Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
But to whom is she (Mrs M) going to speak? Can one buy a ticket?
Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
I think it is a good move as it will receive European attention away from the eurocrats at the commission. I suspect this is the start of a campaign to draw in the individual Countries to put sense into the divorce. And Florence with it's historic trading ties with us is a good place to extol the virtues of World wide free trade
Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
But to whom is she (Mrs M) going to speak? Can one buy a ticket?
No need - it will get live coverage across the UK and Europe broadcast media
OT Angela Merkel fans should note that a Betfair layer has put up £10k at 1.05 that Frau Merkel remembers to look both ways when she crosses the road. Either that or he knows something and we've all done our conkers.
Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
But to whom is she (Mrs M) going to speak? Can one buy a ticket?
No need - it will get live coverage across the UK and Europe broadcast media
Rising house prices might have good aspects when they are generally low but that doesn't apply to most of the UK at present.
When house prices are high they act as a block on socioeconomic mobility, lock too much capital into a non-productive asset and increase inequality by transferring wealth to the old and the rich.
Wasn't the news the other day that in most of the country earnings are growing faster than house prices? That is good news.
In most places, housing has become more affordable, since 2007, but in London and the South East, far less so.
I think rents are very high too.
Small hypocrite warning: I'm just about (god willing) to rent out my 2-bed semi to tenants at a monthly rent (£1,000pcm) that's over £200pcm more than my full repayment mortgage was on a 12 year term. That's in the South-East, of course.
It works if you have 2 x working adults living there (paying £500pcm each) but it doesn't leave much room for saving for a deposit unless you are earning decent money.
How much would it cost to buy though compared to when you bought it. £1000 a month isn't a bad offer if the flat is now worth £300,000 and the potential mortgage £1200 a month. Heck I've seen a lot of rents that are less than the interest only part of a 75% mortgage...
House prices and rents are two very different markets..
Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
But to whom is she (Mrs M) going to speak? Can one buy a ticket?
No need - it will get live coverage across the UK and Europe broadcast media
I still can't get over the fact that TSE is such an expert on the quality of sex tapes. Who'd have thought?
Well I did write this shortly before the EU referendum.
What of David Cameron? With this referendum he must be feeling like the couple who agreed to make home made porn. It sounded like a good idea at the time, he thought it would be fun to do, but now as he sits back and views his production, he must be thinking this hasn’t turned out how he expected it to turn out, whilst regretting his initial descision and feeling a bit nauseous about it all.
Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
But to whom is she (Mrs M) going to speak? Can one buy a ticket?
No need - it will get live coverage across the UK and Europe broadcast media
But if one isn’t there, one can’t ask a question.
Oh, wait!
She will get lots of questions
But will she answer them? T’would be a first. Recently, anyway!
Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
But to whom is she (Mrs M) going to speak? Can one buy a ticket?
No need - it will get live coverage across the UK and Europe broadcast media
But if one isn’t there, one can’t ask a question.
Oh, wait!
She will get lots of questions
But will she answer them? T’would be a first. Recently, anyway!
You may be surprised - we will have to wait and see - and keep an open mind
Wasn’t something like that called Council Housing in a far away land, long, long ago? Until a wicked witch decreed that long-term renting was wrong, wrong, wrong.
Isn't it a tragedy that we stopped building slums-in-the-sky and edge of conurbation sink estates and even more so the slums-in-the-sky in edge of conurbation sink estates.
Council housing was of variable quality. Some of it (like the Watling Estate in Burnt Oak) was excellent. Some of it (like neighbouring Graeme Park) was jerry-built rubbish.
Absolutely right. Rather like, as someone pointed out upthread, privately built estates. The finish on the pre-war council house where my in-laws lived was much better than that on the private estate to which they moved in the 70’s.
Very true the pre war council houses around York were of good construction with very large gardens.In contrast the 1960s and 70s that were built by private speculative house builders were poor quality.All the council housing with the large gardens is now privately owned and the price is cheaper due to the supposed stigma of been an ex council house.
Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
But to whom is she (Mrs M) going to speak? Can one buy a ticket?
No need - it will get live coverage across the UK and Europe broadcast media
But if one isn’t there, one can’t ask a question.
Oh, wait!
She will get lots of questions
But will she answer them? T’would be a first. Recently, anyway!
You may be surprised - we will have to wait and see - and keep an open mind
As the late great Terry Pratchett pointed out, the problem with having an open mind is that people will insist on putting things in it.
The idea that the EU27 are going to undermine their negotiators by going behind their back because Mrs May took a day trip to Florence is as bad as it comes (insert Blackadder reference if so inclined). She should have gone to Brussels , or at the very least to Bruges.
Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
But to whom is she (Mrs M) going to speak? Can one buy a ticket?
No need - it will get live coverage across the UK and Europe broadcast media
But if one isn’t there, one can’t ask a question.
Oh, wait!
She will get lots of questions
But will she answer them? T’would be a first. Recently, anyway!
You may be surprised - we will have to wait and see - and keep an open mind
As the late great Terry Pratchett pointed out, the problem with having an open mind is that people will insist on putting things in it.
