not extend beyond that. NATO does not have self amending powers which can extend its authority beyond that defined in the treaties. These proscriptions do not apply to the EU.
I can understand the Tories' frustration. Jezza, somehow, is managing to hoover up the vast swathes of liberal Remain voters whilst adroitly guarding his working-class flank who, we were all told, would by now be flocking to UKIP. It's political alchemy of the highest order, and I can see no way for the Tories to counter it - especially as they'll soon be saddled with whatever grim realities Brexit throws up. Jezza doesn't need to do much. Just smile serenely and wait for the substantial political benefits to fall into his lap.
Corbyn says he is a Remainer, albeit a diffident one. NickP has confirmed that this is so. They may both be lying, but I know Nick and I've never thought him to be a liar. I don't know Corbyn, but for a man in his position he seems fairly honest and consistent. He's entitled to change his mind though, especially over the EU, as I have done over the years, and not least because it has changed radically over the years since it began as a sort of free-trade area for six European countries.
Fair points Peter. As I have said on here many times, I changed my own EU position from lukewarm Leaver to more definite Remainer. The EU has indeed changed a lot and I was very surprised on the morning after the referendum to find how badly I felt like I had lost part of my identity thanks to Brexit. I was more European than I realised.
Not all of us Labour voters vote for the monkey with the red rosette every time. I switched to the monkey with the yellow rosette last time, precisely because of Brexit. (John Cryer, my sitting Labour MP, is a Brexiteer.)
I am an extremely disloyal voter and re-evalute my voting position at each election. I went Lib Dem last time although I would have ticked "None of the above" if it was an option.
Labour has good reason to let Brexit continue to happen for the time being, and indeed for as long as it can blame the Tories for it. It may well become a stick with which Labour can beat the Tories for many years, maybe even 40. Longer, possibly.
Jeremy Corbyn again laid bare the deep Labour divisions on Brexit today as he slapped down a call by Barry Gardiner to reject a customs union agreement with the EU.
The Shadow International Trade Secretary this morning reiterated his stance that remaining in the customs union would be bad for Britain and leave it a “vassal state”.
But a spokesperson for Mr Corbyn said it was wrong to “sweep options off the table” - something the leadership team has already done on single market membership.
No, I do not think he will. I think Corbyn is a Leaver and since his MPs cannot get rid of him then Labour is stuck. As for Labour voters, voting Labour is a religious article of faith for many and they will vote Labour even if the proverbial monkey is put in a suit with a red rosette and pronounced leader.
Labour will just let Brexit happen and then blame the Tories. Thatcher has faded but she provided a stick that Labour used to beat the Tories with for 40 years. Brexit is the new stick...
Donkey, not monkey, surely?
Can you get a donkey in a suit?
With a sufficiently skilled tailor (imported from the EU), of course!!
In 18 months or so, the Government will present the final deal to Parliament. The LDs will vote against whatever it is, as will the SNP. Labour will also do so - no matter what it will be.
The Tories and the DUP will vote for, apart from the rebels. The Government way well lose.
But we'll then leave the EU and each faction wil then blame the other for what they will both describe as the worst possible option.
Can we fast-forward and do away with the politicking in between?
I agree up to "we'll then leave the EU". I think if the government cannot get a Brexit bill through the House of Commons, then Mrs May will have no choice but to go to the Palace and request a dissolution.
There will then be an election over the terms of the Brexit deal, with the Labour Party promising to renegotiate with the EU, and the LibDems promising we'll stay in.
I don't know what the result of the election will be.
I agree up to '...renegotiate with the EU.'
What makes you think the EU would be willing to do so? It may well be in a take-it-or-leave-it mindset by then. It may alternatively offer to accept withdrawal of the Article 50 letter. We just don't know.
The majority of the EU’s politicians don’t want us to leave. I think they’ll hope we see sense and a) withdraw the A550 letter and b) stop electing people like Farage and Helmer tot he Parliament. We used to have some very good MEP’s.
Good luck with Guido's effort to get the last election annulled but I still can't see how banging on about a popular Labour policy or non-policy helps the Conservatives.
