Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How Kim Jong-un makes Sir Michael Fallon Prime Minister

SystemSystem Posts: 11,723
edited September 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How Kim Jong-un makes Sir Michael Fallon Prime Minister

I’m not going to pretend I’m an expert on affairs on the Korean peninsula, my knowledge is pretty much based on Sir Max Hastings excellent book on The Korean War and what I have learned from the media. But if matters do escalate for a full blown (nuclear) war there then we will be seeing a lot more of Sir Michael Fallon as he will try to reassure the country in his role as Defence Secretary.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • Options
    IcarusIcarus Posts: 914
    The logic that because occasionally a 50-1 shot comes in you should back Fallon 'cos he is 50-1 is flawed!
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited September 2017
    Wasn't he monstered by Emily, Lady Nugee, during the GE2017?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,024
    edited September 2017
    An interesting suggestion, a war would certainly raise Mr Fallon’s profile so it may be a good trading bet - although my strategy for the next PM market so far has been to lay whoever comes to prominence (waves at Boris, Jacob).

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event/28265958/market?marketId=1.125575094
    It’s a wide open market though, someone has to be the next PM and there’s likely to be a vacancy around two years from now. If that timeline is correct, the next PM is most likely in a senior Cabinet position at the moment so that 50/1 bet is good value if you can find it. Fallon’s not listed on the Betfair market for some reason, nor on Oddschecker’s list.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,022
    I think I'd be happy with Fallon, but then again I said I'd be happy with May, so what do I know? :p
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    RobD said:

    I think I'd be happy with Fallon, but then again I said I'd be happy with May, so what do I know? :p

    May has spectacularly bad judgement, right across the board, combined with a cackhandedness that makes Gordon Brown look good.

    Fallon is the sort of boring loyalist that the Tory inner circle likes, but the membership would not. He only wins if it is a coronation, and I don't think that possible.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,519
    He's currently 65. By 2019 he will be 67. We have a weird run of older leaders at the moment but that is too old to become PM and then fight an election supposedly to run the country for 5 years. I think he won't even be in the Parliament.

    May is going to have a reshuffle soon. Some of the cabinet will be asked to step down to make room for new talent. I think he may be one of those.
  • Options

    RobD said:

    I think I'd be happy with Fallon, but then again I said I'd be happy with May, so what do I know? :p

    May has spectacularly bad judgement, right across the board, combined with a cackhandedness that makes Gordon Brown look good.
    I'll put you down as 'undecided' shall I?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,024
    DavidL said:

    He's currently 65. By 2019 he will be 67. We have a weird run of older leaders at the moment but that is too old to become PM and then fight an election supposedly to run the country for 5 years. I think he won't even be in the Parliament.

    May is going to have a reshuffle soon. Some of the cabinet will be asked to step down to make room for new talent. I think he may be one of those.

    A good point about age, Mrs May’s successor is going to want to be younger than her, she’s 61 next month. Hammond, Davis, Green are all older than May.

    So who in the Cabinet is in the 45-58 range - Hunt, Gove, Javid, Rudd. Maybe these are the value bets?
  • Options
    DavidL said:


    May is going to have a reshuffle soon. Some of the cabinet will be asked to step down to make room for new talent. I think he may be one of those.

    Almost guarantees a war then, doesn't it?
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    A good bit of analysis of the next three month. It will all be over by Christmas...

    https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/905556634751164416

    "The public story from the Conservatives is that they underestimated Jeremy Corbyn - who managed to scam Brexit voters into backing a form of Leave, and Remain voters the opposite - and for good measure excite some exuberant young voters with promises of free cash. Meanwhile, many traditional older Tory voters were turned off by the manifesto fiasco.

    Privately, however, there are a host of internal inquests. Former Cabinet minister Sir Eric Pickles has been placed in charge of a particularly important one. So far, only ex-MPs have publicly ruminated about the role of Theresa May's Brexit plan, the mandate for which was the expressly stated rationale for calling the snap election. The strategy of using Brexit to turn longstanding Labour voters and left-ish UKIP voters to the Conservatives failed in all but five seats. Even in some heavily Leave areas, Labour MPs, including ones who had actually voted against Article 50, held their seats, maintaining and even increasing their majorities. Leave voters did not define themselves by their Brexit stance, as the Tory campaign anticipated. Brexit was insufficient to shift many Labour voters long standing General Election affiliation.

    But Theresa May's approach to Brexit did have an effect on the other side of the ledger. Across fertile Cameron-era territory such as the M4 corridor, all the way from London to Swansea - through Slough, Swindon, Bristol and Cardiff - there were 5-10% swings against the Conservatives in areas of high employment."
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    RobD said:

    I think I'd be happy with Fallon, but then again I said I'd be happy with May, so what do I know? :p

    May has spectacularly bad judgement, right across the board, combined with a cackhandedness that makes Gordon Brown look good.
    I'll put you down as 'undecided' shall I?
    When it comes to forming a decision, May has the negative Midas touch. She always gets it wrong.

    Hence I expect the mooted reshuffle to be a disaster. she likes big decisions, and holds grudges. I think Hammond may be deposed, and cabinet packed with true believers.

    It should make for an interesting conference.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Surely protection of regional foodstuffs is a WTO issue as much as an EU one. Are we really going to fight for the right to have ersatz champagne?
  • Options
    MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,240
    Sandpit said:

    An interesting suggestion, a war would certainly raise Mr Fallon’s profile so it may be a good trading bet - although my strategy for the next PM market so far has been to lay whoever comes to prominence (waves at Boris, Jacob).

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event/28265958/market?marketId=1.125575094
    It’s a wide open market though, someone has to be the next PM and there’s likely to be a vacancy around two years from now. If that timeline is correct, the next PM is most likely in a senior Cabinet position at the moment so that 50/1 bet is good value if you can find it. Fallon’s not listed on the Betfair market for some reason, nor on Oddschecker’s list.

    In the event of a nuclear war on the Korean peninsula, frankly we have more to worry about than who is the next empty vessel to lead the Conservative Party.
  • Options

    RobD said:

    I think I'd be happy with Fallon, but then again I said I'd be happy with May, so what do I know? :p

    May has spectacularly bad judgement, right across the board, combined with a cackhandedness that makes Gordon Brown look good.

    Fallon is the sort of boring loyalist that the Tory inner circle likes, but the membership would not. He only wins if it is a coronation, and I don't think that possible.

    All the indications are that the memberships of both major parties are heading to the extremes. In electoral terms what that is likely to mean is increasing polarisation and inconclusive election results. To stop a Rees Mogg, a Johnson or a Raab becoming PM a lot of moderate centre left voters will hold their noses and vote for a Corbyn-led Labour party. Likewise, I imagine that a lot of moderate centre right voters otherwise repelled by a Mogg, a Johnson or a Raab would hold their noses and vote Tory in order to stop Corbyn. The evidence seems to indicate that this happened in June to some extent - and it is only going to accelerate once May is replaced. I guess there is an argument that the anti-Labour vote may already have maxed out because Corbyn has now stood and had all the crap thrown at him, but I am not so sure about that (although Scotland has the potential to be a happy Labour hunting ground next time).

  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    An interesting suggestion, a war would certainly raise Mr Fallon’s profile so it may be a good trading bet - although my strategy for the next PM market so far has been to lay whoever comes to prominence (waves at Boris, Jacob).

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event/28265958/market?marketId=1.125575094
    It’s a wide open market though, someone has to be the next PM and there’s likely to be a vacancy around two years from now. If that timeline is correct, the next PM is most likely in a senior Cabinet position at the moment so that 50/1 bet is good value if you can find it. Fallon’s not listed on the Betfair market for some reason, nor on Oddschecker’s list.

