In simple terms I started as a 60-40 outer and finished at 90 - 10, I still have some regrets but compromises have to be made.
Bus painting, name calling and all the other guff didnt influence me in the slightest.
I moved becasue
- I work in british manufacturing and believe we will do better outside the EU - I am happy that the UK can make its own way in the world and that we should be focussing on GDP per head rather than raw GDP - I prefer to have our politicans held accountable to their electorate - the british establishment had no coherent argument on the benefits of staying in
I started as eurosceptic because the EU will only work for the UK if we adopt european norms on employment law and this country has no appetite to do so
I believe the EU is fundamentally undemocratic and ignores the wishes of its voters.
The EU bureaucracy wishes to form a unitary state, one I have very little affiliation with. But If the others want to form such a state why should we block them
The treatment of the PIGS in 2008 was by a state I didnt want to be a part of
I have no faith in the british political class who have consistently lied about the EU to the electorate. European politicians have been totally upfront on where they are going our guys arent and need a drubbing to get their act together, They have had 2 of them in the last 15 months,
It will have some pain but ultimately I believe we will come back with a better stronger country when the clock has been reset.
But as an Irish passport holder you and your family get to keep all the benefits of EU citizenship that you voted to take away from mine. Lucky you.
I was never asked if I wanted EU citizenship.
Fair point... so why don't we ask people individually to choose whether they want to keep it or not? You can reject yours - I'll choose to keep mine... That way everyone's happy!
You can keep your EU citizenship as long as it is on the same basis as any other dual nationality - that you are subject to UK laws not EU ones when you are in this country. It is the way every other country - including EU members - work.
In simple terms I started as a 60-40 outer and finished at 90 - 10, I still have some regrets but compromises have to be made.
Bus painting, name calling and all the other guff didnt influence me in the slightest.
I moved becasue
- I work in british manufacturing and believe we will do better outside the EU - I am happy that the UK can make its own way in the world and that we should be focussing on GDP per head rather than raw GDP - I prefer to have our politicans held accountable to their electorate - the british establishment had no coherent argument on the benefits of staying in
I started as eurosceptic because the EU will only work for the UK if we adopt european norms on employment law and this country has no appetite to do so
I believe the EU is fundamentally undemocratic and ignores the wishes of its voters.
The EU bureaucracy wishes to form a unitary state, one I have very little affiliation with. But If the others want to form such a state why should we block them
The treatment of the PIGS in 2008 was by a state I didnt want to be a part of
I have no faith in the british political class who have consistently lied about the EU to the electorate. European politicians have been totally upfront on where they are going our guys arent and need a drubbing to get their act together, They have had 2 of them in the last 15 months,
It will have some pain but ultimately I believe we will come back with a better stronger country when the clock has been reset.
But as an Irish passport holder you and your family get to keep all the benefits of EU citizenship that you voted to take away from mine. Lucky you.
I was never asked if I wanted EU citizenship.
I was never asked if I wanted UK citizenship. I am happy to have it, though. Just as I liked the freedoms and opportunities EU citizenship gave me and my family. I am just pleased for Mr Alanbrooke that he was in the fortunate position of being able to take away rights from us that he and his family retain.
Not really a fair comparison is it; you get the citizenship, broadly, of the nation into which you're born.
Not the supranational body in which your country happens to currently be in.
When am I going to get my English citizenship? Nobody asked me if I wanted this supranational union.
You don't count. You have already stated many times before that you disagree with the basic premise of nation states.
How long until we go back to 25 smiling Theresa's?
Evening GIN
Wonderful new road bridge at Queensferry Malc.
Coming home from the north east last week we went over the old bridge which would you believe I watched from my bedroom window in Edinburgh being built over 4 years and crossed it on opening day.
Showing my age just like the old bridge
Big G , good to hear you are well, one of the few gentlemen on here
More evidence that we need to abolish grammar schools, they really do screw children.
One of the country’s leading grammar schools has been accused of acting unlawfully by throwing out sixth-form students who failed to get top grades in AS and equivalent internal exams ahead of their final A-level year.
About 16 pupils at St Olave’s grammar school in Orpington, in the London borough of Bromley, were told their places for year 13 – the last year of school – had been withdrawn after they failed to get the required three Bs. One father accused the school of dumping his son like “old garbage”.
Other students were told they would be allowed to continue on a discretionary basis and were asked to sign a contract warning that if they did not get a minimum B grade in their mocks the school reserved the right not to enter them for their A-level exams.
Lawyers acting for two of the affected families have issued judicial review proceedings against the school’s governing body, also naming Bromley, the local authority responsible for maintaining the school, as an interested party. A hearing has been set for 20 September.
Parents and teachers have criticised the school for behaving like “an exam factory”, focusing purely on results and school league table success at the expense of students’ education and welfare.
In simple terms I started as a 60-40 outer and finished at 90 - 10, I still have some regrets but compromises have to be made.
Bus painting, name calling and all the other guff didnt influence me in the slightest.
I moved becasue
- I work in british manufacturing and believe we will do better outside the EU - I am happy that the UK can make its own way in the world and that we should be focussing on GDP per head rather than raw GDP - I prefer to have our politicans held accountable to their electorate - the british establishment had no coherent argument on the benefits of staying in
I started as eurosceptic because the EU will only work for the UK if we adopt european norms on employment law and this country has no appetite to do so
I believe the EU is fundamentally undemocratic and ignores the wishes of its voters.
The EU bureaucracy wishes to form a unitary state, one I have very little affiliation with. But If the others want to form such a state why should we block them
The treatment of the PIGS in 2008 was by a state I didnt want to be a part of
I have no faith in the british political class who have consistently lied about the EU to the electorate. European politicians have been totally upfront on where they are going our guys arent and need a drubbing to get their act together, They have had 2 of them in the last 15 months,
It will have some pain but ultimately I believe we will come back with a better stronger country when the clock has been reset.
But as an Irish passport holder you and your family get to keep all the benefits of EU citizenship that you voted to take away from mine. Lucky you.
I was never asked if I wanted EU citizenship.
I was never asked if I wanted UK citizenship. I am happy to have it, though. Just as I liked the freedoms and opportunities EU citizenship gave me and my family. I am just pleased for Mr Alanbrooke that he was in the fortunate position of being able to take away rights from us that he and his family retain.
Not really a fair comparison is it; you get the citizenship, broadly, of the nation into which you're born.
Not the supranational body in which your country happens to currently be in.
But you do get EU citizenship like that. And Alanbrooke gets to keep his having voted to remove it from me and my family. Lucky him!
If the privileges of some are so egregious in their effect on others, then the privileges might not be that sensible.
