The assumption which some people are making here that party members will back Boris is wrong, I think. He has had a chance to show himself a serious figure as Foreign Sec, and all he has done is confirm the already considerable doubts people had about him.
Going down the list of Conservatives in Mike's list of odds:
David Davis: Yep, a possibility, especially if its an early contest. By far the most serious and impressive of the key Leave figures and if he can pull off a decent deal with the EU, his reputation will improve dramatically. Of course, the converse is true as well. He's getting on a bit, though.
Phillip Hammond: Yep, a strong possibility, appealing to the grown-up wing of the party, but not exactly one to set the pulses racing. But then, do we want our pulses raced?
JRM: You cannot be serious
Boris: Nope
Amber Rudd: She's talented and feisty, came over notably well in the GE2017 campaign, and has navigated the treacherous post-referendum waters well . However, her tiny majority is a problem.
Ruth Davidson: Nope, not a candidate in any plausible scenario
Damian Green: Articulate and likeable, a possible unity candidate with few enemies, coming through like John Major as the unifying Stop XXX candidate. Might be worth a punt.
Andrea Leadsom: Who?
Michael Gove: Intriguing, high-risk. Probably not, but 40/1 is not too bad
Sajid Javid: Hard to see what his appeal would be compare with others already mentioned
James Cleverly etc: Nope
Amongst longer shots: Consider Esther McVey
Damian Green is barely an asterisk in Conservative Home polls of Tory members, Hammond polls poorly with the members and the public, Davis will be too tied to the Brexit deal or failure to get one, Rudd polls worse than May v Corbyn, Gove's poll ratings with the public are abysmal, none of the others hold a big enough seat in Cabinet to be considered a contender to become PM for the foreseeable future.
Boris tops the polls of the public and along with JRM is the closest rival to Davis in polls of Tory members, he remains the one to beat for me
we go to WTO ,they do too and get nothing for their trouble. It hardly shows a Europe that is open for business - reputational risk sits on their side.
A prediction: if there's a disorderly Brexit, either the EU or the UK will break apart as a consequence.
we go to WTO ,they do too and get nothing for their trouble. It hardly shows a Europe that is open for business - reputational risk sits on their side.
A prediction: if there's a disorderly Brexit, either the EU or the UK will break apart as a consequence.
Tory members will demand a Leaver especially with a transition period to ensure free movement is ultimately ended. The MPs at the end of the day want to save their seats and beat Corbyn and however you cut it the only current Tory able to do that is probably Boris
Merely because May didn't beat Corbyn harder than a dominatrix paid by the lash isn't a sign that he isn't a weak and implausible leader. It is merely a sign that she ran a dreadful campaign. There is good reason to think that a sober, serious candidate willing to meet voters and offer them a positive message could do rather better.
Boris vs Corbyn would be two cheeks of the same arse. Two vacillating and inept populists with a long track record of incompetence and failure going against each other to see who can make the most outlandish promises to the biggest rallies. The only party celebrating that would be the Yellows.
As for 'Tory members will demand a Leaver,' I disagree. I think they will demand quality ahead of what will be archaic principle.
Show me the polling evidence? All the polling evidence suggests a populist like Boris does best v Corbyn in terms of the Tory vote, if not Boris you may as well stick with May who outperforms all the others
Europe will be exactly in the same position as they are now vis-à-vis other countries. Only their relationship with the UK will be changing.
I don't think that's true. Existing EU trade deals and WTO terms were agreed on the basis that access to the UK market was part of the deal. In particular, WTO tariff-rate quotas will have to be apportioned between the EU27 and the UK.
Based on a tiny sample, it looks like the safe, grey, middle candidate -- supported as much for who they are not, rather than who they are -- is favoured to take over in government as prime minister, so John Major (not Hestletine) or Theresa May (not Boris or Gove). I'd imagine that favours Philip Hammond and Amber Rudd if Theresa May resigns, and even more so if May is forced to stand down.
Boris's main hope is that if Labour has a huge poll lead, he might be seen as a vote-winner and MPs hold their noses to save their seats. Otherwise, Boris is disliked by many MPs and what is worse, distrusted, and much of his "joke" support has leached away to Jacob Rees-Mogg. Gove and Davis probably have too many enemies and no compensatory qualities like Boris.
If the contest is towards the end of the Brexit negotiations, that will probably favour Hammond rather than Davis if, as I expect, the final package looks a lot like Hammond's and the Treasury's position.
Only if MPs decide now members decide and that boosts Boris plus Hammond and Rudd both poll worse than May v Corbyn while Boris does fractionally better than May and of course Churchill like Boris was not grey when WW2 broke out and he became leader and Brexit is another big issue and Leavers will want a true Brexiteer to ensure 'Brexit means Brexit'
The members will not get a vote if the takeover is in government and especially if the PM is forced out. I could be wrong but that is what will govern my betting. It may be that not even MPs are consulted if the Cabinet agrees on a successor -- think Howard. Incidentally, the men in grey suits will need to check their choice with the DUP or the government will fall: another reason for not letting it go to a vote.
If Brexit is smooth and Theresa May leads the party into a 2022 election, then everything will be different and the members will make the final choice, but for betting purposes, it is too remote to have any more than a blanket probability.
Hammond to beat Rudd, or Boris if Labour has a big lead.
Tory members will revolt if they are not consulted again this time, remember members chose Cameron who won a majority, Tory MPs chose both Howard and May by coronation neither of whom won a majority
Boris would likely call a general election soon after his election anyway making the DUP redundant
Damian Green is barely an asterisk in Conservative Home polls of Tory members, Hammond polls poorly with the members and the public, Davis will be too tied to the Brexit deal or failure to get one, Rudd polls worse than May v Corbyn, Gove's poll ratings with the public are abysmal, none of the others hold a big enough seat in Cabinet to be considered a contender to become PM for the foreseeable future.
Boris tops the polls of the public and along with JRM is the closest rival to Davis in polls of Tory members, he remains the one to beat for me
It doesn't work like that. Firstly, you are being misled by superficial name recognition, which can easily change during a leadership contest. Secondly, even if you weren't, it's not a first-past-the-post election where the winner is the candidate out of all the possible runners who gets the most votes. In particular, the anti-Boris vote would be huge if he were to be one of the two contenders offered to members.
we go to WTO ,they do too and get nothing for their trouble. It hardly shows a Europe that is open for business - reputational risk sits on their side.
A prediction: if there's a disorderly Brexit, either the EU or the UK will break apart as a consequence.
we go to WTO ,they do too and get nothing for their trouble. It hardly shows a Europe that is open for business - reputational risk sits on their side.
A prediction: if there's a disorderly Brexit, either the EU or the UK will break apart as a consequence.
Prediction: there won't be a disorderly Brexit.
Agree. We'll pay the exit fee and agree to a lot of other stuff to avoid that disorderly Brexit. Assuming that being so, it's in our interest to get on with it rather than concede at the last moment
Let's just be clear - if there is no deal it will be an utter disaster for the UK and it will be an utter disaster for the EU. Nobody is going to be stopping to compare relative disasters to decide who "won", everyone will have lost and everyone will be punished by the electorate.
"The UK got a worse disaster than we did" is not an election winning slogan or a motto for an organisation that is meant to be a bastion of co-operation and free trade. There will be theatrics, there will be temper tantrums, and toys will be thrown out of the pram... and then a deal will be made. It's how the EU works.
Europe will be exactly in the same position as they are now vis-à-vis other countries. Only their relationship with the UK will be changing.
I don't think that's true. Existing EU trade deals and WTO terms were agreed on the basis that access to the UK market was part of the deal. In particular, WTO tariff-rate quotas will have to be apportioned between the EU27 and the UK.
So if there's no deal the EU "crashes out" too?
To an extent, yes.
This also applies to UK-EU27 trade as well. Yesterday Michael O'Leary was going on about a pending disaster if there's no deal on air travel:
“All bookings for summer 2019 will carry a government health warning, that this is subject to regulatory approval.”
He added: “What is increasingly likely to happen is that there will be no flights. Mrs May and the Brexiteers will be trying to explain that to you in 12 months’ time, why getting a car to Scotland or a ferry to Ireland are the only options on offer.”
He's right, of course, but what he omitted to say was that that would be a truly major disaster for the EU27 as well. Imagine the impact on the Greek, Cypriot, Maltese, Spanish and Portugese economies if UK tourism suddenly stops dead.
Damian Green is barely an asterisk in Conservative Home polls of Tory members, Hammond polls poorly with the members and the public, Davis will be too tied to the Brexit deal or failure to get one, Rudd polls worse than May v Corbyn, Gove's poll ratings with the public are abysmal, none of the others hold a big enough seat in Cabinet to be considered a contender to become PM for the foreseeable future.
Boris tops the polls of the public and along with JRM is the closest rival to Davis in polls of Tory members, he remains the one to beat for me
It doesn't work like that. Firstly, you are being misled by superficial name recognition, which can easily change during a leadership contest. Secondly, even if you weren't, it's not a first-past-the-post election where the winner is the candidate out of all the possible runners who gets the most votes. In particular, the anti-Boris vote would be huge if he were to be one of the two contenders offered to members.
It is not name recognition, Hammond is Chancellor and Rudd Home Secretary and they still poll worse than Boris with the public (e.g. Boris is more flexible on the public sector pay cap than Hammond and not associated with the NI rise plan as he was, not associated with the dementia tax like May, nor a Remainer like Rudd)
There may be a significant anti Boris vote but at the end of the day Tory members want to beat Corbyn and that is a huge asset in favour of Boris
Back in 2015, when Greece was attempting to renegotiate its bailout terms, the EU negotiators kept going on about the need for trust – which to them meant fulfilling the existing bailout terms, in full. As I listened to M. Barnier going on about the need for trust, I heard those voices again. The jaws of the Greek trap are opening, and the UK negotiators are walking straight into it.