    He's not listed on any of the next PM markets, only the next Tory leader markets.
  • Options
    MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,240

    RobD said:

    I think I'd be happy with Fallon, but then again I said I'd be happy with May, so what do I know? :p

    May has spectacularly bad judgement, right across the board, combined with a cackhandedness that makes Gordon Brown look good.
    I'll put you down as 'undecided' shall I?
    When it comes to forming a decision, May has the negative Midas touch. She always gets it wrong.

    Hence I expect the mooted reshuffle to be a disaster. she likes big decisions, and holds grudges. I think Hammond may be deposed, and cabinet packed with true believers.

    It should make for an interesting conference.
    One can't but imagine that those letters are beginning to stack up on Graham Brady's desk.

    Her judgement is awful, time and again she reads things badly wrong. And even worse, she has no empathy. Whatsoever.
  • Options
    DavidL said:

    He's currently 65. By 2019 he will be 67. We have a weird run of older leaders at the moment but that is too old to become PM and then fight an election supposedly to run the country for 5 years. I think he won't even be in the Parliament.

    May is going to have a reshuffle soon. Some of the cabinet will be asked to step down to make room for new talent. I think he may be one of those.

    He's younger than Corbyn, and 65 was the age Churchill first became PM, a role he finally stepped down from fifteen years later.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,986
    edited September 2017

    Surely protection of regional foodstuffs is a WTO issue as much as an EU one. Are we really going to fight for the right to have ersatz champagne?

    These are geographical indications and are a part of intellectual property law. There is specific European legislation on this and it is very important in countries like France, Spain and Italy. It is very important here, too, for a number of products. Put it this way - if we end up having English champagne, Scottish whisky in Europe is going to lose one of its key advantages: the unique ability to be labelled Scotch.

    This should be one of the easier issues to solve - though it will make a future free trade deal with the US even trickier to do.

  • Options
    MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,240

    RobD said:

    I think I'd be happy with Fallon, but then again I said I'd be happy with May, so what do I know? :p

    May has spectacularly bad judgement, right across the board, combined with a cackhandedness that makes Gordon Brown look good.

    Fallon is the sort of boring loyalist that the Tory inner circle likes, but the membership would not. He only wins if it is a coronation, and I don't think that possible.

    All the indications are that the memberships of both major parties are heading to the extremes. In electoral terms what that is likely to mean is increasing polarisation and inconclusive election results. To stop a Rees Mogg, a Johnson or a Raab becoming PM a lot of moderate centre left voters will hold their noses and vote for a Corbyn-led Labour party. Likewise, I imagine that a lot of moderate centre right voters otherwise repelled by a Mogg, a Johnson or a Raab would hold their noses and vote Tory in order to stop Corbyn. The evidence seems to indicate that this happened in June to some extent - and it is only going to accelerate once May is replaced. I guess there is an argument that the anti-Labour vote may already have maxed out because Corbyn has now stood and had all the crap thrown at him, but I am not so sure about that (although Scotland has the potential to be a happy Labour hunting ground next time).

    I still don't rule out an enormous volte face from Johnson. His brexit conversion was tactical and blew up in his face. If he sees a real opportunity to lead the centre, he may be the one who has the barefaced chutzpah to go for it.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,380

    Surely protection of regional foodstuffs is a WTO issue as much as an EU one. Are we really going to fight for the right to have ersatz champagne?
    Yes, the revealed EU papers look largely uncontroversial (at least in the Guardian version - I don't have the FT paywall key) - they nearly all relate to minor trademark issues and to transactions in progress on the day of withdrawal. For example, "Any goods in transit on Brexit day would be subject to the jurisdiction of the European court of justice." Would even the most zealous Leaver get upset by that?
  • Options

    RobD said:

    I think I'd be happy with Fallon, but then again I said I'd be happy with May, so what do I know? :p

    May has spectacularly bad judgement, right across the board, combined with a cackhandedness that makes Gordon Brown look good.

    Fallon is the sort of boring loyalist that the Tory inner circle likes, but the membership would not. He only wins if it is a coronation, and I don't think that possible.

    All the indications are that the memberships of both major parties are heading to the extremes. In electoral terms what that is likely to mean is increasing polarisation and inconclusive election results. To stop a Rees Mogg, a Johnson or a Raab becoming PM a lot of moderate centre left voters will hold their noses and vote for a Corbyn-led Labour party. Likewise, I imagine that a lot of moderate centre right voters otherwise repelled by a Mogg, a Johnson or a Raab would hold their noses and vote Tory in order to stop Corbyn. The evidence seems to indicate that this happened in June to some extent - and it is only going to accelerate once May is replaced. I guess there is an argument that the anti-Labour vote may already have maxed out because Corbyn has now stood and had all the crap thrown at him, but I am not so sure about that (although Scotland has the potential to be a happy Labour hunting ground next time).

    I still don't rule out an enormous volte face from Johnson. His brexit conversion was tactical and blew up in his face. If he sees a real opportunity to lead the centre, he may be the one who has the barefaced chutzpah to go for it.

    No-one will believe him. Boris will forever be tied to Leave now and that £350 million a week extra for the NHS.

  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,519
    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    He's currently 65. By 2019 he will be 67. We have a weird run of older leaders at the moment but that is too old to become PM and then fight an election supposedly to run the country for 5 years. I think he won't even be in the Parliament.

    May is going to have a reshuffle soon. Some of the cabinet will be asked to step down to make room for new talent. I think he may be one of those.

    A good point about age, Mrs May’s successor is going to want to be younger than her, she’s 61 next month. Hammond, Davis, Green are all older than May.

    So who in the Cabinet is in the 45-58 range - Hunt, Gove, Javid, Rudd. Maybe these are the value bets?
    I think so but I will also be watching which Ministers of State are promoted to the Cabinet when the reshuffle comes. I remember the way that Major rocketed through the ranks in the last years of Mrs T. It could happen again. May will want to promote someone who will respect her legacy (such as it is) in the way she hasn't respected Cameron. If she has her eye on someone they will get chances to shine.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,024

    Sandpit said:

    An interesting suggestion, a war would certainly raise Mr Fallon’s profile so it may be a good trading bet - although my strategy for the next PM market so far has been to lay whoever comes to prominence (waves at Boris, Jacob).

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event/28265958/market?marketId=1.125575094
    It’s a wide open market though, someone has to be the next PM and there’s likely to be a vacancy around two years from now. If that timeline is correct, the next PM is most likely in a senior Cabinet position at the moment so that 50/1 bet is good value if you can find it. Fallon’s not listed on the Betfair market for some reason, nor on Oddschecker’s list.

    He's not listed on any of the next PM markets, only the next Tory leader markets.
    Ah. More coffee required! He’s priced at 32 on Betfair for that market, and as you say he’s at 51 with most of the bookies.
  • Options
    MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,240
    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    He's currently 65. By 2019 he will be 67. We have a weird run of older leaders at the moment but that is too old to become PM and then fight an election supposedly to run the country for 5 years. I think he won't even be in the Parliament.

    May is going to have a reshuffle soon. Some of the cabinet will be asked to step down to make room for new talent. I think he may be one of those.

    A good point about age, Mrs May’s successor is going to want to be younger than her, she’s 61 next month. Hammond, Davis, Green are all older than May.

    So who in the Cabinet is in the 45-58 range - Hunt, Gove, Javid, Rudd. Maybe these are the value bets?
    I think so but I will also be watching which Ministers of State are promoted to the Cabinet when the reshuffle comes. I remember the way that Major rocketed through the ranks in the last years of Mrs T. It could happen again. May will want to promote someone who will respect her legacy (such as it is) in the way she hasn't respected Cameron. If she has her eye on someone they will get chances to shine.
    Conserve May's legacy?! Are there any former sewage workers in the Tory ranks?
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,013

    Surely protection of regional foodstuffs is a WTO issue as much as an EU one. Are we really going to fight for the right to have ersatz champagne?
    I can't see anything that's contentious about that proposal. I don't know why the Guardian thinks it would annoy Brexit supporters.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,519

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    He's currently 65. By 2019 he will be 67. We have a weird run of older leaders at the moment but that is too old to become PM and then fight an election supposedly to run the country for 5 years. I think he won't even be in the Parliament.