The idea that the EU27 are going to undermine their negotiators by going behind their back because Mrs May took a day trip to Florence is as bad as it comes (insert Blackadder reference if so inclined). She should have gone to Brussels , or at the very least to Bruges.
Quite. There is no reason why she shouldn’t have made the speech in Brussels, as she was invited to do. I recognise, I think, the symbolism of speaking in Florence but I’m sure a lot of people won’t.
Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
But to whom is she (Mrs M) going to speak? Can one buy a ticket?
No need - it will get live coverage across the UK and Europe broadcast media
But if one isn’t there, one can’t ask a question.
Oh, wait!
She will get lots of questions
But will she answer them? T’would be a first. Recently, anyway!
You may be surprised - we will have to wait and see - and keep an open mind
As the late great Terry Pratchett pointed out, the problem with having an open mind is that people will insist on putting things in it.
The idea that the EU27 are going to undermine their negotiators by going behind their back because Mrs May took a day trip to Florence is as bad as it comes (insert Blackadder reference if so inclined). She should have gone to Brussels , or at the very least to Bruges.
She is going to a meeting in Brussels to address the Presidents. I do think the time is coming when Barnier will be instructed to include trade in discussions and the future relationship with the UK. Indeed this is a legal requirement in A50
Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
But to whom is she (Mrs M) going to speak? Can one buy a ticket?
No need - it will get live coverage across the UK and Europe broadcast media
But if one isn’t there, one can’t ask a question.
Oh, wait!
She will get lots of questions
But will she answer them? T’would be a first. Recently, anyway!
You may be surprised - we will have to wait and see - and keep an open mind
As the late great Terry Pratchett pointed out, the problem with having an open mind is that people will insist on putting things in it.
The idea that the EU27 are going to undermine their negotiators by going behind their back because Mrs May took a day trip to Florence is as bad as it comes (insert Blackadder reference if so inclined). She should have gone to Brussels , or at the very least to Bruges.
Quite. There is no reason why she shouldn’t have made the speech in Brussels, as she was invited to do. I recognise, I think, the symbolism of speaking in Florence but I’m sure a lot of people won’t.
I would expect the media will cover the historic trading relationship with Florence which in itself should be very interesting
Next week Theresa will be sharing her latest vision on Brexit with Florence: https://www.theguardian.com/…/theresa-may-to-deliver-brexit… As far as I am aware the only other time Florence saw a cow flying a kite was when Ermintrude did it in The Magic Roundabout: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMpu8jH1LE8
As a University student in the 1960s we used to gather round the TV in the student union at 4pm to watch Magic Roundabout. Much hidden meaning said with a British reserve.
Rising house prices might have good aspects when they are generally low but that doesn't apply to most of the UK at present.
When house prices are high they act as a block on socioeconomic mobility, lock too much capital into a non-productive asset and increase inequality by transferring wealth to the old and the rich.
Wasn't the news the other day that in most of the country earnings are growing faster than house prices? That is good news.
In most places, housing has become more affordable, since 2007, but in London and the South East, far less so.
I think rents are very high too.
Small hypocrite warning: I'm just about (god willing) to rent out my 2-bed semi to tenants at a monthly rent (£1,000pcm) that's over £200pcm more than my full repayment mortgage was on a 12 year term. That's in the South-East, of course.
It works if you have 2 x working adults living there (paying £500pcm each) but it doesn't leave much room for saving for a deposit unless you are earning decent money.
How much would it cost to buy though compared to when you bought it. £1000 a month isn't a bad offer if the flat is now worth £300,000 and the potential mortgage £1200 a month. Heck I've seen a lot of rents that are less than the interest only part of a 75% mortgage...
House prices and rents are two very different markets..
There's little test of affordability on renting. It's become what you only do if you can't buy,m very much a 2nd. preference.
Your 1st. preference: enter the housing market casino and apply to the manager to speculate on margin, a.k.a. take out a 95% mortgage. Triple your money if prices rise 10%, occasionally lose your shirt as people did in 1992.
Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
But to whom is she (Mrs M) going to speak? Can one buy a ticket?
No need - it will get live coverage across the UK and Europe broadcast media
But if one isn’t there, one can’t ask a question.
Oh, wait!
She will get lots of questions
But will she answer them? T’would be a first. Recently, anyway!
You may be surprised - we will have to wait and see - and keep an open mind
As the late great Terry Pratchett pointed out, the problem with having an open mind is that people will insist on putting things in it.
The idea that the EU27 are going to undermine their negotiators by going behind their back because Mrs May took a day trip to Florence is as bad as it comes (insert Blackadder reference if so inclined). She should have gone to Brussels , or at the very least to Bruges.
She is going to a meeting in Brussels to address the Presidents. I do think the time is coming when Barnier will be instructed to include trade in discussions and the future relationship with the UK. Indeed this is a legal requirement in A50
I don't. I can almost guarantee that the EU will determine in October that insufficient progress has been made on the preliminary issues. It would be poor negotiation strategy to conclude anything else. It puts pressure on us to make more concessions and pay more money. Who wouldn't?