In simple terms I started as a 60-40 outer and finished at 90 - 10, I still have some regrets but compromises have to be made.
Bus painting, name calling and all the other guff didnt influence me in the slightest.
I moved becasue
- I work in british manufacturing and believe we will do better outside the EU - I am happy that the UK can make its own way in the world and that we should be focussing on GDP per head rather than raw GDP - I prefer to have our politicans held accountable to their electorate - the british establishment had no coherent argument on the benefits of staying in
I started as eurosceptic because the EU will only work for the UK if we adopt european norms on employment law and this country has no appetite to do so
I believe the EU is fundamentally undemocratic and ignores the wishes of its voters.
The EU bureaucracy wishes to form a unitary state, one I have very little affiliation with. But If the others want to form such a state why should we block them
The treatment of the PIGS in 2008 was by a state I didnt want to be a part of
I have no faith in the british political class who have consistently lied about the EU to the electorate. European politicians have been totally upfront on where they are going our guys arent and need a drubbing to get their act together, They have had 2 of them in the last 15 months,
It will have some pain but ultimately I believe we will come back with a better stronger country when the clock has been reset.
But as an Irish passport holder you and your family get to keep all the benefits of EU citizenship that you voted to take away from mine. Lucky you.
I was never asked if I wanted EU citizenship.
Fair point... so why don't we ask people individually to choose whether they want to keep it or not? You can reject yours - I'll choose to keep mine... That way everyone's happy!
What, like in a referendum?
Er no, exactly not like a referendum... we don't have a referendum on whether we each want to buy a house or get married... You seem to have overlooked the phrase 'individually to choose' in my post.
The thought that it might not work, at a guess. I assume that we don't have enough domestic demand to support a shipbuilding industry, so we will have to attract overseas orders, and that means taking business away from established Japanese and S Korean shipbuilders who may be better/cheaper/quicker than us.
Even more speculatively, perhaps the brexit gun is being jumped here in that we will be able to put business our own way post brexit in a way we couldn't before. And of course if we take back control of our fisheries we are going to need an expanded fishing fleet.
Ah yes, because we really used to make such a good job of running our businesses back in the early 70s before we joned the EEC!
Businesses really boomed from 73 to 79! Everyone remembers fondly the Winter of Contentedness in 1978/79 when after more than half a decade in the EEC there was sunshine, roses and economic growth for everybody!
Oh yes - good point - I suspect the EEC must have been to blame for the 3-day week and power cuts in 1974 too as we'd joined the previous year.
Somehow we managed to avoid the EEC/EC/EU screwing up our economy again in the past 38 years though - we must have got lucky I guess!
Mostly through avoiding moronic socialist policies
That's very bad news for Labour. The polling companies after the election are presumably no longer underestimating Labour -in the case of Yougov, it wasn't in the first place. To be level pegging when Kinnock and Miliband were ahead by double digits shows again that Corbyn is a liability and that history will show that by saving Corbyn's skin, the real beneficiaries of the 2017 election will be the Tories,
Dream on... if the past two years have taught us anything it's that polls outside of an election campaign are meaningless. The longer this government goes on, the more it will suffer from voter disenchantment, which eventually gets every govenrment.
The next general election in 2019/20 will be a straight choice, full Brexit and an end to free movement under the Tories, or years of big payments to the EU, continued single market membership and unlimited free movement under Labour
If Labour were foolish enough to run on that platform they'd get trounced.
How many constituencies were projected to have voted Leave?
In simple terms I started as a 60-40 outer and finished at 90 - 10, I still have some regrets but compromises have to be made.
Bus painting, name calling and all the other guff didnt influence me in the slightest.
I moved becasue
- I work in british manufacturing and believe we will do better outside the EU - I am happy that the UK can make its own way in the world and that we should be focussing on GDP per head rather than raw GDP - I prefer to have our politicans held accountable to their electorate - the british establishment had no coherent argument on the benefits of staying in
I started as eurosceptic because the EU will only work for the UK if we adopt european norms on employment law and this country has no appetite to do so
I believe the EU is fundamentally undemocratic and ignores the wishes of its voters.
The EU bureaucracy wishes to form a unitary state, one I have very little affiliation with. But If the others want to form such a state why should we block them
The treatment of the PIGS in 2008 was by a state I didnt want to be a part of
I have no faith in the british political class who have consistently lied about the EU to the electorate. European politicians have been totally upfront on where they are going our guys arent and need a drubbing to get their act together, They have had 2 of them in the last 15 months,
It will have some pain but ultimately I believe we will come back with a better stronger country when the clock has been reset.
But as an Irish passport holder you and your family get to keep all the benefits of EU citizenship that you voted to take away from mine. Lucky you.
I was never asked if I wanted EU citizenship.
Fair point... so why don't we ask people individually to choose whether they want to keep it or not? You can reject yours - I'll choose to keep mine... That way everyone's happy!
You can keep your EU citizenship as long as it is on the same basis as any other dual nationality - that you are subject to UK laws not EU ones when you are in this country. It is the way every other country - including EU members - work.
I can't keep my EU citizenship.
I think you missed the point I was replying to. Ben was saying he wants to keep his EU Citizenship. I was agreeing he should be allowed to but under certain conditions. It was a hypothetical not a fact unfortunately.
I wish I could have such unwavering beief in a viewpoit that some leavers have. Their desire to leave is beyond question and yet I have still not seen an argument that tells how in the short or medium term it will make "things better". They treat people who try to explain their concerns with disdain and contempt.
Indeed. The arguments for Brexit have collapsed. The only thing left is "well, we voted for it".
I know Remainers are guilty of a world of guff too, but I search in vain for a confident articulation of Brexit today.
Brexit is the assertion by the majority* that the current social settlement isn't working for them, and the demand that their political servants become more accountable and thus responsive to their needs.
As with pretty much all constitutional reform in this country, it is a perfect demonstration of the error correction inherent within our system that puts elites on notice that the spoils of the day (be they power, money, culture) need to be more evenly shared and not become ever more remote.
*who could be bothered to vote, which in my mind is significant
My irony meter just explodes off the scale every time a partisan Tory starts talking about the need for redistribution.
What a partisan response to a non partisan point. A shame.
Could you please elaborate on how a Tory government post Brexit will redistribute the nations wealth away from London and the South East and towards the poorest people of Britain, and particularly in communities like the NE England or S Wales?
Gary lost his dad this week, and started life very modestly. He certainly has done well for himself but is hardly an out of touch person.
Indeed. What Alan was saying was that he had no substantive response to your point but he was happy to throw out an ad hominem about someone who he perceives as a trendy lefty and, gasp, horror of horrors, has committed the shocking crime of expressing liberal views whilst being successful and achieving wealth.
