@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.
Both New Zealand First and One Nation are on the rise again in the polls yes but of course Australia is not in any Asian Union like the EU
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.
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.
I defer to your knowledge of Slovakia and the Czech Republic and this is certainly to be welcomed. Whether we have seen the same level of investment in Romania and Bulgaria seems to be more open to question at this time.
I do agree in time (and we are seeing this already to some degree with Poles and the Baltic States) that there is a flow back to the native lands as their economies improve and the standards of living rise in response.
My point would be if this mechanism is as well known as seems to be the case, some forward thinking and planning as to the managing of the expectations of newly-joining countries would seem to be in order.
As to Cornwall and South Wales, my point was our EU membership was beneficial in sending funding for key infrastructural projects our way - I believe the dualling of the A30 in Cornwall was funded through Objective One as an example. It's that kind of investment in improving the economies of the rural and peripheral areas with which the EU should be involved supporting national Governments.
As an aside, interesting to note another poll in NZ overnight (UK time) put National ten points ahead of Labour 47-37. The poll showed National up four and Labour down 1.5% from the previous survey.
Colmar Brunton, one of the other two public pollsters, showed Labour four points up in its last survey and its next one is out Thursday (NZ time).
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).
If its a minority view then I'm in the minority as well.
As an aside, interesting to note another poll in NZ overnight (UK time) put National ten points ahead of Labour 47-37. The poll showed National up four and Labour down 1.5% from the previous survey.
Colmar Brunton, one of the other two public pollsters, showed Labour four points up in its last survey and its next one is out Thursday (NZ time).
Volatile polls - whatever next ?
I think it could be similar to our election, the Nationals fail to get anywhere near the landslide they hoped for for their new PM and probably lose their majority and have to do a deal with NZ First but Labour though making gains fail to win either
@JamesTapsfield: Now Juncker follows Merkel in ruling out EU membership for Turkey. David Cameron must be kicking himself
It was definitely a mistake (from his point of view) to get the referendum done as quickly as possible.
And no sign now among the professional commentators of the faux-sophisticated argument advanced against Leave that Turkey accession talks were a charade from the start (so that Merkel's and Juncker's statements make no substantive difference to anything). How strange.
Anyone who doesn't live in Ludlow must be aware of the rapidly increasing numbers of rough sleepers in our towns and cities. The numbers seem to be doubling each week. It's not up to Thatcher levels yet but it's noticably on the rise. Whether it's just Tory economic policy or early onset Brexit is hard to say but one thing for certain; after Brexit it's going to get a hell of a lot worse.
I think it could be similar to our election, the Nationals fail to get anywhere near the landslide they hoped for for their new PM and probably lose their majority and have to do a deal with NZ First but Labour though making gains fail to win either
Entirely plausible. Under MMP, it's very hard for a party to gain an overall majority unless it is over 50% (but not impossible). The overnight poll does show National getting 61 out of 120 but that is helped by the Greens just missing the 5% threshold for representation.
Peters is playing it cagey as you would expect given his track record and the possibility of a National-NZ First Government isn't as obvious as you might think for that reason. I think Peters enjoys the kingmaker role until he has to decide who he has to make king (or queen).
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.
The tories' hard won brand equity as sober stewards of economic competence has been completely destroyed in a year. Their conduct of Brexit has been the ultimate in self-indulgent feelz>realz politics.
Anyone who doesn't live in Ludlow must be aware of the rapidly increasing numbers of rough sleepers in our towns and cities. The numbers seem to be doubling each week. It's not up to Thatcher levels yet but it's noticably on the rise. Whether it's just Tory economic policy or early onset Brexit is hard to say but one thing for certain; after Brexit it's going to get a hell of a lot worse.
Fewer rough sleepers from Romania and Bulgaria though
I think it could be similar to our election, the Nationals fail to get anywhere near the landslide they hoped for for their new PM and probably lose their majority and have to do a deal with NZ First but Labour though making gains fail to win either
Entirely plausible. Under MMP, it's very hard for a party to gain an overall majority unless it is over 50% (but not impossible). The overnight poll does show National getting 61 out of 120 but that is helped by the Greens just missing the 5% threshold for representation.
Peters is playing it cagey as you would expect given his track record and the possibility of a National-NZ First Government isn't as obvious as you might think for that reason. I think Peters enjoys the kingmaker role until he has to decide who he has to make king (or queen).
Indeed though he will likely go with the largest party
George Osborne was the Shadow Chancellor who failed to predict a recession which happened and the Chancellor who predicted a recession which didn't happen.
George Osborne was the Shadow Chancellor who failed to predict a recession which happened and the Chancellor who predicted a recession which didn't happen.
When setting out for revenge, first dig two graves....
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).
If its a minority view then I'm in the minority as well.
FPT - I agree with all of Richard Nabavi's posts, which were excellent.
+1
Of course he was probably singing Rule Britannia! in Union Jack underpants as he typed it, if some are to be believed....
I found it rather wistful and paricularly from the ever optimistic Richard who gave us some of the best one liners this site has ever read. "George Osborne the near perfect Chancellor"
This was an altogether more sombre Nabavi. It reminded me of the scene from 'On the Waterfront'. I Could've been a contender. I could've been somebody......'
He's right, of course (except for one point: planning for the possibility of no trade deal is simple commonsense).
However, he's not saying anything new. All this was well known and repeatedly said before the referendum. If he was a Vote Leave staffer, then he shouldn't be in the least bit surprised by the likely consequences of the victory of the campaign he worked for.
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).
If its a minority view then I'm in the minority as well.
And me
You all seem to want young people in remote parts of Europe to be stuck with poor prospects in places they don't want to be. Why anyone would wish such a fate on anyone is beyond me.
Totally agree. It’s a terrible thing to have to live with; they must have had 18 or so months of absolute hell. Our daughter was an adult when she developed Motor Neurone Disease and had a husband to support her, but you still think..... why my child, why not me.
Brexit is getting a bit dull. Isn't time for the annual NHS crisis yet?
Don't worry, winter is coming.
And supposedly this years flu jab gambled on the wrong strains...