Wasn’t something like that called Council Housing in a far away land, long, long ago? Until a wicked witch decreed that long-term renting was wrong, wrong, wrong.
Isn't it a tragedy that we stopped building slums-in-the-sky and edge of conurbation sink estates and even more so the slums-in-the-sky in edge of conurbation sink estates.
Council housing was of variable quality. Some of it (like the Watling Estate in Burnt Oak) was excellent. Some of it (like neighbouring Graeme Park) was jerry-built rubbish.
Wasn't there a tendency for the proportion of jerry-built rubbish to increase during the later stages of council house building ?
"An unusual feature of Japanese housing is that houses are presumed to have a limited lifespan, and are generally torn down and rebuilt after a few decades, generally twenty years for wooden buildings and thirty years for concrete buildings." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_in_Japan
I have often wondered why this works for them and not for us. If jerry-building is a serious concern why not embrace it by adopting the Japanese model? Good long-term employment implications.
Climate (plus our houses are brick built and have been since 1667).
I still struggle with living in a wood house in California...
Also Japan is in earthquake central, which probably has a bearing on thing.
Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
But to whom is she (Mrs M) going to speak? Can one buy a ticket?
No need - it will get live coverage across the UK and Europe broadcast media
But if one isn’t there, one can’t ask a question.
Oh, wait!
She will get lots of questions
But will she answer them? T’would be a first. Recently, anyway!
You may be surprised - we will have to wait and see - and keep an open mind
As the late great Terry Pratchett pointed out, the problem with having an open mind is that people will insist on putting things in it.
The idea that the EU27 are going to undermine their negotiators by going behind their back because Mrs May took a day trip to Florence is as bad as it comes (insert Blackadder reference if so inclined). She should have gone to Brussels , or at the very least to Bruges.
She is going to a meeting in Brussels to address the Presidents. I do think the time is coming when Barnier will be instructed to include trade in discussions and the future relationship with the UK. Indeed this is a legal requirement in A50
I don't. I can almost guarantee that the EU will determine in October that insufficient progress has been made on the preliminary issues. It would be poor negotiation strategy to conclude anything else. It puts pressure on us to make more concessions and pay more money. Who wouldn't?
The EU will lose the public support in the UK and WTO will seem inevitable
Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
But to whom is she (Mrs M) going to speak? Can one buy a ticket?
No need - it will get live coverage across the UK and Europe broadcast media
But if one isn’t there, one can’t ask a question.
Oh, wait!
She will get lots of questions
But will she answer them? T’would be a first. Recently, anyway!
You may be surprised - we will have to wait and see - and keep an open mind
As the late great Terry Pratchett pointed out, the problem with having an open mind is that people will insist on putting things in it.
The idea that the EU27 are going to undermine their negotiators by going behind their back because Mrs May took a day trip to Florence is as bad as it comes (insert Blackadder reference if so inclined). She should have gone to Brussels , or at the very least to Bruges.
She is going to a meeting in Brussels to address the Presidents. I do think the time is coming when Barnier will be instructed to include trade in discussions and the future relationship with the UK. Indeed this is a legal requirement in A50
I don't. I can almost guarantee that the EU will determine in October that insufficient progress has been made on the preliminary issues. It would be poor negotiation strategy to conclude anything else. It puts pressure on us to make more concessions and pay more money. Who wouldn't?
The EU will lose the public support in the UK and WTO will seem inevitable
Our media and the remainers will whip up an hysterical storm and there will be some panic in the markets. It remains to be seen if a government as weak as this can withstand it. I think that's not much better than evens myself. I think we will fold and offer more cash.
Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
But to whom is she (Mrs M) going to speak? Can one buy a ticket?
No need - it will get live coverage across the UK and Europe broadcast media
But if one isn’t there, one can’t ask a question.
Oh, wait!
She will get lots of questions
But will she answer them? T’would be a first. Recently, anyway!
You may be surprised - we will have to wait and see - and keep an open mind
As the late great Terry Pratchett pointed out, the problem with having an open mind is that people will insist on putting things in it.
The idea that the EU27 are going to undermine their negotiators by going behind their back because Mrs May took a day trip to Florence is as bad as it comes (insert Blackadder reference if so inclined). She should have gone to Brussels , or at the very least to Bruges.
She is going to a meeting in Brussels to address the Presidents. I do think the time is coming when Barnier will be instructed to include trade in discussions and the future relationship with the UK. Indeed this is a legal requirement in A50
I don't. I can almost guarantee that the EU will determine in October that insufficient progress has been made on the preliminary issues. It would be poor negotiation strategy to conclude anything else. It puts pressure on us to make more concessions and pay more money. Who wouldn't?
The EU will lose the public support in the UK and WTO will seem inevitable
I think you are right that a cash settlement will be offered, maybe even in Florence, and at the same time an offer on transitional arrangements put on the table. Indeed if TM does not do something on these lines I would conclude that she would have wasted the opportunity of her Florence speech.
Indeed, this speech could be critical for her future as PM
Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
But to whom is she (Mrs M) going to speak? Can one buy a ticket?
No need - it will get live coverage across the UK and Europe broadcast media
But if one isn’t there, one can’t ask a question.