For all the shouting and screaming over Brexit, the balance of Leave/Remain, Right/Wrong has stayed remarkably constant... compare and contrast with the fortunes of Trump and Macron. http://www.lifestuff.xyz/blog/brexit-trumps-macron
we go to WTO ,they do too and get nothing for their trouble. It hardly shows a Europe that is open for business - reputational risk sits on their side.
A prediction: if there's a disorderly Brexit, either the EU or the UK will break apart as a consequence.
Europe will be exactly in the same position as they are now vis-à-vis other countries. Only their relationship with the UK will be changing.
I don't think that's true. Existing EU trade deals and WTO terms were agreed on the basis that access to the UK market was part of the deal. In particular, WTO tariff-rate quotas will have to be apportioned between the EU27 and the UK.
So if there's no deal the EU "crashes out" too?
To an extent, yes.
This also applies to UK-EU27 trade as well. Yesterday Michael O'Leary was going on about a pending disaster if there's no deal on air travel:
“All bookings for summer 2019 will carry a government health warning, that this is subject to regulatory approval.”
He added: “What is increasingly likely to happen is that there will be no flights. Mrs May and the Brexiteers will be trying to explain that to you in 12 months’ time, why getting a car to Scotland or a ferry to Ireland are the only options on offer.”
He's right, of course, but what he omitted to say was that that would be a truly major disaster for the EU27 as well. Imagine the impact on the Greek, Cypriot, Maltese, Spanish and Portugese economies if UK tourism suddenly stops dead.
Yes, but apparently the preservation of the EU legal order is more important. I'm sure everyone working in the tourism industry will understand that they lost their jobs for this very important cause, won't lash out at the politicians in charge, and won;t have a negative impact on their perception of the EU. After all they are good European citizens who are willing to sacrifice everything at the altar of the EU if it is so demanded.
Europe will be exactly in the same position as they are now vis-à-vis other countries. Only their relationship with the UK will be changing.
I don't think that's true. Existing EU trade deals and WTO terms were agreed on the basis that access to the UK market was part of the deal. In particular, WTO tariff-rate quotas will have to be apportioned between the EU27 and the UK.
Lamb and oranges. TFQs for lamb particularly with New Zealand are there to allow preferential trade between New Zealand and the UK. The rest of the EU isn't interested but New Zealand could throw up a fuss about it. The UK has no domestic citrus production to protect and all things being equal might remove all tariffs but the EU may ask for them to be retained in exchange for concessions to the UK, for example on lamb and beef. It's not completely straightforward.
I believe that there is a solution to this impasse but not yet as both sides have to virtually fall out to follow the script.
On the 29th March 2019 we leave the EU on a two year transition deal where we continue to pay into the organisation but that at the end of the two year period we agree to pay an ex gratia amount towards the EU for their on going costs as a gesture of goodwill, subject to a non tariff trade deal.
If we pay £20 billion for the two years than a sum of circa £30 billion sense would have prevailed and both sides could move on. Total cost of circa £70 billion
For all the shouting and screaming over Brexit, the balance of Leave/Remain, Right/Wrong has stayed remarkably constant... compare and contrast with the fortunes of Trump and Macron. http://www.lifestuff.xyz/blog/brexit-trumps-macron
Brexit, Trump, Macron… the revolutions of the unexpected, the anti-establishment and the outsider. But only one remains popular… Brexit.
Damian Green is barely an asterisk in Conservative Home polls of Tory members, Hammond polls poorly with the members and the public, Davis will be too tied to the Brexit deal or failure to get one, Rudd polls worse than May v Corbyn, Gove's poll ratings with the public are abysmal, none of the others hold a big enough seat in Cabinet to be considered a contender to become PM for the foreseeable future.
Boris tops the polls of the public and along with JRM is the closest rival to Davis in polls of Tory members, he remains the one to beat for me
It doesn't work like that. Firstly, you are being misled by superficial name recognition, which can easily change during a leadership contest. Secondly, even if you weren't, it's not a first-past-the-post election where the winner is the candidate out of all the possible runners who gets the most votes. In particular, the anti-Boris vote would be huge if he were to be one of the two contenders offered to members.
The assumption which some people are making here that party members will back Boris is wrong, I think. He has had a chance to show himself a serious figure as Foreign Sec, and all he has done is confirm the already considerable doubts people had about him.
Going down the list of Conservatives in Mike's list of odds:
David Davis: Yep, a possibility, especially if its an early contest. By far the most serious and impressive of the key Leave figures and if he can pull off a decent deal with the EU, his reputation will improve dramatically. Of course, the converse is true as well. He's getting on a bit, though.
Phillip Hammond: Yep, a strong possibility, appealing to the grown-up wing of the party, but not exactly one to set the pulses racing. But then, do we want our pulses raced?
JRM: You cannot be serious
Boris: Nope
Amber Rudd: She's talented and feisty, came over notably well in the GE2017 campaign, and has navigated the treacherous post-referendum waters well . However, her tiny majority is a problem.
Ruth Davidson: Nope, not a candidate in any plausible scenario
Damian Green: Articulate and likeable, a possible unity candidate with few enemies, coming through like John Major as the unifying Stop XXX candidate. Might be worth a punt.
Andrea Leadsom: Who?
Michael Gove: Intriguing, high-risk. Probably not, but 40/1 is not too bad
Sajid Javid: Hard to see what his appeal would be compare with others already mentioned
For all the shouting and screaming over Brexit, the balance of Leave/Remain, Right/Wrong has stayed remarkably constant... compare and contrast with the fortunes of Trump and Macron. http://www.lifestuff.xyz/blog/brexit-trumps-macron
Brexit, Trump, Macron… the revolutions of the unexpected, the anti-establishment and the outsider. But only one remains popular… Brexit.
The amorphous one that isn't attached to any single individual's reputation? Hardly surprising.
I've said before and will say again: None of this will be settled by the Commission.
This will come down to the political judgement of the Council of Ministers and the UK government.
My best guess is a fudge on the money: Continue payments in 2019 and 2020 - total €18bn plus one-off share-of-the-house settlement of another #9bn paid in 2021 in return for comprehensive free trade deal, mutual recognition of standards and qualifications plus the establishment of a EU-UK court to settle disputes.
Most of next year will be taken up with Davis-Barnier stalemate, culminating with the grown-ups taking over and doing a deal at the October summit.
I believe that there is a solution to this impasse but not yet as both sides have to virtually fall out to follow the script.
On the 29th March 2019 we leave the EU on a two year transition deal where we continue to pay into the organisation but that at the end of the two year period we agree to pay an ex gratia amount towards the EU for their on going costs as a gesture of goodwill, subject to a non tariff trade deal.
If we pay £20 billion for the two years than a sum of circa £30 billion sense would have prevailed and both sides could move on. Total cost of circa £70 billion
Damian Green is barely an asterisk in Conservative Home polls of Tory members, Hammond polls poorly with the members and the public, Davis will be too tied to the Brexit deal or failure to get one, Rudd polls worse than May v Corbyn, Gove's poll ratings with the public are abysmal, none of the others hold a big enough seat in Cabinet to be considered a contender to become PM for the foreseeable future.
Boris tops the polls of the public and along with JRM is the closest rival to Davis in polls of Tory members, he remains the one to beat for me
It doesn't work like that. Firstly, you are being misled by superficial name recognition, which can easily change during a leadership contest. Secondly, even if you weren't, it's not a first-past-the-post election where the winner is the candidate out of all the possible runners who gets the most votes. In particular, the anti-Boris vote would be huge if he were to be one of the two contenders offered to members.
Boris vs one of Hague's 60/1 outsiders?
Quite possibly. Bear in mind that the other candidate would have been specially chosen by MPs as the Stop Boris option. HYUFD's faith in polls is touching, but it just doesn't work in a way which polls can measure. What's more, we only have to go back to last year to see this: who on earth would have thought that Andrea Leadsom might be in the final two?
Amber Rudd as a unity candidate? She's one of the most over-promoted members of the cabinet and will be distracted during a general election due to her occupying a marginal seat. Plus, she's the Home Secretary, she heads the department responsible for producing Government PR disasters on a regular basis - how is that meant to help?
Last Home Secretary didn't do too badly....er! May be not....
For all the shouting and screaming over Brexit, the balance of Leave/Remain, Right/Wrong has stayed remarkably constant... compare and contrast with the fortunes of Trump and Macron. http://www.lifestuff.xyz/blog/brexit-trumps-macron
Brexit, Trump, Macron… the revolutions of the unexpected, the anti-establishment and the outsider. But only one remains popular… Brexit.
The amorphous one that isn't attached to any single individual's reputation? Hardly surprising.
Europe will be exactly in the same position as they are now vis-à-vis other countries. Only their relationship with the UK will be changing.
I don't think that's true. Existing EU trade deals and WTO terms were agreed on the basis that access to the UK market was part of the deal. In particular, WTO tariff-rate quotas will have to be apportioned between the EU27 and the UK.
So if there's no deal the EU "crashes out" too?
To an extent, yes.
This also applies to UK-EU27 trade as well. Yesterday Michael O'Leary was going on about a pending disaster if there's no deal on air travel:
“All bookings for summer 2019 will carry a government health warning, that this is subject to regulatory approval.”
He added: “What is increasingly likely to happen is that there will be no flights. Mrs May and the Brexiteers will be trying to explain that to you in 12 months’ time, why getting a car to Scotland or a ferry to Ireland are the only options on offer.”
He's right, of course, but what he omitted to say was that that would be a truly major disaster for the EU27 as well. Imagine the impact on the Greek, Cypriot, Maltese, Spanish and Portugese economies if UK tourism suddenly stops dead.
The EU can get us to concede, eventually, on the stuff that is important to them without stopping all air travel. This doesn't give us any leverage. Our main leverages are paying them lots of money, allowing their citizens to work freely in the UK, supporting their international positions diplomatically and giving Ireland what it wants. That's what they are interested in. If we give them those things we become interesting to them too.
