There’s no way he’ll be impeached unless the Dems win the House in the mid-terms. And they are next year.
Which makes getting through the impeachment process in his first term almost impossible. It could be done by acclamation but that is going to require a lot more smoke and guns than we have seen to date.
It's May's attempt to secure the Parliamentary majority denied her by the bloody voters.
She now has a guaranteed majority on every committee scrutinising Brexit
Awesome!
Good politics by the whips then
Indeed. The baloney about Corbyn being a PM in waiting is shown up as such by the fact that politics is largely about process, and sometimes rather technical process at that; Corbyn doesn't seem to have got to grips with that.
For all Miliband's faults, he understood Parly procedure. Probably because he didn't spend his entire career sniping from the back benches and preaching to choirs in Islington,
Actually, Trotskyites are usually very good at the rulebook, packing votes and pushing through agendas when they get the chance.
Theresa is setting an aeful lot of precedents for autocracy.
Wasn't that the Stalinists? Trotsky was notoriously poor at Party management. Uncle Joe not so.
I was thinking more of modern Trotskyite groups such as Militant.
Who were banned from Labour, right? Doesn't seem that they played that well.
Any example of Corbyn winning a vote since becoming leader? He polarises as well as being a poor politician. I can understand his wider appeal, but at the nuts and bolts he is hapless...
It's May's attempt to secure the Parliamentary majority denied her by the bloody voters.
She now has a guaranteed majority on every committee scrutinising Brexit
Awesome!
Good politics by the whips then
Indeed. The baloney about Corbyn being a PM in waiting is shown up as such by the fact that politics is largely about process, and sometimes rather technical process at that; Corbyn doesn't seem to have got to grips with that.
For all Miliband's faults, he understood Parly procedure. Probably because he didn't spend his entire career sniping from the back benches and preaching to choirs in Islington,
Actually, Trotskyites are usually very good at the rulebook, packing votes and pushing through agendas when they get the chance.
Theresa is setting an aeful lot of precedents for autocracy.
Wasn't that the Stalinists? Trotsky was notoriously poor at Party management. Uncle Joe not so.
I was thinking more of modern Trotskyite groups such as Militant.
Who were banned from Labour, right? Doesn't seem that they played that well.
Any example of Corbyn winning a vote since becoming leader? He polarises as well as being a poor politician. I can understand his wider appeal, but at the nuts and bolts he is hapless...
It took them a long time to get banned, but they are good with the rulebook.
This is going to be an interesting conference season, and very different to what May wanted. A celebratory Labour conference, while blood on the floor and plotting in every corner at the Tory one.
It's May's attempt to secure the Parliamentary majority denied her by the bloody voters.
She now has a guaranteed majority on every committee scrutinising Brexit
Awesome!
Good politics by the whips then
Indeed. The baloney about Corbyn being a PM in waiting is shown up as such by the fact that politics is largely about process, and sometimes rather technical process at that; Corbyn doesn't seem to have got to grips with that.
For all Miliband's faults, he understood Parly procedure. Probably because he didn't spend his entire career sniping from the back benches and preaching to choirs in Islington,
Actually, Trotskyites are usually very good at the rulebook, packing votes and pushing through agendas when they get the chance.
Theresa is setting an aeful lot of precedents for autocracy.
Wasn't that the Stalinists? Trotsky was notoriously poor at Party management. Uncle Joe not so.
I was thinking more of modern Trotskyite groups such as Militant.
Who were banned from Labour, right? Doesn't seem that they played that well.
Any example of Corbyn winning a vote since becoming leader? He polarises as well as being a poor politician. I can understand his wider appeal, but at the nuts and bolts he is hapless...
It took them a long time to get banned, but they are good with the rulebook.
This is going to be an interesting conference season, and very different to what May wanted. A celebratory Labour conference, while blood on the floor and plotting in every corner at the Tory one.
Celebrating the fact that they lost?
Still waiting for these examples of Corbyn and his team being good at winning parliamentary or technical party votes...
It's May's attempt to secure the Parliamentary majority denied her by the bloody voters.
She now has a guaranteed majority on every committee scrutinising Brexit
Awesome!
Good politics by the whips then
Indeed. The baloney about Corbyn being a PM in waiting is shown up as such by the fact that politics is largely about process, and sometimes rather technical process at that; Corbyn doesn't seem to have got to grips with that.
For all Miliband's faults, he understood Parly procedure. Probably because he didn't spend his entire career sniping from the back benches and preaching to choirs in Islington,
Actually, Trotskyites are usually very good at the rulebook, packing votes and pushing through agendas when they get the chance.
Theresa is setting an aeful lot of precedents for autocracy.
Wasn't that the Stalinists? Trotsky was notoriously poor at Party management. Uncle Joe not so.
I was thinking more of modern Trotskyite groups such as Militant.
Who were banned from Labour, right? Doesn't seem that they played that well.
Any example of Corbyn winning a vote since becoming leader? He polarises as well as being a poor politician. I can understand his wider appeal, but at the nuts and bolts he is hapless...
It took them a long time to get banned, but they are good with the rulebook.
This is going to be an interesting conference season, and very different to what May wanted. A celebratory Labour conference, while blood on the floor and plotting in every corner at the Tory one.
It's May's attempt to secure the Parliamentary majority denied her by the bloody voters.
She now has a guaranteed majority on every committee scrutinising Brexit
Awesome!
Good politics by the whips then
Indeed. The baloney about Corbyn being a PM in waiting is shown up as such by the fact that politics is largely about process, and sometimes rather technical process at that; Corbyn doesn't seem to have got to grips with that.
For all Miliband's faults, he understood Parly procedure. Probably because he didn't spend his entire career sniping from the back benches and preaching to choirs in Islington,
Actually, Trotskyites are usually very good at the rulebook, packing votes and pushing through agendas when they get the chance.
Theresa is setting an aeful lot of precedents for autocracy.
Wasn't that the Stalinists? Trotsky was notoriously poor at Party management. Uncle Joe not so.
I was thinking more of modern Trotskyite groups such as Militant.
Who were banned from Labour, right? Doesn't seem that they played that well.
Any example of Corbyn winning a vote since becoming leader? He polarises as well as being a poor politician. I can understand his wider appeal, but at the nuts and bolts he is hapless...
It took them a long time to get banned, but they are good with the rulebook.
This is going to be an interesting conference season, and very different to what May wanted. A celebratory Labour conference, while blood on the floor and plotting in every corner at the Tory one.
Celebrating the fact that they lost?
Still waiting for these examples of Corbyn and his team being good at winning parliamentary or technical party votes...
Celebrating the fact that an untrammelled left wing party is closer to government than any time in at least the last four decades.
It's May's attempt to secure the Parliamentary majority denied her by the bloody voters.
She now has a guaranteed majority on every committee scrutinising Brexit
Awesome!
Good politics by the whips then
Indeed. The baloney about Corbyn being a PM in waiting is shown up as such by the fact that politics is largely about process, and sometimes rather technical process at that; Corbyn doesn't seem to have got to grips with that.
For all Miliband's faults, he understood Parly procedure. Probably because he didn't spend his entire career sniping from the back benches and preaching to choirs in Islington,
Actually, Trotskyites are usually very good at the rulebook, packing votes and pushing through agendas when they get the chance.