I know someone who works in Pharma (researching new drugs for people with lung complaints) who says the flu jab is a complete waste of time and money and most people might as well have a Placebo.
Brexit is getting a bit dull. Isn't time for the annual NHS crisis yet?
Don't worry, winter is coming.
And supposedly this years flu jab gambled on the wrong strains...
I know someone who works in Pharma (researching new drugs for people with lung complaints) who says the flu jab is a complete waste of time and money and most people might as well have a Placebo.
"most" is a concerning word there. Sure "most" may as well have a placebo but what about the others? Presumably for the others the jab did something useful?
Brexit is getting a bit dull. Isn't time for the annual NHS crisis yet?
Don't worry, winter is coming.
And supposedly this years flu jab gambled on the wrong strains...
I know someone who works in Pharma (researching new drugs for people with lung complaints) who says the flu jab is a complete waste of time and money and most people might as well have a Placebo.
"most" is a concerning word there. Sure "most" may as well have a placebo but what about the others? Presumably for the others the jab did something useful?
I am also strongly in favour of moving to qualified majority voting for decisions on the common consolidated corporate tax base, on VAT, on fair taxes for the digital industry and on the financial transaction tax. Europe has to be able to act quicker and more decisively
Today, the Commission is proposing new rules on the financing of political parties and foundations. We should not be filling the coffers of anti-European extremists. We should be giving European parties the means to better organise themselves..
Brexit is getting a bit dull. Isn't time for the annual NHS crisis yet?
Don't worry, winter is coming.
And supposedly this years flu jab gambled on the wrong strains...
I know someone who works in Pharma (researching new drugs for people with lung complaints) who says the flu jab is a complete waste of time and money and most people might as well have a Placebo.
"most" is a concerning word there. Sure "most" may as well have a placebo but what about the others? Presumably for the others the jab did something useful?
Dunno. Just saying what I was told.
The jab confers herd immunity. Mr Gin’s friend is quite correct, but, and there’s always a but, being vaccinated stops those who might get it getting it, and consequenly spreading it.
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.
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.
In Germany the bigger Brexit developments get a little coverage in the news, but you're right that it is no issue in the general election because it not directly relevant to German life or German federal politics. Where it is indirectly relevant, at least 4 of the 6 main parties (and around 80% of the "MPs" after the election) would take exactly the same stance on Brexit
Totally agree. It’s a terrible thing to have to live with; they must have had 18 or so months of absolute hell. Our daughter was an adult when she developed Motor Neurone Disease and had a husband to support her, but you still think..... why my child, why not me.
Yes my thoughts exactly , our children are so called SWANs syndrome without a name.Complete DNA genetic testing at Manchester and Great Ormond Street Hospital still can not find a cause to their severe disability.
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.
I defer to your knowledge of Slovakia and the Czech Republic and this is certainly to be welcomed. Whether we have seen the same level of investment in Romania and Bulgaria seems to be more open to question at this time.
I do agree in time (and we are seeing this already to some degree with Poles and the Baltic States) that there is a flow back to the native lands as their economies improve and the standards of living rise in response.
My point would be if this mechanism is as well known as seems to be the case, some forward thinking and planning as to the managing of the expectations of newly-joining countries would seem to be in order.
As to Cornwall and South Wales, my point was our EU membership was beneficial in sending funding for key infrastructural projects our way - I believe the dualling of the A30 in Cornwall was funded through Objective One as an example. It's that kind of investment in improving the economies of the rural and peripheral areas with which the EU should be involved supporting national Governments.
We give a bunch of money to the EU
They deduct some in administration costs and give us a small part back to widen a road in Cornwall.
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.
I wouldn't equate unpreparedness with laziness, but it suggests that the Brexit politicians never really expected to succeed.
I criticise the LDs in 2010 in much the same way. They campaigned for years to have an influence in a coalition cabinet, and blew it straight away by not being prepared for the difficult coalition negotiations.
Totally agree. It’s a terrible thing to have to live with; they must have had 18 or so months of absolute hell. Our daughter was an adult when she developed Motor Neurone Disease and had a husband to support her, but you still think..... why my child, why not me.
Yes my thoughts exactly , our children are so called SWANs syndrome without a name.Complete DNA genetic testing at Manchester and Great Ormond Street Hospital still can not find a cause to their severe disability.
That’s dreadful; all one can do is try to ameliorate the condition. My heartfelt sympathies.
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
Just heard on the German news "Exceptions only for the UK and Denmark"
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).
If its a minority view then I'm in the minority as well.
And me
You all seem to want young people in remote parts of Europe to be stuck with poor prospects in places they don't want to be. Why anyone would wish such a fate on anyone is beyond me.
How about leveraging the European institutions to invest in the home state and improve opportunities. Then, as the home state improves, local people get worthwhile employment and each member state increases in prosperity. Sucking out the best and brightest to work as second class citizens in a wealthy core EU state doesn't do that.
Just heard on the German news "Exceptions only for the UK and Denmark"
That is the formal treaty position: Denmark and the UK negotiated opt-outs. Sweden didn't, so it is supposed to be committed to moving towards Euro membership, but in practice it is working around the rules by creative sloth.
The Germans, of course, are very keen on rules being followed to the letter!
Yes, me too. But there never was much doubt that the departure of the UK from the EU would result in an acceleration of the project. We have been a brake on that project since at least 1992, constantly looking to limit and opt out of the various developments. Given the decision to proceed with the Euro without any regard to the underlying economic reality such an acceleration is both necessary and welcome. Those EU countries who are not in the Euro have some difficult choices to face.
The real question is whether the EU would have proceeded down this road anyway had we remained members. I think it is clear that it would, just more slowly and in more complicated ways. Building a consensus for such a future for the UK is something those committed to the EU never even attempted. Instead they lied about what the effect of treaties was, what the extent of EU influence was (now painfully exposed by the Repeal Bill) and when we would ever get a say. The accusations of lies directed towards the leave campaign are really quite funny. If those in favour of the EU had not lied and lied leave would never have had a chance.
How about leveraging the European institutions to invest in the home state and improve opportunities. Then, as the home state improves, local people get worthwhile employment and each member state increases in prosperity. Sucking out the best and brightest to work as second class citizens in a wealthy core EU state doesn't do that.