Europe will be exactly in the same position as they are now vis-à-vis other countries. Only their relationship with the UK will be changing.
For us, it could be a change with every country. I am not sure we could set up the logistics to go WTO by March 2019.
There's still a sense of disbelief that there will be practical consequences and a hope that it'll be all right on the night. It's Brexit change denial.
for which side ?
no deal affects both
It's not a symmetrical threat. If affects the UK sooner and to a greater degree.
I suppose many EU banks sell their products in the UK? Didn't the Deutsche Bank recently expand their efforts to sign up rich people in the UK?
Deutsche Bank already has a UK legal entity, offices, UK capital, and is FSA regulated. They would be unaffected in the UK by a WTO Brexit, because they have a presence here.
By contrast, if you look at my old firm, we were a UK based asset manager, with no staff or offices outside the UK. A large portion of our client base was French retail. In the event of WTO Brexit, we would need to create an EU domiciled wrapper. (In Switzerland, which was not covered by the single financial passport, we had a local partner who acted as the legal entity, and which took a big fee.)
Unexpected to all those who think the exchange rate is a virility symbol and could never understand why countries like Germany and China wanted a low rate.
Damian Green is barely an asterisk in Conservative Home polls of Tory members, Hammond polls poorly with the members and the public, Davis will be too tied to the Brexit deal or failure to get one, Rudd polls worse than May v Corbyn, Gove's poll ratings with the public are abysmal, none of the others hold a big enough seat in Cabinet to be considered a contender to become PM for the foreseeable future.
Boris tops the polls of the public and along with JRM is the closest rival to Davis in polls of Tory members, he remains the one to beat for me
It doesn't work like that. Firstly, you are being misled by superficial name recognition, which can easily change during a leadership contest. Secondly, even if you weren't, it's not a first-past-the-post election where the winner is the candidate out of all the possible runners who gets the most votes. In particular, the anti-Boris vote would be huge if he were to be one of the two contenders offered to members.
Boris vs one of Hague's 60/1 outsiders?
Quite possibly. Bear in mind that the other candidate would have been specially chosen by MPs as the Stop Boris option. HYUFD's faith in polls is touching, but it just doesn't work in a way which polls can measure. What's more, we only have to go back to last year to see this: who on earth would have thought that Andrea Leadsom might be in the final two?
Leadsom was only in the final 2 because Boris dropped out, indeed Boris backed her when he withdrew. This new outsider candidate would also need a big Cabinet job first and to prove himself or herself in the polls, remember Major only won the leadership in 1990 after a poll showed him doing slightly better than Heseltine against Kinnock following Thatcher's fall
Damian Green is barely an asterisk in Conservative Home polls of Tory members, Hammond polls poorly with the members and the public, Davis will be too tied to the Brexit deal or failure to get one, Rudd polls worse than May v Corbyn, Gove's poll ratings with the public are abysmal, none of the others hold a big enough seat in Cabinet to be considered a contender to become PM for the foreseeable future.
Boris tops the polls of the public and along with JRM is the closest rival to Davis in polls of Tory members, he remains the one to beat for me
It doesn't work like that. Firstly, you are being misled by superficial name recognition, which can easily change during a leadership contest. Secondly, even if you weren't, it's not a first-past-the-post election where the winner is the candidate out of all the possible runners who gets the most votes. In particular, the anti-Boris vote would be huge if he were to be one of the two contenders offered to members.
Boris vs one of Hague's 60/1 outsiders?
Quite possibly. Bear in mind that the other candidate would have been specially chosen by MPs as the Stop Boris option. HYUFD's faith in polls is touching, but it just doesn't work in a way which polls can measure. What's more, we only have to go back to last year to see this: who on earth would have thought that Andrea Leadsom might be in the final two?
Leadsom was only in the final 2 because Boris dropped out, indeed Boris backed her when he withdrew. This new outsider candidate would also need a big Cabinet job first and prove himself in the polls, remember Major only won the leadership in 1990 after a poll showed him doing slightly better than Heseltine against Kinnock following Thatcher's fall
Not a criticism but surely the new big cabinet role could be 'himself/herself'
Europe will be exactly in the same position as they are now vis-à-vis other countries. Only their relationship with the UK will be changing.
For us, it could be a change with every country. I am not sure we could set up the logistics to go WTO by March 2019.
There's still a sense of disbelief that there will be practical consequences and a hope that it'll be all right on the night. It's Brexit change denial.
for which side ?
no deal affects both
It's not a symmetrical threat. If affects the UK sooner and to a greater degree.
If the UK and the EU are plunged into a recession like the one in 2008/9 because of the lack of a deal people aren't going to stop and compare GDP contraction between EU27 and UK. The fact that someone in the UK might be doing even worse is no compensation to a person who just lost their job in the EU, they just want to punish the people responsible...
Andrew Neil, while perhaps eliding some of the detail, is essentially right.
The key point he is right on is that this is not about the UK wanting special access to the EU market as some sort of one-sided request for a privilege, it's about the UK wanting a reciprocal deal whereby they get favourable access to the world's fifth or sixth largest economy. This needs to be reiterated again and again. Do they want this or not?
Of course they want it.
But they've also realised that the later the deal happens, the better it is for them. Delay is beneficial to the EU, and damaging to the UK.
So, the EU benefits from allowing the UK to have full access to EU financial services market. But it also benefits from firms moving jobs to the EU. So, it will likely cave only on financial market access at 11:59 on the last day of the negotiations.
We really can't expect them - or any negotiating counterparty - to act in anything other than their own interest. They are trying to maximise their outcome, and the outcome for us is - and shouldn't be - any concern of theirs. Conversely the same is true of us. We want the best deal for the UK, not the best deal for the UK and the EU.
On his worst day, David Cameron is better than the shower of shit listed above.
Was Cameron's worst day the one where he almost broke up the UK, the one when he set Brexit in motion, or when he stormed off to leave the aforementioned shower of shit to clean up his mess?
On his worst day, David Cameron is better than the shower of shit listed above.
Can you clarify what David Cameron's worst day is? The day he resigned after his foreign policy collapsed or the day we discovered his peculiar love for bacon?
On his worst day, David Cameron is better than the shower of shit listed above.
I was a great supporter of David Cameron and it is a shame he is not around today. However, he was lazy with Juncker and should have walked out on him when he refused to consider any compromise on free movement.
Indeed, it is to the shame of the EU that they continue to allow Juncker to hold any position in the EU. He as much as Cameron is responsible for the present position
The photograph of him and Blair in close on each other in the press today is toe curling
Interesting the Jeremy Hunt is not on the list at all. Despite having the public persona of a genital wart, he really should be higher. Surely he has to run or resign.
FWIW I think it's Gove next. Ambitious, ruthless and mad enough to want it. David Davis is beyond useless.
Interesting the Jeremy Hunt is not on the list at all. Despite having the public persona of a genital wart, he really should be higher. Surely he has to run or resign.
FWIW I think it's Gove next. Ambitious, ruthless and mad enough to want it. David Davis is beyond useless.
I think he has already indicated that Health Secretary will be his last job in Government
On his worst day, David Cameron is better than the shower of shit listed above.
Can you clarify what David Cameron's worst day is? The day he resigned after his foreign policy collapsed or the day we discovered his peculiar love for bacon?
Politically, Dave considered his worst day shortly after the Millie Dowler phone hacking story broke.
He had been lied to by Andy Coulson and then Rebekah Brooks announced she was closing the NOTW because much worse was to come.
Both the public and private polling showed Dave's ratings collapsing (although the Tory private polling showed that it really wasn't a salient issue among floating voters.) But he did wonder if he might become the shortest serving PM since Callaghan/Eden.
Dave found the bacon story funny, it was bollocks as he privately put it, apparently anyone who attended the dump knows one couldn't be a member of both the Bullingdon and the Piers Gaveston society, and Dave was clearly (and publicly) Bullingdon material.
I think it confirmed to Dave he was right not to give Lord Ashcroft a ministerial role.
I was a great supporter of David Cameron and it is a shame he is not around today. However, he was lazy with Juncker and should have walked out on him when he refused to consider any compromise on free movement.
Juncker doesn't have any power to compromise on free movement.
Perhaps not having a written constitution is a handicap for us politically in engaging with other states in rules based cooperation because our default assumption is that leaders can just make it up as they go along and we take it personally when they don't.
I was a great supporter of David Cameron and it is a shame he is not around today. However, he was lazy with Juncker and should have walked out on him when he refused to consider any compromise on free movement.
Juncker doesn't have any power to compromise on free movement.
Perhaps not having a written constitution is a handicap for us politically in engaging with other states in rules based cooperation because our default assumption is that leaders can just make it up as they go along and we take it personally when they don't.
Juncker should not have power in anything. That was one thing David Cameron got absolutely right when he opposed his candidacy for President. The man is worse than useless
Damian Green is barely an asterisk in Conservative Home polls of Tory members, Hammond polls poorly with the members and the public, Davis will be too tied to the Brexit deal or failure to get one, Rudd polls worse than May v Corbyn, Gove's poll ratings with the public are abysmal, none of the others hold a big enough seat in Cabinet to be considered a contender to become PM for the foreseeable future.
Boris tops the polls of the public and along with JRM is the closest rival to Davis in polls of Tory members, he remains the one to beat for me
It doesn't work like that. Firstly, you are being misled by superficial name recognition, which can easily change during a leadership contest. Secondly, even if you weren't, it's not a first-past-the-post election where the winner is the candidate out of all the possible runners who gets the most votes. In particular, the anti-Boris vote would be huge if he were to be one of the two contenders offered to members.
Boris vs one of Hague's 60/1 outsiders?