Theresa is setting an aeful lot of precedents for autocracy.
Wasn't that the Stalinists? Trotsky was notoriously poor at Party management. Uncle Joe not so.
I was thinking more of modern Trotskyite groups such as Militant.
Who were banned from Labour, right? Doesn't seem that they played that well.
Any example of Corbyn winning a vote since becoming leader? He polarises as well as being a poor politician. I can understand his wider appeal, but at the nuts and bolts he is hapless...
It took them a long time to get banned, but they are good with the rulebook.
This is going to be an interesting conference season, and very different to what May wanted. A celebratory Labour conference, while blood on the floor and plotting in every corner at the Tory one.
Celebrating the fact that they lost?
Still waiting for these examples of Corbyn and his team being good at winning parliamentary or technical party votes...
Celebrating gettig their mojo back, celebrating gains in Scotland and the South of England, celebrating that they are closer to power than 2015. It is going to be very different to the last couple of years.
It's May's attempt to secure the Parliamentary majority denied her by the bloody voters.
She now has a guaranteed majority on every committee scrutinising Brexit
Awesome!
Good politics by the whips then
Indeed. The baloney about Corbyn being a PM in waiting is shown up as such by the fact that politics is largely about process, and sometimes rather technical process at that; Corbyn doesn't seem to have got to grips with that.
For all Miliband's faults, he understood Parly procedure. Probably because he didn't spend his entire career sniping from the back benches and preaching to choirs in Islington,
Actually, Trotskyites are usually very good at the rulebook, packing votes and pushing through agendas when they get the chance.
Theresa is setting an aeful lot of precedents for autocracy.
Wasn't that the Stalinists? Trotsky was notoriously poor at Party management. Uncle Joe not so.
I was thinking more of modern Trotskyite groups such as Militant.
Who were banned from Labour, right? Doesn't seem that they played that well.
Any example of Corbyn winning a vote since becoming leader? He polarises as well as being a poor politician. I can understand his wider appeal, but at the nuts and bolts he is hapless...
It took them a long time to get banned, but they are good with the rulebook.
This is going to be an interesting conference season, and very different to what May wanted. A celebratory Labour conference, while blood on the floor and plotting in every corner at the Tory one.
That depends on what is debated at labour.
I think that they will at least be real debates, Corbyn has a refreshing willingness to openly discuss issues and policies.
The Tory one will resemble an Eastern Boc Soviet in the 1980's, rhetoric and stage managed but with everyone knowing the rotten state of things.
The "build it and they will come" mentality is not particularly healthy for the economy. But I'm sure it will win China a loyal ally close to America
We'll see. In any event, Haiti deserves a break - and I'm pretty sure the millions of Haitians whose risk of cholera will plummet won't see it quite the way you do.
FPT - I agree with all of Richard Nabavi's posts, which were excellent.
He's a thoughtful mainstream conservative. They tell you what you want to hear, like nanny.
It doesn't stop them being more wishful thinking though
I am still waiting for any kind of evidence that the EU believes it needs us more than we need them, or that the CEOs of German companies are beating down doors to beg Angela Merkel to ensure a deal is done, or that by Brexit day we will have negotiated a free trade area vastly bigger than the EU, or that there would be no downside to leaving the EU, or that it would be very easy to do - all central claims made by Tory Brexiteers, even before we start to look at what we were told about greater prosperity, extra money for the NHS and so on.
The simple truth is that, as has been blindingly obvious from the start, leaving the EU without a deal in place will causes the UK substantial and immediate damage that will extend into the long-term. But by pandering to the Tory right instead of seeking a Brexit that works for the entire country Mrs May has boxed herself into a political corner which makes securing an outcome that avoids the cliff-edge almost impossibly difficult. Furthermore, her chief negotiator has spent much of his political life believing that Brussels is the "enemy" while failing absolutely to ever learn how the EU works or what drives FTA deal-making.
Brexit is going to happen, but since the referendum the Tories have done all they can to ensure it will be on the worst possible basis. For a party that is supposed to be patriotic and pro-business that is quite some achievement. Their only hope now is to somehow contrive a situation where all of this is perceived to be the EU's fault. That is clearly what is happening now. A blazing show of defiance, combined with an histrionic walk-out may well see the Tories get a polling bounce - but then what happens?
Europe is our biggest market, no-one will do a trade deal with us until our relationship with the EU is sorted out, if we leave without a deal we not only revert to WTO tariffs, but regulations covering hundreds of topics affecting our ability to export will cease to apply to us and, potentially, we become more vulnerable security-wise. All this when the Tories have promised voters that Brexit will lead to more prosperity and greater equality. What an unbelievable mess they have made.
It's May's attempt to secure the Parliamentary majority denied her by the bloody voters.
She now has a guaranteed majority on every committee scrutinising Brexit
Awesome!
Good politics by the whips then
Indeed. The baloney about Corbyn being a PM in waiting is shown up as such by the fact that politics is largely about process, and sometimes rather technical process at that; Corbyn doesn't seem to have got to grips with that.
For all Miliband's faults, he understood Parly procedure. Probably because he didn't spend his entire career sniping from the back benches and preaching to choirs in Islington,
Actually, Trotskyites are usually very good at the rulebook, packing votes and pushing through agendas when they get the chance.
Theresa is setting an aeful lot of precedents for autocracy.
Wasn't that the Stalinists? Trotsky was notoriously poor at Party management. Uncle Joe not so.
I was thinking more of modern Trotskyite groups such as Militant.
Who were banned from Labour, right? Doesn't seem that they played that well.
Any example of Corbyn winning a vote since becoming leader? He polarises as well as being a poor politician. I can understand his wider appeal, but at the nuts and bolts he is hapless...
It took them a long time to get banned, but they are good with the rulebook.
This is going to be an interesting conference season, and very different to what May wanted. A celebratory Labour conference, while blood on the floor and plotting in every corner at the Tory one.
Celebrating the fact that they lost?
Still waiting for these examples of Corbyn and his team being good at winning parliamentary or technical party votes...
Celebrating gettig their mojo back, celebrating gains in Scotland and the South of England, celebrating that they are closer to power than 2015. It is going to be very different to the last couple of years.
It'll be a festival of self-congratulation and Jeremy worship. The Labour left believes that just one more heave is required. We'll see about that.
The "build it and they will come" mentality is not particularly healthy for the economy. But I'm sure it will win China a loyal ally close to America
We'll see. In any event, Haiti deserves a break - and I'm pretty sure the millions of Haitians whose risk of cholera will plummet won't see it quite the way you do.
You don't need $30bn to put in a good sewage system and water network
What you will send up is crumbling monolithic airports that are under-utilised (and probably used to dump inferior Chinese steel and concrete).
And Haiti will need to bear the running and maintenance costs.
It's more important to build what you need (including excess capacity) than to distort the economy
FPT - I agree with all of Richard Nabavi's posts, which were excellent.
He's a thoughtful mainstream conservative. They tell you what you want to hear, like nanny.
It doesn't stop them being more wishful thinking though
No, i think his analysis was rational, fact-based and sober.
I have no interest in being told what I want to hear or, indeed, just being told what I don't want to hear. I want posters who provide real insight, and Richard provides that.