What you're describing is exactly what happens, and there are no second class citizens in the EU, despite the fervent desire of the Brexiteers to make it so.
As @rcs1000 has pointed out, every new EU member since 1973 with the exception of Greece has closed the economic gap with Germany.
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.
I wouldn't equate unpreparedness with laziness, but it suggests that the Brexit politicians never really expected to succeed.
I criticise the LDs in 2010 in much the same way. They campaigned for years to have an influence in a coalition cabinet, and blew it straight away by not being prepared for the difficult coalition negotiations.
It's ignorance ultimately that comes from a lack of interest. It's understandable that the man and woman in the street aren't interested in the EU and so take a decision with considerable ignorance of the topic they are asked to decide on.
It's less acceptable that ministers tasked with effecting the required change should be so ignorant and unwilling to get up to speed on a topic they don't understand.
Just heard on the German news "Exceptions only for the UK and Denmark"
That is the formal treaty position: Denmark and the UK negotiated opt-outs. Sweden didn't, so it is supposed to be committed to moving towards Euro membership, but in practice it is working around the rules by creative sloth.
The Germans, of course, are very keen on rules being followed to the letter!
Though while I was in Sweden this year, it was nearly a cashless society. Everything from buses to bars to street stalls took cards, and many wouldn't take cash. As the SEK is very stable to the Euro it may actually make very little difference.
When it is cashless, and the currency rates are stable, it matters very little in what nominal currency the transaction is conducted in.
Just heard on the German news "Exceptions only for the UK and Denmark"
That is the formal treaty position: Denmark and the UK negotiated opt-outs. Sweden didn't, so it is supposed to be committed to moving towards Euro membership, but in practice it is working around the rules by creative sloth.
The Germans, of course, are very keen on rules being followed to the letter!
Though while I was in Sweden this year, it was nearly a cashless society. Everything from buses to bars to street stalls took cards, and many wouldn't take cash. As the SEK is very stable to the Euro it may actually make very little difference.
When it is cashless, and the currency rates are stable, it matters very little in what nominal currency the transaction is conducted in.
Not that stable: https://www.bing.com/search?q=1 SEK to EUR&FORM=S00037&filter=ufn:%22SEK%22 aid:%22de79675229366a3bf9c00cb0b4f461a4%22 sid:%22EUR1%22 cpair:%22EUR1%22 dstr:%22%22 currency:%221%22
I don't see the connection between a society being cashless and an indifference to what the exchange rate of that currency is.
When it is cashless, and the currency rates are stable, it matters very little in what nominal currency the transaction is conducted in.
OTOH the flip side of that is that if you have to keep your currency stable with someone else's bigger one, and it's cashless, there's basically zero benefit to having your own currency.
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.
I defer to your knowledge of Slovakia and the Czech Republic and this is certainly to be welcomed. Whether we have seen the same level of investment in Romania and Bulgaria seems to be more open to question at this time.
I do agree in time (and we are seeing this already to some degree with Poles and the Baltic States) that there is a flow back to the native lands as their economies improve and the standards of living rise in response.
My point would be if this mechanism is as well known as seems to be the case, some forward thinking and planning as to the managing of the expectations of newly-joining countries would seem to be in order.
As to Cornwall and South Wales, my point was our EU membership was beneficial in sending funding for key infrastructural projects our way - I believe the dualling of the A30 in Cornwall was funded through Objective One as an example. It's that kind of investment in improving the economies of the rural and peripheral areas with which the EU should be involved supporting national Governments.
We give a bunch of money to the EU
They deduct some in administration costs and give us a small part back to widen a road in Cornwall.
Isn't there a more efficient way to do this?
Indeed why should we have redistribution Charles? Maybe committees of volunteers could be exhorted to widen the road for free, parish by parish.
Isn't that the Big Society? Or are those days unmentionable now?
How about leveraging the European institutions to invest in the home state and improve opportunities. Then, as the home state improves, local people get worthwhile employment and each member state increases in prosperity. Sucking out the best and brightest to work as second class citizens in a wealthy core EU state doesn't do that.
What you're describing is exactly what happens, and there are no second class citizens in the EU, despite the fervent desire of the Brexiteers to make it so.
As @rcs1000 has pointed out, every new EU member since 1973 with the exception of Greece has closed the economic gap with Germany.
There will be no second class citizens in the UK. There will be British citizens, (and British citizenship is freely available for those who want it) and foreign nationals with varying residence rights.
When it is cashless, and the currency rates are stable, it matters very little in what nominal currency the transaction is conducted in.
OTOH the flip side of that is that if you have to keep your currency stable with someone else's bigger one, and it's cashless, there's basically zero benefit to having your own currency.
That's the situation the Danish kroner is in. It's so closely and deliberately tied to the Euro, it might as well not exist, except for the sentimental attachment of Danes to their historic currency, and I suppose an escape route in extremis. Otherwise it just adds costs.
Just heard on the German news "Exceptions only for the UK and Denmark"
That is the formal treaty position: Denmark and the UK negotiated opt-outs. Sweden didn't, so it is supposed to be committed to moving towards Euro membership, but in practice it is working around the rules by creative sloth.
The Germans, of course, are very keen on rules being followed to the letter!
Though while I was in Sweden this year, it was nearly a cashless society. Everything from buses to bars to street stalls took cards, and many wouldn't take cash. As the SEK is very stable to the Euro it may actually make very little difference.
When it is cashless, and the currency rates are stable, it matters very little in what nominal currency the transaction is conducted in.
Not that stable: https://www.bing.com/search?q=1 SEK to EUR&FORM=S00037&filter=ufn:%22SEK%22 aid:%22de79675229366a3bf9c00cb0b4f461a4%22 sid:%22EUR1%22 cpair:%22EUR1%22 dstr:%22%22 currency:%221%22
I don't see the connection between a society being cashless and an indifference to what the exchange rate of that currency is.
More that the indifference is to the nominal currency rather than the exchange rate.
The Danish Krona is very tightly managed to mirror the Euro. The Swedisk Krona may be deliberately moving more, so as to justify non convergence.
My point is that national currencies are more likely to be abolished by technology than governments.