Oh, wait!
She will get lots of questions
But will she answer them? T’would be a first. Recently, anyway!
You may be surprised - we will have to wait and see - and keep an open mind
As the late great Terry Pratchett pointed out, the problem with having an open mind is that people will insist on putting things in it.
The idea that the EU27 are going to undermine their negotiators by going behind their back because Mrs May took a day trip to Florence is as bad as it comes (insert Blackadder reference if so inclined). She should have gone to Brussels , or at the very least to Bruges.
David, T May now might do what is best for the country ,rather than purely thinking of her own position and her party.As I guess in reality she knows the last election was her last as leader.This might free her up to be a stateswoman with a legacy to be proud of rather than PM of derision.
Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
But to whom is she (Mrs M) going to speak? Can one buy a ticket?
No need - it will get live coverage across the UK and Europe broadcast media
But if one isn’t there, one can’t ask a question.
Oh, wait!
She will get lots of questions
But will she answer them? T’would be a first. Recently, anyway!
You may be surprised - we will have to wait and see - and keep an open mind
As the late great Terry Pratchett pointed out, the problem with having an open mind is that people will insist on putting things in it.
The idea that the EU27 are going to undermine their negotiators by going behind their back because Mrs May took a day trip to Florence is as bad as it comes (insert Blackadder reference if so inclined). She should have gone to Brussels , or at the very least to Bruges.
David, T May now might do what is best for the country ,rather than purely thinking of her own position and her party.As I guess in reality she knows the last election was her last as leader.This might free her up to be a stateswoman with a legacy to be proud of rather than PM of derision.
As I have said, Florence will be the most important speech of her career
Wasn’t something like that called Council Housing in a far away land, long, long ago? Until a wicked witch decreed that long-term renting was wrong, wrong, wrong.
Isn't it a tragedy that we stopped building slums-in-the-sky and edge of conurbation sink estates and even more so the slums-in-the-sky in edge of conurbation sink estates.
Council housing was of variable quality. Some of it (like the Watling Estate in Burnt Oak) was excellent. Some of it (like neighbouring Graeme Park) was jerry-built rubbish.
Wasn't there a tendency for the proportion of jerry-built rubbish to increase during the later stages of council house building ?
Yes. Robin Hood Gardens is a good example of that; an award-winning development, in neo-brutalist style, that rapidly became uninhabitable, due to damp and vermin.
A lot had to do with the fact that pre-War, council housing was meant to be inhabited by the "respectable" working classes. Getting a council house was a step up from renting from a private landlord. Some estates had committees to interview prospective tenants, in order to satisfy themselves that they were the right sort of people to live there. The same builders who were building smart houses for private owners in Metroland were hired by the LCC and local councils to build less smart, but still good-quality, houses for council tenants. Unsurprisingly, these houses are now very popular with buyers. At that stage, council housing was meant to turn a profit, if less of a profit than sales to private buyers.
After the war, council estates were increasingly designed to house the poor. Local authorities became much less concerned about the quality of the developments.
Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
But to whom is she (Mrs M) going to speak? Can one buy a ticket?
No need - it will get live coverage across the UK and Europe broadcast media
But if one isn’t there, one can’t ask a question.
Oh, wait!
She will get lots of questions
But will she answer them? T’would be a first. Recently, anyway!
You may be surprised - we will have to wait and see - and keep an open mind
As the late great Terry Pratchett pointed out, the problem with having an open mind is that people will insist on putting things in it.
The idea that the EU27 are going to undermine their negotiators by going behind their back because Mrs May took a day trip to Florence is as bad as it comes (insert Blackadder reference if so inclined). She should have gone to Brussels , or at the very least to Bruges.
She is going to a meeting in Brussels to address the Presidents. I do think the time is coming when Barnier will be instructed to include trade in discussions and the future relationship with the UK. Indeed this is a legal requirement in A50
I don't. I can almost guarantee that the EU will determine in October that insufficient progress has been made on the preliminary issues. It would be poor negotiation strategy to conclude anything else. It puts pressure on us to make more concessions and pay more money. Who wouldn't?
The EU will lose the public support in the UK and WTO will seem inevitable
WTO is inevitable....
The EU bureaucrats have adopted the Borg approach to negotiations. Resistance is futile. Yes WTO does look inevitable.
Hugely significant if true: Renault have told Red Bull that they want to terminate their contract with them from the end of next season, casting doubt on the future of drivers Daniel Ricciardo and Max Verstappen. (Daily Mail)
Rising house prices might have good aspects when they are generally low but that doesn't apply to most of the UK at present.
When house prices are high they act as a block on socioeconomic mobility, lock too much capital into a non-productive asset and increase inequality by transferring wealth to the old and the rich.
Wasn't the news the other day that in most of the country earnings are growing faster than house prices? That is good news.
It would be interesting to compare the change in housing affordability per area to the electoral swing since 2010.
I suspect swings to Labour are closely correlated to reducing affordability of homes.
I also think you would find quite a strong correlation.
Home ownership makes people trend Conservative. And, vice versa.