You mean wrong to say that Treasury is planning for no deal? Or wrong to say WTO is a disaster? Hammond admitted the former yesterday, although said it was early days in the planning.
You mean wrong to say that Treasury is planning for no deal? Or wrong to say WTO is a disaster? Hammond admitted the former yesterday, although said it was early days in the planning.
FPT - I agree with all of Richard Nabavi's posts, which were excellent.
He's a thoughtful mainstream conservative. They tell you what you want to hear, like nanny.
It doesn't stop them being more wishful thinking though
I am still waiting for any kind of evidence that the EU believes it needs us more than we need them, or that the CEOs of German companies are beating down doors to beg Angela Merkel to ensure a deal is done, or that by Brexit day we will have negotiated a free trade area vastly bigger than the EU, or that there would be no downside to leaving the EU, or that it would be very easy to do - all central claims made by Tory Brexiteers, even before we start to look at what we were told about greater prosperity, extra money for the NHS and so on.
The simple truth is that, as has been blindingly obvious from the start, leaving the EU without a deal in place will causes the UK substantial and immediate damage that will extend into the long-term. But by pandering to the Tory right instead of seeking a Brexit that works for the entire country Mrs May has boxed herself into a political corner which makes securing an outcome that avoids the cliff-edge almost impossibly difficult. Furthermore, her chief negotiator has spent much of his political life believing that Brussels is the "enemy" while failing absolutely to ever learn how the EU works or what drives FTA deal-making.
Brexit is going to happen, but since the referendum the Tories have done all they can to ensure it will be on the worst possible basis. For a party that is supposed to be patriotic and pro-business that is quite some achievement. Their only hope now is to somehow contrive a situation where all of this is perceived to be the EU's fault. That is clearly what is happening now. A blazing show of defiance, combined with an histrionic walk-out may well see the Tories get a polling bounce - but then what happens?
Europe is our biggest market, no-one will do a trade deal with us until our relationship with the EU is sorted out, if we leave without a deal we not only revert to WTO tariffs, but regulations covering hundreds of topics affecting our ability to export will cease to apply to us and, potentially, we become more vulnerable security-wise. All this when the Tories have promised voters that Brexit will lead to more prosperity and greater equality. What an unbelievable mess they have made.
Like. And there’s also the sense of 40+ wasted years in putting together business and professional alliances and common structures.
You mean wrong to say that Treasury is planning for no deal? Or wrong to say WTO is a disaster? Hammond admitted the former yesterday, although said it was early days in the planning.
Why is he wrong about the WTO?
Lack of customs deal would be where I worry most in this scenario. As Hammond admitted yesterday there would be chaos at Dover if lorries had to have even a minute's worth of checks. Dover is pure roll-on roll-off.
On topic, no. What a dreadful market. If "no impeachment" meant that bets would be returned, maybe worth considering. As it is, shudder.
On Southam's post, the predictions seem to range from "modest immediate damage, perhaps worsening over time" to "disastrous damage". I think there will be a deal in the end and immediate disaster will be averted - the EU always works with crises and late-night haggling and breakdowns and delayed deadlines, but they get there is the end, and so will we, because we need to. But there's no reason to expect a particularly helpful deal.
The key point which I don't think has widely sunk in among the political class is that the Continental electorate - and therefore to some extent the politicians - don't actually care very much. Brexit barely featured in the French elections, and it's not featuring at all in the German ones. Everyone sees it as the Brits going off and doing something eccentric- they feel mildly regretful but ultimately hey, it's our business. Insofar as they're paying attention, they want a good payment to cover commitments and some sort of workable trading arrangement, and that will do.
The sensible Remain wing of politics, notably Hammond, is playing it long, trying to go for near-membership for the forseeable future: more Norway than Singapore. That's roughly where Labour will end up. What is still unclear is whether that line will win out on the Government side.
The "build it and they will come" mentality is not particularly healthy for the economy. But I'm sure it will win China a loyal ally close to America
We'll see. In any event, Haiti deserves a break - and I'm pretty sure the millions of Haitians whose risk of cholera will plummet won't see it quite the way you do.
You don't need $30bn to put in a good sewage system and water network
No, of course not. Did you actually read the article ? The initial investment is around $5bn, and will provide power; water; sewage systems; drainage etc in the capital - i.e. basic infrastructure which any economy needs, and Haiti doesn't have - along with perhaps 20,000 jobs. Haiti is an economic basket case which bears the legacy of the worst of colonialism and plantation slavery. It will be interesting to watch how this pans out.
You mean wrong to say that Treasury is planning for no deal? Or wrong to say WTO is a disaster? Hammond admitted the former yesterday, although said it was early days in the planning.
Why is he wrong about the WTO?
Lack of customs deal would be where I worry most in this scenario. As Hammond admitted yesterday there would be chaos at Dover if lorries had to have even a minute's worth of checks. Dover is pure roll-on roll-off.
FPT - I agree with all of Richard Nabavi's posts, which were excellent.
The Article 50 talks are a two year opportunity to get an agreement on withdrawal. The default is to left with absolutely no agreements of any kind with the EU on March 30 2019 because all treaties lapse under Article 50. As the main blockage is a sum of money that is unlikely to be much more than what we paid before and are likely to pay ongoing to European countries anyway, we would be highly irrational to walk away as Richard proposes. But the whole Brexit thing as conducted so far has been irrational. I am getting less confident of a sensible arrangement, although I still think agreement is more likely than not.
FPT - I agree with all of Richard Nabavi's posts, which were excellent.
He's a thoughtful mainstream conservative. They tell you what you want to hear, like nanny.
It doesn't stop them being more wishful thinking though
I am still waiting for any kind of evidence that the EU believes it needs us more than we need them, or that the CEOs of German companies are beating down doors to beg Angela Merkel to ensure a deal is done, or that by Brexit day we will have negotiated a free trade area vastly bigger than the EU, or that there would be no downside to leaving the EU, or that it would be very easy to do - all central claims made by Tory Brexiteers, even before we start to look at what we were told about greater prosperity, extra money for the NHS and so on.
The simple truth is that, as has been blindingly obvious from the start, leaving the EU without a deal in place will causes the UK substantial and immediate damage that will extend into the long-term. But by pandering to the Tory right instead of seeking a Brexit that works for the entire country Mrs May has boxed herself into a political corner which makes securing an outcome that avoids the cliff-edge almost impossibly difficult. Furthermore, her chief negotiator has spent much of his political life believing that Brussels is the "enemy" while failing absolutely to ever learn how the EU works or what drives FTA deal-making.
Brexithappens?
Europe is our biggest market, no-one will do a trade deal with us until our relationship with the EU is sorted out, if we leave without a deal we not only revert to WTO tariffs, but regulations covering hundreds of topics affecting our ability to export will cease to apply to us and, potentially, we become more vulnerable security-wise. All this when the Tories have promised voters that Brexit will lead to more prosperity and greater equality. What an unbelievable mess they have made.
Like. And there’s also the sense of 40+ wasted years in putting together business and professional alliances and common structures.
When push comes to shove what gets me most is the sheer laziness of people like Davis, Fox. Johnson and Gove. They had years to work all this out and to learn how the EU works and what underpins successful FTA negotiations. But it turns out they couldn't be arsed.
"Labour risks losing touch with northern Brexit voters if the party fails to crackdown on freedom of movement, Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham has warned."