Quite possibly. Bear in mind that the other candidate would have been specially chosen by MPs as the Stop Boris option. HYUFD's faith in polls is touching, but it just doesn't work in a way which polls can measure. What's more, we only have to go back to last year to see this: who on earth would have thought that Andrea Leadsom might be in the final two?
Leadsom was only in the final 2 because Boris dropped out, indeed Boris backed her when he withdrew. This new outsider candidate would also need a big Cabinet job first and prove himself in the polls, remember Major only won the leadership in 1990 after a poll showed him doing slightly better than Heseltine against Kinnock following Thatcher's fall
Not a criticism but surely the new big cabinet role could be 'himself/herself'
Interesting the Jeremy Hunt is not on the list at all. Despite having the public persona of a genital wart, he really should be higher. Surely he has to run or resign.
FWIW I think it's Gove next. Ambitious, ruthless and mad enough to want it. David Davis is beyond useless.
I think he has already indicated that Health Secretary will be his last job in Government
That sort of statement can be discounted. In the same way as Gove ruled it out and May isn't going to have an early general election.
It's just stuff that politicians say. I am sure that Hunt could be persuaded for the good of the party, yadda, yadda yadda.
Has the Populus study not been mentioned yet? They asked panels of MPs who the next leader of their party is most likely to be. For the Conservatives; Boris came top with 32%, Davis second with 20%, and then the field completely fractures with a joint 3rd place of Dominic Raab and Damian Green on 5%.
Labour picture is even more fragmented - Starmer on 15% with Cooper and Rayner in 2nd and 3rd place within 4% of him. Suggests everything to place for whenever the vacancy arises.
On his worst day, David Cameron is better than the shower of shit listed above.
I was a great supporter of David Cameron and it is a shame he is not around today. However, he was lazy with Juncker and should have walked out on him when he refused to consider any compromise on free movement.
Indeed, it is to the shame of the EU that they continue to allow Juncker to hold any position in the EU. He as much as Cameron is responsible for the present position
The photograph of him and Blair in close on each other in the press today is toe curling
Has the Populus study not been mentioned yet? They asked panels of MPs who the next leader of their party is most likely to be. For the Conservatives; Boris came top with 32%, Davis second with 20%, and then the field completely fractures with a joint 3rd place of Dominic Raab and Damian Green on 5%.
Labour picture is even more fragmented - Starmer on 15% with Cooper and Rayner in 2nd and 3rd place within 4% of him. Suggests everything to place for whenever the vacancy arises.
Europe will be exactly in the same position as they are now vis-à-vis other countries. Only their relationship with the UK will be changing.
For us, it could be a change with every country. I am not sure we could set up the logistics to go WTO by March 2019.
There's still a sense of disbelief that there will be practical consequences and a hope that it'll be all right on the night. It's Brexit change denial.
for which side ?
no deal affects both
It's not a symmetrical threat. If affects the UK sooner and to a greater degree.
If the UK and the EU are plunged into a recession like the one in 2008/9 because of the lack of a deal people aren't going to stop and compare GDP contraction between EU27 and UK. The fact that someone in the UK might be doing even worse is no compensation to a person who just lost their job in the EU, they just want to punish the people responsible...
The thing is, the EU has rebalanced since 2007/8, and we haven't.
In 2007/8, we ran a huge current account deficit, and so did large chunks of the Eurozone.
Now, the Eurozone countries running deficits are few and far between: Cyprus is the only one with a deficit bigger than ours, and countries like Spain, and Italy now run fairly sizeable surpluses.
George Osborne has many fans on this site. But ultimately, he failed to rebalance the UK economy. Despite the advantage of having our own currency, our exports have risen less than Spain, Portugal or Greece in the last decade. We've borrowed from abroad to spend on new iPhones and BMWs.
We tell ourselves how great our economic model is. Yet our model seems to involve borrowing from other countries to buy their products. I can't be anything other than pretty pessimistic about our prospects. (Note: this is not because of Brexit. This is because we have the most unbalanced economy in the developed world.)
Andrew Neil, while perhaps eliding some of the detail, is essentially right.
The key point he is right on is that this is not about the UK wanting special access to the EU market as some sort of one-sided request for a privilege, it's about the UK wanting a reciprocal deal whereby they get favourable access to the world's fifth or sixth largest economy. This needs to be reiterated again and again. Do they want this or not?
Of course they want it.
But they've also realised that the later the deal happens, the better it is for them. Delay is beneficial to the EU, and damaging to the UK.
So, the EU benefits from allowing the UK to have full access to EU financial services market. But it also benefits from firms moving jobs to the EU. So, it will likely cave only on financial market access at 11:59 on the last day of the negotiations.
We really can't expect them - or any negotiating counterparty - to act in anything other than their own interest. They are trying to maximise their outcome, and the outcome for us is - and shouldn't be - any concern of theirs. Conversely the same is true of us. We want the best deal for the UK, not the best deal for the UK and the EU.
Good negotiators - especially in a repeat encounter model - are concerned about the other side's outcome
On his worst day, David Cameron is better than the shower of shit listed above.
Can you clarify what David Cameron's worst day is? The day he resigned after his foreign policy collapsed or the day we discovered his peculiar love for bacon?
Politically, Dave considered his worst day shortly after the Millie Dowler phone hacking story broke.
He had been lied to by Andy Coulson and then Rebekah Brooks announced she was closing the NOTW because much worse was to come.
Both the public and private polling showed Dave's ratings collapsing (although the Tory private polling showed that it really wasn't a salient issue among floating voters.)
Dave found the bacon story funny, it was bollocks as he privately put it, apparently anyone who attended the dump knows one couldn't be a member of both the Bullingdon and the Piers Gaveston society, and Dave was clearly (and publicly) Bullingdon material.
I think it confirmed to Dave he was right not to give Lord Ashcroft a ministerial role.
Are you David Cameron's psychoanalyst?
Seriously, on what basis do you claim to know Dave's worst day or the inner thoughts of George Osborne ?
I mean, you sound like a 8-year old obsessed with the latest trivia about members of a boy band. Yeah, Dave's favourite colour is green, and George's best day is when he blew a big soap bubble.
Europe will be exactly in the same position as they are now vis-à-vis other countries. Only their relationship with the UK will be changing.
For us, it could be a change with every country. I am not sure we could set up the logistics to go WTO by March 2019.
There's still a sense of disbelief that there will be practical consequences and a hope that it'll be all right on the night. It's Brexit change denial.
for which side ?
no deal affects both
It's not a symmetrical threat. If affects the UK sooner and to a greater degree.
If the UK and the EU are plunged into a recession like the one in 2008/9 because of the lack of a deal people aren't going to stop and compare GDP contraction between EU27 and UK. The fact that someone in the UK might be doing even worse is no compensation to a person who just lost their job in the EU, they just want to punish the people responsible...
The thing is, the EU has rebalanced since 2007/8, and we haven't.
In 2007/8, we ran a huge current account deficit, and so did large chunks of the Eurozone.
Now, the Eurozone countries running deficits are few and far between: Cyprus is the only one with a deficit bigger than ours, and countries like Spain, and Italy now run fairly sizeable surpluses.
George Osborne has many fans on this site. But ultimately, he failed to rebalance the UK economy. Despite the advantage of having our own currency, our exports have risen less than Spain, Portugal or Greece in the last decade. We've borrowed from abroad to spend on new iPhones and BMWs.
We tell ourselves how great our economic model is. Yet our model seems to involve borrowing from other countries to buy their products. I can't be anything other than pretty pessimistic about our prospects. (Note: this is not because of Brexit. This is because we have the most unbalanced economy in the developed world.)
I may be mistaken but haven't exports risen relative to exports since 24/6/16?
Europe will be exactly in the same position as they are now vis-à-vis other countries. Only their relationship with the UK will be changing.
For us, it could be a change with every country. I am not sure we could set up the logistics to go WTO by March 2019.
There's still a sense of disbelief that there will be practical consequences and a hope that it'll be all right on the night. It's Brexit change denial.
for which side ?
no deal affects both
It's not a symmetrical threat. If affects the UK sooner and to a greater degree.
If the UK and the EU are plunged into a recession like the one in 2008/9 because of the lack of a deal people aren't going to stop and compare GDP contraction between EU27 and UK. The fact that someone in the UK might be doing even worse is no compensation to a person who just lost their job in the EU, they just want to punish the people responsible...
The thing is, the EU has rebalanced since 2007/8, and we haven't.
In 2007/8, we ran a huge current account deficit, and so did large chunks of the Eurozone.
Now, the Eurozone countries running deficits are few and far between: Cyprus is the only one with a deficit bigger than ours, and countries like Spain, and Italy now run fairly sizeable surpluses.
George Osborne has many fans on this site. But ultimately, he failed to rebalance the UK economy. Despite the advantage of having our own currency, our exports have risen less than Spain, Portugal or Greece in the last decade. We've borrowed from abroad to spend on new iPhones and BMWs.
We tell ourselves how great our economic model is. Yet our model seems to involve borrowing from other countries to buy their products. I can't be anything other than pretty pessimistic about our prospects. (Note: this is not because of Brexit. This is because we have the most unbalanced economy in the developed world.)
I may be mistaken but haven't exports risen relative to exports since 24/6/16?
Is Brexit itself rebalancing the economy?
Our current account deficit has improved, yes. But it's still at a horrendous level.
Ultimately, closing the current account deficit will require the savings rate to rise. And a rising savings rate means falling consumer spending, and that's very rarely pretty.
We tell ourselves how great our economic model is. Yet our model seems to involve borrowing from other countries to buy their products. I can't be anything other than pretty pessimistic about our prospects. (Note: this is not because of Brexit. This is because we have the most unbalanced economy in the developed world.)
I agree with that. It's the reason why I've been a long-term Sterling bear for several years, and why I have weighted my long-term investments to non-UK assets and to those UK-quoted companies with international income streams. Brexit reinforces the point.