Over in the US... Trump is openly talking about ditching Sessions and going for Giuliani as Attorney General. Giuliani would presumably be open to firing Robert Mueller and derailing the Russia investigation.
I'm unsure whether that is good news for my bet that Trump will make it until 2019....
That this was not a Brexit election—or a Brexit ‘realignment’—in that the vote is better seen as a symptom the longer-term geographical bifurcation of politics; less revenge of the ‘Remainers’ and more a continuing battle of mobilisation between cosmopolitan and non-cosmopolitan areas.
gan as a sort of free-trade area for six European countries.
Fair points Peter. As I have said on here many times, I changed my own EU position from lukewarm Leaver to more definite Remainer. The EU has indeed changed a lot and I was very surprised on the morning after the referendum to find how badly I felt like I had lost part of my identity thanks to Brexit. I was more European than I realised.
Not all of us Labour voters vote for the monkey with the red rosette every time. I switched to the monkey with the yellow rosette last time, precisely because of Brexit. (John Cryer, my sitting Labour MP, is a Brexiteer.)
I am an extremely disloyal voter and re-evalute my voting position at each election. I went Lib Dem last time although I would have ticked "None of the above" if it was an option.
Labour has good reason to let Brexit continue to happen for the time being, and indeed for as long as it can blame the Tories for it. It may well become a stick with which Labour can beat the Tories for many years, maybe even 40. Longer, possibly.
It will be the gift that keeps on giving
On the disloyal voter business, I guess I'm the kind of centreist that the Tory Party has lost forever now.
My old man was a One Nation Tory and I would probably have followed in his footsteps but he thought Mrs T was too divisive and his allegiances changed in his later years as a result. I was a young man then of course and regarded both her social and economic policies as completely unacceptable. I did however accept, as most did, that her stance against the Unions was both necessary and courageous, even if the methods were not always strictly kosher.
Major I liked a lot and he might have wooed me into the Tory camp but I hated 'the bastards' as much as he did and of course ever since the Tory well has been poisened by its Europhobic minority. I don't regret supporting Labour through the subsequent period, but am sad that the Centre has not held, and the decline of the LDs has been disappointing for me. I blame FPTP for both these disappointments, but doubt I will see it change in my lifetime.
I'm not sure who I will vote for next time. It depends what happens next, and that's very hard to predict, but it is extremely unlikely I will ever vote for the Party that led us into Brexit, which I regard as the biggest act of political folly in my lifetime.
Good luck with Guido's effort to get the last election annulled but I still can't see how banging on about a popular Labour policy or non-policy helps the Conservatives.
because, like a positive campaign based on the economy, you don't do it in isolation.
*they did say this *they are now saying they didn't *they can't afford it anyway
pick holes in the story, drive a truck through the maths, point out over and over again what the cost of "every existing student will have all their debt wiped off." If they claim they never made such claims, get these videos, these quotes out there.
You don't just stop at step 1.
Well, you *do* if you're running the Tory 2017 campaign but ...
In 18 months or so, the Government will present the final deal to Parliament. The LDs will vote against whatever it is, as will the SNP. Labour will also do so - no matter what it will be.
The Tories and the DUP will vote for, apart from the rebels. The Government way well lose.
But we'll then leave the EU and each faction wil then blame the other for what they will both describe as the worst possible option.
Can we fast-forward and do away with the politicking in between?
I agree up to "we'll then leave the EU". I think if the government cannot get a Brexit bill through the House of Commons, then Mrs May will have no choice but to go to the Palace and request a dissolution.
There will then be an election over the terms of the Brexit deal, with the Labour Party promising to renegotiate with the EU, and the LibDems promising we'll stay in.
I don't know what the result of the election will be.
I agree up to '...renegotiate with the EU.'
What makes you think the EU would be willing to do so? It may well be in a take-it-or-leave-it mindset by then. It may alternatively offer to accept withdrawal of the Article 50 letter. We just don't know.