    May is going to have a reshuffle soon. Some of the cabinet will be asked to step down to make room for new talent. I think he may be one of those.

    A good point about age, Mrs May’s successor is going to want to be younger than her, she’s 61 next month. Hammond, Davis, Green are all older than May.

    So who in the Cabinet is in the 45-58 range - Hunt, Gove, Javid, Rudd. Maybe these are the value bets?
    I think so but I will also be watching which Ministers of State are promoted to the Cabinet when the reshuffle comes. I remember the way that Major rocketed through the ranks in the last years of Mrs T. It could happen again. May will want to promote someone who will respect her legacy (such as it is) in the way she hasn't respected Cameron. If she has her eye on someone they will get chances to shine.
    Conserve May's legacy?! Are there any former sewage workers in the Tory ranks?
    People as PMs always have delusions about this. She wouldn't want someone who was as rude about her as she has been about Osborne.
  • Options

    Surely protection of regional foodstuffs is a WTO issue as much as an EU one. Are we really going to fight for the right to have ersatz champagne?
    Yes, the revealed EU papers look largely uncontroversial (at least in the Guardian version - I don't have the FT paywall key) - they nearly all relate to minor trademark issues and to transactions in progress on the day of withdrawal. For example, "Any goods in transit on Brexit day would be subject to the jurisdiction of the European court of justice." Would even the most zealous Leaver get upset by that?

    There is one fundamental issue in these papers - and all the others that both sides have released: the UK may leave the EU but in many ways it will remain tied to it. In terms of doing FTAs that is going to have a profound effect. As per my post below, for example, even something as simple as geographical indications will prove hugely problematic in a US/UK deal. The more committed to following EU regulations the UK is as the result of the final Brexit deal we do the harder it will be to craft distinctive, advantageous FTAs with other major economies.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,024
    Sean_F said:

    Surely protection of regional foodstuffs is a WTO issue as much as an EU one. Are we really going to fight for the right to have ersatz champagne?
    I can't see anything that's contentious about that proposal. I don't know why the Guardian thinks it would annoy Brexit supporters.
    Indeed, it’s the sort of thing we would have expected in a trade deal under mutual recognition of trademarks. Not a problem, provided the same rules apply both sides and the EU can’t start making “Scotch” Whisky.
  • Options
    Sean_F said:

    Surely protection of regional foodstuffs is a WTO issue as much as an EU one. Are we really going to fight for the right to have ersatz champagne?
    I can't see anything that's contentious about that proposal. I don't know why the Guardian thinks it would annoy Brexit supporters.
    You'd think it might upset the more extreme Remainers who've had their 'No Trade Talks at this rate ever' fox shot....
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,986
    edited September 2017
    Sean_F said:

    Surely protection of regional foodstuffs is a WTO issue as much as an EU one. Are we really going to fight for the right to have ersatz champagne?
    I can't see anything that's contentious about that proposal. I don't know why the Guardian thinks it would annoy Brexit supporters.

    It makes an FTA with the US even harder to do than it is now. The European and American view of GIs is very, very different. If we follow the European route, we will have to give up a huge amount elsewhere in order to get anything done - and the more we tie ourselves to the EU in other seemingly uncontentious areas, the tougher it will become. And that not only applies to a US FTA.

    It may not be controversial right now, but just you wait.

  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    edited September 2017
    A leader who appears in public during an election?

    Whatever next!

    She will have a pretty safe win.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,986
    edited September 2017

    Sean_F said:

    Surely protection of regional foodstuffs is a WTO issue as much as an EU one. Are we really going to fight for the right to have ersatz champagne?
    I can't see anything that's contentious about that proposal. I don't know why the Guardian thinks it would annoy Brexit supporters.
    You'd think it might upset the more extreme Remainers who've had their 'No Trade Talks at this rate ever' fox shot....

    The fact that we all think this is uncontentious shows just how little experience the UK currently has in conducting free trade negotiations.

    The protection of geographical indications (GIs) is slated to be one of the more contentious parts of the TTIP negotiations. The EU is home to many well-known GIs that are used in the United States as common names for products, such as wines and cheeses. European negotiators see that as a problem to remedy through TTIP.
    Both parties are major producers of these products, so the issue has real commercial significance. But it also touches on cultural and ideological differences between Old World and New World economies. It’s not simply a matter of deciding what is “feta” or “champagne” and who can use those words. Europe’s GI protection scheme is part of a much larger policy that seeks to preserve traditional production methods and ways of life in the face of globalization ...
    The issue of GI protection engenders strong feelings and uncompromising rhetoric on both sides of the Atlantic. Wisconsin Republican Paul Ryan, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, which has jurisdiction over matter of trade policy, condemns European GIs as trade barriers and vows that “for generations to come, we’re going to keep making gouda in Wisconsin. And feta, and cheddar and everything else.”1
    At the same time, the EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström laments that Italian cheeses are being “undermined by inferior domestic imitations” in the United States and vowed to solve the problem through TTIP by “getting a strong agreement on geographical indications.”

    https://www.cato.org/publications/cato-online-forum/geographical-indications-ttip-impossible-task

  • Options
    Good morning, everyone.

    How old is Fallon?
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,380
    Yes, but note the protesters had been bussed in by far-right groups. I've got a piece on the state of German opinion coming on the site later today. The latest polling data from Saxony, where she was speaking, shows her CDU on 46% (3.4% up on last time)
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    Sean_F said:

    Surely protection of regional foodstuffs is a WTO issue as much as an EU one. Are we really going to fight for the right to have ersatz champagne?
    I can't see anything that's contentious about that proposal. I don't know why the Guardian thinks it would annoy Brexit supporters.
    Indeed, it’s the sort of thing we would have expected in a trade deal under mutual recognition of trademarks. Not a problem, provided the same rules apply both sides and the EU can’t start making “Scotch” Whisky.

    If only the French can sell champagne in the UK and only the Greeks can sell feta and so on, then that means American producers will not be able to. And that means no trade deal with the US.

  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,022

    Sandpit said:

    Sean_F said:

    Surely protection of regional foodstuffs is a WTO issue as much as an EU one. Are we really going to fight for the right to have ersatz champagne?
    I can't see anything that's contentious about that proposal. I don't know why the Guardian thinks it would annoy Brexit supporters.
    Indeed, it’s the sort of thing we would have expected in a trade deal under mutual recognition of trademarks. Not a problem, provided the same rules apply both sides and the EU can’t start making “Scotch” Whisky.

    If only the French can sell champagne in the UK and only the Greeks can sell feta and so on, then that means American producers will not be able to. And that means no trade deal with the US.

    I sometimes wonder why they are even trying!
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,022

    Sean_F said:

    Surely protection of regional foodstuffs is a WTO issue as much as an EU one. Are we really going to fight for the right to have ersatz champagne?
    I can't see anything that's contentious about that proposal. I don't know why the Guardian thinks it would annoy Brexit supporters.
    You'd think it might upset the more extreme Remainers who've had their 'No Trade Talks at this rate ever' fox shot....

    The fact that we all think this is uncontentious shows just how little experience the UK currently has in conducting free trade negotiations.