Blaming current politicians for not being prepared is missing the point. The blame lies fairly with Cameron D. He was in charge of the Civil Service, and their people would normally have had position papers ready for the possible eventualities. Unless stopped from doing so.
Dave promised to implement the will of the people .... but he didn't expect to lose, so he f*cked off.
I think there was a window of opportunity for the UK to stay in the EU, but only a slight one. Acceptance of the democratic will of the UK by the EU and the Remainers.
But that was never going to happen. It take have taken flexibility on the EU's part plus a lack of rancour from the losers. The former reacted with spite and anger "You will bend the knee (as they say in G.O.T) or we will make you pay" and with anger and spite from the latter "You're all stupid and racist Neanderthals" .
Just heard on the German news "Exceptions only for the UK and Denmark"
That is the formal treaty position: Denmark and the UK negotiated opt-outs. Sweden didn't, so it is supposed to be committed to moving towards Euro membership, but in practice it is working around the rules by creative sloth.
The Germans, of course, are very keen on rules being followed to the letter!
Not quite Germany is very keen on others following the rules to the letter but will ignore both the letters and the rules if they have to implement it but don't agree with it...
Just heard on the German news "Exceptions only for the UK and Denmark"
That is the formal treaty position: Denmark and the UK negotiated opt-outs. Sweden didn't, so it is supposed to be committed to moving towards Euro membership, but in practice it is working around the rules by creative sloth.
The Germans, of course, are very keen on rules being followed to the letter!
Though while I was in Sweden this year, it was nearly a cashless society. Everything from buses to bars to street stalls took cards, and many wouldn't take cash. As the SEK is very stable to the Euro it may actually make very little difference.
When it is cashless, and the currency rates are stable, it matters very little in what nominal currency the transaction is conducted in.
Not that stable: https://www.bing.com/search?q=1 SEK to EUR&FORM=S00037&filter=ufn:%22SEK%22 aid:%22de79675229366a3bf9c00cb0b4f461a4%22 sid:%22EUR1%22 cpair:%22EUR1%22 dstr:%22%22 currency:%221%22
I don't see the connection between a society being cashless and an indifference to what the exchange rate of that currency is.
Because cashless payment uses a computer, so when you pay you can be given the price in both currencies and you just look at the one that interests you
Blaming current politicians for not being prepared is missing the point. The blame lies fairly with Cameron D. He was in charge of the Civil Service, and their people would normally have had position papers ready for the possible eventualities. Unless stopped from doing so.
Dave promised to implement the will of the people .... but he didn't expect to lose, so he f*cked off.
I think there was a window of opportunity for the UK to stay in the EU, but only a slight one. Acceptance of the democratic will of the UK by the EU and the Remainers.
But that was never going to happen. It take have taken flexibility on the EU's part plus a lack of rancour from the losers. The former reacted with spite and anger "You will bend the knee (as they say in G.O.T) or we will make you pay" and with anger and spite from the latter "You're all stupid and racist Neanderthals" .
Why would Dave need to do any preparation?
1) You Leavers said the Brexit deal would be the easiest in human history, as Deutsche car makers would force Frau Merkel to give us a good deal.
2) You Leavers said no one was threatening our place in the single market.
Blaming current politicians for not being prepared is missing the point. The blame lies fairly with Cameron D. He was in charge of the Civil Service, and their people would normally have had position papers ready for the possible eventualities. Unless stopped from doing so.
Dave promised to implement the will of the people .... but he didn't expect to lose, so he f*cked off.
I think there was a window of opportunity for the UK to stay in the EU, but only a slight one. Acceptance of the democratic will of the UK by the EU and the Remainers.
But that was never going to happen. It take have taken flexibility on the EU's part plus a lack of rancour from the losers. The former reacted with spite and anger "You will bend the knee (as they say in G.O.T) or we will make you pay" and with anger and spite from the latter "You're all stupid and racist Neanderthals" .
There was certainly a window of opportunity not to get into the mess we're in now. It needed to recognise in the first instance that 52/48 was actually a close result with the country utterly divided, not a decisive victory for leave, and then a period of proper reflection on the potential ways forward with DCameron leading it, not going to ground.
Just heard on the German news "Exceptions only for the UK and Denmark"
That is the formal treaty position: Denmark and the UK negotiated opt-outs. Sweden didn't, so it is supposed to be committed to moving towards Euro membership, but in practice it is working around the rules by creative sloth.
The Germans, of course, are very keen on rules being followed to the letter!
Though while I was in Sweden this year, it was nearly a cashless society. Everything from buses to bars to street stalls took cards, and many wouldn't take cash. As the SEK is very stable to the Euro it may actually make very little difference.
When it is cashless, and the currency rates are stable, it matters very little in what nominal currency the transaction is conducted in.
Not that stable: https://www.bing.com/search?q=1 SEK to EUR&FORM=S00037&filter=ufn:%22SEK%22 aid:%22de79675229366a3bf9c00cb0b4f461a4%22 sid:%22EUR1%22 cpair:%22EUR1%22 dstr:%22%22 currency:%221%22
I don't see the connection between a society being cashless and an indifference to what the exchange rate of that currency is.
More that the indifference is to the nominal currency rather than the exchange rate.
The Danish Krona is very tightly managed to mirror the Euro. The Swedisk Krona may be deliberately moving more, so as to justify non convergence.
My point is that national currencies are more likely to be abolished by technology than governments.
I agree that the Danish Krona is more tightly managed. I also agree that the Swedes are making sure that the conditions for membership of the Euro are not quite met.
I don't see how technology abolishes currencies unless it facilitates dollarization type dominance. If the people of Denmark, for example, choose to price and accept items in euros to an overwhelming extent then their currency could become redundant. But I don't think there is much evidence of that happening.
I strongly suspect that Dave not only did no preparation, he expressly prevented the Civil Service from, as he thought, wasting their time preparing. That is what the Civil Service would do routinely unless stopped.
Blaming current politicians for not being prepared is missing the point. The blame lies fairly with Cameron D. He was in charge of the Civil Service, and their people would normally have had position papers ready for the possible eventualities. Unless stopped from doing so.