Andrew Neil, while perhaps eliding some of the detail, is essentially right.
The key point he is right on is that this is not about the UK wanting special access to the EU market as some sort of one-sided request for a privilege, it's about the UK wanting a reciprocal deal whereby they get favourable access to the world's fifth or sixth largest economy. This needs to be reiterated again and again. Do they want this or not?
Of course they want it.
But they've also realised that the later the deal happens, the better it is for them. Delay is beneficial to the EU, and damaging to the UK.
So, the EU benefits from allowing the UK to have full access to EU financial services market. But it also benefits from firms moving jobs to the EU. So, it will likely cave only on financial market access at 11:59 on the last day of the negotiations.
We really can't expect them - or any negotiating counterparty - to act in anything other than their own interest. They are trying to maximise their outcome, and the outcome for us is - and shouldn't be - any concern of theirs. Conversely the same is true of us. We want the best deal for the UK, not the best deal for the UK and the EU.
Good negotiators - especially in a repeat encounter model - are concerned about the other side's outcome
How many times do you think we'll be leaving the EU?
Europe will be exactly in the same position as they are now vis-à-vis other countries. Only their relationship with the UK will be changing.
For us, it could be a change with every country. I am not sure we could set up the logistics to go WTO by March 2019.
There's still a sense of disbelief that there will be practical consequences and a hope that it'll be all right on the night. It's Brexit change denial.
for which side ?
no deal affects both
It's not a symmetrical threat. If affects the UK sooner and to a greater degree.
If the UK and the EU are plunged into a recession like the one in 2008/9 because of the lack of a deal people aren't going to stop and compare GDP contraction between EU27 and UK. The fact that someone in the UK might be doing even worse is no compensation to a person who just lost their job in the EU, they just want to punish the people responsible...
The thing is, the EU has rebalanced since 2007/8, and we haven't.
In 2007/8, we ran a huge current account deficit, and so did large chunks of the Eurozone.
Now, the Eurozone countries running deficits are few and far between: Cyprus is the only one with a deficit bigger than ours, and countries like Spain, and Italy now run fairly sizeable surpluses.
George Osborne has many fans on this site. But ultimately, he failed to rebalance the UK economy. Despite the advantage of having our own currency, our exports have risen less than Spain, Portugal or Greece in the last decade. We've borrowed from abroad to spend on new iPhones and BMWs.
We tell ourselves how great our economic model is. Yet our model seems to involve borrowing from other countries to buy their products. I can't be anything other than pretty pessimistic about our prospects. (Note: this is not because of Brexit. This is because we have the most unbalanced economy in the developed world.)
I may be mistaken but haven't exports risen relative to exports since 24/6/16?
Is Brexit itself rebalancing the economy?
What would you expect when your currency drops by 15% or more. Of course, a bit later imports get dearer too. There will still be an advantage for exports, if labour costs can be held back.
But that is not why people were voting to Leave, were they ?
On his worst day, David Cameron is better than the shower of shit listed above.
Can you clarify what David Cameron's worst day is? The day he resigned after his foreign policy collapsed or the day we discovered his peculiar love for bacon?
Politically, Dave considered his worst day shortly after the Millie Dowler phone hacking story broke.
He had been lied to by Andy Coulson and then Rebekah Brooks announced she was closing the NOTW because much worse was to come.
Both the public and private polling showed Dave's ratings collapsing (although the Tory private polling showed that it really wasn't a salient issue among floating voters.)
Dave found the bacon story funny, it was bollocks as he privately put it, apparently anyone who attended the dump knows one couldn't be a member of both the Bullingdon and the Piers Gaveston society, and Dave was clearly (and publicly) Bullingdon material.
I think it confirmed to Dave he was right not to give Lord Ashcroft a ministerial role.
Are you David Cameron's psychoanalyst?
Seriously, on what basis do you claim to know Dave's worst day or the inner thoughts of George Osborne ?
I mean, you sound like a 8-year old obsessed with the latest trivia about members of a boy band. Yeah, Dave's favourite colour is green, and George's best day is when he blew a big soap bubble.
It's almost like I've met David Cameron and George Osborne on a few occasions, talked to them, and keep in touch with people who work(ed) for them.
Europe will be exactly in the same position as they are now vis-à-vis other countries. Only their relationship with the UK will be changing.
For us, it could be a change with every country. I am not sure we could set up the logistics to go WTO by March 2019.
There's still a sense of disbelief that there will be practical consequences and a hope that it'll be all right on the night. It's Brexit change denial.
for which side ?
no deal affects both
It's not a symmetrical threat. If affects the UK sooner and to a greater degree.
If the UK and the EU are plunged into a recession like the one in 2008/9 because of the lack of a deal people aren't going to stop and compare GDP contraction between EU27 and UK. The fact that someone in the UK might be doing even worse is no compensation to a person who just lost their job in the EU, they just want to punish the people responsible...
The thing is, the EU has rebalanced since 2007/8, and we haven't.
In 2007/8, we ran a huge current account deficit, and so did large chunks of the Eurozone.
Now, the Eurozone countries running deficits are few and far between: Cyprus is the only one with a deficit bigger than ours, and countries like Spain, and Italy now run fairly sizeable surpluses.
George Osborne has many fans on this site. But ultimately, he failed to rebalance the UK economy. Despite the advantage of having our own currency, our exports have risen less than Spain, Portugal or Greece in the last decade. We've borrowed from abroad to spend on new iPhones and BMWs.
We tell ourselves how great our economic model is. Yet our model seems to involve borrowing from other countries to buy their products. I can't be anything other than pretty pessimistic about our prospects. (Note: this is not because of Brexit. This is because we have the most unbalanced economy in the developed world.)
I may be mistaken but haven't exports risen relative to exports since 24/6/16?
Is Brexit itself rebalancing the economy?
What would you expect when your currency drops by 15% or more. Of course, a bit later imports get dearer too. There will still be an advantage for exports, if labour costs can be held back.
But that is not why people were voting to Leave, were they ?
So, just to clear this up, the Labour supporting Surby wants to keep wages down?
Europe will be exactly in the same position as they are now vis-à-vis other countries. Only their relationship with the UK will be changing.
For us, it could be a change with every country. I am not sure we could set up the logistics to go WTO by March 2019.
There's still a sense of disbelief that there will be practical consequences and a hope that it'll be all right on the night. It's Brexit change denial.
for which side ?
no deal affects both
It's not a symmetrical threat. If affects the UK sooner and to a greater degree.
If the UK and the EU are plunged into a recession like the one in 2008/9 ,,...
The thing is, the EU has rebalanced since 2007/8, and we haven't.
In 2007/8, we ran a huge current account deficit, and so did large chunks of the Eurozone.
Now, the Eurozone countries running deficits are few and far between: Cyprus is the only one with a deficit bigger than ours, and countries like Spain, and Italy now run fairly sizeable surpluses.
George Osborne has many fans on this site. But ultimately, he failed to rebalance the UK economy. Despite the advantage of having our own currency, our exports have risen less than Spain, Portugal or Greece in the last decade. We've borrowed from abroad to spend on new iPhones and BMWs.
We tell ourselves how great our economic model is. Yet our model seems to involve borrowing from other countries to buy their products. I can't be anything other than pretty pessimistic about our prospects. (Note: this is not because of Brexit. This is because we have the most unbalanced economy in the developed world.)
I may be mistaken but haven't exports risen relative to exports since 24/6/16?
Is Brexit itself rebalancing the economy?
Our current account deficit has improved, yes. But it's still at a horrendous level.
Ultimately, closing the current account deficit will require the savings rate to rise. And a rising savings rate means falling consumer spending, and that's very rarely pretty.
Britain for many, many years [ centuries ] have run current account deficits but always managed to pay for that with invisible surpluses. Brexit: the lack of passport may affect that [ but only with the EU countries ]. Sterling depreciation will help compete against New York, Singapore, Hong Kong.
But is this what "sovereignty" is about ? The right to periodically devalue our currency !
On his worst day, David Cameron is better than the shower of shit listed above.
Can you clarify what David Cameron's worst day is? The day he resigned after his foreign policy collapsed or the day we discovered his peculiar love for bacon?
Politically, Dave considered his worst day shortly after the Millie Dowler phone hacking story broke.
He had been lied to by Andy Coulson and then Rebekah Brooks announced she was closing the NOTW because much worse was to come.
Both the public and private polling showed Dave's ratings collapsing (although the Tory private polling showed that it really wasn't a salient issue among floating voters.)
Dave found the bacon story funny, it was bollocks as he privately put it, apparently anyone who attended the dump knows one couldn't be a member of both the Bullingdon and the Piers Gaveston society, and Dave was clearly (and publicly) Bullingdon material.
I think it confirmed to Dave he was right not to give Lord Ashcroft a ministerial role.
Are you David Cameron's psychoanalyst?
Seriously, on what basis do you claim to know Dave's worst day or the inner thoughts of George Osborne ?
I mean, you sound like a 8-year old obsessed with the latest trivia about members of a boy band. Yeah, Dave's favourite colour is green, and George's best day is when he blew a big soap bubble.
It's almost like I've met David Cameron and George Osborne on a few occasions, talked to them, and keep in touch with people who work(ed) for them.
I've met politicians, and know one or two well.
I certainly don't think that is a basis for me to state what their worst day was.
Europe will be exactly in the same position as they are now vis-à-vis other countries. Only their relationship with the UK will be changing.
For us, it could be a change with every country. I am not sure we could set up the logistics to go WTO by March 2019.
There's still a sense of disbelief that there will be practical consequences and a hope that it'll be all right on the night. It's Brexit change denial.
for which side ?
no deal affects both
It's not a symmetrical threat. If affects the UK sooner and to a greater degree.
If the UK and the EU are plunged into a recession like the one in 2008/9 ...
The thing is, the EU has rebalanced since 2007/8, and we haven't.