In Guido Country, where right is might and real men wield their mighty keyboards beneath the sigil of House Dacre, that is the cardinal sin.
The thought that it might not work, at a guess. I assume that we don't have enough domestic demand to support a shipbuilding industry, so we will have to attract overseas orders, and that means taking business away from established Japanese and S Korean shipbuilders who may be better/cheaper/quicker than us.
Even more speculatively, perhaps the brexit gun is being jumped here in that we will be able to put business our own way post brexit in a way we couldn't before. And of course if we take back control of our fisheries we are going to need an expanded fishing fleet.
Ah yes, because we really used to make such a good job of running our businesses back in the early 70s before we joned the EEC!
Businesses really boomed from 73 to 79! Everyone remembers fondly the Winter of Contentedness in 1978/79 when after more than half a decade in the EEC there was sunshine, roses and economic growth for everybody!
Oh yes - good point - I suspect the EEC must have been to blame for the 3-day week and power cuts in 1974 too as we'd joined the previous year.
Somehow we managed to avoid the EEC/EC/EU screwing up our economy again in the past 38 years though - we must have got lucky I guess!
Mostly through avoiding moronic socialist policies
3-day week was on the Tory watch IIRC
At a time when the country was still following socialist principles of massive nationalised industry, over powerful trade unions and collective bargaining. It didn't matter who the Government was, the socialists were still running things. (Into the ground)
The thought that it might not work, at a guess. I assume that we don't have enough domestic demand to support a shipbuilding industry, so we will have to attract overseas orders, and that means taking business away from established Japanese and S Korean shipbuilders who may be better/cheaper/quicker than us.
Even more speculatively, perhaps the brexit gun is being jumped here in that we will be able to put business our own way post brexit in a way we couldn't before. And of course if we take back control of our fisheries we are going to need an expanded fishing fleet.
Ah yes, because we really used to make such a good job of running our businesses back in the early 70s before we joned the EEC!
Ho lee fuk, that must be the dimmest post in the history of pb. What I said was that we might *not* make a good job of running our shipbuilding business now, so what you think you are being sarcastic about God only knows.
A Brexit transition deal cannot last more than two years or it will risk being challenged in the European Court of Justice or shot down in the German parliament, the government has been warned.
The strict timeline on a transition period after Brexit points to a toughening UK approach on the transition deal in which the UK will seek the right to negotiate and sign trade deals - although not finally implement them - during any transition period.
“It’s now difficult to see how any interim period could go beyond two years given the threat of legal challenge,” said a senior Whitehall source with knowledge of the UK negotiating position.
"'It's European solidarity' German carmakers to shun UK business to support Brussels".
Hmm... next week the UK starts real life testing for car emissions. Mercedes and BMW have withdrawn, I think, diesels from the USA market, presumably they don't think they can get through real life tests there. With more rigerous testing here too, perhaps the German manufacturers will get their wish?
My thanks to AndyJS for putting up the Betfair cricket odds on Sunday.
Hows that Northern Powerhouse going ?
I expect it's all built now
Its all a bit bizarre in South Yorkshire - lots of houses, shops and industrial units are being built.
Now I can understand the houses but there's already no shortage of retail and industrial units which have 'To Let' signs on them.
So we're either going to have an economic boom along the M18 or we're in the later stages of a property speculation bubble.
For what it's worth, which may be not much, we went back to Selby for a few days last week, where we lived for 6 years until 2009.
It definitely felt like it was thriving, which was great to see. While we lived there it still seemed to be suffering from the after effects of disappearing industry and mining. Not sure whether it's now benefitting from commuter spillover from Leeds and York but good to see it feeling less run-down than 10 years ago.
Edit: Strangely sad though to see Ferrybridge power station closed and Eggborough now only on stand-by. I know they are not good for the environment but they used to have a weird beauty - huge 'cloud factories' alongside the M62. Only Drax now still pumping out the clouds
They should definitely preserve some of the coal power stations - they're like the cathedrals of the post war era.
I live near the Ironbridge Gorge and many of the residents would like to see the Ironbridge PS cooling towers kept. Closed last year. But it won't happen. Land too valuable, too expensive to maintain etc.
Will Be quite a sight to watch them come down though.
A Brexit transition deal cannot last more than two years or it will risk being challenged in the European Court of Justice or shot down in the German parliament, the government has been warned.
The strict timeline on a transition period after Brexit points to a toughening UK approach on the transition deal in which the UK will seek the right to negotiate and sign trade deals - although not finally implement them - during any transition period.
“It’s now difficult to see how any interim period could go beyond two years given the threat of legal challenge,” said a senior Whitehall source with knowledge of the UK negotiating position.
The thought that it might not work, at a guess. I assume that we don't have enough domestic demand to support a shipbuilding industry, so we will have to attract overseas orders, and that means taking business away from established Japanese and S Korean shipbuilders who may be better/cheaper/quicker than us.
Even more speculatively, perhaps the brexit gun is being jumped here in that we will be able to put business our own way post brexit in a way we couldn't before. And of course if we take back control of our fisheries we are going to need an expanded fishing fleet.
Ah yes, because we really used to make such a good job of running our businesses back in the early 70s before we joned the EEC!
Ho lee fuk, that must be the dimmest post in the history of pb. What I said was that we might *not* make a good job of running our shipbuilding business now, so what you think you are being sarcastic about God only knows.
Ah fair cop Ishmael - I'm afraid I misread your post "put business our own way post brexit in a way we couldn't before" thinking you meant "run business our own way post brexit in a way we couldn't before". Sorry.
Some accolade though: "the dimmest post in the history of pb" - I'll treasure that
How long until we go back to 25 smiling Theresa's?
Evening GIN
Wonderful new road bridge at Queensferry Malc.
Coming home from the north east last week we went over the old bridge which would you believe I watched from my bedroom window in Edinburgh being built over 4 years and crossed it on opening day.
Showing my age just like the old bridge
Big G , good to hear you are well, one of the few gentlemen on here
That's nice of you Malc and yes my wife and I were stunned at the beauty and amazed at its length as we approached it down the M90.
A wonderful piece of engineering all Scotland can be proud of.
It did make me reflect that the old road bridge has not endured that well being opened in 1964, 53 years ago while the new bridge is expected to last over 100 years apparently
In simple terms I started as a 60-40 outer and finished at 90 - 10, I still have some regrets but compromises have to be made.
Bus painting, name calling and all the other guff didnt influence me in the slightest.