In life I've found that things are better than you fear and less good than you hope. You might find things less stressful if you adopt a similar philosophy
The electorate, whilst split very much on In/Out, would, I'd suggest, be generally very pro-economics and anti-politics from the EU. All the time the political class was throwing away vetoes, rebate money and reducing national influence in favour of EU ideology/integration it was moving further and further away from the electorate. The political class may not even have realised this, as the media [broadcast, certainly] and London are both far more pro-EU than the national average.
FPT - I agree with all of Richard Nabavi's posts, which were excellent.
He's a thoughtful mainstream conservative. They tell you what you want to hear, like nanny.
It doesn't stop them being more wishful thinking though
I am still waiting for any kind of evidence that the EU believes it needs us more than we need them, or that the CEOs of German companies are beating down doors to beg Angela Merkel to ensure a deal is done, or that by Brexit day we will have negotiated a free trade area vastly bigger than the EU, or that there would be no downside to leaving the EU, or that it would be very easy to do - all central claims made by Tory Brexiteers, even before we start to look at what we were told about greater prosperity, extra money for the NHS and so on.
The simple truth is that, as has been blindingly obvious from the start, leaving the EU without a deal in place will causes the UK substantial and immediate damage that will extend into the long-term. But by pandering to the Tory right instead of seeking a Brexit that works for the entire country Mrs May has boxed herself into a political corner which makes securing an outcome that avoids the cliff-edge almost impossibly difficult. Furthermore, her chief negotiator has spent much of his political life believing that Brussels is the "enemy" while failing absolutely to ever learn how the EU works or what drives FTA deal-making.
Brexithappens?
Europe is our biggest market, no-one will do a trade deal with us until our relationship with the EU is sorted out, if we leave without a deal we not only revert to WTO tariffs, but regulations covering hundreds of topics affecting our ability to export will cease to apply to us and, potentially, we become more vulnerable security-wise. All this when the Tories have promised voters that Brexit will lead to more prosperity and greater equality. What an unbelievable mess they have made.
Like. And there’s also the sense of 40+ wasted years in putting together business and professional alliances and common structures.
When push comes to shove what gets me most is the sheer laziness of people like Davis, Fox. Johnson and Gove. They had years to work all this out and to learn how the EU works and what underpins successful FTA negotiations. But it turns out they couldn't be arsed.
Perhaps Bill Cash should have been in Cabinet leading Brexit? I may not agree with him at all, but you get the impression he has bothered to understand every aspect of how it all works.
In life I've found that things are better than you fear and less good than you hope. You might find things less stressful if you adopt a similar philosophy
In life I've found that things are better than you fear and less good than you hope. You might find things less stressful if you adopt a similar philosophy
Did I see you playing violin on the Titanic?
In this case the passengers voted for the captain to sale towards the iceberg.
FPT - I agree with all of Richard Nabavi's posts, which were excellent.
He's a thoughtful mainstream conservative. They tell you what you want to hear, like nanny.
It doesn't stop them being more wishful thinking though
No, i think his analysis was rational, fact-based and sober.
I have no interest in being told what I want to hear or, indeed, just being told what I don't want to hear. I want posters who provide real insight, and Richard provides that.
If you want analysis that is rational, fact based and sober read what SO has written above. Your beloved party has been captured by a bunch of cultists, who are hell bent on driving this country into the abyss.
Of course, a few hedgies will do very nicely thanks.
@PolhomeEditor: It's not journalists' job to be patriotic.
@RupertMyers: It's laughable for politicians to question the patriotism of journalists, but for people who claim to be journalists to do it is inexcusable
What I don't understand is why something so important is left to David Davis and Liam Fox. Davis is at best a buffoon and Fox is so puffed up he might pop at any moment.
FPT - I agree with all of Richard Nabavi's posts, which were excellent.
He's a thoughtful mainstream conservative. They tell you what you want to hear, like nanny.
It doesn't stop them being more wishful thinking though
I am still waiting for any kind of evidence that the EU believes it needs us more than we need them, or that the CEOs of German companies are beating down doors to beg Angela Merkel to ensure a deal is done, or that by Brexit day we will have negotiated a free trade area vastly bigger than the EU, or that there would be no downside to leaving the EU, or that it would be very easy to do - all central claims made by Tory Brexiteers, even before we start to look at what we were told about greater prosperity, extra money for the NHS and so on.
The simple truth is that, as has been blindingly obvious from the start, leaving the EU without a deal in place will causes the UK substantial and immediate damage that will extend into the long-term. But by pandering to the Tory right instead of seeking a Brexit that works for the entire country Mrs May has boxed herself into a political corner which makes securing an outcome that avoids the cliff-edge almost impossibly difficult. Furthermore, her chief negotiator has spent much of his political life believing that Brussels is the "enemy" while failing absolutely to ever learn how the EU works or what drives FTA deal-making.
Brexit is going to happen, but since the referendum the Tories have done all they can to ensure it will be on the worst possible basis. For a party that is supposed to be patriotic and pro-business that is quite some achievement. Their only hope now is to somehow contrive a situation where all of this is perceived to be the EU's fault. That is clearly what is happening now. A blazing show of defiance, combined with an histrionic walk-out may well see the Tories get a polling bounce - but then what happens?
Europe is our biggest market, no-one will do a trade deal with us until our relationship with the EU is sorted out, if we leave without a deal we not only revert to WTO tariffs, but regulations covering hundreds of topics affecting our ability to export will cease to apply to us and, potentially, we become more vulnerable security-wise. All this when the Tories have promised voters that Brexit will lead to more prosperity and greater equality. What an unbelievable mess they have made.
Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker will call for non-eurozone countries to join the EU’s common currency in his State of the European Union address in Strasbourg Wednesday, according to an EU diplomat who briefed reporters on the speech beforehand.
In life I've found that things are better than you fear and less good than you hope. You might find things less stressful if you adopt a similar philosophy
In life I've found that things are better than you fear and less good than you hope. You might find things less stressful if you adopt a similar philosophy
Yes, Charles, I imagine in your life that has always been the case. But thanks for the advice.
FPT - I agree with all of Richard Nabavi's posts, which were excellent.
The Article 50 talks are a two year opportunity to get an agreement on withdrawal. The default is to left with absolutely no agreements of any kind with the EU on March 30 2019 because all treaties lapse under Article 50. As the main blockage is a sum of money that is unlikely to be much more than what we paid before and are likely to pay ongoing to European countries anyway, we would be highly irrational to walk away as Richard proposes. But the whole Brexit thing as conducted so far has been irrational. I am getting less confident of a sensible arrangement, although I still think agreement is more likely than not.
Leaving the EU with no agreement will cost us a lot more than any sums we have seen mentioned - let alone the £50 billion or so that seems to be the actual figure both sides are looking at. The problem is buffoons like Boris - and May's embrace of the Brexit right - have made it impossible for the Tories to say this.
In life I've found that things are better than you fear and less good than you hope. You might find things less stressful if you adopt a similar philosophy
Excellent post - so true
Only the pollyanna principle now remains for the more sensible leavers.
The "build it and they will come" mentality is not particularly healthy for the economy. But I'm sure it will win China a loyal ally close to America
We'll see. In any event, Haiti deserves a break - and I'm pretty sure the millions of Haitians whose risk of cholera will plummet won't see it quite the way you do.