In 2007/8, we ran a huge current account deficit, and so did large chunks of the Eurozone.
Now, the Eurozone countries running deficits are few and far between: Cyprus is the only one with a deficit bigger than ours, and countries like Spain, and Italy now run fairly sizeable surpluses.
George Osborne has many fans on this site. But ultimately, he failed to rebalance the UK economy. Despite the advantage of having our own currency, our exports have risen less than Spain, Portugal or Greece in the last decade. We've borrowed from abroad to spend on new iPhones and BMWs.
We tell ourselves how great our economic model is. Yet our model seems to involve borrowing from other countries to buy their products. I can't be anything other than pretty pessimistic about our prospects. (Note: this is not because of Brexit. This is because we have the most unbalanced economy in the developed world.)
I may be mistaken but haven't exports risen relative to exports since 24/6/16?
Is Brexit itself rebalancing the economy?
What would you expect when your currency drops by 15% or more. Of course, a bit later imports get dearer too. There will still be an advantage for exports, if labour costs can be held back.
But that is not why people were voting to Leave, were they ?
So, just to clear this up, the Labour supporting Surby wants to keep wages down?
No, I don't. My policies would not have led to a 15% drop in Sterling in the first place. Ironically, with Brexit , that is the only way to remain competitive. Those who voted to Leave should know that.
The assumption which some people are making here that party members will back Boris is wrong, I think. He has had a chance to show himself a serious figure as Foreign Sec, and all he has done is confirm the already considerable doubts people had about him.
Going down the list of Conservatives in Mike's list of odds:
David Davis: Yep, a possibility, especially if its an early contest. By far the most serious and impressive of the key Leave figures and if he can pull off a decent deal with the EU, his reputation will improve dramatically. Of course, the converse is true as well. He's getting on a bit, though.
Phillip Hammond: Yep, a strong possibility, appealing to the grown-up wing of the party, but not exactly one to set the pulses racing. But then, do we want our pulses raced?
JRM: You cannot be serious
Boris: Nope
Amber Rudd: She's talented and feisty, came over notably well in the GE2017 campaign, and has navigated the treacherous post-referendum waters well . However, her tiny majority is a problem.
Ruth Davidson: Nope, not a candidate in any plausible scenario
Damian Green: Articulate and likeable, a possible unity candidate with few enemies, coming through like John Major as the unifying Stop XXX candidate. Might be worth a punt.
Andrea Leadsom: Who?
Michael Gove: Intriguing, high-risk. Probably not, but 40/1 is not too bad
Sajid Javid: Hard to see what his appeal would be compare with others already mentioned
James Cleverly etc: Nope
Amongst longer shots: Consider Esther McVey
Not Rory?
It's a bit like your 50 best films. Always people miss out, disagree, etc.
Wot, no Kwasi, Nicks (Boles, Herbert), Raab, Eustice (super-marginal). Plus Neil O'Brien is a rising star.
Once shared a cab with Neil - an interesting chap who is clearly very capable. Not sure I even see him in the cabinet for another term, let alone the leadership.
He comes over as you saw as understated but there's a big brain in there plus, as we Cons lament, he is the answer to: is there a bright non-posho available to lead the party?
It's not a symmetrical threat. If affects the UK sooner and to a greater degree.
If the UK and the EU are plunged into a recession like the one in 2008/9 ,,...
The thing is, the EU has rebalanced since 2007/8, and we haven't.
In 2007/8, we ran a huge current account deficit, and so did large chunks of the Eurozone.
Now, the Eurozone countries running deficits are few and far between: Cyprus is the only one with a deficit bigger than ours, and countries like Spain, and Italy now run fairly sizeable surpluses.
George Osborne has many fans on this site. But ultimately, he failed to rebalance the UK economy. Despite the advantage of having our own currency, our exports have risen less than Spain, Portugal or Greece in the last decade. We've borrowed from abroad to spend on new iPhones and BMWs.
We tell ourselves how great our economic model is. Yet our model seems to involve borrowing from other countries to buy their products. I can't be anything other than pretty pessimistic about our prospects. (Note: this is not because of Brexit. This is because we have the most unbalanced economy in the developed world.)
I may be mistaken but haven't exports risen relative to exports since 24/6/16?
Is Brexit itself rebalancing the economy?
Our current account deficit has improved, yes. But it's still at a horrendous level.
Ultimately, closing the current account deficit will require the savings rate to rise. And a rising savings rate means falling consumer spending, and that's very rarely pretty.
Britain for many, many years [ centuries ] have run current account deficits but always managed to pay for that with invisible surpluses. Brexit: the lack of passport may affect that [ but only with the EU countries ]. Sterling depreciation will help compete against New York, Singapore, Hong Kong.
But is this what "sovereignty" is about ? The right to periodically devalue our currency !
That's not true. We ran Balance of Payment deficits, that were made up for via invisibles. Current Accounts include invisibles.
Britain used to be a creditor to the world. It had vast foreign assets, on which it earned returns. As recently as the mid 1990s, we still had a fairly sizeable net foreign assets. We now have more liabilities than assets, and every day we run a current account deficit, that gets more negative.
Andrew Neil, while perhaps eliding some of the detail, is essentially right.
The key point he is right on is that this is not about the UK wanting special access to the EU market as some sort of one-sided request for a privilege, it's about the UK wanting a reciprocal deal whereby they get favourable access to the world's fifth or sixth largest economy. This needs to be reiterated again and again. Do they want this or not?
Of course they want it.
But they've also realised that the later the deal happens, the better it is for them. Delay is beneficial to the EU, and damaging to the UK.
So, the EU benefits from allowing the UK to have full access to EU financial services market. But it also benefits from firms moving jobs to the EU. So, it will likely cave only on financial market access at 11:59 on the last day of the negotiations.
We really can't expect them - or any negotiating counterparty - to act in anything other than their own interest. They are trying to maximise their outcome, and the outcome for us is - and shouldn't be - any concern of theirs. Conversely the same is true of us. We want the best deal for the UK, not the best deal for the UK and the EU.
Good negotiators - especially in a repeat encounter model - are concerned about the other side's outcome
How many times do you think we'll be leaving the EU?
I think if we are going to end up with a 'deep and special partnership' we might be intending to pick up the phone on occasion?
On his worst day, David Cameron is better than the shower of shit listed above.
Can you clarify what David Cameron's worst day is? The day he resigned after his foreign policy collapsed or the day we discovered his peculiar love for bacon?
Politically, Dave considered his worst day shortly after the Millie Dowler phone hacking story broke.
He had been lied to by Andy Coulson and then Rebekah Brooks announced she was closing the NOTW because much worse was to come.
Both the public and private polling showed Dave's ratings collapsing (although the Tory private polling showed that it really wasn't a salient issue among floating voters.)
Dave found the bacon story funny, it was bollocks as he privately put it, apparently anyone who attended the dump knows one couldn't be a member of both the Bullingdon and the Piers Gaveston society, and Dave was clearly (and publicly) Bullingdon material.
I think it confirmed to Dave he was right not to give Lord Ashcroft a ministerial role.
Are you David Cameron's psychoanalyst?
Seriously, on what basis do you claim to know Dave's worst day or the inner thoughts of George Osborne ?
I mean, you sound like a 8-year old obsessed with the latest trivia about members of a boy band. Yeah, Dave's favourite colour is green, and George's best day is when he blew a big soap bubble.
It's almost like I've met David Cameron and George Osborne on a few occasions, talked to them, and keep in touch with people who work(ed) for them.
I've met politicians, and know one or two well.
I certainly don't think that is a basis for me to state what their worst day was.
Would you like a bet of £50 that when Dave's autobiography is published (within the next 18 months or so) that he calls the phone hacking saga the worst week/day in politics?
The thing is, the EU has rebalanced since 2007/8, and we haven't.
In 2007/8, we ran a huge current account deficit, and so did large chunks of the Eurozone.
Now, the Eurozone countries running deficits are few and far between: Cyprus is the only one with a deficit bigger than ours, and countries like Spain, and Italy now run fairly sizeable surpluses.
George Osborne has many fans on this site. But ultimately, he failed to rebalance the UK economy. Despite the advantage of having our own currency, our exports have risen less than Spain, Portugal or Greece in the last decade. We've borrowed from abroad to spend on new iPhones and BMWs.
We tell ourselves how great our economic model is. Yet our model seems to involve borrowing from other countries to buy their products. I can't be anything other than pretty pessimistic about our prospects. (Note: this is not because of Brexit. This is because we have the most unbalanced economy in the developed world.)
I may be mistaken but haven't exports risen relative to exports since 24/6/16?
Is Brexit itself rebalancing the economy?
What would you expect when your currency drops by 15% or more. Of course, a bit later imports get dearer too. There will still be an advantage for exports, if labour costs can be held back.
But that is not why people were voting to Leave, were they ?
Whether or not it was why people were voting to Leave is secondary to the matter we are discussing.
EDIT: I've never known anyone for example to vote because they wanted to cause a recession but if one happens due to the actions of the politicians elected by the election then that is still a consequence.
On his worst day, David Cameron is better than the shower of shit listed above.
Can you clarify what David Cameron's worst day is? The day he resigned after his foreign policy collapsed or the day we discovered his peculiar love for bacon?
Politically, Dave considered his worst day shortly after the Millie Dowler phone hacking story broke.
He had been lied to by Andy Coulson and then Rebekah Brooks announced she was closing the NOTW because much worse was to come.
Both the public and private polling showed Dave's ratings collapsing (although the Tory private polling showed that it really wasn't a salient issue among floating voters.)
Dave found the bacon story funny, it was bollocks as he privately put it, apparently anyone who attended the dump knows one couldn't be a member of both the Bullingdon and the Piers Gaveston society, and Dave was clearly (and publicly) Bullingdon material.
I think it confirmed to Dave he was right not to give Lord Ashcroft a ministerial role.