The majority of the EU’s politicians don’t want us to leave. I think they’ll hope we see sense and a) withdraw the A550 letter and b) stop electing people like Farage and Helmer tot he Parliament. We used to have some very good MEP’s.
Yes, I think that's right but the mechanics of the thing are tricky, so hard to be sure exactly what would happen.
No, I do not think he will. I think Corbyn is a Leaver and since his MPs cannot get rid of him then Labour is stuck. As for Labour voters, voting Labour is a religious article of faith for many and they will vote Labour even if the proverbial monkey is put in a suit with a red rosette and pronounced leader.
Labour will just let Brexit happen and then blame the Tories. Thatcher has faded but she provided a stick that Labour used to beat the Tories with for 40 years. Brexit is the new stick...
Donkey, not monkey, surely?
Can you get a donkey in a suit?
With a sufficiently skilled tailor (imported from the EU), of course!!
Isn't Brussels famous for the skill of its tailors?
As well as the entrenchment of views, Cameron's failed renegotiation also served to effectively destroy the centre ground of fudge. If he'd succeeded, then people who like the EU's economic benefits but despair of the political encroachment could've (and would've) backed Remain.
But given the referendum result, any reversion to remaining would likely demand concessions *and* be seen (or [ab]used as a green light) to integrate more.
Whatever happens in the next 5-10 years, about half the country will not be happy about it.
It's also worth noting that if it had been 52/48 the other way, the same situation would exist, except that the political and media class would've been far more pleased about things. It'd be similar to Owen Jones' approach to terrorist attacks: https://twitter.com/misslauratyrie/status/889195038391119872
In 18 months or so, the Government will present the final deal to Parliament. The LDs will vote against whatever it is, as will the SNP. Labour will also do so - no matter what it will be.
The Tories and the DUP will vote for, apart from the rebels. The Government way well lose.
But we'll then leave the EU and each faction wil then blame the other for what they will both describe as the worst possible option.
Can we fast-forward and do away with the politicking in between?
I agree up to "we'll then leave the EU". I think if the government cannot get a Brexit bill through the House of Commons, then Mrs May will have no choice but to go to the Palace and request a dissolution.
There will then be an election over the terms of the Brexit deal, with the Labour Party promising to renegotiate with the EU, and the LibDems promising we'll stay in.
I don't know what the result of the election will be.
I agree up to '...renegotiate with the EU.'
What makes you think the EU would be willing to do so? It may well be in a take-it-or-leave-it mindset by then. It may alternatively offer to accept withdrawal of the Article 50 letter. We just don't know.
The majority of the EU’s politicians don’t want us to leave. I think they’ll hope we see sense and a) withdraw the A550 letter and b) stop electing people like Farage and Helmer tot he Parliament. We used to have some very good MEP’s.
If by that you mean MEPs who shut up, do as they are told and don't rock the boat then by your definition you are quite right. But that is certainly not who I want representing me.
Your problem is you want to change the whole nature of the British electorate because you disagree with their views.
Like the Corbyn attacks this is misguided. It paints a picture of a man trying to make a difference against opposition from the system. It's exactly where he likes to be.
The tweet is from a Labour MP, encouraging young voters to vote Labour to have their debt wiped out.
A position Corbyn now resiles from
This is not a Tory attack. This is reality biting Corbyn on the ass
It won't damage him. It will strengthen him.
Because it really backs up his claim that he does "straight talking, honest politics"?
@david_herdson If you think it's a 40/1 shot then it's not really so 'out there' at all.
Describing it as odds-on, as you implicitly do (give or take the entry date), is 'out there' though.
In order for that not to be the end-game, one of two near impossible things needs to happen:
- We leave the EU successfully - We remain on the same terms as if nothing has happened
Brexit is this generation's Suez and Eurosceptics will have about as much influence in British politics over the next decade as empire die-hards had in the 60s. It's over.
I think Corbynistas are partly misinterpreting the rise in the Labour vote and are assuming that it is some great vindication of Corbyn. Many people voted Labour to stop May from getting a landslide for her Hard Brexit/No Deal stance. Labour remains in a dangerous position regarding Brexit, and it would just as dangerous for Labour to oppose Brexit as it would be for it to support it.