    The protection of geographical indications (GIs) is slated to be one of the more contentious parts of the TTIP negotiations. The EU is home to many well-known GIs that are used in the United States as common names for products, such as wines and cheeses. European negotiators see that as a problem to remedy through TTIP.
    Both parties are major producers of these products, so the issue has real commercial significance. But it also touches on cultural and ideological differences between Old World and New World economies. It’s not simply a matter of deciding what is “feta” or “champagne” and who can use those words. Europe’s GI protection scheme is part of a much larger policy that seeks to preserve traditional production methods and ways of life in the face of globalization ...
    The issue of GI protection engenders strong feelings and uncompromising rhetoric on both sides of the Atlantic. Wisconsin Republican Paul Ryan, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, which has jurisdiction over matter of trade policy, condemns European GIs as trade barriers and vows that “for generations to come, we’re going to keep making gouda in Wisconsin. And feta, and cheddar and everything else.”1
    At the same time, the EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström laments that Italian cheeses are being “undermined by inferior domestic imitations” in the United States and vowed to solve the problem through TTIP by “getting a strong agreement on geographical indications.”

    https://www.cato.org/publications/cato-online-forum/geographical-indications-ttip-impossible-task

    Also from that article

    It is worth remembering that the United States is not demanding that the European Union allow the sale of products labeled Kraft Parmesan Cheese or California Champagne in Europe.
  • Options
    RobD said:

    Sean_F said:

    Surely protection of regional foodstuffs is a WTO issue as much as an EU one. Are we really going to fight for the right to have ersatz champagne?
    I can't see anything that's contentious about that proposal. I don't know why the Guardian thinks it would annoy Brexit supporters.
    You'd think it might upset the more extreme Remainers who've had their 'No Trade Talks at this rate ever' fox shot....

    The fact that we all think this is uncontentious shows just how little experience the UK currently has in conducting free trade negotiations.

    The protection of geographical indications (GIs) is slated to be one of the more contentious parts of the TTIP negotiations. The EU is home to many well-known GIs that are used in the United States as common names for products, such as wines and cheeses. European negotiators see that as a problem to remedy through TTIP.
    Both parties are major producers of these products, so the issue has real commercial significance. in the face of globalization ...
    The issue of GI protection engenders strong feelings and uncompromising rhetoric on both sides of the Atlantic. Wisconsin Republican Paul Ryan, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, which has jurisdiction over matter of trade policy, condemns European GIs as trade barriers and vows that “for generations to come, we’re going to keep making gouda in Wisconsin. And feta, and cheddar and everything else.”1
    At the same time, the EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström laments that Italian cheeses are being “undermined by inferior domestic imitations” in the United States and vowed to solve the problem through TTIP by “getting a strong agreement on geographical indications.”

    https://www.cato.org/publications/cato-online-forum/geographical-indications-ttip-impossible-task

    Also from that article

    It is worth remembering that the United States is not demanding that the European Union allow the sale of products labeled Kraft Parmesan Cheese or California Champagne in Europe.

    Yes, that's a deal with the EU - a much bigger, more significant market than the UK and one that the US will make concessions to access. If we want an FTA with the Americans we have to give them more than they have now.

  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,022

    RobD said:

    Sean_F said:

    Surely protection of regional foodstuffs is a WTO issue as much as an EU one. Are we really going to fight for the right to have ersatz champagne?
    I can't see anything that's contentious about that proposal. I don't know why the Guardian thinks it would annoy Brexit supporters.
    You'd think it might upset the more extreme Remainers who've had their 'No Trade Talks at this rate ever' fox shot....

    The fact that we all think this is uncontentious shows just how little experience the UK currently has in conducting free trade negotiations.

    The protection of geographical indications (GIs) is slated to be one of the more contentious parts of the TTIP negotiations. The EU is home to many well-known GIs that are used in the United States as common names for products, such as wines and cheeses. European negotiators see that as a problem to remedy through TTIP.
    Both parties are major producers of these products, so the issue has real commercial significance. in the face of globalization ...
    The issue of GI protection engenders strong feelings and uncompromising rhetoric on both sides of the Atlantic. Wisconsin Republican Paul Ryan, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, which has jurisdiction over matter of trade policy, condemns European GIs as trade barriers and vows that “for generations to come, we’re going to keep making gouda in Wisconsin. And feta, and cheddar and everything else.”1
    At the same time, the EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström laments that Italian cheeses are being “undermined by inferior domestic imitations” in the United States and vowed to solve the problem through TTIP by “getting a strong agreement on geographical indications.”

    https://www.cato.org/publications/cato-online-forum/geographical-indications-ttip-impossible-task

    Also from that article

    It is worth remembering that the United States is not demanding that the European Union allow the sale of products labeled Kraft Parmesan Cheese or California Champagne in Europe.

    Yes, that's a deal with the EU - a much bigger, more significant market than the UK and one that the US will make concessions to access. If we want an FTA with the Americans we have to give them more than they have now.

    Is there actually any indication that they will demand GIs?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,024
    edited September 2017

    Sean_F said:

    I can't see anything that's contentious about that proposal. I don't know why the Guardian thinks it would annoy Brexit supporters.
    You'd think it might upset the more extreme Remainers who've had their 'No Trade Talks at this rate ever' fox shot....

    The fact that we all think this is uncontentious shows just how little experience the UK currently has in conducting free trade negotiations.

    The protection of geographical indications (GIs) is slated to be one of the more contentious parts of the TTIP negotiations. The EU is home to many well-known GIs that are used in the United States as common names for products, such as wines and cheeses. European negotiators see that as a problem to remedy through TTIP.
    Both parties are major producers of these products, so the issue has real commercial significance. But it also touches on cultural and ideological differences between Old World and New World economies. It’s not simply a matter of deciding what is “feta” or “champagne” and who can use those words. Europe’s GI protection scheme is part of a much larger policy that seeks to preserve traditional production methods and ways of life in the face of globalization ...
    The issue of GI protection engenders strong feelings and uncompromising rhetoric on both sides of the Atlantic. Wisconsin Republican Paul Ryan, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, which has jurisdiction over matter of trade policy, condemns European GIs as trade barriers and vows that “for generations to come, we’re going to keep making gouda in Wisconsin. And feta, and cheddar and everything else.”1
    At the same time, the EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström laments that Italian cheeses are being “undermined by inferior domestic imitations” in the United States and vowed to solve the problem through TTIP by “getting a strong agreement on geographical indications.”

    https://www.cato.org/publications/cato-online-forum/geographical-indications-ttip-impossible-task

    That’s a very good article, showing the very contradictory approaches taken by the US and Europeans on this issue - mostly about European names in common use in the US, I guess as expected of a country with comparatively recent history and mainly populated by descendent s of European immigrants.

    When it comes to a trade deal with the USA, I’d have thought that a first phase approach dealing in sectors such as financial services and complex manufactured goods (cars, planes) would be relatively easy to implement. More complex areas such as Agriculture are going to be a lot more difficult, as we have such different approaches to the sector in the first place.
  • Options
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Sean_F said:

    Surely protection of regional foodstuffs is a WTO issue as much as an EU one. Are we really going to fight for the right to have ersatz champagne?
    I can't see anything that's contentious about that proposal. I don't know why the Guardian thinks it would annoy Brexit supporters.
    You'd think it might upset the more extreme Remainers who've had their 'No Trade Talks at this rate ever' fox shot....

    The fact that we all think this is uncontentious shows just how little experience the UK currently has in conducting free trade negotiations.

    The protection of geographical indications (GIs) is slated to be one of the more contentious parts of the TTIP negotiations. The EU is home to many well-known GIs that are used in the United States as common names for products, such as wines and cheeses. European negotiators see that as a problem to remedy through TTIP.
    Both parties are major producers of these products, so the issue has real commercial significance. in the face of globalization ...
    The issue of GI protection engenders strong feelings and uncompromising rhetoric on both sides of the everything else.”1
    At the same time, the EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström laments that Italian cheeses are being “undermined by inferior domestic imitations” in the United States and vowed to solve the problem through TTIP by “getting a strong agreement on geographical indications.”

    https://www.cato.org/publications/cato-online-forum/geographical-indications-ttip-impossible-task

    Also from that article

    It is worth remembering that the United States is not demanding that the European Union allow the sale of products labeled Kraft Parmesan Cheese or California Champagne in Europe.

    Yes, that's a deal with the EU - a much bigger, more significant market than the UK and one that the US will make concessions to access. If we want an FTA with the Americans we have to give them more than they have now.

    Is there actually any indication that they will demand GIs?