Dave promised to implement the will of the people .... but he didn't expect to lose, so he f*cked off.
I think there was a window of opportunity for the UK to stay in the EU, but only a slight one. Acceptance of the democratic will of the UK by the EU and the Remainers.
But that was never going to happen. It take have taken flexibility on the EU's part plus a lack of rancour from the losers. The former reacted with spite and anger "You will bend the knee (as they say in G.O.T) or we will make you pay" and with anger and spite from the latter "You're all stupid and racist Neanderthals" .
There was certainly a window of opportunity not to get into the mess we're in now. It needed to recognise in the first instance that 52/48 was actually a close result with the country utterly divided, not a decisive victory for leave, and then a period of proper reflection on the potential ways forward with DCameron leading it, not going to ground.
Quite, it was indeed close. The will of the people - no not really.
I strongly suspect that Dave not only did no preparation, he expressly prevented the Civil Service from, as he thought, wasting their time preparing. That is what the Civil Service would do routinely unless stopped.
Well you're wrong.
Preparation was begun but since Leave had no manifesto, nor any white paper (like the Scottish Government in the Indyref) it was hard for the civil service to wargame the precise Brexit route that would be delivered as the Vote Leave campaign contained so many contradictions and blatantly unrealistic hopes.
Just heard on the German news "Exceptions only for the UK and Denmark"
That is the formal treaty position: Denmark and the UK negotiated opt-outs. Sweden didn't, so it is supposed to be committed to moving towards Euro membership, but in practice it is working around the rules by creative sloth.
The Germans, of course, are very keen on rules being followed to the letter!
Though while I was in Sweden this year, it was nearly a cashless society. Everything from buses to bars to street stalls took cards, and many wouldn't take cash. As the SEK is very stable to the Euro it may actually make very little difference.
When it is cashless, and the currency rates are stable, it matters very little in what nominal currency the transaction is conducted in.
Not that stable: https://www.bing.com/search?q=1 SEK to EUR&FORM=S00037&filter=ufn:%22SEK%22 aid:%22de79675229366a3bf9c00cb0b4f461a4%22 sid:%22EUR1%22 cpair:%22EUR1%22 dstr:%22%22 currency:%221%22
I don't see the connection between a society being cashless and an indifference to what the exchange rate of that currency is.
More that the indifference is to the nominal currency rather than the exchange rate.
The Danish Krona is very tightly managed to mirror the Euro. The Swedisk Krona may be deliberately moving more, so as to justify non convergence.
My point is that national currencies are more likely to be abolished by technology than governments.
I agree that the Danish Krona is more tightly managed. I also agree that the Swedes are making sure that the conditions for membership of the Euro are not quite met.
I don't see how technology abolishes currencies unless it facilitates dollarization type dominance. If the people of Denmark, for example, choose to price and accept items in euros to an overwhelming extent then their currency could become redundant. But I don't think there is much evidence of that happening.
Concievably in a cashless society all bills could reasily be paid in any currency, and recieved in any currency, and with the exchange rate electronic, very little commission.
The pub owner gets paid in SEK, but I paid in Sterling for the same transaction. I genuinely struggled to find a use for the SEK that I took.
With all the criticism again on here of the Government, I can't believe that people are now just taking for granted the extraordinary unemployment figures that this government has achieved. They are truly remarkable and they should be congratulated.
Just heard on the German news "Exceptions only for the UK and Denmark"
That is the formal treaty position: Denmark and the UK negotiated opt-outs. Sweden didn't, so it is supposed to be committed to moving towards Euro membership, but in practice it is working around the rules by creative sloth.
The Germans, of course, are very keen on rules being followed to the letter!
With all the criticism again on here of the Government, I can't believe that people are now just taking for granted the extraordinary unemployment figures that this government has achieved. They are truly remarkable and they should be congratulated.
A testament to George Osborne's magnificent stewardship of the economy and golden economic legacy he bequeathed Mrs May's government.
I strongly suspect that Dave not only did no preparation, he expressly prevented the Civil Service from, as he thought, wasting their time preparing. That is what the Civil Service would do routinely unless stopped.
Well you're wrong.
Preparation was begun but since Leave had no manifesto, nor any white paper (like the Scottish Government in the Indyref) it was hard for the civil service to wargame the precise Brexit route that would be delivered as the Vote Leave campaign contained so many contradictions and blatantly unrealistic hopes.
And lord knows the Civil Service had their hearts set on it. I mean, they really dislike the EU and the status quo, right?
I suspect we'll not agree so we'll leave it at that.
Dave was a stereotype Toff.
Affable when getting his own way, but incandescent with rage when thwarted. As a horny-handed son of the soil from Yorkshire, I thought you might understand that.
With all the criticism again on here of the Government, I can't believe that people are now just taking for granted the extraordinary unemployment figures that this government has achieved. They are truly remarkable and they should be congratulated.
With all the criticism again on here of the Government, I can't believe that people are now just taking for granted the extraordinary unemployment figures that this government has achieved. They are truly remarkable and they should be congratulated.
A testament to George Osborne's magnificent stewardship of the economy and golden economic legacy he bequeathed Mrs May's government.
One that still has a structural deficit of approximately £1bn a week from working tax credits and housing benefit
With all the criticism again on here of the Government, I can't believe that people are now just taking for granted the extraordinary unemployment figures that this government has achieved. They are truly remarkable and they should be congratulated.
A testament to George Osborne's magnificent stewardship of the economy and golden economic legacy he bequeathed Mrs May's government.
I think you refer to the golden years of Danny Alexander at the Treasury.
I strongly suspect that Dave not only did no preparation, he expressly prevented the Civil Service from, as he thought, wasting their time preparing. That is what the Civil Service would do routinely unless stopped.
Well you're wrong.
Preparation was begun but since Leave had no manifesto, nor any white paper (like the Scottish Government in the Indyref) it was hard for the civil service to wargame the precise Brexit route that would be delivered as the Vote Leave campaign contained so many contradictions and blatantly unrealistic hopes.
The "wrong sort of snow" argument in its purest form.