@david_herdson If you think it's a 40/1 shot then it's not really so 'out there' at all.
Describing it as odds-on, as you implicitly do (give or take the entry date), is 'out there' though.
In order for that not to be the end-game, one of two near impossible things needs to happen:
- We leave the EU successfully - We remain on the same terms as if nothing has happened
Brexit is this generation's Suez and Eurosceptics will have about as much influence in British politics over the next decade as empire die-hards had in the 60s. It's over.
More lunatic wishful thinking from William this morning.
On the disloyal voter business, I guess I'm the kind of centreist that the Tory Party has lost forever now.
...
I'm not sure who I will vote for next time. It depends what happens next, and that's very hard to predict, but it is extremely unlikely I will ever vote for the Party that led us into Brexit, which I regard as the biggest act of political folly in my lifetime.
I completely agree with the above comments.
It is odd, looking back with hindsight, how Major now looks like a stateman, a politician of substance. At the time he seemed so ineffective. I cannot tell whether it is rose-tinted glasses or comparison to the current political pygmies that cause this effect. Having said that, I did vote Tory when Major was running the show because the alternative was Kinnock and, later on, Mr Sweaty.
There are fleeting moments when I forget myself and start to feel ever so slightly sorry for the SNP. A mere two years ago, it was untouchable. It might have lost the referendum but it had won the war for hearts and minds.
Scotland had a majority SNP government at Holyrood, 56 Nationalist MPs at Westminster, and a Yes vote in a second referendum was only a matter of time.
In a brutally short space of time, the voters have confiscated its majority, devastated its Commons contingent, and torn its Indyref 2 plans to shreds.
LOL, CCHQ down to quoting the big jessie blubber, how desperate can you get.
Playing the man rather than the ball again Malcolm. Thing is, the points are all accurate, aren't they? The SNP have gone backwards at Holyrood and Westminster and IndyRef2 is off the table.
Dear Dear David, They won Holyrood election , General election and Indyref2 is not off the table , anything but. You seem to be as deluded as the stupid buffoon Daisley. A blubbering self righteous windbag who has no clue and does not seem to understand basic facts.
The basic facts, as you put it, are that the SNP lost MSPs, lost MPs and that Sturgeon was forced to withdraw her early IndyRef2 proposal.
It's usually the case that when a government loses seats from one election to the next, the forces that drive that loss - tiredness, division, ineptitude, or whatever - will increase and force further losses in the future until such point as the party ends in opposition. The SNP might have the votes to push IndyRef2 through but the land has changed very considerably now that Brexit's been voted for and the realities of what international divorce looks like are being played out for real - and that just within a confederation of less than 50 years' standing (in the UK's case); not a country that was largely a unitary state for 300+ years.
won both elections I repeat , in charge of Scotland at all levels and indyref2 in background if as expected the Tories make an even bigger hash of it than expected , steal all the powers etc. We will see if anyone gets anywhere near them next time, don't hold your breath.
I think Corbynistas are partly misinterpreting the rise in the Labour vote and are assuming that it is some great vindication of Corbyn. Many people voted Labour to stop May from getting a landslide for her Hard Brexit/No Deal stance. Labour remains in a dangerous position regarding Brexit, and it would just as dangerous for Labour to oppose Brexit as it would be for it to support it.
I'm not sure you, or anyone else, can divine exactly the reasons why each of the nearly 13 million people who voted Labour.
The EU will take an uncompromising line with us. It's not entirely good from their point of view to be so inflexible, but to a large extent their hands are tied. They are a legal construct governed by a very intricate set of treaties. Given that, we will either have to accommodate their demands (little say in the rules and regulations we follow; being bound by their jurisdiction) or reject it all, when there isn't an alternative that doesn't damage our prospects. The heart says reject; the head says accommodate. I am fairly sure the head will win and the heart will be mightily pissed off. Our relationship will be very frustrating.