Are you David Cameron's psychoanalyst?
Seriously, on what basis do you claim to know Dave's worst day or the inner thoughts of George Osborne ?
I mean, you sound like a 8-year old obsessed with the latest trivia about members of a boy band. Yeah, Dave's favourite colour is green, and George's best day is when he blew a big soap bubble.
It's almost like I've met David Cameron and George Osborne on a few occasions, talked to them, and keep in touch with people who work(ed) for them.
I've met politicians, and know one or two well.
I certainly don't think that is a basis for me to state what their worst day was.
Would you like a bet of £50 that when Dave's autobiography is published (within the next 18 months or so) that he calls the phone hacking saga the worst week/day in politics?
If he thinks his worst day was the phone scandal and not his utter inability to understand how the referendum was playing out then he isn't a good judge of scale of crisis....
is there a bright non-posho available to lead the party?
Chris Philp. Needs a few years, though.
Edit: And he went to the right university.
I like Chris a lot. He quietly and determinedly gets on with it. Slight Rees-Moggism on his personal wealth (in that people will probe and might not like it that he succeeded in his ventures) but otherwise a good choice and yes, needs a few years and more grey hairs.
The assumption which some people are making here that party members will back Boris is wrong, I think. He has had a chance to show himself a serious figure as Foreign Sec, and all he has done is confirm the already considerable doubts people had about him.
Going down the list of Conservatives in Mike's list of odds:
David Davis: Yep, a possibility, especially if its an early contest. By far the most serious and impressive of the key Leave figures and if he can pull off a decent deal with the EU, his reputation will improve dramatically. Of course, the converse is true as well. He's getting on a bit, though.
Phillip Hammond: Yep, a strong possibility, appealing to the grown-up wing of the party, but not exactly one to set the pulses racing. But then, do we want our pulses raced?
JRM: You cannot be serious
Boris: Nope
Amber Rudd: She's talented and feisty, came over notably well in the GE2017 campaign, and has navigated the treacherous post-referendum waters well . However, her tiny majority is a problem.
Ruth Davidson: Nope, not a candidate in any plausible scenario
Damian Green: Articulate and likeable, a possible unity candidate with few enemies, coming through like John Major as the unifying Stop XXX candidate. Might be worth a punt.
Andrea Leadsom: Who?
Michael Gove: Intriguing, high-risk. Probably not, but 40/1 is not too bad
Sajid Javid: Hard to see what his appeal would be compare with others already mentioned
James Cleverly etc: Nope
Amongst longer shots: Consider Esther McVey
Not Rory?
It's a bit like your 50 best films. Always people miss out, disagree, etc.
Wot, no Kwasi, Nicks (Boles, Herbert), Raab, Eustice (super-marginal). Plus Neil O'Brien is a rising star.
Once shared a cab with Neil - an interesting chap who is clearly very capable. Not sure I even see him in the cabinet for another term, let alone the leadership.
He comes over as you saw as understated but there's a big brain in there plus, as we Cons lament, he is the answer to: is there a bright non-posho available to lead the party?
Philip Davies and to top that he's a West Yorkshire MP ,what't not to like Mr Topping ;-)
The assumption which some people are making here that party members will back Boris is wrong, I think. He has had a chance to show himself a serious figure as Foreign Sec, and all he has done is confirm the already considerable doubts people had about him.
Going down the list of Conservatives in Mike's list of odds:
David Davis: Yep, a possibility, especially if its an early contest. By far the most serious and impressive of the key Leave figures and if he can pull off a decent deal with the EU, his reputation will improve dramatically. Of course, the converse is true as well. He's getting on a bit, though.
Phillip Hammond: Yep, a strong possibility, appealing to the grown-up wing of the party, but not exactly one to set the pulses racing. But then, do we want our pulses raced?
JRM: You cannot be serious
Boris: Nope
Amber Rudd: She's talented and feisty, came over notably well in the GE2017 campaign, and has navigated the treacherous post-referendum waters well . However, her tiny majority is a problem.
Ruth Davidson: Nope, not a candidate in any plausible scenario
Damian Green: Articulate and likeable, a possible unity candidate with few enemies, coming through like John Major as the unifying Stop XXX candidate. Might be worth a punt.
Andrea Leadsom: Who?
Michael Gove: Intriguing, high-risk. Probably not, but 40/1 is not too bad
Sajid Javid: Hard to see what his appeal would be compare with others already mentioned
James Cleverly etc: Nope
Amongst longer shots: Consider Esther McVey
Not Rory?
It's a bit like your 50 best films. Always people miss out, disagree, etc.
Wot, no Kwasi, Nicks (Boles, Herbert), Raab, Eustice (super-marginal). Plus Neil O'Brien is a rising star.
Once shared a cab with Neil - an interesting chap who is clearly very capable. Not sure I even see him in the cabinet for another term, let alone the leadership.
He comes over as you saw as understated but there's a big brain in there plus, as we Cons lament, he is the answer to: is there a bright non-posho available to lead the party?
Philip Davies and to top that he's a West Yorkshire MP ,what't not to like Mr Topping ;-)
absolutely nothing, although how Yorkshire lads & lasses will feel about him taking a seat "down south" you tell me.
The assumption which some people are making here that party members will back Boris is wrong, I think. He has had a chance to show himself a serious figure as Foreign Sec, and all he has done is confirm the already considerable doubts people had about him.
Going down the list of Conservatives in Mike's list of odds:
David Davis: Yep, a possibility, especially if its an early contest. By far the most serious and impressive of the key Leave figures and if he can pull off a decent deal with the EU, his reputation will improve dramatically. Of course, the converse is true as well. He's getting on a bit, though.
Phillip Hammond: Yep, a strong possibility, appealing to the grown-up wing of the party, but not exactly one to set the pulses racing. But then, do we want our pulses raced?
JRM: You cannot be serious
Boris: Nope
Amber Rudd: She's talented and feisty, came over notably well in the GE2017 campaign, and has navigated the treacherous post-referendum waters well . However, her tiny majority is a problem.
Ruth Davidson: Nope, not a candidate in any plausible scenario
Damian Green: Articulate and likeable, a possible unity candidate with few enemies, coming through like John Major as the unifying Stop XXX candidate. Might be worth a punt.
Andrea Leadsom: Who?
Michael Gove: Intriguing, high-risk. Probably not, but 40/1 is not too bad
Sajid Javid: Hard to see what his appeal would be compare with others already mentioned
James Cleverly etc: Nope
Amongst longer shots: Consider Esther McVey
Not Rory?
It's a bit like your 50 best films. Always people miss out, disagree, etc.
Wot, no Kwasi, Nicks (Boles, Herbert), Raab, Eustice (super-marginal). Plus Neil O'Brien is a rising star.
Once shared a cab with Neil - an interesting chap who is clearly very capable. Not sure I even see him in the cabinet for another term, let alone the leadership.
He comes over as you saw as understated but there's a big brain in there plus, as we Cons lament, he is the answer to: is there a bright non-posho available to lead the party?
Philip Davies and to top that he's a West Yorkshire MP ,what't not to like Mr Topping ;-)
absolutely nothing, although how Yorkshire lads & lasses will feel about him taking a seat "down south" you tell me.
I don't regard him particularly highly but why would he give up his Shipley seat ?
The assumption which some people are making here that party members will back Boris is wrong, I think. He has had a chance to show himself a serious figure as Foreign Sec, and all he has done is confirm the already considerable doubts people had about him.
Going down the list of Conservatives in Mike's list of odds:
David Davis: Yep, a possiHe's getting on a bit, though.
Phillip Hammond: Yep, a strong possibility, appealing to the grown-up wing of the party, but not exactly one to set the pulses racing. But then, do we want our pulses raced?
JRM: You cannot be serious
Boris: Nope
Amber Rudd: She's talented and feisty, came over notably well in the GE2017 campaign, and has navigated the treacherous post-referendum waters well . However, her tiny majority is a problem.
Ruth Davidson: Nope, not a candidate in any plausible scenario
Damian Green: Articulate and likeable, a possible unity candidate with few enemies, coming through like John Major as the unifying Stop XXX candidate. Might be worth a punt.
Andrea Leadsom: Who?
Michael Gove: Intriguing, high-risk. Probably not, but 40/1 is not too bad
Sajid Javid: Hard to see what his appeal would be compare with others already mentioned
James Cleverly etc: Nope
Amongst longer shots: Consider Esther McVey
Not Rory?
It's a bit like your 50 best films. Always people miss out, disagree, etc.
Wot, no Kwasi, Nicks (Boles, Herbert), Raab, Eustice (super-marginal). Plus Neil O'Brien is a rising star.
Once shared a cab with Neil - an interesting chap who is clearly very capable. Not sure I even see him in the cabinet for another term, let alone the leadership.
He comes over as you saw as understated but there's a big brain in there plus, as we Cons lament, he is the answer to: is there a bright non-posho available to lead the party?
Philip Davies and to top that he's a West Yorkshire MP ,what't not to like Mr Topping ;-)
absolutely nothing, although how Yorkshire lads & lasses will feel about him taking a seat "down south" you tell me.
I don't regard him particularly highly but why would he give up his Shipley seat ?
Aargh sorry - getting my next Cons leaders/PMs mixed up.
I was still thinking of Neil O'Brien who was born in West Yorkshire but now of course has Edward Garnier's old seat in the midlands.
It's all going horribly wrong, when's the weekend.
is there a bright non-posho available to lead the party?
Chris Philp. Needs a few years, though.
Edit: And he went to the right university.
And is a scientist (Physics, but we can't have everything) and has an MSc in quantum mechanics, so he'll know all about uncertainty....
An MP with a physics degree ... good grief, that's impressive.
Otherwise the only name on the list that interests me is Rory Stewart. Very posh, unfortunately, but apparently a one nation Tory, i.e. like the pre-Thatcher wets.