Mind you, in retrospect the best (and valid, sadly) Remain argument was this: you are shackled hand and foot in an otherwise comfortable dungeon where you get three good meals a day, and fast internet access. The dungeon is in the heart of Siberia, it is midwinter and packs of starving wolves surround the compound round the whole set up. Do you stay put, or do you gnaw through each one of your four limbs, roll out through the razorwire and get eaten by the wolves?
I suspect we'll not agree so we'll leave it at that.
Dave was a stereotype Toff.
Affable when getting his own way, but incandescent with rage when thwarted. As a horny-handed son of the soil from Yorkshire, I thought you might understand that.
You should really meet and speak to the people who worked for David Cameron, they'd laugh at your characterisation of him.
With all the criticism again on here of the Government, I can't believe that people are now just taking for granted the extraordinary unemployment figures that this government has achieved. They are truly remarkable and they should be congratulated.
The employment figures are indeed remarkable and a very strong contrast to the mass unemployment that was tolerated in the 1980s as the economy was reformed. But there are a number of problems.
Firstly, why is this strong growth in employment not being reflected in growth in GDP? The implication is that productivity is flat to falling backwards. This tends to suggest that much of the employment growth is at the bottom end of the skills and wages arc. This in turn is driving down average pay since the proportion of our workforce on low skills at or just above minimum wage is increasing.
Much of this employment is subsidised by in work benefits. There are good social reasons for this but this is also why significant falls in unemployment have not really helped with deficit reduction. The subsidy means demand is expanded beyond the value of the output. This is a major cause of our trade deficit.
Ultimately there has to be a concern that this is not sustainable. We need to produce enough value to pay our bills individually, in the public finances and as a country. And we aren't. We need to focus enough of our efforts on higher value jobs with higher pay. At the moment we are excessively focussing on the low skill, low paid.
Mr Eagles, You are missing my point. I strongly suspect that Dave not only did no preparation, he expressly prevented the Civil Service from, as he thought, wasting their time preparing. That is what the Civil Service would do routinely unless stopped.
Well you're wrong. Preparation was begun but since Leave had no manifesto, nor any white paper (like the Scottish Government in the Indyref) it was hard for the civil service to wargame the precise Brexit route that would be delivered as the Vote Leave campaign contained so many contradictions and blatantly unrealistic hopes.
The "wrong sort of snow" argument in its purest form. Mind you, in retrospect the best (and valid, sadly) Remain argument was this: you are shackled hand and foot in an otherwise comfortable dungeon where you get three good meals a day, and fast internet access. The dungeon is in the heart of Siberia, it is midwinter and packs of starving wolves surround the compound round the whole set up. Do you stay put, or do you gnaw through each one of your four limbs, roll out through the razorwire and get eaten by the wolves?
With all the criticism again on here of the Government, I can't believe that people are now just taking for granted the extraordinary unemployment figures that this government has achieved. They are truly remarkable and they should be congratulated.
I just wish they would move publication day from Wednesday, it gives the PM a rather lame free hit once a month ("I am surprised he doesn't welcome his morning's employment figures rather than asking questions about..")
Mr. Eagles, I'm confused by your position. You did say, pre-vote, that you believed we should leave, but 10 years down the line after another referendum. Why would that be easier?
Depending on what May says in about a week (21st, I think) that *may* [ahem] open the door to another vote. I think it unlikely, but a plausible possibility.
There's still a total failure to look at matters of integration and defending British cultural values (such as not raping people because they're white working class children or not looking the other way because the rapists are Pakistani Muslims) which is more critical, I would argue, to the migration debate than the actual numbers involved.
We're certainly in the middle of interesting times. And they won't be ending for a while yet.
With all the criticism again on here of the Government, I can't believe that people are now just taking for granted the extraordinary unemployment figures that this government has achieved. They are truly remarkable and they should be congratulated.
The employment figures are indeed remarkable and a very strong contrast to the mass unemployment that was tolerated in the 1980s as the economy was reformed. But there are a number of problems.
Firstly, why is this strong growth in employment not being reflected in growth in GDP? The implication is that productivity is flat to falling backwards. This tends to suggest that much of the employment growth is at the bottom end of the skills and wages arc. This in turn is driving down average pay since the proportion of our workforce on low skills at or just above minimum wage is increasing.
Much of this employment is subsidised by in work benefits. There are good social reasons for this but this is also why significant falls in unemployment have not really helped with deficit reduction. The subsidy means demand is expanded beyond the value of the output. This is a major cause of our trade deficit.
Ultimately there has to be a concern that this is not sustainable. We need to produce enough value to pay our bills individually, in the public finances and as a country. And we aren't. We need to focus enough of our efforts on higher value jobs with higher pay. At the moment we are excessively focussing on the low skill, low paid.
With all the criticism again on here of the Government, I can't believe that people are now just taking for granted the extraordinary unemployment figures that this government has achieved. They are truly remarkable and they should be congratulated.
The employment figures are indeed remarkable and a very strong contrast to the mass unemployment that was tolerated in the 1980s as the economy was reformed. But there are a number of problems.
Firstly, why is this strong growth in employment not being reflected in growth in GDP? The implication is that productivity is flat to falling backwards. This tends to suggest that much of the employment growth is at the bottom end of the skills and wages arc. This in turn is driving down average pay since the proportion of our workforce on low skills at or just above minimum wage is increasing.
Much of this employment is subsidised by in work benefits. There are good social reasons for this but this is also why significant falls in unemployment have not really helped with deficit reduction. The subsidy means demand is expanded beyond the value of the output. This is a major cause of our trade deficit.
Ultimately there has to be a concern that this is not sustainable. We need to produce enough value to pay our bills individually, in the public finances and as a country. And we aren't. We need to focus enough of our efforts on higher value jobs with higher pay. At the moment we are excessively focussing on the low skill, low paid.
Mr. Eagles, I'm confused by your position. You did say, pre-vote, that you believed we should leave, but 10 years down the line after another referendum. Why would that be easier?
Depending on what May says in about a week (21st, I think) that *may* [ahem] open the door to another vote. I think it unlikely, but a plausible possibility.
There's still a total failure to look at matters of integration and defending British cultural values (such as not raping people because they're white working class children or not looking the other way because the rapists are Pakistani Muslims) which is more critical, I would argue, to the migration debate than the actual numbers involved.