In March 2016, I wrote about how long EU negotiations took. It was one of the pieces that I have written that was received with most hostility by posters, with the standard Leaver view being that a deal could be negotiated effortlessly. In 18 months the consensus Leave view has gone through a 180 degree turn, without any of those posters having the grace to acknowledge that this had been foreseen by others long ago.
In March 2016, I wrote about how long EU negotiations took. It was one of the pieces that I have written that was received with most hostility by posters, with the standard Leaver view being that a deal could be negotiated effortlessly. In 18 months the consensus Leave view has gone through a 180 degree turn, without any of those posters having the grace to acknowledge that this had been foreseen by others long ago.
I don't think it matters too much where Theresa May makes her speech. The contents matter more. The tone matters most of all. It's time for the Government to come down from the barricades and start talking about the type of next door neighbour it wants Britain to be.
In March 2016, I wrote about how long EU negotiations took. It was one of the pieces that I have written that was received with most hostility by posters, with the standard Leaver view being that a deal could be negotiated effortlessly. In 18 months the consensus Leave view has gone through a 180 degree turn, without any of those posters having the grace to acknowledge that this had been foreseen by others long ago.
Looks as if Juncker's has upset many in the EU on his idiotic speech yesterday which apparently was all to do with his legacy.
His legacy will always be his abject failure to agree a compromise with David Cameron and being mostly to blame for the UK exit
I don't think it matters too much where Theresa May makes her speech. The contents matter more. The tone matters most of all. It's time for the Government to come down from the barricades and start talking about the type of next door neighbour it wants Britain to be.
In March 2016, I wrote about how long EU negotiations took. It was one of the pieces that I have written that was received with most hostility by posters, with the standard Leaver view being that a deal could be negotiated effortlessly. In 18 months the consensus Leave view has gone through a 180 degree turn, without any of those posters having the grace to acknowledge that this had been foreseen by others long ago.
You are brilliant.
(will that do?)
It's a start.
But more important than my undoubted brilliance is the fact that things have not proceeded as Leavers anticipated or sought to persuade others that they would (the same is true of Remainers of course in different aspects; it's even true of me). That should give cause for Leavers to pause to rethink whether any of their other assumptions were wildly out of kilter and whether their worldview needs a retune.
I don't think it matters too much where Theresa May makes her speech. The contents matter more. The tone matters most of all. It's time for the Government to come down from the barricades and start talking about the type of next door neighbour it wants Britain to be.
So long as its replicated then I agree.
If though after we make a first move the EU insists on still demanding the impossible before we talk about what kind of neighbours we will be then we need to head back to the barricade.
Its impossible to talk about money for a deal without knowing what the deal is. Its impossible to resolve the border in Ireland until we know what customs arrangements are. We should offer to meet them half way and if they agree to too then great we can move on, if they insist on us meeting them as supplicants on our knees then we need to prepare for hardest Brexit.
In March 2016, I wrote about how long EU negotiations took. It was one of the pieces that I have written that was received with most hostility by posters, with the standard Leaver view being that a deal could be negotiated effortlessly. In 18 months the consensus Leave view has gone through a 180 degree turn, without any of those posters having the grace to acknowledge that this had been foreseen by others long ago.
I don't think it matters too much where Theresa May makes her speech. The contents matter more. The tone matters most of all. It's time for the Government to come down from the barricades and start talking about the type of next door neighbour it wants Britain to be.
Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
But to whom is she (Mrs M) going to speak? Can one buy a ticket?
No need - it will get live coverage across the UK and Europe broadcast media
But if one isn’t there, one can’t ask a question.
Oh, wait!
She will get lots of questions
But will she answer them? T’would be a first. Recently, anyway!
You may be surprised - we will have to wait and see - and keep an open mind
As the late great Terry Pratchett pointed out, the problem with having an open mind is that people will insist on putting things in it.
The idea that the EU27 are going to undermine their negotiators by going behind their back because Mrs May took a day trip to Florence is as bad as it comes (insert Blackadder reference if so inclined). She should have gone to Brussels , or at the very least to Bruges.
She is going to a meeting in Brussels to address the Presidents. I do think the time is coming when Barnier will be instructed to include trade in discussions and the future relationship with the UK. Indeed this is a legal requirement in A50
I don't. I can almost guarantee that the EU will determine in October that insufficient progress has been made on the preliminary issues. It would be poor negotiation strategy to conclude anything else. It puts pressure on us to make more concessions and pay more money. Who wouldn't?
The EU will lose the public support in the UK and WTO will seem inevitable
WTO is inevitable....
And not at all frightening, according to James Dyson.
Watching the astronaut series on BBC2? Usually on Sunday 9pm, but skipping next week for some reason. It's quite interesting. A bit like The Apprentice, but with people who are competent and nice.
In March 2016, I wrote about how long EU negotiations took. It was one of the pieces that I have written that was received with most hostility by posters, with the standard Leaver view being that a deal could be negotiated effortlessly. In 18 months the consensus Leave view has gone through a 180 degree turn, without any of those posters having the grace to acknowledge that this had been foreseen by others long ago.
You are brilliant.
(will that do?)
It's a start.