    The Americans will not want GIs - or a much looser regime than the current European one:

    https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44556.pdf

    If we sign up tot he European regime - which is what protecting EU GIs by UK legislation would do - that would be very unpopular in the US.

  • Options
    Fallon -- the Times front page reports yet more defence cuts are on the way. Look for signs this is Fallon's eurosausage but otherwise he is not a contender.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,022
    edited September 2017
    Sandpit said:


    That’s a very good article, showing the very contradictory approaches taken by the US and Europeans on this issue - mostly about European names in common use in the US, I guess as expected of a country with comparatively recent history and mainly populated by descendent s of European immigrants.

    When it comes to a trade deal with the USA, I’d have thought that a first phase approach dealing in sectors such as financial services and complex manufactured goods (cars, planes) would be relatively easy to implement. More complex areas such as Agriculture are going to be a lot more difficult, as we have such different approaches to the sector in the first place.

    Na, the whole thing will be called off because they can't flood the UK with Californian champagne.
  • Options
    Fallon comes across as a nasty piece of work.

    He'll appeal to the Tory membership if he makes the final two.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,024

    Yes, but note the protesters had been bussed in by far-right groups. I've got a piece on the state of German opinion coming on the site later today. The latest polling data from Saxony, where she was speaking, shows her CDU on 46% (3.4% up on last time)
    I guess the semi-professional organised crowds of cheerers and booers are becoming just another feature of modern politics.
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    Sean_F said:

    I can't see anything that's contentious about that proposal. I don't know why the Guardian thinks it would annoy Brexit supporters.
    You'd think it might upset the more extreme Remainers who've had their 'No Trade Talks at this rate ever' fox shot....

    The fact that we all think this is uncontentious shows just how little experience the UK currently has in conducting free trade negotiations.

    The protection of geographical indications (GIs) is slated to be one of the more contentious parts of the TTIP TTIP.
    Both parties are major producers of these products, so the issue has real commercial significance. ways of life in the face of globalization ...
    The issue of GI protection engenders strong feelings and uncompromising rhetoric on both sides of the Atlantic. everything else.”1
    At the same time, the EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström laments that Italian cheeses are being “undermined by inferior domestic imitations” in the United States and vowed to solve the problem through TTIP by “getting a strong agreement on geographical indications.”

    https://www.cato.org/publications/cato-online-forum/geographical-indications-ttip-impossible-task

    That’s a very good article, showing the very contradictory approaches taken by the US and Europeans on this issue - mostly about European names in common use in the US, I guess as expected of a country with comparatively recent history and mainly populated by descendent s of European immigrants.

    When it comes to a trade deal with the USA, I’d have thought that a first phase approach dealing in sectors such as financial services and complex manufactured goods (cars, planes) would be relatively easy to implement. More complex areas such as Agriculture are going to be a lot more difficult, as we have such different approaches to the sector in the first place.

    The more tied we are to Europe in terms of regulation, the harder an FTA with the US becomes. So at some stage a decision is going to have to be made about whether we want to remain within the European sphere of influence or move into the US one. We cannot stand alone as a third party. FTAs are not really about tariffs; it's the regulation that matters.

  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,022


    The Americans will not want GIs - or a much looser regime than the current European one:

    https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44556.pdf

    If we sign up tot he European regime - which is what protecting EU GIs by UK legislation would do - that would be very unpopular in the US.

    Sorry, I meant demand that we do not recognise GIs?

    I could be persuaded either way on them. If we can use GIs as a concession in the EU negotiations, why not?
  • Options
    RobD said:

    Sandpit said:


    That’s a very good article, showing the very contradictory approaches taken by the US and Europeans on this issue - mostly about European names in common use in the US, I guess as expected of a country with comparatively recent history and mainly populated by descendent s of European immigrants.

    When it comes to a trade deal with the USA, I’d have thought that a first phase approach dealing in sectors such as financial services and complex manufactured goods (cars, planes) would be relatively easy to implement. More complex areas such as Agriculture are going to be a lot more difficult, as we have such different approaches to the sector in the first place.

    Na, the whole thing will be called off because they can't flood the UK with Californian champagne.

    The US Congress has to approve every FTA that the US does. The US will not agree to give the UK more access to its markets than it has now unless the UK opens up its own markets to the US. The agricultural lobby in the US is immensely powerful. A deal that is not rubber stamped by it will not get through Congress.

  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,843

    Surely protection of regional foodstuffs is a WTO issue as much as an EU one. Are we really going to fight for the right to have ersatz champagne?
    Yes, the revealed EU papers look largely uncontroversial (at least in the Guardian version - I don't have the FT paywall key) - they nearly all relate to minor trademark issues and to transactions in progress on the day of withdrawal. For example, "Any goods in transit on Brexit day would be subject to the jurisdiction of the European court of justice." Would even the most zealous Leaver get upset by that?
    The potentially significant paper (it would be nice to see the actual papers rather than a report of them) is the Irish one. It throws responsibility back at the UK for sorting out the border problem, given it is the party that is leaving and wants to change things. Between them the EU and the UK seem to imply there is no Brexit solution the Irish border problem, at least if the UK leaves the Custom Union.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,022

    Sandpit said:

    Sean_F said:

    I can't see anything that's contentious about that proposal. I don't know why the Guardian thinks it would annoy Brexit supporters.
    You'd think it might upset the more extreme Remainers who've had their 'No Trade Talks at this rate ever' fox shot....

    The fact that we all think this is uncontentious shows just how little experience the UK currently has in conducting free trade negotiations.

    The protection of geographical indications (GIs) is slated to be one of the more contentious parts of the TTIP TTIP.
    Both parties are major producers of these products, so the issue has real commercial significance. ways of life in the face of globalization ...
    The issue of GI protection engenders strong feelings and uncompromising rhetoric on both sides of the Atlantic. everything else.”1
    At the same time, the EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström laments that Italian cheeses are being “undermined by inferior domestic imitations” in the United States and vowed to solve the problem through TTIP by “getting a strong agreement on geographical indications.”

    https://www.cato.org/publications/cato-online-forum/geographical-indications-ttip-impossible-task

    That’s a very good article, showing the very contradictory approaches taken by the US and Europeans on this issue - mostly about European names in common use in the US, I guess as expected of a country with comparatively recent history and mainly populated by descendent s of European immigrants.

    When it comes to a trade deal with the USA, I’d have thought that a first phase approach dealing in sectors such as financial services and complex manufactured goods (cars, planes) would be relatively easy to implement. More complex areas such as Agriculture are going to be a lot more difficult, as we have such different approaches to the sector in the first place.

    The more tied we are to Europe in terms of regulation, the harder an FTA with the US becomes. So at some stage a decision is going to have to be made about whether we want to remain within the European sphere of influence or move into the US one. We cannot stand alone as a third party. FTAs are not really about tariffs; it's the regulation that matters.

    Canada has an FTA with both, why not the UK?
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,013
    RobD said:

    Sean_F said:

    Surely protection of regional foodstuffs is a WTO issue as much as an EU one. Are we really going to fight for the right to have ersatz champagne?
    I can't see anything that's contentious about that proposal. I don't know why the Guardian thinks it would annoy Brexit supporters.
    You'd think it might upset the more extreme Remainers who've had their 'No Trade Talks at this rate ever' fox shot....

    The fact that we all think this is uncontentious shows just how little experience the UK currently has in conducting free trade negotiations.