You don't need $30bn to put in a good sewage system and water network
No, of course not. Did you actually read the article ? The initial investment is around $5bn, and will provide power; water; sewage systems; drainage etc in the capital - i.e. basic infrastructure which any economy needs, and Haiti doesn't have - along with perhaps 20,000 jobs. Haiti is an economic basket case which bears the legacy of the worst of colonialism and plantation slavery. It will be interesting to watch how this pans out.
It sounds great. If I were running somewhere like Haiti and someone offered to sort things out like this, I absolutely would not fret about economic distortion or the human rights record of the donor, and if the price was, say, to vote loyally with China in the UN, I'd do it like a shot. If China wants to get some Western hemisphere influence by helping countries that have been disaster cases for generations, I think they deserve any political credit they get from the recipients.
China would, however, be wise to conduct the programme with fairly close monitoring.
Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker will call for non-eurozone countries to join the EU’s common currency in his State of the European Union address in Strasbourg Wednesday, according to an EU diplomat who briefed reporters on the speech beforehand.
If Sweden and Denmark are forced to choose between staying in the EU but joining the euro or leaving and rejoining EFTA they may well choose EFTA given both nations rejected the euro in referendums
Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker will call for non-eurozone countries to join the EU’s common currency in his State of the European Union address in Strasbourg Wednesday, according to an EU diplomat who briefed reporters on the speech beforehand.
Let's hope they don't. Apart from it being a crap economic idea, it will put more pressure on us to do so, when we inevitably rejoin in twenty years time.
Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker will call for non-eurozone countries to join the EU’s common currency in his State of the European Union address in Strasbourg Wednesday, according to an EU diplomat who briefed reporters on the speech beforehand.
If Sweden and Denmark are forced to choose between staying in the EU but joining the euro or leaving and rejoining EFTA they may well choose EFTA given both nations rejected the euro in referendums
In life I've found that things are better than you fear and less good than you hope. You might find things less stressful if you adopt a similar philosophy
Mr. P, I fear you've accidentally completely missed the point I was making and made an entirely separate and irrelevant reply.
Mr. Jonathan, the tone of your post confuses me. Are you concerned that Fox will pop, or that he won't?
F1: looking at a few markets, to win, and to 'win' first practice. Focusing on Red Bull for both. I think they've gained performance over the season and the power deficit matters less at Singapore than any other remaining circuit. Ricciardo is 8 to win, Verstappen 8.5 (assuming his engine doesn't blow up), and Verstappen is 7 to 'win' FP1 (I'm more interested in the Dutchman than the Aussie for that market because last year Verstappen was ahead of Ricciardo across practice).
All are on an each way basis. That's top 2 for winning, top 3 for practice (1/3 and 1/5 odds respectively).
Decided to back those bets. Was a bit iffy about the practice one, more confident on the race win bets.
Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker will call for non-eurozone countries to join the EU’s common currency in his State of the European Union address in Strasbourg Wednesday, according to an EU diplomat who briefed reporters on the speech beforehand.
If Sweden and Denmark are forced to choose between staying in the EU but joining the euro or leaving and rejoining EFTA they may well choose EFTA given both nations rejected the euro in referendums
Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker will call for non-eurozone countries to join the EU’s common currency in his State of the European Union address in Strasbourg Wednesday, according to an EU diplomat who briefed reporters on the speech beforehand.
If Sweden and Denmark are forced to choose between staying in the EU but joining the euro or leaving and rejoining EFTA they may well choose EFTA given both nations rejected the euro in referendums
In life I've found that things are better than you fear and less good than you hope. You might find things less stressful if you adopt a similar philosophy
Did I see you playing violin on the Titanic?
In this case the passengers voted for the captain to sale towards the iceberg.
If the Titanic had hit the iceberg head on it's very likely that more people would have survived
The "build it and they will come" mentality is not particularly healthy for the economy. But I'm sure it will win China a loyal ally close to America
We'll see. In any event, Haiti deserves a break - and I'm pretty sure the millions of Haitians whose risk of cholera will plummet won't see it quite the way you do.
You don't need $30bn to put in a good sewage system and water network
No, of course not. Did you actually read the article ? The initial investment is around $5bn, and will provide power; water; sewage systems; drainage etc in the capital - i.e. basic infrastructure which any economy needs, and Haiti doesn't have - along with perhaps 20,000 jobs. Haiti is an economic basket case which bears the legacy of the worst of colonialism and plantation slavery. It will be interesting to watch how this pans out.
It sounds great. If I were running somewhere like Haiti and someone offered to sort things out like this, I absolutely would not fret about economic distortion or the human rights record of the donor, and if the price was, say, to vote loyally with China in the UN, I'd do it like a shot. If China wants to get some Western hemisphere influence by helping countries that have been disaster cases for generations, I think they deserve any political credit they get from the recipients.
China would, however, be wise to conduct the programme with fairly close monitoring.
China has already bought most of Africa on the same basis so knows how it's done. For a recent ft article Google "Chinese investment in Africa: Beijing’s testing ground" - googling gets past paywall
FPT - I agree with all of Richard Nabavi's posts, which were excellent.
He's a thoughtful mainstream conservative. They tell you what you want to hear, like nanny.
It doesn't stop them being more wishful thinking though
I am still waiting for any kind of evidence that the EU believes it needs us more than we need them, or that the CEOs of German companies are beating down doors to beg Angela Merkel to ensure a deal is done, or that by Brexit day we will have negotiated a free trade area vastly bigger than the EU, or that there would be no downside to leaving the EU, or that it would be very easy to do - all central claims made by Tory Brexiteers, even before we start to look at what we were told about greater prosperity, extra money for the NHS and so on.
The simple truth is that, as has been blindingly obvious from the start, leaving the EU without a deal in place will causes the UK substantial and immediate damage that will extend into the long-term. But by pandering to the Tory right instead of seeking a Brexit that works for the entire country Mrs May has boxed herself into a political corner which makes securing an outcome that avoids the cliff-edge almost impossibly difficult. Furthermore, her chief negotiator has spent much of his political life believing that Brussels is the "enemy" while failing absolutely to ever learn how the EU works or what drives FTA deal-making.
Brexit is going to happen, but since the referendum the Tories have done all they can to ensure it will be on the worst possible basis. For a party that is supposed to be patriotic and pro-business that is quite some achievement. Their only hope now is to somehow contrive a situation where all of this is perceived to be the EU's fault. That is clearly what is happening now. A blazing show of defiance, combined with an histrionic walk-out may well see the Tories get a polling bounce - but then what happens?
Europe is our biggest market, no-one will do a trade deal with us until our relationship with the EU is sorted out, if we leave without a deal we not only revert to WTO tariffs, but regulations covering hundreds of topics affecting our ability to export will cease to apply to us and, potentially, we become more vulnerable security-wise. All this when the Tories have promised voters that Brexit will lead to more prosperity and greater equality. What an unbelievable mess they have made.
In life I've found that things are better than you fear and less good than you hope. You might find things less stressful if you adopt a similar philosophy
@PolhomeEditor: It's not journalists' job to be patriotic.