We're certainly in the middle of interesting times. And they won't be ending for a while yet.
Because Brexit is a process that cannot be squeezed into a two year time frame.
I suspect we'll not agree so we'll leave it at that.
Dave was a stereotype Toff.
Affable when getting his own way, but incandescent with rage when thwarted. As a horny-handed son of the soil from Yorkshire, I thought you might understand that.
You should really meet and speak to the people who worked for David Cameron, they'd laugh at your characterisation of him.
one can compare Cameron's free and easy style post PM with Osborne's bitter and twisted ravings
Mr. Eagles, I have quite a lot of sympathy with your time scale point. However, voting to Remain would mean remaining. The process would not even begin.
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.
I defer to your knowledge of Slovakia and the Czech Republic and this is certainly to be welcomed. Whether we have seen the same level of investment in Romania and Bulgaria seems to be more open to question at this time.
I do agree in time (and we are seeing this already to some degree with Poles and the Baltic States) that there is a flow back to the native lands as their economies improve and the standards of living rise in response.
My point would be if this mechanism is as well known as seems to be the case, some forward thinking and planning as to the managing of the expectations of newly-joining countries would seem to be in order.
As to Cornwall and South Wales, my point was our EU membership was beneficial in sending funding for key infrastructural projects our way - I believe the dualling of the A30 in Cornwall was funded through Objective One as an example. It's that kind of investment in improving the economies of the rural and peripheral areas with which the EU should be involved supporting national Governments.
We give a bunch of money to the EU
They deduct some in administration costs and give us a small part back to widen a road in Cornwall.
Isn't there a more efficient way to do this?
Indeed why should we have redistribution Charles? Maybe committees of volunteers could be exhorted to widen the road for free, parish by parish.
Isn't that the Big Society? Or are those days unmentionable now?
I'm all in favour of redistribution - both on an individual level and on a regional level. One of the main aims of my cultural programme is promoting regional development.
But I'd rather London helps Cornwall directly than we send a bunch of money to Brussels who then send some of it back to Cornwall. (And I'd rather spend more in Cornwall or other parts of the UK than Bulgaria or Romania).
With all the criticism again on here of the Government, I can't believe that people are now just taking for granted the extraordinary unemployment figures that this government has achieved. They are truly remarkable and they should be congratulated.
The employment figures are indeed remarkable and a very strong contrast to the mass unemployment that was tolerated in the 1980s as the economy was reformed. But there are a number of problems.
Firstly, why is this strong growth in employment not being reflected in growth in GDP? The implication is that productivity is flat to falling backwards. This tends to suggest that much of the employment growth is at the bottom end of the skills and wages arc. This in turn is driving down average pay since the proportion of our workforce on low skills at or just above minimum wage is increasing.
Much of this employment is subsidised by in work benefits. There are good social reasons for this but this is also why significant falls in unemployment have not really helped with deficit reduction. The subsidy means demand is expanded beyond the value of the output. This is a major cause of our trade deficit.
Ultimately there has to be a concern that this is not sustainable. We need to produce enough value to pay our bills individually, in the public finances and as a country. And we aren't. We need to focus enough of our efforts on higher value jobs with higher pay. At the moment we are excessively focussing on the low skill, low paid.
I strongly suspect that Dave not only did no preparation, he expressly prevented the Civil Service from, as he thought, wasting their time preparing. That is what the Civil Service would do routinely unless stopped.
Well you're wrong.
Preparation was begun but since Leave had no manifesto, nor any white paper (like the Scottish Government in the Indyref) it was hard for the civil service to wargame the precise Brexit route that would be delivered as the Vote Leave campaign contained so many contradictions and blatantly unrealistic hopes.
Article dated 17 Jan 2016
Mr Cameron and his Chancellor George Osborne, who are leading Britain's renegotiation with the European Union ahead of a referendum within the next two years, have insisted that civil servants are not working on planning what will happen if Britons vote to leave in the European Union referendum.
Comments
I do agree in time (and we are seeing this already to some degree with Poles and the Baltic States) that there is a flow back to the native lands as their economies improve and the standards of living rise in response.
My point would be if this mechanism is as well known as seems to be the case, some forward thinking and planning as to the managing of the expectations of newly-joining countries would seem to be in order.
As to Cornwall and South Wales, my point was our EU membership was beneficial in sending funding for key infrastructural projects our way - I believe the dualling of the A30 in Cornwall was funded through Objective One as an example. It's that kind of investment in improving the economies of the rural and peripheral areas with which the EU should be involved supporting national Governments.
This is another 'More Europe' speech from an EU apparatchik. How novel.
Colmar Brunton, one of the other two public pollsters, showed Labour four points up in its last survey and its next one is out Thursday (NZ time).
Volatile polls - whatever next ?
Clear now what way Europe is heading. Not sure its plain sailing from here on in (both UK and EU sides)
Alex Wickham
Verified account
@WikiGuido 46m
46 minutes ago
May speech to "reset" negotiations, offer compromise, conciliatory tone. (Some clarity on transition and £?)
Peters is playing it cagey as you would expect given his track record and the possibility of a National-NZ First Government isn't as obvious as you might think for that reason. I think Peters enjoys the kingmaker role until he has to decide who he has to make king (or queen).
"told his allies that he wants her 'chopped up in bags in my freezer'"
http://www.esquire.co.uk/culture/longform/a17158/george-osborne-revenge/
I know "it's the UKs responsibility to answer the border question".....
Of course he was probably singing Rule Britannia! in Union Jack underpants as he typed it, if some are to be believed....
This was an altogether more sombre Nabavi. It reminded me of the scene from 'On the Waterfront'. I Could've been a contender. I could've been somebody......'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBiewQrpBBA
However, he's not saying anything new. All this was well known and repeatedly said before the referendum. If he was a Vote Leave staffer, then he shouldn't be in the least bit surprised by the likely consequences of the victory of the campaign he worked for.
I have both the CD and the underpants, but am yet to combine the two.
Our daughter was an adult when she developed Motor Neurone Disease and had a husband to support her, but you still think..... why my child, why not me.