I moved becasue
- I work in british manufacturing and believe we will do better outside the EU - I am happy that the UK can make its own way in the world and that we should be focussing on GDP per head rather than raw GDP - I prefer to have our politicans held accountable to their electorate - the british establishment had no coherent argument on the benefits of staying in
I started as eurosceptic because the EU will only work for the UK if we adopt european norms on employment law and this country has no appetite to do so
I believe the EU is fundamentally undemocratic and ignores the wishes of its voters.
The EU bureaucracy wishes to form a unitary state, one I have very little affiliation with. But If the others want to form such a state why should we block them
The treatment of the PIGS in 2008 was by a state I didnt want to be a part of
I have no faith in the british political class who have consistently lied about the EU to the electorate. European politicians have been totally upfront on where they are going our guys arent and need a drubbing to get their act together, They have had 2 of them in the last 15 months,
It will have some pain but ultimately I believe we will come back with a better stronger country when the clock has been reset.
But as an Irish passport holder you and your family get to keep all the benefits of EU citizenship that you voted to take away from mine. Lucky you.
I was never asked if I wanted EU citizenship.
Fair point... so why don't we ask people individually to choose whether they want to keep it or not? You can reject yours - I'll choose to keep mine... That way everyone's happy!
You can keep your EU citizenship as long as it is on the same basis as any other dual nationality - that you are subject to UK laws not EU ones when you are in this country. It is the way every other country - including EU members - work.
I can't keep my EU citizenship.
I think you missed the point I was replying to. Ben was saying he wants to keep his EU Citizenship. I was agreeing he should be allowed to but under certain conditions. It was a hypothetical not a fact unfortunately.
I'd accept your conditions too, but sadly I think Tessa has ruled the possibilty out
That's very bad news for Labour. The polling companies after the election are presumably no longer underestimating Labour -in the case of Yougov, it wasn't in the first place. To be level pegging when Kinnock and Miliband were ahead by double digits shows again that Corbyn is a liability and that history will show that by saving Corbyn's skin, the real beneficiaries of the 2017 election will be the Tories,
Dream on... if the past two years have taught us anything it's that polls outside of an election campaign are meaningless. The longer this government goes on, the more it will suffer from voter disenchantment, which eventually gets every govenrment.
The next general election in 2019/20 will be a straight choice, full Brexit and an end to free movement under the Tories, or years of big payments to the EU, continued single market membership and unlimited free movement under Labour
If Labour were foolish enough to run on that platform they'd get trounced.
How many constituencies were projected to have voted Leave?
2/3 but Labour are heading for that platform, I don't think they would be trounced but they would likely lose certainly
Last month the Labour Party in Scotland tweeted out the YouGov sub sample showing the SNP loosing seats and them only a point or so behind and Baxtered the results. I thought at the time it was pretty desperate stuff - tweeting out sub samples.
Obviously they couldn't do that today since the latest one shows a strong SNP lead which Baxtered would have the SNP back up to 42 seats mainly at Tory expense.
Not suggesting that was a final straw for Kezza but it is still weird having political parties tweeting out subsamples!!
That's very bad news for Labour. The polling companies after the election are presumably no longer underestimating Labour -in the case of Yougov, it wasn't in the first place. To be level pegging when Kinnock and Miliband were ahead by double digits shows again that Corbyn is a liability and that history will show that by saving Corbyn's skin, the real beneficiaries of the 2017 election will be the Tories,
Dream on... if the past two years have taught us anything it's that polls outside of an election campaign are meaningless. The longer this government goes on, the more it will suffer from voter disenchantment, which eventually gets every govenrment.
The next general election in 2019/20 will be a straight choice, full Brexit and an end to free movement under the Tories, or years of big payments to the EU, continued single market membership and unlimited free movement under Labour
If Labour were foolish enough to run on that platform they'd get trounced.
How many constituencies were projected to have voted Leave?
I doubt the next election will be fought on brexit, given even in the last one it hardly got a mention. It will be the economy, standard of living and public services.
A Brexit transition deal cannot last more than two years or it will risk being challenged in the European Court of Justice or shot down in the German parliament, the government has been warned.
The strict timeline on a transition period after Brexit points to a toughening UK approach on the transition deal in which the UK will seek the right to negotiate and sign trade deals - although not finally implement them - during any transition period.
“It’s now difficult to see how any interim period could go beyond two years given the threat of legal challenge,” said a senior Whitehall source with knowledge of the UK negotiating position.
Quoted that earlier on this thread. Puts labour's new policy on life support and is a big blow to those who hope to delay the process until or if the the mood changes to remain.
I'd accept your conditions too, but sadly I think Tessa has ruled the possibilty out
She has unfortunately ruled out many ideas that would have been sensible mostly because she believes the Remainer myth that this was only ever a vote about immigration.
Last month the Labour Party in Scotland tweeted out the YouGov sub sample showing the SNP loosing seats and them only a point or so behind and Baxtered the results. I thought at the time it was pretty desperate stuff - tweeting out sub samples.
Obviously they couldn't do that today since the latest one shows a strong SNP lead which Baxtered would have the SNP back up to 42 seats mainly at Tory expense.
Not suggesting that was a final straw for Kezza but it is still weird having political parties tweeting out subsamples!!
That's very bad news for Labour. The polling companies after the election are presumably no longer underestimating Labour -in the case of Yougov, it wasn't in the first place. To be level pegging when Kinnock and Miliband were ahead by double digits shows again that Corbyn is a liability and that history will show that by saving Corbyn's skin, the real beneficiaries of the 2017 election will be the Tories,
Dream on... if the past two years have taught us anything it's that polls outside of an election campaign are meaningless. The longer this government goes on, the more it will suffer from voter disenchantment, which eventually gets every govenrment.
The next general election in 2019/20 will be a straight choice, full Brexit and an end to free movement under the Tories, or years of big payments to the EU, continued single market membership and unlimited free movement under Labour
If Labour were foolish enough to run on that platform they'd get trounced.
How many constituencies were projected to have voted Leave?
I doubt the next election will be fought on brexit, given even in the last one it hardly got a mention. It will be the economy, standard of living and public services.
Only because Corbyn agreed with May on Brexit (hence he won 20% of 2015 voters), if next time Labour goes in promising to keep free movement etc it will be a pivotal issue
Quoted that earlier on this thread. Puts labour's new policy on life support and is a big blow to those who hope to delay the process until or if the the mood changes to remain.
One of the most important comment pieces to date
I can't see the whole article through the paywall - where does the figure of two years come from? It seems a very odd and over-specific figure unless there is some treaty basis to it.
Quoted that earlier on this thread. Puts labour's new policy on life support and is a big blow to those who hope to delay the process until or if the the mood changes to remain.
One of the most important comment pieces to date
I can't see the whole article through the paywall - where does the figure of two years come from? It seems a very odd and over-specific figure unless there is some treaty basis to it.