The assumption which some people are making here that party members will back Boris is wrong, I think. He has had a chance to show himself a serious figure as Foreign Sec, and all he has done is confirm the already considerable doubts people had about him.
Going down the list of Conservatives in Mike's list of odds:
David Davis: Yep, a possibility, especially if its an early contest. By far the most serious and impressive of the key Leave figures and if he can pull off a decent deal with the EU, his reputation will improve dramatically. Of course, the converse is true as well. He's getting on a bit, though.
Phillip Hammond: Yep, a strong possibility, appealing to the grown-up wing of the party, but not exactly one to set the pulses racing. But then, do we want our pulses raced?
JRM: You cannot be serious
Boris: Nope
Amber Rudd: She's talented and feisty, came over notably well in the GE2017 campaign, and has navigated the treacherous post-referendum waters well . However, her tiny majority is a problem.
Ruth Davidson: Nope, not a candidate in any plausible scenario
Damian Green: Articulate and likeable, a possible unity candidate with few enemies, coming through like John Major as the unifying Stop XXX candidate. Might be worth a punt.
Andrea Leadsom: Who?
Michael Gove: Intriguing, high-risk. Probably not, but 40/1 is not too bad
Sajid Javid: Hard to see what his appeal would be compare with others already mentioned
James Cleverly etc: Nope
Amongst longer shots: Consider Esther McVey
Not Rory?
It's a bit like your 50 best films. Always people miss out, disagree, etc.
Wot, no Kwasi, Nicks (Boles, Herbert), Raab, Eustice (super-marginal). Plus Neil O'Brien is a rising star.
Once shared a cab with Neil - an interesting chap who is clearly very capable. Not sure I even see him in the cabinet for another term, let alone the leadership.
He comes over as you saw as understated but there's a big brain in there plus, as we Cons lament, he is the answer to: is there a bright non-posho available to lead the party?
Philip Davies and to top that he's a West Yorkshire MP ,what't not to like Mr Topping ;-)
absolutely nothing, although how Yorkshire lads & lasses will feel about him taking a seat "down south" you tell me.
I was not serious on Davies but testing the water of which Tory MP would push TSE on renewing his membership. ;-)
we go to WTO ,they do too and get nothing for their trouble. It hardly shows a Europe that is open for business - reputational risk sits on their side.
A prediction: if there's a disorderly Brexit, either the EU or the UK will break apart as a consequence.
Comments
Boris tops the polls of the public and along with JRM is the closest rival to Davis in polls of Tory members, he remains the one to beat for me
that nice Mr Edogan appears to have a new hobby called locking up Germans
currently 55 have been detained on political grounds
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausland/zwei-weitere-deutsche-aus-politischen-gruenden-in-tuerkei-festgenommen-15178609.html
Boris would likely call a general election soon after his election anyway making the DUP redundant
"The UK got a worse disaster than we did" is not an election winning slogan or a motto for an organisation that is meant to be a bastion of co-operation and free trade. There will be theatrics, there will be temper tantrums, and toys will be thrown out of the pram... and then a deal will be made. It's how the EU works.
This also applies to UK-EU27 trade as well. Yesterday Michael O'Leary was going on about a pending disaster if there's no deal on air travel:
“All bookings for summer 2019 will carry a government health warning, that this is subject to regulatory approval.”
He added: “What is increasingly likely to happen is that there will be no flights. Mrs May and the Brexiteers will be trying to explain that to you in 12 months’ time, why getting a car to Scotland or a ferry to Ireland are the only options on offer.”
He's right, of course, but what he omitted to say was that that would be a truly major disaster for the EU27 as well. Imagine the impact on the Greek, Cypriot, Maltese, Spanish and Portugese economies if UK tourism suddenly stops dead.
There may be a significant anti Boris vote but at the end of the day Tory members want to beat Corbyn and that is a huge asset in favour of Boris
Back in 2015, when Greece was attempting to renegotiate its bailout terms, the EU negotiators kept going on about the need for trust – which to them meant fulfilling the existing bailout terms, in full. As I listened to M. Barnier going on about the need for trust, I heard those voices again. The jaws of the Greek trap are opening, and the UK negotiators are walking straight into it.
http://www.lifestuff.xyz/blog/brexit-trumps-macron
When's INDYREF2?
https://twitter.com/oldnorthroad/status/903574668552097792
On the 29th March 2019 we leave the EU on a two year transition deal where we continue to pay into the organisation but that at the end of the two year period we agree to pay an ex gratia amount towards the EU for their on going costs as a gesture of goodwill, subject to a non tariff trade deal.
If we pay £20 billion for the two years than a sum of circa £30 billion sense would have prevailed and both sides could move on. Total cost of circa £70 billion
This will come down to the political judgement of the Council of Ministers and the UK government.
My best guess is a fudge on the money: Continue payments in 2019 and 2020 - total €18bn plus one-off share-of-the-house settlement of another #9bn paid in 2021 in return for comprehensive free trade deal, mutual recognition of standards and qualifications plus the establishment of a EU-UK court to settle disputes.
Most of next year will be taken up with Davis-Barnier stalemate, culminating with the grown-ups taking over and doing a deal at the October summit.
https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/903564900865372162
By contrast, if you look at my old firm, we were a UK based asset manager, with no staff or offices outside the UK. A large portion of our client base was French retail. In the event of WTO Brexit, we would need to create an EU domiciled wrapper. (In Switzerland, which was not covered by the single financial passport, we had a local partner who acted as the legal entity, and which took a big fee.)
But they've also realised that the later the deal happens, the better it is for them. Delay is beneficial to the EU, and damaging to the UK.
So, the EU benefits from allowing the UK to have full access to EU financial services market. But it also benefits from firms moving jobs to the EU. So, it will likely cave only on financial market access at 11:59 on the last day of the negotiations.
We really can't expect them - or any negotiating counterparty - to act in anything other than their own interest. They are trying to maximise their outcome, and the outcome for us is - and shouldn't be - any concern of theirs. Conversely the same is true of us. We want the best deal for the UK, not the best deal for the UK and the EU.
Indeed, it is to the shame of the EU that they continue to allow Juncker to hold any position in the EU. He as much as Cameron is responsible for the present position
The photograph of him and Blair in close on each other in the press today is toe curling
FWIW I think it's Gove next. Ambitious, ruthless and mad enough to want it. David Davis is beyond useless.
He had been lied to by Andy Coulson and then Rebekah Brooks announced she was closing the NOTW because much worse was to come.
Both the public and private polling showed Dave's ratings collapsing (although the Tory private polling showed that it really wasn't a salient issue among floating voters.) But he did wonder if he might become the shortest serving PM since Callaghan/Eden.
Dave found the bacon story funny, it was bollocks as he privately put it, apparently anyone who attended the dump knows one couldn't be a member of both the Bullingdon and the Piers Gaveston society, and Dave was clearly (and publicly) Bullingdon material.
I think it confirmed to Dave he was right not to give Lord Ashcroft a ministerial role.
Perhaps not having a written constitution is a handicap for us politically in engaging with other states in rules based cooperation because our default assumption is that leaders can just make it up as they go along and we take it personally when they don't.
It's just stuff that politicians say. I am sure that Hunt could be persuaded for the good of the party, yadda, yadda yadda.
Labour picture is even more fragmented - Starmer on 15% with Cooper and Rayner in 2nd and 3rd place within 4% of him. Suggests everything to place for whenever the vacancy arises.
Small sample but provides some insight: http://www.populus.co.uk/2017/08/mps-think-will-next-party-leader/
Makes me laugh when lefties criticise the Tory benches.
On their worst day, any of those listed above are head and shoulders above Rayner.
In 2007/8, we ran a huge current account deficit, and so did large chunks of the Eurozone.
Now, the Eurozone countries running deficits are few and far between: Cyprus is the only one with a deficit bigger than ours, and countries like Spain, and Italy now run fairly sizeable surpluses.
George Osborne has many fans on this site. But ultimately, he failed to rebalance the UK economy. Despite the advantage of having our own currency, our exports have risen less than Spain, Portugal or Greece in the last decade. We've borrowed from abroad to spend on new iPhones and BMWs.
We tell ourselves how great our economic model is. Yet our model seems to involve borrowing from other countries to buy their products. I can't be anything other than pretty pessimistic about our prospects. (Note: this is not because of Brexit. This is because we have the most unbalanced economy in the developed world.)
Seriously, on what basis do you claim to know Dave's worst day or the inner thoughts of George Osborne ?
I mean, you sound like a 8-year old obsessed with the latest trivia about members of a boy band. Yeah, Dave's favourite colour is green, and George's best day is when he blew a big soap bubble.
Is Brexit itself rebalancing the economy?
Ultimately, closing the current account deficit will require the savings rate to rise. And a rising savings rate means falling consumer spending, and that's very rarely pretty.
But that is not why people were voting to Leave, were they ?
But is this what "sovereignty" is about ? The right to periodically devalue our currency !
I certainly don't think that is a basis for me to state what their worst day was.
Britain used to be a creditor to the world. It had vast foreign assets, on which it earned returns. As recently as the mid 1990s, we still had a fairly sizeable net foreign assets. We now have more liabilities than assets, and every day we run a current account deficit, that gets more negative.
Edit: And he went to the right university.
EDIT: I've never known anyone for example to vote because they wanted to cause a recession but if one happens due to the actions of the politicians elected by the election then that is still a consequence.
OAP 'reacts badly' to alcohol...
I was still thinking of Neil O'Brien who was born in West Yorkshire but now of course has Edward Garnier's old seat in the midlands.
It's all going horribly wrong, when's the weekend.
Otherwise the only name on the list that interests me is Rory Stewart. Very posh, unfortunately, but apparently a one nation Tory, i.e. like the pre-Thatcher wets.
NEW THREAD
That being said, I can't see how a trade agreement with the US can be reached that would be acceptable to the UK.