Comments
He was LEAVE before even Farage..
I have no sympathy with nationalists either. Nationalists require some third party on whom to fasten their grievance, whether that is the English, Europe, Jews, or whatever. If they ever get what they want, when they find it doesn't work that also will be the fault of the English, Europe, Jews, or whatever. The modus operandi is also, quite often, to make the blamee reciprocate the hate. The IRA wanted the rest of Britain to despise the Irish so we'd want to get rid of them. The SNP playbook appears similar vis-a-vis the English.
So giving nationalists what they imagine they want does not work. Giving Scotland independence would amplify, not reduce, the SNP's demands for English money. Whatever made Leavers vote for Brexit will not be fixed by Brexit - and economic problems will be because the EU continues to stitch us up. Hamburg was only firebombed because Jews.
For me the EU referendum choice was like the choice US voters faced between Trump and Clinton. Both options were unacceptable. I just had better things to do that day than detour to a polling booth and spoil my ballot paper.
....some argue this means we should negotiate to stay inside the European Economic Area (EEA), which would retain the friction-free trade not only in goods but also in services, upon which the bulk of our economy is based.
However, the political price to be paid for such access is correspondingly high, and runs directly counter to the leavers’ four objectives. In the EEA, Britain would be obliged to keep the four freedoms, including the free movement of people, so no regaining control of our borders; align its regulatory regime with the EU’s – so no regaining sovereignty (in fact we would no longer have a seat at the table so there would actually be a reduction of sovereignty); follow ECJ rulings; and still pay into the EU budget.
The UK would technically not be a member of the EU, but we would in effect become a vassal state: obliged to pay into the union’s budget while having even less sovereignty than we do now – no longer able to appoint commissioners, sit on the EU council to have a say in how we determine our regulations and laws, or appoint British judges to the ECJ to adjudicate disputes...
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/24/leaving-eu-single-market-customs-union-brexit-britain-europe
What could be fairer?
By your logic Richard, Westminster should pass all powers to Cardiff, Edinburgh and Belfast as they are independent countries (nations) which makes Westminster a "supranational body" which can "overrule the choices of the electorate simply because they have a different economic view"
He grunted: ‘Labour have learned nothing because rather than holding the Tories to account, they are still campaigning in Scotland against the SNP, which is odd given the majority of Corbyn’s policies are already being delivered by a progressive SNP Scottish Government. And no one in Scotland should be in any doubt – whether under Kezia Dugdale or Corbyn – Labour are a party that backs an extreme Tory Brexit and policies like Trident renewal, against Scotland’s national interests.’
Mr Dornan’s public statements sometimes read like a shredded dictionary hastily pieced back together so, rest assured, you read that right. There’s no need to vote for Corbyn in Scotland because the SNP is already delivering his policies. Except his policies are extreme and anti-Scottish. But not when the SNP delivers them. Then they’re progressive.
The profound moral incompetence he and his cabal exhibit make him and them wholly unfit for office in any capacity whatever.
Labour will just let Brexit happen and then blame the Tories. Thatcher has faded but she provided a stick that Labour used to beat the Tories with for 40 years. Brexit is the new stick...
There will then be an election over the terms of the Brexit deal, with the Labour Party promising to renegotiate with the EU, and the LibDems promising we'll stay in.
I don't know what the result of the election will be.
But, I absolutely believe that his government had the right to pursue them, after receiving a mandate to do so from the voters. It would have been odious had some supranational body prevented them from doing so.
In any case, 'limiting' UK legislation is exactly the same as stopping it in those circumstances.
It will probably be very narrow vote though. We'll probably LEAVE with the same Commons majority we JOINED all those years ago...
We're joining the Euro, and it couldn't have been done without the help of people who voted to destroy the status quo last June.
It's usually the case that when a government loses seats from one election to the next, the forces that drive that loss - tiredness, division, ineptitude, or whatever - will increase and force further losses in the future until such point as the party ends in opposition. The SNP might have the votes to push IndyRef2 through but the land has changed very considerably now that Brexit's been voted for and the realities of what international divorce looks like are being played out for real - and that just within a confederation of less than 50 years' standing (in the UK's case); not a country that was largely a unitary state for 300+ years.