Catherine Barnard, professor of EU law Cambridge University, said that allowing the Article 50 divorce proceedings to become a permanent state of affairs, or a backdoor to remaining in the EU, would inevitably invite a court challenge.
Under EU law, the Article 50 ‘divorce deal’ can be agreed after a majority vote by EU member states, but comprehensive trade deals with independent countries - which the UK will become after Brexit - must be unanimously agreed under Article 218.
"Article 50 says nothing on transition. All it contains is a reference to ‘taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union’ but that allows us to read transitional arrangements into that language,” she explained.
“However if a transition period went on too long, it's highly likely someone might challenge the legality by arguing this transition has become a de facto trade agreement and is circumventing the requirement that trade deals are negotiated under Article 207 or Article 217 and the legal procedures set out under Article 218.”
Because of the lack of specificity in Article 50 there remains legal grey areas over how long a transition could be permitted under Article 50.
Jean-Claude Piris, the EU’s former chief lawyer from 1988-2010, said he believed that the length of transition was “a matter for both parties to decide”, but UK officials are clear that a transition that dragged on much beyond would draw a legal challenge - whether successful or not.
Other EU experts said that end of the current 7-year EU budget cycle in 2020 also pointed to a natural ending-point for a two-year transition, since the UK would want to avoid getting entangled in the next budget round.
Catherine Barnard, professor of EU law Cambridge University, said that allowing the Article 50 divorce proceedings to become a permanent state of affairs, or a backdoor to remaining in the EU, would inevitably invite a court challenge.
Under EU law, the Article 50 ‘divorce deal’ can be agreed after a majority vote by EU member states, but comprehensive trade deals with independent countries - which the UK will become after Brexit - must be unanimously agreed under Article 218.
"Article 50 says nothing on transition. All it contains is a reference to ‘taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union’ but that allows us to read transitional arrangements into that language,” she explained.
“However if a transition period went on too long, it's highly likely someone might challenge the legality by arguing this transition has become a de facto trade agreement and is circumventing the requirement that trade deals are negotiated under Article 207 or Article 217 and the legal procedures set out under Article 218.”
Because of the lack of specificity in Article 50 there remains legal grey areas over how long a transition could be permitted under Article 50.
Jean-Claude Piris, the EU’s former chief lawyer from 1988-2010, said he believed that the length of transition was “a matter for both parties to decide”, but UK officials are clear that a transition that dragged on much beyond would draw a legal challenge - whether successful or not.
Other EU experts said that end of the current 7-year EU budget cycle in 2020 also pointed to a natural ending-point for a two-year transition, since the UK would want to avoid getting entangled in the next budget round.
Thanks. It sounds as though the two year figure has no specific justification.
Also, who is going to challenge it? It would be a very strange and potentially expensive hobby for anyone to enter into.
Catherine Barnard, professor of EU law Cambridge University, said that allowing the Article 50 divorce proceedings to become a permanent state of affairs, or a backdoor to remaining in the EU, would inevitably invite a court challenge.
Under EU law, the Article 50 ‘divorce deal’ can be agreed after a majority vote by EU member states, but comprehensive trade deals with independent countries - which the UK will become after Brexit - must be unanimously agreed under Article 218.
"Article 50 says nothing on transition. All it contains is a reference to ‘taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union’ but that allows us to read transitional arrangements into that language,” she explained.
“However if a transition period went on too long, it's highly likely someone might challenge the legality by arguing this transition has become a de facto trade agreement and is circumventing the requirement that trade deals are negotiated under Article 207 or Article 217 and the legal procedures set out under Article 218.”
Because of the lack of specificity in Article 50 there remains legal grey areas over how long a transition could be permitted under Article 50.
Jean-Claude Piris, the EU’s former chief lawyer from 1988-2010, said he believed that the length of transition was “a matter for both parties to decide”, but UK officials are clear that a transition that dragged on much beyond would draw a legal challenge - whether successful or not.
Other EU experts said that end of the current 7-year EU budget cycle in 2020 also pointed to a natural ending-point for a two-year transition, since the UK would want to avoid getting entangled in the next budget round.
Thanks. It sounds as though the two year figure has no specific justification.
Also, who is going to challenge it? It would be a very strange and potentially expensive hobby for anyone to enter into.
Catherine Barnard, professor of EU law Cambridge University, said that allowing the Article 50 divorce proceedings to become a permanent state of affairs, or a backdoor to remaining in the EU, would inevitably invite a court challenge.
Under EU law, the Article 50 ‘divorce deal’ can be agreed after a majority vote by EU member states, but comprehensive trade deals with independent countries - which the UK will become after Brexit - must be unanimously agreed under Article 218.
"Article 50 says nothing on transition. All it contains is a reference to ‘taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union’ but that allows us to read transitional arrangements into that language,” she explained.
“However if a transition period went on too long, it's highly likely someone might challenge the legality by arguing this transition has become a de facto trade agreement and is circumventing the requirement that trade deals are negotiated under Article 207 or Article 217 and the legal procedures set out under Article 218.”
Because of the lack of specificity in Article 50 there remains legal grey areas over how long a transition could be permitted under Article 50.
Jean-Claude Piris, the EU’s former chief lawyer from 1988-2010, said he believed that the length of transition was “a matter for both parties to decide”, but UK officials are clear that a transition that dragged on much beyond would draw a legal challenge - whether successful or not.
Other EU experts said that end of the current 7-year EU budget cycle in 2020 also pointed to a natural ending-point for a two-year transition, since the UK would want to avoid getting entangled in the next budget round.
Thanks. It sounds as though the two year figure has no specific justification.
Also, who is going to challenge it? It would be a very strange and potentially expensive hobby for anyone to enter into.
Plus: And of course, if a two-year transition deal were to be problematic, how much more problematic would the EU27's claim of more than two years' membership fees as an exit bill be? They can't have it both ways!
Catherine Barnard, professor of EU law Cambridge University, said that allowing the Article 50 divorce proceedings to become a permanent state of affairs, or a backdoor to remaining in the EU, would inevitably invite a court challenge.
Under EU law, the Article 50 ‘divorce deal’ can be agreed after a majority vote by EU member states, but comprehensive trade deals with independent countries - which the UK will become after Brexit - must be unanimously agreed under Article 218.
"Article 50 says nothing on transition. All it contains is a reference to ‘taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union’ but that allows us to read transitional arrangements into that language,” she explained.
“However if a transition period went on too long, it's highly likely someone might challenge the legality by arguing this transition has become a de facto trade agreement and is circumventing the requirement that trade deals are negotiated under Article 207 or Article 217 and the legal procedures set out under Article 218.”