But more important than my undoubted brilliance is the fact that things have not proceeded as Leavers anticipated or sought to persuade others that they would (the same is true of Remainers of course in different aspects; it's even true of me). That should give cause for Leavers to pause to rethink whether any of their other assumptions were wildly out of kilter and whether their worldview needs a retune.
I think to be fair a lot of Leavers were quite realistic and suggested all along that a deal would be reached but it would be done so quite late on. The EU never does anything today that can be kicked into the grass until tomorrow.
Watching the astronaut series on BBC2? Usually on Sunday 9pm, but skipping next week for some reason. It's quite interesting. A bit like The Apprentice, but with people who are competent and nice.
In March 2016, I wrote about how long EU negotiations took. It was one of the pieces that I have written that was received with most hostility by posters, with the standard Leaver view being that a deal could be negotiated effortlessly. In 18 months the consensus Leave view has gone through a 180 degree turn, without any of those posters having the grace to acknowledge that this had been foreseen by others long ago.
The problem is that in the immediate wake of the Brexit vote there was too much back slapping, jockeying for position and fantasies about landslides and Theresa as the new Maggie. Two years seemed a long, long way away back then. I'm resigned to a cliff-edge WTO Brexit now. I foresee a panicked government shoving Liam into the spotlight at some point to intone that we need to 'redouble our efforts' to secure trading links with the rest of the world. Thereafter the prospect of PM Jezza will be the next point of discussion.
In March 2016, I wrote about how long EU negotiations took. It was one of the pieces that I have written that was received with most hostility by posters, with the standard Leaver view being that a deal could be negotiated effortlessly. In 18 months the consensus Leave view has gone through a 180 degree turn, without any of those posters having the grace to acknowledge that this had been foreseen by others long ago.
You are brilliant.
(will that do?)
It's a start.
But more important than my undoubted brilliance is the fact that things have not proceeded as Leavers anticipated or sought to persuade others that they would (the same is true of Remainers of course in different aspects; it's even true of me). That should give cause for Leavers to pause to rethink whether any of their other assumptions were wildly out of kilter and whether their worldview needs a retune.
Christ that looks like a mea culpa. Tell me you haven't been hacked.
Watching the astronaut series on BBC2? Usually on Sunday 9pm, but skipping next week for some reason. It's quite interesting. A bit like The Apprentice, but with people who are competent and nice.
Am recording it for binge viewing later - now the little 'un is in preschool most of the day, I've got a little more free time before Mrs J tells me to get a job.
Your Renault/Red Bull story: I'm very unsurprised, given how Red Bull behaved towards Renault a few years back.
I wouldn't go so far as to say it's 'the solution' to our housing problems, but it can certainly be a very good part of the solution. It does however require long-term regulatory certainty.
I don't think it matters too much where Theresa May makes her speech. The contents matter more. The tone matters most of all. It's time for the Government to come down from the barricades and start talking about the type of next door neighbour it wants Britain to be.
So long as its replicated then I agree.
If though after we make a first move the EU insists on still demanding the impossible before we talk about what kind of neighbours we will be then we need to head back to the barricade.
Its impossible to talk about money for a deal without knowing what the deal is. Its impossible to resolve the border in Ireland until we know what customs arrangements are. We should offer to meet them half way and if they agree to too then great we can move on, if they insist on us meeting them as supplicants on our knees then we need to prepare for hardest Brexit.
Absolutely - you can't negotiate with someone whose position is "I'll decide".
In March 2016, I wrote about how long EU negotiations took. It was one of the pieces that I have written that was received with most hostility by posters, with the standard Leaver view being that a deal could be negotiated effortlessly. In 18 months the consensus Leave view has gone through a 180 degree turn, without any of those posters having the grace to acknowledge that this had been foreseen by others long ago.
There was disbelief at the inherent stupidity of those at the top of the EU in Brussels and those at the head of each EU27 country to keep them there. But we can see in the migration crisis and the Euro, the inability of the EU to reform. It just trundles on with higher unemployment and a declining share of global GDP.
Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
But to whom is she (Mrs M) going to speak? Can one buy a ticket?
No need - it will get live coverage across the UK and Europe broadcast media
But if one isn’t there, one can’t ask a question.
Oh, wait!
She will get lots of questions
But will she answer them? T’would be a first. Recently, anyway!
You may be surprised - we will have to wait and see - and keep an open mind
As the late great Terry Pratchett pointed out, the problem with having an open mind is that people will insist on putting things in it.
The idea that the EU27 are going to undermine their negotiators by going behind their back because Mrs May took a day trip to Florence is as bad as it comes (insert Blackadder reference if so inclined). She should have gone to Brussels , or at the very least to Bruges.
She is going to a meeting in Brussels to address the Presidents. I do think the time is coming when Barnier will be instructed to include trade in discussions and the future relationship with the UK. Indeed this is a legal requirement in A50
I don't. I can almost guarantee that the EU will determine in October that insufficient progress has been made on the preliminary issues. It would be poor negotiation strategy to conclude anything else. It puts pressure on us to make more concessions and pay more money. Who wouldn't?
The EU will lose the public support in the UK and WTO will seem inevitable
WTO is inevitable....