    The protection of geographical indications (GIs) is slated to be one of the more contentious parts of the TTIP negotiations. The EU is home to many well-known GIs that are used in the United States as common names for products, such as wines and cheeses. European negotiators see that as a problem to remedy through TTIP.
    Both parties are major producers of these products, so the issue has real commercial significance. But it also touches on cultural and ideological differences between Old World and New World economies. It’s not simply a matter of deciding what is “feta” or “champagne” and who can use those words. Europe’s GI protection scheme is part of a much larger policy that seeks to preserve traditional production methods and ways of life in the face of globalization ...
    The issue of GI protection engenders strong feelings and uncompromising rhetoric on both sides of the Atlantic. Wisconsin Republican Paul Ryan, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, which has jurisdiction over matter of trade policy, condemns European GIs as trade barriers and vows that “for generations to come, we’re going to keep making gouda in Wisconsin. And feta, and cheddar and everything else.”1
    At the same time, the EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström laments that Italian cheeses are being “undermined by inferior domestic imitations” in the United States and vowed to solve the problem through TTIP by “getting a strong agreement on geographical indications.”

    https://www.cato.org/publications/cato-online-forum/geographical-indications-ttip-impossible-task

    Also from that article

    It is worth remembering that the United States is not demanding that the European Union allow the sale of products labeled Kraft Parmesan Cheese or California Champagne in Europe.
    I have to admit, I had no idea there was such a thing as Californian Champagne.
  • Options
    Yes, exactly. And barely commented upon.

    The UK has called the EU's bluff on this, and flushed them out earlier than they wanted.

    A win for the UK.
  • Options
    RobD said:


    The Americans will not want GIs - or a much looser regime than the current European one:

    https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44556.pdf

    If we sign up tot he European regime - which is what protecting EU GIs by UK legislation would do - that would be very unpopular in the US.

    Sorry, I meant demand that we do not recognise GIs?

    I could be persuaded either way on them. If we can use GIs as a concession in the EU negotiations, why not?

    I agree. My only point is that in doing that, and in incorporating other EU rules and regulations into UK law - we make doing trade deals with the Americans and others much, much harder, because all will want better access to the UK than they have now. The more EU regulations become domestic UK regulations the tougher it becomes to do FTAs.

  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,022

    RobD said:

    Sandpit said:


    That’s a very good article, showing the very contradictory approaches taken by the US and Europeans on this issue - mostly about European names in common use in the US, I guess as expected of a country with comparatively recent history and mainly populated by descendent s of European immigrants.

    When it comes to a trade deal with the USA, I’d have thought that a first phase approach dealing in sectors such as financial services and complex manufactured goods (cars, planes) would be relatively easy to implement. More complex areas such as Agriculture are going to be a lot more difficult, as we have such different approaches to the sector in the first place.

    Na, the whole thing will be called off because they can't flood the UK with Californian champagne.

    The US Congress has to approve every FTA that the US does. The US will not agree to give the UK more access to its markets than it has now unless the UK opens up its own markets to the US. The agricultural lobby in the US is immensely powerful. A deal that is not rubber stamped by it will not get through Congress.

    Do we know how many products that have an EU geographical indicator the US want to sell in the UK? I can't imagine it being a huge number, and some can easily be re-named and still sold. If it is cheaper than the EU stuff, it may sell.
  • Options

    RobD said:

    Also from that article

    It is worth remembering that the United States is not demanding that the European Union allow the sale of products labeled Kraft Parmesan Cheese or California Champagne in Europe.

    Yes, that's a deal with the EU - a much bigger, more significant market than the UK and one that the US will make concessions to access. If we want an FTA with the Americans we have to give them more than they have now.

    You underestimate the importance of the UK. The world's fifth largest economy and nearly 1/5th of the size of the EU. If GI's are not on the table in Europe and the USA still wants a deal, then we still have a room for a deal independently without putting GI's on the table.

    The difference is that the EU wants the USA to accept GI's. We can happily not demand that and be much closer to a deal than the EU was.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,022

    RobD said:


    The Americans will not want GIs - or a much looser regime than the current European one:

    https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44556.pdf

    If we sign up tot he European regime - which is what protecting EU GIs by UK legislation would do - that would be very unpopular in the US.

    Sorry, I meant demand that we do not recognise GIs?

    I could be persuaded either way on them. If we can use GIs as a concession in the EU negotiations, why not?

    I agree. My only point is that in doing that, and in incorporating other EU rules and regulations into UK law - we make doing trade deals with the Americans and others much, much harder, because all will want better access to the UK than they have now. The more EU regulations become domestic UK regulations the tougher it becomes to do FTAs.

    I'm just not convinced it is that huge of an issue. Are there really US equivalents of all ~3000 products protected by a GI?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,101

    Fallon comes across as a nasty piece of work...

    That's probably because he is...

    I've always disliked Fallon because all that he is - 'is a strong campaigner'.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,217
    edited September 2017
    Thatcher and Cameron became leader in opposition. Fallon is an outside chance in government but historically the new PM in government is Foreign Secretary or Chancellor or Home Secretary which means Boris or Hammond or Rudd and probably the former
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,101
    A few days back there was a discussion of sorts about the merits and utility of Bitcoin.
    This is an excellent, and fairly easy to read paper on the economics of Bitcoin (and crypto currencies in general):

    http://www.columbia.edu/~jl4130/BTC.pdf
    The blockchain design enables Bitcoin and other crypto-currencies to function similarly to conventional payment systems such as Fed Wire, Swift, Visa, and PayPal. These payment systems are natural monopolies in that they enjoy economies of scale and network effects. Each of them is operated by an organization that determines its rules and modifies them as circumstances change. These rules include how and how much participants pay for using the system. The governing organization ensures the system is trusted and is responsible for maintain the required infrastructure for the system. Payment systems are often regulated (or outright owned by government agencies) in order to mitigate the welfare loss associated with their monopolistic positions.
    The innovation in Bitcoin’s blockchain design is in the absence of a governing organization. Rather, a protocol sets the system’s rules, by which all constituents abide. Absent is a central entity that maintains the infrastructure. Rather, Bitcoin’s infrastructure consists of computer servers (called “miners”) which enter and exit the system at will, responding to perceived profit opportunities.
    Participants follow the protocol because it is in their best interest to do so, assuming the other participants follow the protocol. Thus, the protocol-derived rules are practically fixed and binding on all parties.
    The blockchain design carries an economic innovation. Unlike other payment systems, Bitcoin is a two-sided platform with rules that are pre-specified by a computer protocol. No participant has power to set or modify fees or rules of conduct or otherwise control the system. Each participant in the market place, users and miners alike, is a price taker.…


    The conclusions at the bottom are particularly interesting.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,128
    edited September 2017
    Sean_F said:

    RobD said:

    Sean_F said:

    Surely protection of regional foodstuffs is a WTO issue as much as an EU one. Are we really going to fight for the right to have ersatz champagne?
    I can't see anything that's contentious about that proposal. I don't know why the Guardian thinks it would annoy Brexit supporters.
    You'd think it might upset the more extreme Remainers who've had their 'No Trade Talks at this rate ever' fox shot....



    The protection of geographical indications (GIs) is slated to be one of the more contentious parts of the TTIP negotiations. The EU is home to many well-known GIs that are used in the United States as common names for products, such as wines and cheeses. European negotiators see that as a problem to remedy through TTIP.
    Both parties are major producers of these products, so the issue has real commercial significance. But it also touches on cultural and ideological differences between Old World and New World economies. It’s not simply a matter of deciding what is “feta” or “champagne” and who can use those words. Europe’s GI protection scheme is part of a much larger policy that seeks to preserve traditional production methods and ways of life in the face of globalization ...
    The issue of GI protection engenders strong feelings and uncompromising rhetoric on both sides of the Atlantic. Wisconsin Republican Paul Ryan, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, which has jurisdiction over matter of trade policy, condemns European GIs as trade barriers and vows that “for generations to come, we’re going to keep making gouda in Wisconsin. And feta, and cheddar and everything else.”1
    At the same time, the EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström laments that Italian cheeses are being “undermined by inferior domestic imitations” in the United States and vowed to solve the problem through TTIP by “getting a strong agreement on geographical indications.”

    https://www.cato.org/publications/cato-online-forum/geographical-indications-ttip-impossible-task

    Also from that article

    It is worth remembering that the United States is not demanding that the European Union allow the sale of products labeled Kraft Parmesan Cheese or California Champagne in Europe.
    I have to admit, I had no idea there was such a thing as Californian Champagne.
    Have a look at https://vinepair.com/wine-blog/loophole-california-champagne-legal/
  • Options

    RobD said:

    Also from that article

    It is worth remembering that the United States is not demanding that the European Union allow the sale of products labeled Kraft Parmesan Cheese or California Champagne in Europe.