Because of the lack of specificity in Article 50 there remains legal grey areas over how long a transition could be permitted under Article 50.
Jean-Claude Piris, the EU’s former chief lawyer from 1988-2010, said he believed that the length of transition was “a matter for both parties to decide”, but UK officials are clear that a transition that dragged on much beyond would draw a legal challenge - whether successful or not.
Other EU experts said that end of the current 7-year EU budget cycle in 2020 also pointed to a natural ending-point for a two-year transition, since the UK would want to avoid getting entangled in the next budget round.
Thanks. It sounds as though the two year figure has no specific justification.
Also, who is going to challenge it? It would be a very strange and potentially expensive hobby for anyone to enter into.
A Brexit transition deal cannot last more than two years or it will risk being challenged in the European Court of Justice or shot down in the German parliament, the government has been warned.
The strict timeline on a transition period after Brexit points to a toughening UK approach on the transition deal in which the UK will seek the right to negotiate and sign trade deals - although not finally implement them - during any transition period.
“It’s now difficult to see how any interim period could go beyond two years given the threat of legal challenge,” said a senior Whitehall source with knowledge of the UK negotiating position.
Quoted that earlier on this thread. Puts labour's new policy on life support and is a big blow to those who hope to delay the process until or if the the mood changes to remain.
One of the most important comment pieces to date
Even a 2 year deal would take us into 2021, beyond a 2019/20 general election, Boris has made clear he will accept a 1 year transition deal maximum
I think he is, if the facts are as reported. A big if, perhaps.
Which bit do you doubt ?
The article says his mother has British nationality and that he was born here. That would make him a British citizen, I believe.
What is 100% clear is that it is bonkers to blame the present PM for the pre-2006 rules. But then, about 95% of the things Theresa May gets blamed for are absolutely nothing to do with her.
Gotta attack the SNP from the left. Is the logical tactic. Davidson sits on the soft right. Sturgeon trying to run a Govt on a falling oil price, and being all things to all true Scotsmen (and women). Shame cos I liked Kezia.
“However if a transition period went on too long, it's highly likely someone might challenge the legality by arguing this transition has become a de facto trade agreement and is circumventing the requirement that trade deals are negotiated under Article 207 or Article 217 and the legal procedures set out under Article 218.”
Hold on. The transition period - however long it is - would be agreed and signed between both parties, yes? It's not just the status-quo, it's a new deal. So it won't be a defacto trade agreement, it'll be a dejure one, and any preexisting legal problems will have to be specifically taken care of in the agreement itself.
In simple terms I started as a 60-40 outer and finished at 90 - 10, I still have some regrets but compromises have to be made.
Bus painting, name calling and all the other guff didnt influence me in the slightest.
I moved becasue
- I work in british manufacturing and believe we will do better outside the EU - I am happy that the UK can make its own way in the world and that we should be focussing on GDP per head rather than raw GDP - I prefer to have our politicans held accountable to their electorate - the british establishment had no coherent argument on the benefits of staying in
I started as eurosceptic because the EU will only work for the UK if we adopt european norms on employment law and this country has no appetite to do so
I believe the EU is fundamentally undemocratic and ignores the wishes of its voters.
The EU bureaucracy wishes to form a unitary state, one I have very little affiliation with. But If the others want to form such a state why should we block them
The treatment of the PIGS in 2008 was by a state I didnt want to be a part of
I have no faith in the british political class who have consistently lied about the EU to the electorate. European politicians have been totally upfront on where they are going our guys arent and need a drubbing to get their act together, They have had 2 of them in the last 15 months,
It will have some pain but ultimately I believe we will come back with a better stronger country when the clock has been reset.
But as an Irish passport holder you and your family get to keep all the benefits of EU citizenship that you voted to take away from mine. Lucky you.
I was never asked if I wanted EU citizenship.
Fair point... so why don't we ask people individually to choose whether they want to keep it or not? You can reject yours - I'll choose to keep mine... That way everyone's happy!
You can keep your EU citizenship as long as it is on the same basis as any other dual nationality - that you are subject to UK laws not EU ones when you are in this country. It is the way every other country - including EU members - work.
Quoted that earlier on this thread. Puts labour's new policy on life support and is a big blow to those who hope to delay the process until or if the the mood changes to remain.
One of the most important comment pieces to date
I can't see the whole article through the paywall - where does the figure of two years come from? It seems a very odd and over-specific figure unless there is some treaty basis to it.
Catherine Barnard, professor of EU law Cambridge University, said that allowing the Article 50 divorce proceedings
And I have to tell you, there is one clear way in which we can preserve these arrangements - and that is for the UK to remain a member of a Customs Union, and of the Single Market. As long as we are still at the stage of considering options as regards customs - and that is what the UK paper two weeks ago does, it presents options - then we have to remind our elected representatives that, by a country mile - and it is still OK to talk in miles in the European Union! - by a country mile, the best solution for Northern Ireland is for the UK to remain within the Customs Union.
I think he is, if the facts are as reported. A big if, perhaps.
Which bit do you doubt ?
The article says his mother has British nationality and that he was born here. That would make him a British citizen, I believe.
What is 100% clear is that it is bonkers to blame the present PM for the pre-2006 rules. But then, about 95% of the things Theresa May gets blamed for are absolutely nothing to do with her.
What is amazing about his case is that he only seems to have come into the 'system' when he has applied for a passport - not when he has been given an NI number, taken A-levels, GCSEs, a driving test. It seems to indicate the system is set up to catch people out only if and when they apply for passports, something a person who knows they're living illegally probably won't go for.......
Britain Elects @britainelects Aug 26 More If an election were held today, our model forecasts...
CON: 298 (-19) LAB: 289 (+27)
JICIPM!!!
If the crazy communist does have to become PM, that would be a cracking position for the Tories to be in: second-time loser Corbyn propped up by Nicola Sturgeon, Tories still largest party and only 20 seats away from power...
I think he is, if the facts are as reported. A big if, perhaps.
Which bit do you doubt ?
The article says his mother has British nationality and that he was born here. That would make him a British citizen, I believe.
What is 100% clear is that it is bonkers to blame the present PM for the pre-2006 rules. But then, about 95% of the things Theresa May gets blamed for are absolutely nothing to do with her.
Father is British but not eligible to claim via father if he wasn't married to mother under pre-2006 rules.
Says mother is an Australian but dual-national British due to her parents so I don't understand why he can't claim British citizenship from her. Except that you can't claim via grandparents (citizenship only travels one generation) so if she's not actually British and the article is wrong then that would close that route too.