Today, the Commission is proposing new rules on the financing of political parties and foundations. We should not be filling the coffers of anti-European extremists. We should be giving European parties the means to better organise themselves..
They deduct some in administration costs and give us a small part back to widen a road in Cornwall.
Isn't there a more efficient way to do this?
https://twitter.com/JGForsyth/status/907902866953838592
I criticise the LDs in 2010 in much the same way. They campaigned for years to have an influence in a coalition cabinet, and blew it straight away by not being prepared for the difficult coalition negotiations.
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/theresa-may/news/88695/theresa-mays-government-will
The Germans, of course, are very keen on rules being followed to the letter!
The real question is whether the EU would have proceeded down this road anyway had we remained members. I think it is clear that it would, just more slowly and in more complicated ways. Building a consensus for such a future for the UK is something those committed to the EU never even attempted. Instead they lied about what the effect of treaties was, what the extent of EU influence was (now painfully exposed by the Repeal Bill) and when we would ever get a say. The accusations of lies directed towards the leave campaign are really quite funny. If those in favour of the EU had not lied and lied leave would never have had a chance.
As @rcs1000 has pointed out, every new EU member since 1973 with the exception of Greece has closed the economic gap with Germany.
It's less acceptable that ministers tasked with effecting the required change should be so ignorant and unwilling to get up to speed on a topic they don't understand.
But yesterday's uptick in inflation means wages are falling even further behind.
When it is cashless, and the currency rates are stable, it matters very little in what nominal currency the transaction is conducted in.
I don't see the connection between a society being cashless and an indifference to what the exchange rate of that currency is.
Isn't that the Big Society? Or are those days unmentionable now?
The Danish Krona is very tightly managed to mirror the Euro. The Swedisk Krona may be deliberately moving more, so as to justify non convergence.
My point is that national currencies are more likely to be abolished by technology than governments.
Blaming current politicians for not being prepared is missing the point. The blame lies fairly with Cameron D. He was in charge of the Civil Service, and their people would normally have had position papers ready for the possible eventualities. Unless stopped from doing so.
Dave promised to implement the will of the people .... but he didn't expect to lose, so he f*cked off.
I think there was a window of opportunity for the UK to stay in the EU, but only a slight one. Acceptance of the democratic will of the UK by the EU and the Remainers.
But that was never going to happen. It take have taken flexibility on the EU's part plus a lack of rancour from the losers. The former reacted with spite and anger "You will bend the knee (as they say in G.O.T) or we will make you pay" and with anger and spite from the latter "You're all stupid and racist Neanderthals" .
1) You Leavers said the Brexit deal would be the easiest in human history, as Deutsche car makers would force Frau Merkel to give us a good deal.
2) You Leavers said no one was threatening our place in the single market.
3) So you Brexit, you fix it.
I don't see how technology abolishes currencies unless it facilitates dollarization type dominance. If the people of Denmark, for example, choose to price and accept items in euros to an overwhelming extent then their currency could become redundant. But I don't think there is much evidence of that happening.
You are missing my point.
I strongly suspect that Dave not only did no preparation, he expressly prevented the Civil Service from, as he thought, wasting their time preparing. That is what the Civil Service would do routinely unless stopped.
Preparation was begun but since Leave had no manifesto, nor any white paper (like the Scottish Government in the Indyref) it was hard for the civil service to wargame the precise Brexit route that would be delivered as the Vote Leave campaign contained so many contradictions and blatantly unrealistic hopes.
The pub owner gets paid in SEK, but I paid in Sterling for the same transaction. I genuinely struggled to find a use for the SEK that I took.
I suspect we'll not agree so we'll leave it at that.
Dave was a stereotype Toff.
Affable when getting his own way, but incandescent with rage when thwarted. As a horny-handed son of the soil from Yorkshire, I thought you might understand that.
Mind you, in retrospect the best (and valid, sadly) Remain argument was this: you are shackled hand and foot in an otherwise comfortable dungeon where you get three good meals a day, and fast internet access. The dungeon is in the heart of Siberia, it is midwinter and packs of starving wolves surround the compound round the whole set up. Do you stay put, or do you gnaw through each one of your four limbs, roll out through the razorwire and get eaten by the wolves?
Firstly, why is this strong growth in employment not being reflected in growth in GDP? The implication is that productivity is flat to falling backwards. This tends to suggest that much of the employment growth is at the bottom end of the skills and wages arc. This in turn is driving down average pay since the proportion of our workforce on low skills at or just above minimum wage is increasing.
Much of this employment is subsidised by in work benefits. There are good social reasons for this but this is also why significant falls in unemployment have not really helped with deficit reduction. The subsidy means demand is expanded beyond the value of the output. This is a major cause of our trade deficit.
Ultimately there has to be a concern that this is not sustainable. We need to produce enough value to pay our bills individually, in the public finances and as a country. And we aren't. We need to focus enough of our efforts on higher value jobs with higher pay. At the moment we are excessively focussing on the low skill, low paid.
Mr. Eagles, I'm confused by your position. You did say, pre-vote, that you believed we should leave, but 10 years down the line after another referendum. Why would that be easier?
Depending on what May says in about a week (21st, I think) that *may* [ahem] open the door to another vote. I think it unlikely, but a plausible possibility.
There's still a total failure to look at matters of integration and defending British cultural values (such as not raping people because they're white working class children or not looking the other way because the rapists are Pakistani Muslims) which is more critical, I would argue, to the migration debate than the actual numbers involved.
We're certainly in the middle of interesting times. And they won't be ending for a while yet.
Brexit should be a process and not an event.
But I'd rather London helps Cornwall directly than we send a bunch of money to Brussels who then send some of it back to Cornwall. (And I'd rather spend more in Cornwall or other parts of the UK than Bulgaria or Romania).
Mr Cameron and his Chancellor George Osborne, who are leading Britain's renegotiation with the European Union ahead of a referendum within the next two years, have insisted that civil servants are not working on planning what will happen if Britons vote to leave in the European Union referendum.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12104609/Civil-servants-are-mentally-working-on-Brexit-plans-to-avoid-FOI-says-Gus-ODonnell.html
https://twitter.com/JamesReedYP/status/907862173388591105