    Yes, that's a deal with the EU - a much bigger, more significant market than the UK and one that the US will make concessions to access. If we want an FTA with the Americans we have to give them more than they have now.

    You underestimate the importance of the UK. The world's fifth largest economy and nearly 1/5th of the size of the EU. If GI's are not on the table in Europe and the USA still wants a deal, then we still have a room for a deal independently without putting GI's on the table.

    The difference is that the EU wants the USA to accept GI's. We can happily not demand that and be much closer to a deal than the EU was.

    GIs are one part of the equation. There will be plenty of others. Gove, for example, has said there will be no compromises on the current food safety regime - that's not just chlorinated chicken, but also things like hormone treated beef. And they all add up. My original point was that to see GIs as an uncontroversial issue is to have no appreciation of international trade negotiations.

  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,217

    Yes, but note the protesters had been bussed in by far-right groups. I've got a piece on the state of German opinion coming on the site later today. The latest polling data from Saxony, where she was speaking, shows her CDU on 46% (3.4% up on last time)
    Nationally though the latest poll has the CDU on just 34% nationally and the AfD third on 11% which means CDU FDP will likely not have the numbers for a majority and with the SPD wary of another Grand Coalition a CDU minority government is possible
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,101
    if he has a ‘good war’...

    I don't think, in the context of Korea, that there is any such thing.
    And any input the UK's armed forces might have is likely to be utterly minimal, and will serve only to underline our impotence in the matter, irrespective of any bellicose blustering by Fallon.
    As far as his being PM is concerned, he'd conceivably be quite a bit worse than May.
  • Options
    Sean_F said:

    RobD said:

    Sean_F said:

    Surely protection of regional foodstuffs is a WTO issue as much as an EU one. Are we really going to fight for the right to have ersatz champagne?
    I can't see anything that's contentious about that proposal. I don't know why the Guardian thinks it would annoy Brexit supporters.
    You'd think it might upset the more extreme Remainers who've had their 'No Trade Talks at this rate ever' fox shot....

    The fact that we all think this is uncontentious shows just how little experience the UK currently has in conducting free trade negotiations.

    The protection of geographical indications (GIs) is slated to be one of the more contentious parts of the TTIP negotiations. The EU is home to many well-known GIs that are used in the United States as common names for products, such as wines and cheeses. European negotiators see that as a problem to remedy through TTIP.
    Both parties are major producers of these products, so the issue has real commercial significance. But it also touches on cultural and ideological differences between Old World and New World and ways of life in the face of globalization ...
    The issue of GI protection engenders strong feelings and uncompromising rhetoric on both sides of the Atlantic. come, we’re going to keep making gouda in Wisconsin. And feta, and cheddar and everything else.”1
    At the same time, the EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström laments that Italian cheeses are being “undermined by inferior domestic imitations” in the United States and vowed to solve the problem through TTIP by “getting a strong agreement on geographical indications.”

    https://www.cato.org/publications/cato-online-forum/geographical-indications-ttip-impossible-task

    Also from that article

    It is worth remembering that the United States is not demanding that the European Union allow the sale of products labeled Kraft Parmesan Cheese or California Champagne in Europe.
    I have to admit, I had no idea there was such a thing as Californian Champagne.

    Oh yes - as an IP-based business, when we do events in the US and host receptions we have to be very careful about what kind of "champagne" we offer as we do not want to cause fury among our client-base!

  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,217
    The EU is working on a separate Brexit deal for Northern Ireland
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41183041
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,022
    HYUFD said:

    The EU is working on a separate Brexit deal for Northern Ireland
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41183041

    That'll go down like a cup of cold sick!
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,771

    Yes, but note the protesters had been bussed in by far-right groups. I've got a piece on the state of German opinion coming on the site later today. The latest polling data from Saxony, where she was speaking, shows her CDU on 46% (3.4% up on last time)
    I dont think the buses had to travel that far, they were all Ossis. Yesterday she was pelted with tomatoes.

    For a German election this is bordering on the raucous, ohne Ordnung.

    Merkel clearly has a problem in the East, given her seat is in Meclenburg Vorpommerm it will be interesting to see if she suffers as a result or still commands a personal vote.

    Immiigration is the big issue and currently she is on the wrong side of her own supporters

  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,024
    RobD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The EU is working on a separate Brexit deal for Northern Ireland
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41183041

    That'll go down like a cup of cold sick!
    Especially given that it's only the EU that want a physical border in the first place. The UK are happy with an electronic system backed with spot checks.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,217
    RobD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The EU is working on a separate Brexit deal for Northern Ireland
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41183041

    That'll go down like a cup of cold sick!
    Depends on the terms, even the UK government is looking at some separate terms for NI
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,943
    TSE's been on the sauce again? ;)
  • Options
    Maybe we should offer free movement to Denmark. Not the rest of the EU, mind. Just Denmark.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,022

    Maybe we should offer free movement to Denmark. Not the rest of the EU, mind. Just Denmark.

    Yeah, the UK isn't allowed to negotiate with the members of the EU.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,943

    Maybe we should offer free movement to Denmark. Not the rest of the EU, mind. Just Denmark.

    I read on here that it's all about to kick off again with Catalonia. Sure we can put them at the "front of the queue" for trade talks? ;)
  • Options
    RobD said:

    Maybe we should offer free movement to Denmark. Not the rest of the EU, mind. Just Denmark.

    Yeah, the UK isn't allowed to negotiate with the members of the EU.
    Do you detect any particular desire among EU member states to negotiate directly with Britain?
  • Options
    On topic, he wouldn't be the worst choice the Conservatives could make.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,101
    RobD said:

    Maybe we should offer free movement to Denmark. Not the rest of the EU, mind. Just Denmark.

    Yeah, the UK isn't allowed to negotiate with the members of the EU.
    Who needs to negotiate ? Just give it to them.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,022

    RobD said:

    Maybe we should offer free movement to Denmark. Not the rest of the EU, mind. Just Denmark.

    Yeah, the UK isn't allowed to negotiate with the members of the EU.
    Do you detect any particular desire among EU member states to negotiate directly with Britain?
    They have no choice in the matter :p
  • Options
    Thanks for the header. He's definitely a gap in my attempts to cover as much of the likely contenders as possible. May have another look.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,943

    On topic, he wouldn't be the worst choice the Conservatives could make.

    Yeh, millions of people might have been wiped out in a nuclear winter but just think of the betting opportunities from Sir Michael becoming Con leader... ;)
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,101
    HYUFD said:

    The EU is working on a separate Brexit deal for Northern Ireland
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41183041

    So the principle of indivisible rights is only a binding principal as long as it suits them ?

    I don't mind their playing hardball, but it's the nauseating sanctimonious hypocrisy that tends to wind me up...
  • Options
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Maybe we should offer free movement to Denmark. Not the rest of the EU, mind. Just Denmark.

    Yeah, the UK isn't allowed to negotiate with the members of the EU.
    Do you detect any particular desire among EU member states to negotiate directly with Britain?
    They have no choice in the matter :p
    Try answering the question you were asked rather than the one you wanted to answer.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,028
    edited September 2017
    Mr. B, it's rancid. It's also meddling in domestic politics. The EU is totally indivisible, but apparently a nation-state can be divided according to EU preference. Not only that, citizens' rights for the EU is indivisible, but rights for UK citizens is a matter for EU nation states.

    Hopefully it'll lead to a similar backlash that which Obama caused.