Gotta attack the SNP from the left. Is the logical tactic. Davidson sits on the soft right. Sturgeon trying to run a Govt on a falling oil price, and being all things to all true Scotsmen (and women). Shame cos I liked Kezia.
Kezia was a lightweight. Who will get the job now ?
There was a discussion on Bloomberg a few days ago that came to the conclusion the pound is now undervalued and expectation is that it will bounce back. The US rate is quite good at present
I moved some GBP into USD earlier this year and have been checking it every day, so I may have some insights here
Firstly, I was stupidly surprised at the importance of central bankers. We speak of Trump, Juncker and May but far more important are Yelland, Draghi and Carney. Day-to-day and week to week movements tend to be dependent on things like the dates of upcoming speeches and - to put it bluntly - gossip and rumour, especially on interest rates.
Secondly, the Trump bump has turned into the Trump slump. At election Trump was seen as a probusiness agent who would introduce legislation to favour business, but his focus since inauguration has been on socially conservative or antibusiness measures via executive orders or privileges and his ability to get legislation thru Congress is seen as compromised.
Thirdly, Brexit is not causing further falls in GBP/USD: the damage seems to have been arrested, at least for this year. Since it hit the low of, what, $1.19 earlier this year, it has been sinewaving gently upwards[1] and it now about $1.3. However Brexit is acting as a retardant: whenever GBP attains a head of steam some Brexitty piece of folderol crops up and slows it down or reverses it.
Fourthly: EUR is doing well. Economic news from the EZ/EU27 has been good and rumours (remember the power of rumour) about the ECB starting to taper off quantitative easing (or somesuch) is making it go further. Combined with the latest goss about no UK interest rate rises soon[2] I don't see GBP rising against EUR any time soon.
Fifthly: predictions are ten-a-penny. This year I have seen predictions of £1=$1.15 (Deutsche bank) and £1=$1.4 (I forget whom). The way things are going I can see it hitting £1=$1.35 by year end, but bear in mind it's nearly September now.
Sixthly, it is difficult to invest in other currencies. Conversion costs eat up any profit and holding more than two currencies make it even worse unless you can transfer from C to A without going via B. I might still move some money into Euros, but it would be to minimise loss rather than make a profit.
Gotta attack the SNP from the left. Is the logical tactic. Davidson sits on the soft right. Sturgeon trying to run a Govt on a falling oil price, and being all things to all true Scotsmen (and women). Shame cos I liked Kezia.
Kezia was a lightweight. Who will get the job now ?
I haven't seen an apology from the arrogant Martin Boon.
Although he does have annoying Twitter habits, Martin Boon had well-thought-out reasons for polling as he did. He was simply wrong, not malevolent nor careless.
I think he is, if the facts are as reported. A big if, perhaps.
Which bit do you doubt ?
The article says his mother has British nationality and that he was born here. That would make him a British citizen, I believe.
What is 100% clear is that it is bonkers to blame the present PM for the pre-2006 rules. But then, about 95% of the things Theresa May gets blamed for are absolutely nothing to do with her.
Father is British but not eligible to claim via father if he wasn't married to mother under pre-2006 rules.
Says mother is an Australian but dual-national British due to her parents so I don't understand why he can't claim British citizenship from her. Except that you can't claim via grandparents (citizenship only travels one generation) so if she's not actually British and the article is wrong then that would close that route too.
Reading other articles, it looks like he was born outside the UK. Mother was British by descent and couldn't pass on UK naitonality, so he could only claim via his father. As his parents weren't married and he was born before 2006 he doesn't qualify.
Thanks. It sounds as though the two year figure has no specific justification.
Also, who is going to challenge it? It would be a very strange and potentially expensive hobby for anyone to enter into.
More to the point, it a potential challenger going to wait two years to make the challenge? "I disagree with this agreement, but I can't be arsed to do this now so I'll wait for a bit. That's OK, yeah?"
A good link, thank you. It seems that LeCarre has now reached the twilight stage in his career where instead of inventing new characters he revisits old ones. To adopt a film metaphor, if "A Legacy of Spies" is his "Prometheus", I will be pleased, but if it's his "Alien: Covenant"...well, let us draw a kindly veil...
Gotta attack the SNP from the left. Is the logical tactic. Davidson sits on the soft right. Sturgeon trying to run a Govt on a falling oil price, and being all things to all true Scotsmen (and women). Shame cos I liked Kezia.
She was absolute crap though the best they have, so god knows what absolute donkey will take over
I think he is, if the facts are as reported. A big if, perhaps.
Which bit do you doubt ?
The article says his mother has British nationality and that he was born here. That would make him a British citizen, I believe.
What is 100% clear is that it is bonkers to blame the present PM for the pre-2006 rules. But then, about 95% of the things Theresa May gets blamed for are absolutely nothing to do with her.
Father is British but not eligible to claim via father if he wasn't married to mother under pre-2006 rules.
Says mother is an Australian but dual-national British due to her parents so I don't understand why he can't claim British citizenship from her. Except that you can't claim via grandparents (citizenship only travels one generation) so if she's not actually British and the article is wrong then that would close that route too.
Reading other articles, it looks like he was born outside the UK. Mother was British by descent and couldn't pass on UK naitonality, so he could only claim via his father. As his parents weren't married and he was born before 2006 he doesn't qualify.
No, he was born in the UK. His mother was born in Australia when her British parents were visiting (and is now a U.K. citizen).
I think he is, if the facts are as reported. A big if, perhaps.
Which bit do you doubt ?
The article says his mother has British nationality and that he was born here. That would make him a British citizen, I believe.
What is 100% clear is that it is bonkers to blame the present PM for the pre-2006 rules. But then, about 95% of the things Theresa May gets blamed for are absolutely nothing to do with her.
I didn't even mention May, so I'm not sure where that part of your response comes from.
It is interesting, though, that the rules for residence and nationality are something of an impenetrable thicket for people like this guy who get tangled up in them. That doesn't seem to bother you as much as making the point that May, who as a very long serving Home Secretary and then PM might the one person in the country who bears some responsibility for that, be exonerated of any such thing.
Comments
How many constituencies were projected to have voted Leave?
In Guido Country, where right is might and real men wield their mighty keyboards beneath the sigil of House Dacre, that is the cardinal sin.
The strict timeline on a transition period after Brexit points to a toughening UK approach on the transition deal in which the UK will seek the right to negotiate and sign trade deals - although not finally implement them - during any transition period.
“It’s now difficult to see how any interim period could go beyond two years given the threat of legal challenge,” said a senior Whitehall source with knowledge of the UK negotiating position.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/29/brexit-transition-deal-could-face-legal-challenge-shot-german/
Hmm... next week the UK starts real life testing for car emissions. Mercedes and BMW have withdrawn, I think, diesels from the USA market, presumably they don't think they can get through real life tests there. With more rigerous testing here too, perhaps the German manufacturers will get their wish?