Go Jezz...
https://twitter.com/MyBoyTrubetskoy/status/889202686813503488
https://twitter.com/UKDefJournal/status/889793387863441408
https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/889766007354609665
The electoral system was literally designed to preclude options for change. And both the Big Two parties have repeatedly and consistently resisted any attempt to change that, as the prospect of power is the most fundamental driver of both of them.
Which gives us an electoral system for the politicians rather than the people. To give us a governing class, albeit one in two factions, and we get whatever alternative the "other" faction deigns to give us
.
Reward bad behaviour and you get more of it.
Which makes your second sentence not only superfluous but misleading. "Corbyn is the only viable alternative. While that remains true, nothing will change" would be more accurate.
https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/nhs-and-brexit-remain-biggest-issues-facing-country
What makes you think the EU would be willing to do so? It may well be in a take-it-or-leave-it mindset by then. It may alternatively offer to accept withdrawal of the Article 50 letter. We just don't know.
As an aside, unless the FTPA has been repealed, Mrs May wouldn't be going to the Palace unless to resign. If she wanted an early election then she'd be placing a dissolution motion before the Commons.
You clearly forget I am in favour of Scottish independence and of the absolute principle of powers being exercised atvthe lowest possible level in the system. It is a driving philosophy behind all of my politics.
Wouldn't we have been better off with three smaller ones?
Nine aircraft are already in service ... and ahead of the carrier commissioning.
"McLaren's Fernando Alonso says the fact there is less reliance on power at the Hungary Grand Prix means the race "presents one of the best opportunities for us this year". (ESPN)"
This has implications at the sharp end too. Ferrari is weaker than Mercedes on power, but better at slower stuff. I do think Vettel is too long. Backed him at 5.2 and tipped earlier around 4.4 (think he's still at that level).
I'll also check Raikkonen's pole (each way) odds.
Also worth recalling Hungary's a difficult place to overtake.
If you want to live in a society rather than a yurt then you have to accept that something has to give, and common rules that benefit all mean that you have to agree to some things your do not like in order to get the other things that you do like.
I am not saying the EU will extend the timetable for negotiations in the event of a change of government, or that it might (in the one in a thousand chance that the LDs won the election) be possible to withdraw the Article 50 notification, I am merely positing that an election would be almost inevitable if the government could not get the Brexit Bill through the HoC.
@Gin
I don't believe that Labour rebels would vote for the Brexit Bill, because they would see the opportunity for Jeremy Corbyn to be elected if the government fell. My - admittedly cynical - view is that even the world's most perfect Brexit settlement, where the EU paid us one trillion pounds per year, would be opposed tooth and nail by Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party, because it wasn't the two trillion pounds Labour would have gotten had they been in power.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-24/deutsche-bank-is-said-to-weigh-moving-350-billion-to-frankfurt-j5i8g8i5?cmpid=BBBXT072517_BIZ&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_term=170725&utm_campaign=brexit
Corbyn says he is a Remainer, albeit a diffident one. NickP has confirmed that this is so. They may both be lying, but I know Nick and I've never thought him to be a liar. I don't know Corbyn, but for a man in his position he seems fairly honest and consistent. He's entitled to change his mind though, especially over the EU, as I have done over the years, and not least because it has changed radically over the years since it began as a sort of free-trade area for six European countries.
Not all of us Labour voters vote for the monkey with the red rosette every time. I switched to the monkey with the yellow rosette last time, precisely because of Brexit. (John Cryer, my sitting Labour MP, is a Brexiteer.)
Labour has good reason to let Brexit continue to happen for the time being, and indeed for as long as it can blame the Tories for it. It may well become a stick with which Labour can beat the Tories for many years, maybe even 40. Longer, possibly.
I think the chances of Britain joining the Euro by 2025 are way out into double figures. Say 40/1.