    Edited extra bit: it's also bemusing that the EU has the time to come up with this bullshit but still can't present any sort of proposal on money, except that the UK isn't paying enough because it won't agree to whatever the EU demands.
  • Options
    GIN1138 said:

    Maybe we should offer free movement to Denmark. Not the rest of the EU, mind. Just Denmark.

    I read on here that it's all about to kick off again with Catalonia. Sure we can put them at the "front of the queue" for trade talks? ;)

    Catalonia is descending into a pit for which it is hard to see how it or Spain are going to escape unscathed. There seems to be little way that the 1st October referendum on separation is not going to happen. It has been declared illegal and unconstitutional by the Spanish courts - and the organisers face stiff financial penalties and even imprisonment - but that will make no difference: it will go ahead and because those opposing independence are very unlikely to take part in any great numbers the separatists will win a huge majority. The next day, the Catalan parliament will unilaterally declare independence and will be roundly ignored by the entire world.

    The thing is, though, that at least 40% of Catalans do want independence - many of them very much indeed. When they see it not happening despite the vote and when they see the Catalan separatist leaders being prosecuted and previously devolved powers being taken back by Madrid in order to maintain the integrity of the Spanish state they are not going to react well. I think there could well be significant violence, without the outside chance of lives being lost.

    I don't say this lightly, but if people are thinking about a trip to Barcelona or anywhere else in Catalonia during October and November time, they might want to have a rethink.

  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    The EU is working on a separate Brexit deal for Northern Ireland
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41183041

    So the principle of indivisible rights is only a binding principal as long as it suits them ?

    I don't mind their playing hardball, but it's the nauseating sanctimonious hypocrisy that tends to wind me up...
    I think the EU are operating a similar "Cake and eat it too" policy to our own dear government, only with a different cake.

    On the subject of sidelining the EU negotiating team. It is not going to happen, any more than Leicester City get to pick the Chelsea side to play on Saturday. Any attempt to do so smacks of desperation and lack of understanding of how the EU works.
  • Options

    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    The EU is working on a separate Brexit deal for Northern Ireland
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41183041

    So the principle of indivisible rights is only a binding principal as long as it suits them ?

    I don't mind their playing hardball, but it's the nauseating sanctimonious hypocrisy that tends to wind me up...
    I think the EU are operating a similar "Cake and eat it too" policy to our own dear government, only with a different cake.

    On the subject of sidelining the EU negotiating team. It is not going to happen, any more than Leicester City get to pick the Chelsea side to play on Saturday. Any attempt to do so smacks of desperation and lack of understanding of how the EU works.

    The EU's job in this matter is to look after the interests of the Republic of Ireland. It seems to be taking that responsibility pretty seriously.

  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,572
    edited September 2017
    Interesting piece on the vast cash reserves of US companies hold abroad and what happens if Trump acts to force them to bring it home:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/09/06/write-donald-trump-dollar-peril/

    It's AEP, so usual warning about bleak outlook!
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    Yes, but note the protesters had been bussed in by far-right groups. I've got a piece on the state of German opinion coming on the site later today. The latest polling data from Saxony, where she was speaking, shows her CDU on 46% (3.4% up on last time)
    Nationally though the latest poll has the CDU on just 34% nationally and the AfD third on 11% which means CDU FDP will likely not have the numbers for a majority and with the SPD wary of another Grand Coalition a CDU minority government is possible
    How about the 'Jamaica' coalition CDU/CSU, FDP, Gruene
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/0/german-election-polls-odds-tracker-merkel-seeks-fourth-term1/
  • Options
    GIN1138 said:

    Maybe we should offer free movement to Denmark. Not the rest of the EU, mind. Just Denmark.

    I read on here that it's all about to kick off again with Catalonia. Sure we can put them at the "front of the queue" for trade talks? ;)
    They want sovereignty, not to leave the EU or single market. They're not mad.
  • Options
    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    The EU is working on a separate Brexit deal for Northern Ireland
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41183041

    So the principle of indivisible rights is only a binding principal as long as it suits them ?

    I don't mind their playing hardball, but it's the nauseating sanctimonious hypocrisy that tends to wind me up...
    I think this is generally being misread. The correct way to read this is the way that @Casino_Royale reads the issue of the paper on food geographical indicators. The EU is starting to list its wants. Wherever the EU lists its wants, the UK has an opportunity to consider whether it wishes to accommodate them or not. This is progress.

    On this particular one the UK should be very accommodating. Northern Ireland has quite enough problems without being messed up further by extreme Brexit.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,022

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Maybe we should offer free movement to Denmark. Not the rest of the EU, mind. Just Denmark.

    Yeah, the UK isn't allowed to negotiate with the members of the EU.
    Do you detect any particular desire among EU member states to negotiate directly with Britain?
    They have no choice in the matter :p
    Try answering the question you were asked rather than the one you wanted to answer.
    I'm not in a position to know that.
  • Options
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Maybe we should offer free movement to Denmark. Not the rest of the EU, mind. Just Denmark.

    Yeah, the UK isn't allowed to negotiate with the members of the EU.
    Do you detect any particular desire among EU member states to negotiate directly with Britain?
    They have no choice in the matter :p
    They do. There is nothing to prevent the UK from talking to the member states. Indeed, given that Barnier is following the guidelines set by the Council, then if the UK wants the EU to be innovative and flexible - which his current guidelines don't allow him to be, if noises from within the EU are to be believed - then it's only by talking to the member governments that his guidelines can be amended and flexibility achieved.

    Of course, they might choose to refuse such talks but that would be their choice.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,221
    [M]ost EU migrants are employed (and contribute significantly more in taxes than they do in benefits).

    That's an interesting statement. I'm sure most EU migrants are employed; however, do most contribute significantly more in taxes than they do in benefits? Or does that assertion refer to all EU migrants added together (i.e. being heavily skewed by French bankers and PL footballers?).
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,022
    edited September 2017

    twitter.com/TheStephenRalph/status/905379404838293504

    The last point surely is the fault of the previous Labour government? I'm not sure May was in a position to introduce a temporary suspension of freedom of movement on the eastern European countries.

    And what a surprise, the UK does enforce those benefit rules:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-25134521
  • Options

    HYUFD said:

    Yes, but note the protesters had been bussed in by far-right groups. I've got a piece on the state of German opinion coming on the site later today. The latest polling data from Saxony, where she was speaking, shows her CDU on 46% (3.4% up on last time)
    Nationally though the latest poll has the CDU on just 34% nationally and the AfD third on 11% which means CDU FDP will likely not have the numbers for a majority and with the SPD wary of another Grand Coalition a CDU minority government is possible
    How about the 'Jamaica' coalition CDU/CSU, FDP, Gruene
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/0/german-election-polls-odds-tracker-merkel-seeks-fourth-term1/
    That is quite a possible outcome. That said, the latest poll is a little out of line with the other recent ones, for no particularly obvious reason (yes, there was the debate but neither seemed to score any big hits). Most polling over the last fortnight has had

    CDU/CSU 37-39
    SPD 23-24
    Linke 9-10
    AfD 8-10
    FPD 8-10
    Grune 6-8

    YouGov do seem to report the combined CDU/CSU-FDP share lower than other pollsters. This latest one gives them 43, which is the same as the last poll (which was a 36/7 split). Other pollsters have reported 45-49, which probably stradles the threshold for a two-party majority.
  • Options
    tlg86 said:

    That's an interesting statement. I'm sure most EU migrants are employed; however, do most contribute significantly more in taxes than they do in benefits? Or does that assertion refer to all EU migrants added together (i.e. being heavily skewed by French bankers and PL footballers?).

    It could be that after Brexit the mix of future EU migration is more biased towards lower earners, while UK migration to the EU is more biased towards high level professionals. The exact opposite of the intention.
  • Options
    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/sep/06/secondary-school-makes-uniform-gender-neutral

    What an absolutely stupid decision. Surely just say uniform is trousers or skirt, pupils can choose, which is what most schools do.
This discussion has been closed.