Will Be quite a sight to watch them come down though.
CON: 42% =
LD 7%=
KABOOM
Are ICM still in business?
Some accolade though: "the dimmest post in the history of pb" - I'll treasure that
Needs an actual Socialist to replace her
A wonderful piece of engineering all Scotland can be proud of.
It did make me reflect that the old road bridge has not endured that well being opened in 1964, 53 years ago while the new bridge is expected to last over 100 years apparently
Last month the Labour Party in Scotland tweeted out the YouGov sub sample showing the SNP loosing seats and them only a point or so behind and Baxtered the results. I thought at the time it was pretty desperate stuff - tweeting out sub samples.
Obviously they couldn't do that today since the latest one shows a strong SNP lead which Baxtered would have the SNP back up to 42 seats mainly at Tory expense.
Not suggesting that was a final straw for Kezza but it is still weird having political parties tweeting out subsamples!!
One of the most important comment pieces to date
http://www.activate.uk.net/events/
Under EU law, the Article 50 ‘divorce deal’ can be agreed after a majority vote by EU member states, but comprehensive trade deals with independent countries - which the UK will become after Brexit - must be unanimously agreed under Article 218.
"Article 50 says nothing on transition. All it contains is a reference to ‘taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union’ but that allows us to read transitional arrangements into that language,” she explained.
“However if a transition period went on too long, it's highly likely someone might challenge the legality by arguing this transition has become a de facto trade agreement and is circumventing the requirement that trade deals are negotiated under Article 207 or Article 217 and the legal procedures set out under Article 218.”
Because of the lack of specificity in Article 50 there remains legal grey areas over how long a transition could be permitted under Article 50.
Jean-Claude Piris, the EU’s former chief lawyer from 1988-2010, said he believed that the length of transition was “a matter for both parties to decide”, but UK officials are clear that a transition that dragged on much beyond would draw a legal challenge - whether successful or not.
Other EU experts said that end of the current 7-year EU budget cycle in 2020 also pointed to a natural ending-point for a two-year transition, since the UK would want to avoid getting entangled in the next budget round.
Also, who is going to challenge it? It would be a very strange and potentially expensive hobby for anyone to enter into.
and/or
ii) Use Brexit to pour encourager les autres any other countries that might be considering leaving the EU
CON: 46.5% (+14.1)
LAB: 35.2% (+20.8)
IND: 13.9% (-6.2)
YORK: 4.4% (+4.4)
No UKIP (-16.7) and Grn (-8.6) as prev.
Wow
Corbyn plus one
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/aug/29/joiner-shane-ridge-born-and-raised-in-britain-told-to-leave-home-office
Carwyn next
Britain Elects @britainelects Aug 26
More
If an election were held today, our model forecasts...
CON: 298 (-19)
LAB: 289 (+27)
JICIPM!!!
She's completely incompetent.
What is 100% clear is that it is bonkers to blame the present PM for the pre-2006 rules. But then, about 95% of the things Theresa May gets blamed for are absolutely nothing to do with her.
Oh.
https://www.dfa.ie/news-and-media/speeches/speeches-archive/2017/august/minister-coveney-remarks-to-ni-chamber-of-commerce/
And I have to tell you, there is one clear way in which we can preserve these arrangements - and that is for the UK to remain a member of a Customs Union, and of the Single Market. As long as we are still at the stage of considering options as regards customs - and that is what the UK paper two weeks ago does, it presents options - then we have to remind our elected representatives that, by a country mile - and it is still OK to talk in miles in the European Union! - by a country mile, the best solution for Northern Ireland is for the UK to remain within the Customs Union.
It seems to indicate the system is set up to catch people out only if and when they apply for passports, something a person who knows they're living illegally probably won't go for.......
https://allevents.in/london/day-of-the-disappeared-benefit-concert/279767592504064
Going with a couple of friends, but would be nice to see some PB faces.
Or, if you can't come but would like to support it:
https://www.justgiving.com/campaigns/charity/redcross/dayofthedisappeared2017
Says mother is an Australian but dual-national British due to her parents so I don't understand why he can't claim British citizenship from her. Except that you can't claim via grandparents (citizenship only travels one generation) so if she's not actually British and the article is wrong then that would close that route too.
Firstly, I was stupidly surprised at the importance of central bankers. We speak of Trump, Juncker and May but far more important are Yelland, Draghi and Carney. Day-to-day and week to week movements tend to be dependent on things like the dates of upcoming speeches and - to put it bluntly - gossip and rumour, especially on interest rates.
Secondly, the Trump bump has turned into the Trump slump. At election Trump was seen as a probusiness agent who would introduce legislation to favour business, but his focus since inauguration has been on socially conservative or antibusiness measures via executive orders or privileges and his ability to get legislation thru Congress is seen as compromised.
Thirdly, Brexit is not causing further falls in GBP/USD: the damage seems to have been arrested, at least for this year. Since it hit the low of, what, $1.19 earlier this year, it has been sinewaving gently upwards[1] and it now about $1.3. However Brexit is acting as a retardant: whenever GBP attains a head of steam some Brexitty piece of folderol crops up and slows it down or reverses it.
Fourthly: EUR is doing well. Economic news from the EZ/EU27 has been good and rumours (remember the power of rumour) about the ECB starting to taper off quantitative easing (or somesuch) is making it go further. Combined with the latest goss about no UK interest rate rises soon[2] I don't see GBP rising against EUR any time soon.
Fifthly: predictions are ten-a-penny. This year I have seen predictions of £1=$1.15 (Deutsche bank) and £1=$1.4 (I forget whom). The way things are going I can see it hitting £1=$1.35 by year end, but bear in mind it's nearly September now.
Sixthly, it is difficult to invest in other currencies. Conversion costs eat up any profit and holding more than two currencies make it even worse unless you can transfer from C to A without going via B. I might still move some money into Euros, but it would be to minimise loss rather than make a profit.
[1] See http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=GBP&to=USD&view=1Y
[2] This week at least. Rumours really swarm on this one...
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/08/25/books/review/john-le-carre-ben-macintyre-british-spy-thrillers.html?smid=tw-share&referer=https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2017/08/donald-trump-russia-putin/amp
His mother was born in Australia when her British parents were visiting (and is now a U.K. citizen).
It is interesting, though, that the rules for residence and nationality are something of an impenetrable thicket for people like this guy who get tangled up in them.
That doesn't seem to bother you as much as making the point that May, who as a very long serving Home Secretary and then PM might the one person in the country who bears some responsibility for that, be exonerated of any such thing.