And not at all frightening, according to James Dyson.
It's not at all frightening for James Dyson. That is not quite the same thing.
My finger on the air guess at the current likelihoods and why:
Exit to transition deal: 50-60% Don't think we'll get this as a get out to negotiations going badly as that would be an open ended commitment sticking in resource, but unanimity to extend is very possible if a future relationship is broadly agreed, but time is needed to put in place, for instance customs arrangements, and the transition is time limited. For differing reasons, limiting any transition is needed for both UK and EU
Exit directly to new deal: 15-20% If broadly agreed and implementation hurdles are low, why not complete. Again the desire of EU to make v things time-limited and move on means not v as impossible as prior trade deals might suggest.
Exit with no deal: 15-20% There is enough understanding of how bad WTO would be to strain to avoid, but breakdown of talks or parliamentary defeats that are not wrapped up in remain amendments might happen by accident.
Remain: 10% Parliament led, but also requires public opinion to move.
In the latter two I wonder if cabinet could consider whether to enact or whether to resign en masse, this might even be a more likely fall of government mechanism than VONC.
I don't think it matters too much where Theresa May makes her speech. The contents matter more. The tone matters most of all. It's time for the Government to come down from the barricades and start talking about the type of next door neighbour it wants Britain to be.
So long as its replicated then I agree.
If though after we make a first move the EU insists on still demanding the impossible before we talk about what kind of neighbours we will be then we need to head back to the barricade.
Its impossible to talk about money for a deal without knowing what the deal is. Its impossible to resolve the border in Ireland until we know what customs arrangements are. We should offer to meet them half way and if they agree to too then great we can move on, if they insist on us meeting them as supplicants on our knees then we need to prepare for hardest Brexit.
Absolutely - you can't negotiate with someone whose position is "I'll decide".
You can. You say either No you won't, OK I accept or grow up and discuss the issues, here are my proposals.
Is it just possible that Mrs May read @Cyclefree's brilliant header on here about us just talking to ourselves a few days ago and decided, right, I'll go and speak to someone else, that'll show Mrs Clever clogs. And she's of Italian extraction as well so we will go there. Hah!
This is my best theory to date but it is still a work in progress.
But to whom is she (Mrs M) going to speak? Can one buy a ticket?
No need - it will get live coverage across the UK and Europe broadcast media
But if one isn’t there, one can’t ask a question.
Oh, wait!
She will get lots of questions
But will she answer them? T’would be a first. Recently, anyway!
You may be surprised - we will have to wait and see - and keep an open mind
As the late great Terry Pratchett pointed out, the problem with having an open mind is that people will insist on putting things in it.
The idea that the EU27 are going to undermine their negotiators by going behind their back because Mrs May took a day trip to Florence is as bad as it comes (insert Blackadder reference if so inclined). She should have gone to Brussels , or at the very least to Bruges.
She is going to a meeting in Brussels to address the Presidents. I do think the time is coming when Barnier will be instructed to include trade in discussions and the future relationship with the UK. Indeed this is a legal requirement in A50
I don't. I can almost guarantee that the EU will determine in October that insufficient progress has been made on the preliminary issues. It would be poor negotiation strategy to conclude anything else. It puts pressure on us to make more concessions and pay more money. Who wouldn't?
The EU will lose the public support in the UK and WTO will seem inevitable
WTO is inevitable....
And not at all frightening, according to James Dyson.
It's not at all frightening for James Dyson. That is not quite the same thing.
He indicated that Europe was in decline trading wise and that growth was now in the Asian markets
I don't think it matters too much where Theresa May makes her speech. The contents matter more. The tone matters most of all. It's time for the Government to come down from the barricades and start talking about the type of next door neighbour it wants Britain to be.
So long as its replicated then I agree.
If though after we make a first move the EU insists on still demanding the impossible before we talk about what kind of neighbours we will be then we need to head back to the barricade.
Its impossible to talk about money for a deal without knowing what the deal is. Its impossible to resolve the border in Ireland until we know what customs arrangements are. We should offer to meet them half way and if they agree to too then great we can move on, if they insist on us meeting them as supplicants on our knees then we need to prepare for hardest Brexit.
Absolutely - you can't negotiate with someone whose position is "I'll decide".
You can. You say either No you won't, OK or grow up and discuss the issues, here are my proposals.
You suggested that we'd got past that stage, which is what I was agreeing with
I don't think it matters too much where Theresa May makes her speech. The contents matter more. The tone matters most of all. It's time for the Government to come down from the barricades and start talking about the type of next door neighbour it wants Britain to be.
So long as its replicated then I agree.
If though after we make a first move the EU insists on still demanding the impossible before we talk about what kind of neighbours we will be then we need to head back to the barricade.
Its impossible to talk about money for a deal without knowing what the deal is. Its impossible to resolve the border in Ireland until we know what customs arrangements are. We should offer to meet them half way and if they agree to too then great we can move on, if they insist on us meeting them as supplicants on our knees then we need to prepare for hardest Brexit.
Absolutely - you can't negotiate with someone whose position is "I'll decide".