@RupertMyers: It's laughable for politicians to question the patriotism of journalists, but for people who claim to be journalists to do it is inexcusable
How dare the BBC report news Tim does not like. Especially as Tim owns patriotism.
Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker will call for non-eurozone countries to join the EU’s common currency in his State of the European Union address in Strasbourg Wednesday, according to an EU diplomat who briefed reporters on the speech beforehand.
If Sweden and Denmark are forced to choose between staying in the EU but joining the euro or leaving and rejoining EFTA they may well choose EFTA given both nations rejected the euro in referendums
Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker will call for non-eurozone countries to join the EU’s common currency in his State of the European Union address in Strasbourg Wednesday, according to an EU diplomat who briefed reporters on the speech beforehand.
If Sweden and Denmark are forced to choose between staying in the EU but joining the euro or leaving and rejoining EFTA they may well choose EFTA given both nations rejected the euro in referendums
In life I've found that things are better than you fear and less good than you hope. You might find things less stressful if you adopt a similar philosophy
Did I see you playing violin on the Titanic?
In this case the passengers voted for the captain to sale towards the iceberg.
If the Titanic had hit the iceberg head on it's very likely that more people would have survived
If May's government steered towards the iceberg to minimise the impact , it would hit it side on and then plough into a minefield that wasn't there 5 minutes before.
Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker will call for non-eurozone countries to join the EU’s common currency in his State of the European Union address in Strasbourg Wednesday, according to an EU diplomat who briefed reporters on the speech beforehand.
If Sweden and Denmark are forced to choose between staying in the EU but joining the euro or leaving and rejoining EFTA they may well choose EFTA given both nations rejected the euro in referendums
Which reminds me, I have £15 @ 66/1 on Sweden being the next country to leave the EU, provided it does so within the next 10 years. Druncker could make me a grand.
In life I've found that things are better than you fear and less good than you hope. You might find things less stressful if you adopt a similar philosophy
Not in yours or my lifetimes. Get used to it, the only way you will ever be part of the EU federal state you are so desperate for is if you leave the UK.
The problem for me has never been the Euro but the Single Market. It is a pernicious mechanism which has enriched a few and caused immense social damage in many areas. Opening borders and markets has simply caused labour and capital to flow to the wealthier areas of Europe and impoverished the peripheries and other places.
For all that London, Bavaria, the Rhineland and other places have gained from migrant labour and the ability to expand service-driven economies, the social damage both in terms of the impact of migration on the places where the migrants have arrived and (much more importantly) the areas they have left has been considerable.
I wanted a European Union dedicated to the economic improvement of all of Europe including and especially the poorer peripheral areas yet all they have got is depopulation and economic devastation whether it's a Greek island or a Romanian or Bulgarian village or even parts of Ireland - the young have left, the businesses have closed and only the old remain. This was foreshadowed in the depopulation of the GDR after unification but we didn't see or want to see and, incidentally, makes the claims of those who assert they didn't realise the potential flow of economic migrants from Poland and other accessor countries lamentable.
I'm sure my vision of what the EU should be is a minority one and I'm not going with the economic flow - I don't care. Parts of Cornwall and Wales benefitted in the past from projects supported by EU Objective One funding and there remains considerable poverty in the rural and peripheral areas of Europe but that no longer seems to be the EU's focus and that's why I voted to Leave (among other reasons).
You mean wrong to say that Treasury is planning for no deal? Or wrong to say WTO is a disaster? Hammond admitted the former yesterday, although said it was early days in the planning.
Why is he wrong about the WTO?
Lack of customs deal would be where I worry most in this scenario. As Hammond admitted yesterday there would be chaos at Dover if lorries had to have even a minute's worth of checks. Dover is pure roll-on roll-off.
Genuinely alarmed at what this negotiation delay might be making space for. I was pretty confident we would avoid WTO, and Europe's last minutism is still a factor, but government's thinking at the moment is so addled that anything could happen.
And if vWTO were the answer and we the Titanic, then the queues at Dover (and Holyhead, Hull, Dublin ports and indeed ports that primarily handle our non EU trade) would be merely the visible tip that we mistakenly call the iceberg in the early days.
The "build it and they will come" mentality is not particularly healthy for the economy. But I'm sure it will win China a loyal ally close to America
We'll see. In any event, Haiti deserves a break - and I'm pretty sure the millions of Haitians whose risk of cholera will plummet won't see it quite the way you do.
You don't need $30bn to put in a good sewage system and water network
No, of course not. Did you actually read the article ? The initial investment is around $5bn, and will provide power; water; sewage systems; drainage etc in the capital - i.e. basic infrastructure which any economy needs, and Haiti doesn't have - along with perhaps 20,000 jobs. Haiti is an economic basket case which bears the legacy of the worst of colonialism and plantation slavery. It will be interesting to watch how this pans out.
It sounds great. If I were running somewhere like Haiti and someone offered to sort things out like this, I absolutely would not fret about economic distortion or the human rights record of the donor, and if the price was, say, to vote loyally with China in the UN, I'd do it like a shot. If China wants to get some Western hemisphere influence by helping countries that have been disaster cases for generations, I think they deserve any political credit they get from the recipients.
China would, however, be wise to conduct the programme with fairly close monitoring.
China has already bought most of Africa on the same basis so knows how it's done. For a recent ft article Google "Chinese investment in Africa: Beijing’s testing ground" - googling gets past paywall
That's hardly 'most of Africa'. They have, however become perhaps the most significant investor in Africa, if you exclude natural resources. Some of their investments won't pay; others will - but compared with the history of western aid, it looks like relative success. And it's hard to see the US being able to beat them in either solar or mobile telecoms, for example.
The problem for me has never been the Euro but the Single Market. It is a pernicious mechanism which has enriched a few and caused immense social damage in many areas. Opening borders and markets has simply caused labour and capital to flow to the wealthier areas of Europe and impoverished the peripheries and other places.
For all that London, Bavaria, the Rhineland and other places have gained from migrant labour and the ability to expand service-driven economies, the social damage both in terms of the impact of migration on the places where the migrants have arrived and (much more importantly) the areas they have left has been considerable.
I wanted a European Union dedicated to the economic improvement of all of Europe including and especially the poorer peripheral areas yet all they have got is depopulation and economic devastation whether it's a Greek island or a Romanian or Bulgarian village or even parts of Ireland - the young have left, the businesses have closed and only the old remain. This was foreshadowed in the depopulation of the GDR after unification but we didn't see or want to see and, incidentally, makes the claims of those who assert they didn't realise the potential flow of economic migrants from Poland and other accessor countries lamentable.
I'm sure my vision of what the EU should be is a minority one and I'm not going with the economic flow - I don't care. Parts of Cornwall and Wales benefitted in the past from projects supported by EU Objective One funding and there remains considerable poverty in the rural and peripheral areas of Europe but that no longer seems to be the EU's focus and that's why I voted to Leave (among other reasons).
That's a similar argument to that for (say) building a trans-Pennine HS3 before HS1. We do exactly the same in the UK, and leaving the EU is hardly going to help matters.
In life I've found that things are better than you fear and less good than you hope. You might find things less stressful if you adopt a similar philosophy
@joncstone: Juncker announces the EU is opening trade negotiations with Australia and New Zealand #SOTEU
So Australia is going to be welded to Asia then?