You would need a massive turnaround in public opinion, you'd need the EU to accept the UK back, and you'd need the Euro not to fall apart in the meantime. The second and third parts are probable, either in their own right or in conjunction with the first. That one, however, is for deluded Eurodreamers.
Technically, you can be outside the EU but inside the single market. Philosophically, you're still in the EU.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/07/what-jeremy-corbyn-gets-right-about-single-market
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/corbyn-fans-your-hero-s-mask-is-slipping-lfpsn7pbf
There is, however, a good argument for increased building of frigates and destroyers, not just for carrier group duties but as vessels to serve on solo duties too.
I am an extremely disloyal voter and re-evalute my voting position at each election. I went Lib Dem last time although I would have ticked "None of the above" if it was an option. It will be the gift that keeps on giving
The Shadow International Trade Secretary this morning reiterated his stance that remaining in the customs union would be bad for Britain and leave it a “vassal state”.
But a spokesperson for Mr Corbyn said it was wrong to “sweep options off the table” - something the leadership team has already done on single market membership.
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/foreign-affairs/brexit/news/87797/labour-brexit-splits-jeremy-corbn-slaps-down-frontbencher
We used to have some very good MEP’s.
I'm unsure whether that is good news for my bet that Trump will make it until 2019....
That this was not a Brexit election—or a Brexit ‘realignment’—in that the vote is better seen as a symptom the longer-term geographical bifurcation of politics; less revenge of the ‘Remainers’ and more a continuing battle of mobilisation between cosmopolitan and non-cosmopolitan areas.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-923X.12403/full
My old man was a One Nation Tory and I would probably have followed in his footsteps but he thought Mrs T was too divisive and his allegiances changed in his later years as a result. I was a young man then of course and regarded both her social and economic policies as completely unacceptable. I did however accept, as most did, that her stance against the Unions was both necessary and courageous, even if the methods were not always strictly kosher.
Major I liked a lot and he might have wooed me into the Tory camp but I hated 'the bastards' as much as he did and of course ever since the Tory well has been poisened by its Europhobic minority. I don't regret supporting Labour through the subsequent period, but am sad that the Centre has not held, and the decline of the LDs has been disappointing for me. I blame FPTP for both these disappointments, but doubt I will see it change in my lifetime.
I'm not sure who I will vote for next time. It depends what happens next, and that's very hard to predict, but it is extremely unlikely I will ever vote for the Party that led us into Brexit, which I regard as the biggest act of political folly in my lifetime.
*they did say this
*they are now saying they didn't
*they can't afford it anyway
pick holes in the story, drive a truck through the maths, point out over and over again what the cost of "every existing student will have all their debt wiped off." If they claim they never made such claims, get these videos, these quotes out there.
You don't just stop at step 1.
Well, you *do* if you're running the Tory 2017 campaign but ...
As well as the entrenchment of views, Cameron's failed renegotiation also served to effectively destroy the centre ground of fudge. If he'd succeeded, then people who like the EU's economic benefits but despair of the political encroachment could've (and would've) backed Remain.
But given the referendum result, any reversion to remaining would likely demand concessions *and* be seen (or [ab]used as a green light) to integrate more.
Whatever happens in the next 5-10 years, about half the country will not be happy about it.
It's also worth noting that if it had been 52/48 the other way, the same situation would exist, except that the political and media class would've been far more pleased about things. It'd be similar to Owen Jones' approach to terrorist attacks:
https://twitter.com/misslauratyrie/status/889195038391119872
Your problem is you want to change the whole nature of the British electorate because you disagree with their views.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-40568413
- We leave the EU successfully
- We remain on the same terms as if nothing has happened
Brexit is this generation's Suez and Eurosceptics will have about as much influence in British politics over the next decade as empire die-hards had in the 60s. It's over.
It is odd, looking back with hindsight, how Major now looks like a stateman, a politician of substance. At the time he seemed so ineffective. I cannot tell whether it is rose-tinted glasses or comparison to the current political pygmies that cause this effect. Having said that, I did vote Tory when Major was running the show because the alternative was Kinnock and, later on, Mr Sweaty.