It has been for 30 years. Haven't you been paying attention? It is precisely that that is annoying the Pauline Hanson and Winston Peters.
If we want a trade deal then we might want to expand our High Commission in Canberra, rather than run it down through FCO cuts. I think that it has a UK diplomatic staff in single figures.
The problem for me has never been the Euro but the Single Market. It is a pernicious mechanism which has enriched a few and caused immense social damage in many areas. Opening borders and markets has simply caused labour and capital to flow to the wealthier areas of Europe and impoverished the peripheries and other places.
For all that London, Bavaria, the Rhineland and other places have gained from migrant labour and the ability to expand service-driven economies, the social damage both in terms of the impact of migration on the places where the migrants have arrived and (much more importantly) the areas they have left has been considerable.
I wanted a European Union dedicated to the economic improvement of all of Europe including and especially the poorer peripheral areas yet all they have got is depopulation and economic devastation whether it's a Greek island or a Romanian or Bulgarian village or even parts of Ireland - the young have left, the businesses have closed and only the old remain. This was foreshadowed in the depopulation of the GDR after unification but we didn't see or want to see and, incidentally, makes the claims of those who assert they didn't realise the potential flow of economic migrants from Poland and other accessor countries lamentable.
I'm sure my vision of what the EU should be is a minority one and I'm not going with the economic flow - I don't care. Parts of Cornwall and Wales benefitted in the past from projects supported by EU Objective One funding and there remains considerable poverty in the rural and peripheral areas of Europe but that no longer seems to be the EU's focus and that's why I voted to Leave (among other reasons).
So how do you explain the investment by big EC companies in manufacturing in Slovakia, Czech Republic etc? It could clearly be argued that there is a transitional phase during which these accession countries lose population, skills etc., but this is compensated over time by investment, and they gradually rise to the mean. I'm a very regular visitor to the two aforementioned countries and what I see is I see two countries on the up, going in a very different direction to the UK.
The woes of places like Cornwall and South Wales are largely down to domestic policy post war, not anything the EU did to us.
You mean wrong to say that Treasury is planning for no deal? Or wrong to say WTO is a disaster? Hammond admitted the former yesterday, although said it was early days in the planning.
Why is he wrong about the WTO?
Lack of customs deal would be where I worry most in this scenario. As Hammond admitted yesterday there would be chaos at Dover if lorries had to have even a minute's worth of checks. Dover is pure roll-on roll-off.
Genuinely alarmed at what this negotiation delay might be making space for. I was pretty confident we would avoid WTO, and Europe's last minutism is still a factor, but government's thinking at the moment is so addled that anything could happen.
And if vWTO were the answer and we the Titanic, then the queues at Dover (and Holyhead, Hull, Dublin ports and indeed ports that primarily handle our non EU trade) would be merely the visible tip that we mistakenly call the iceberg in the early days.
Or it could be we say "Ok we're in for two years transition in the EEA" meaning we will have left the political structure come end of March 2019 and can say FOM ending is on a specific timeframe, but all else remains the same till 2021, which in turn means we pay in as now for that period. I don't know, but I suspect, that those extra two years would assuage some of the "exit bill" issues as we'd be paying in an extra 20Bn+ net anyway, we could say it's a transition, they can say we're paying but are out, and it brings it all nearer to the end of the current EU budget period and ties up some of the reste a liquider issues as some would've crystallised in that tie (e.g "we're going to build the Krakow bypass we think as of 2017 it'll cost 5bn but in 2019 we know the bill is in fact 4.5bn").
FPT - I agree with all of Richard Nabavi's posts, which were excellent.
He's a thoughtful mainstream conservative. They tell you what you want to hear, like nanny.
It doesn't stop them being more wishful thinking though
I am still waiting for any kind of evidence that the EU believes it needs us more than we need them, or that the CEOs of German companies are beating down doors to beg Angela Merkel to ensure a deal is done, or that by Brexit day we will have negotiated a free trade area vastly bigger than the EU, or that there would be no downside to leaving the EU, or that it would be very easy to do - all central claims made by Tory Brexiteers, even before we start to look at what we were told about greater prosperity, extra money for the NHS and so on.
The simple truth is that, as has been blindingly obvious from the start, leaving the EU without a deal in place will causes the UK substantial and immediate damage that will extend into the long-term. But by pandering to the Tory right instead of seeking a Brexit that works for the entire country Mrs May has boxed herself into a political corner which makes securing an outcome that avoids the cliff-edge almost impossibly difficult. Furthermore, her chief negotiator has spent much of his political life believing that Brussels is the "enemy" while failing absolutely to ever learn how the EU works or what drives FTA deal-making.
Brexit is going to happen, but since the referendum the Tories have done all they can to ensure it will be on the worst possible basis. For a party that is supposed to be patriotic and pro-business that is quite some achievement. Their only hope now is to somehow contrive a situation where all of this is perceived to be the EU's fault. That is clearly what is happening now. A blazing show of defiance, combined with an histrionic walk-out may well see the Tories get a polling bounce - but then what happens?
Europe is our biggest market, no-one will do a trade deal with us until our relationship with the EU is sorted out, if we leave without a deal we not only revert to WTO tariffs, but regulations covering hundreds of topics affecting our ability to export will cease to apply to us and, potentially, we become more vulnerable security-wise. All this when the Tories have promised voters that Brexit will lead to more prosperity and greater equality. What an unbelievable mess they have made.
There is no Brexit deal that 'works for the entire country.'
As yesterday's ORB poll showed 43% want immigration controls to be the Brexit priority and 43% free trade, an exact tie. You can have 1 or the other but not both
Comments
Any example of Corbyn winning a vote since becoming leader? He polarises as well as being a poor politician. I can understand his wider appeal, but at the nuts and bolts he is hapless...
This is going to be an interesting conference season, and very different to what May wanted. A celebratory Labour conference, while blood on the floor and plotting in every corner at the Tory one.
In any event, not interested, especially as the plain impeachment odds are better value.
Still waiting for these examples of Corbyn and his team being good at winning parliamentary or technical party votes...
https://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Work-Begins-Soon-to-Bring-Haiti-into-Silk-Road-After-China-Invests-US30-billion-to-Develop-Infrastructure-20170901-0003.html
It doesn't stop them being more wishful thinking though
The "build it and they will come" mentality is not particularly healthy for the economy. But I'm sure it will win China a loyal ally close to America
Not a market to tempt me, to be honest. I suspect Trump will be there in 2020, but may not stand again.
The Tory one will resemble an Eastern Boc Soviet in the 1980's, rhetoric and stage managed but with everyone knowing the rotten state of things.
In any event, Haiti deserves a break - and I'm pretty sure the millions of Haitians whose risk of cholera will plummet won't see it quite the way you do.
The simple truth is that, as has been blindingly obvious from the start, leaving the EU without a deal in place will causes the UK substantial and immediate damage that will extend into the long-term. But by pandering to the Tory right instead of seeking a Brexit that works for the entire country Mrs May has boxed herself into a political corner which makes securing an outcome that avoids the cliff-edge almost impossibly difficult. Furthermore, her chief negotiator has spent much of his political life believing that Brussels is the "enemy" while failing absolutely to ever learn how the EU works or what drives FTA deal-making.
Brexit is going to happen, but since the referendum the Tories have done all they can to ensure it will be on the worst possible basis. For a party that is supposed to be patriotic and pro-business that is quite some achievement. Their only hope now is to somehow contrive a situation where all of this is perceived to be the EU's fault. That is clearly what is happening now. A blazing show of defiance, combined with an histrionic walk-out may well see the Tories get a polling bounce - but then what happens?
Europe is our biggest market, no-one will do a trade deal with us until our relationship with the EU is sorted out, if we leave without a deal we not only revert to WTO tariffs, but regulations covering hundreds of topics affecting our ability to export will cease to apply to us and, potentially, we become more vulnerable security-wise. All this when the Tories have promised voters that Brexit will lead to more prosperity and greater equality. What an unbelievable mess they have made.
If I was going to bet, which I wont, on this market, then I like tax evasion.
After all, this is how they got Al Capone iirc.
https://twitter.com/OliverNorgrove/status/907687683128004608
What you will send up is crumbling monolithic airports that are under-utilised (and probably used to dump inferior Chinese steel and concrete).
And Haiti will need to bear the running and maintenance costs.
It's more important to build what you need (including excess capacity) than to distort the economy
I have no interest in being told what I want to hear or, indeed, just being told what I don't want to hear. I want posters who provide real insight, and Richard provides that.
On Southam's post, the predictions seem to range from "modest immediate damage, perhaps worsening over time" to "disastrous damage". I think there will be a deal in the end and immediate disaster will be averted - the EU always works with crises and late-night haggling and breakdowns and delayed deadlines, but they get there is the end, and so will we, because we need to. But there's no reason to expect a particularly helpful deal.
The key point which I don't think has widely sunk in among the political class is that the Continental electorate - and therefore to some extent the politicians - don't actually care very much. Brexit barely featured in the French elections, and it's not featuring at all in the German ones. Everyone sees it as the Brits going off and doing something eccentric- they feel mildly regretful but ultimately hey, it's our business. Insofar as they're paying attention, they want a good payment to cover commitments and some sort of workable trading arrangement, and that will do.
The sensible Remain wing of politics, notably Hammond, is playing it long, trying to go for near-membership for the forseeable future: more Norway than Singapore. That's roughly where Labour will end up. What is still unclear is whether that line will win out on the Government side.
Did you actually read the article ?
The initial investment is around $5bn, and will provide power; water; sewage systems; drainage etc in the capital - i.e. basic infrastructure which any economy needs, and Haiti doesn't have - along with perhaps 20,000 jobs.
Haiti is an economic basket case which bears the legacy of the worst of colonialism and plantation slavery. It will be interesting to watch how this pans out.
https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2017/01/economist-explains-4
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/andy-burnham-brexit_uk_59b7fc47e4b09be41658755b?utm_hp_ref=uk
In life I've found that things are better than you fear and less good than you hope. You might find things less stressful if you adopt a similar philosophy
The electorate, whilst split very much on In/Out, would, I'd suggest, be generally very pro-economics and anti-politics from the EU. All the time the political class was throwing away vetoes, rebate money and reducing national influence in favour of EU ideology/integration it was moving further and further away from the electorate. The political class may not even have realised this, as the media [broadcast, certainly] and London are both far more pro-EU than the national average.
Of course, a few hedgies will do very nicely thanks.
@fatshez: Tim takes aim and blows both barrels straight at the messenger. https://twitter.com/montie/status/907861565273239559
@PolhomeEditor: It's not journalists' job to be patriotic.
@RupertMyers: It's laughable for politicians to question the patriotism of journalists, but for people who claim to be journalists to do it is inexcusable
Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker will call for non-eurozone countries to join the EU’s common currency in his State of the European Union address in Strasbourg Wednesday, according to an EU diplomat who briefed reporters on the speech beforehand.
@joncstone: Juncker announces the EU is opening trade negotiations with Australia and New Zealand #SOTEU
https://mobile.twitter.com/britainelects/status/907703497898053633?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^tweet
China would, however, be wise to conduct the programme with fairly close monitoring.
Edit: That's if we ever actually leave.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8tz2jhRAC8
Mr. Jonathan, the tone of your post confuses me. Are you concerned that Fox will pop, or that he won't?
F1: looking at a few markets, to win, and to 'win' first practice. Focusing on Red Bull for both. I think they've gained performance over the season and the power deficit matters less at Singapore than any other remaining circuit. Ricciardo is 8 to win, Verstappen 8.5 (assuming his engine doesn't blow up), and Verstappen is 7 to 'win' FP1 (I'm more interested in the Dutchman than the Aussie for that market because last year Verstappen was ahead of Ricciardo across practice).
All are on an each way basis. That's top 2 for winning, top 3 for practice (1/3 and 1/5 odds respectively).
Decided to back those bets. Was a bit iffy about the practice one, more confident on the race win bets.
This is why wanting to restrict freedom of movement is toxic to any deal.
Do you have a response yet ?
For you,
O'er the hills and o'er the main
Through Flanders, Portugal and Spain.
Herr Juncker commands and we obey
Over the hills and far away.
https://twitter.com/JenniferMerode/status/907872740891402240
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/explore/winnie-the-pooh-quotes/?lp=true
The problem for me has never been the Euro but the Single Market. It is a pernicious mechanism which has enriched a few and caused immense social damage in many areas. Opening borders and markets has simply caused labour and capital to flow to the wealthier areas of Europe and impoverished the peripheries and other places.
For all that London, Bavaria, the Rhineland and other places have gained from migrant labour and the ability to expand service-driven economies, the social damage both in terms of the impact of migration on the places where the migrants have arrived and (much more importantly) the areas they have left has been considerable.
I wanted a European Union dedicated to the economic improvement of all of Europe including and especially the poorer peripheral areas yet all they have got is depopulation and economic devastation whether it's a Greek island or a Romanian or Bulgarian village or even parts of Ireland - the young have left, the businesses have closed and only the old remain. This was foreshadowed in the depopulation of the GDR after unification but we didn't see or want to see and, incidentally, makes the claims of those who assert they didn't realise the potential flow of economic migrants from Poland and other accessor countries lamentable.
I'm sure my vision of what the EU should be is a minority one and I'm not going with the economic flow - I don't care. Parts of Cornwall and Wales benefitted in the past from projects supported by EU Objective One funding and there remains considerable poverty in the rural and peripheral areas of Europe but that no longer seems to be the EU's focus and that's why I voted to Leave (among other reasons).
And if vWTO were the answer and we the Titanic, then the queues at Dover (and Holyhead, Hull, Dublin ports and indeed ports that primarily handle our non EU trade) would be merely the visible tip that we mistakenly call the iceberg in the early days.
They have, however become perhaps the most significant investor in Africa, if you exclude natural resources. Some of their investments won't pay; others will - but compared with the history of western aid, it looks like relative success.
And it's hard to see the US being able to beat them in either solar or mobile telecoms, for example.
If we want a trade deal then we might want to expand our High Commission in Canberra, rather than run it down through FCO cuts. I think that it has a UK diplomatic staff in single figures.
The woes of places like Cornwall and South Wales are largely down to domestic policy post war, not anything the EU did to us.
As yesterday's ORB poll showed 43% want immigration controls to be the Brexit priority and 43% free trade, an exact tie. You can have 1 or the other but not both