You can. You say either No you won't, OK or grow up and discuss the issues, here are my proposals.
You suggested that we'd got past that stage, which is what I was agreeing with
Except that was a different Philip, and I had only speed read the thread.... so maybe some confusion!
I see that the thread's Leavers are under some kind of delusion that Britain is being horribly wronged by the EU. Since the Government and its acolytes, here and elsewhere, have spent the last year or so trumpeting their hostility to the EU, it's hardly surprising that the EU is treating the whole process as an entirely transactional matter for now.
Perhaps Mrs May is thinking of the precedent of the 1801 Treaty of Florence, in which the Kingdom of Naples capitulated to the overwhelming force of Napoleon, but wasn't treated as harshly as might have been feared.
I don't think it matters too much where Theresa May makes her speech. The contents matter more. The tone matters most of all. It's time for the Government to come down from the barricades and start talking about the type of next door neighbour it wants Britain to be.
So long as its replicated then I agree.
If though after we make a first move the EU insists on still demanding the impossible before we talk about what kind of neighbours we will be then we need to head back to the barricade.
Its impossible to talk about money for a deal without knowing what the deal is. Its impossible to resolve the border in Ireland until we know what customs arrangements are. We should offer to meet them half way and if they agree to too then great we can move on, if they insist on us meeting them as supplicants on our knees then we need to prepare for hardest Brexit.
Absolutely - you can't negotiate with someone whose position is "I'll decide".
You can. You say either No you won't, OK or grow up and discuss the issues, here are my proposals.
You suggested that we'd got past that stage, which is what I was agreeing with
Except that was a different Philip, and I had only speed read the thread.... so maybe some confusion!
definitely - can one of you change your name please
Well following Juncker's Borg like musings yesterday, if it's that or WTO, then WTO it is. Hopefully it won't come to that of course, but I always feared this was the real choice: Out or USE. You can bet your bottom Dollar that had we voted in by 52/48 we'd never have heard the end of it from Juncker that it was "full sails ahead, and you lot voted for it all".
In the absence of anything much positive to say last year, Remain's campaign boiled down to a Borg choice of "yes, it's a bit crap, but resistance is futile". Personally I'd rather take my chances roaming the galaxy a bit more like Blake's 7.
Perhaps Mrs May is thinking of the precedent of the 1801 Treaty of Florence, in which the Kingdom of Naples capitulated to the overwhelming force of Napoleon, but wasn't treated as harshly as might have been feared.
I don't think it matters too much where Theresa May makes her speech. The contents matter more. The tone matters most of all. It's time for the Government to come down from the barricades and start talking about the type of next door neighbour it wants Britain to be.
The problem with May - unlike any other Prime Minister in recent history - is that it is absolutely impossible to judge the value of her pronouncements. Most politicians have some degree of core belief - Thatcher in the market economy and privatisation, Blair in modernising the Labour Party and also in engagement in Europe, Cameron in social liberalism and economic austerity, even with Brown and Major it was clear what their core beliefs were. And knowing that enabled us to judge the degree to which they believed what they were saying at any particular point and the way in which they were trying to move the debate.
But May is impossible to read - it is wholly unclear if she supports a hard Brexit, soft Brexit or even no Brexit (her position before the referendum). Does she genuinely believe in easing austerity and a more interventionist economic policy or is this merely rhetoric forced on her by changing public attitudes and Corbyn's unexpected election success? What kind of country does she want the UK to be?
She has changed her mind and gone back on firm commitments so often that her credibility is nil and it is hard to see how any speech from her can do much to move the Brexit process - or anything else - forward.
There was disbelief at the inherent stupidity of those at the top of the EU in Brussels and those at the head of each EU27 country to keep them there. But we can see in the migration crisis and the Euro, the inability of the EU to reform. It just trundles on with higher unemployment and a declining share of global GDP.
A declining share of global GDP is inevitable, unless you think that western policy for the last 50 years should have been to prevent China from industrialising and to keep the developing world down?
Unemployment is falling, growth is rising. Structural reforms in the Mediterranean members states are working.
It seems to me that the UK made the pre-emptive moves, i.e. no single market, no customs union. In the circumstances, is it not appropriate to ask what custom arrangements are proposed for the land border?
In the absence of anything much positive to say last year, Remain's campaign boiled down to a Borg choice of "yes, it's a bit crap, but resistance is futile". Personally I'd rather take my chances roaming the galaxy a bit more like Blake's 7.
We're leaving the EU, not Europe. The borg will be looming over us at every turn.
The problem is that the EU refuses to discuss any trade agreement with is necessary to resolve the Irish border settlement. It's like demanding your wife cooks dinner, then locking the fridge and refusing to unlock it unless you approve of dinner.
... But May is impossible to read - it is wholly unclear if she supports a hard Brexit, soft Brexit or even no Brexit (her position before the referendum)....
This is one of those silly things which people repeatedly say but is trivially easy to refute. Just read her Lancaster House speech or the Article 50 letter. It is not possible in human affairs to be any clearer than she has been as to what she wants to achieve.
Whether it is achievable is another matter of course. The uncertainty lies on the EU27's side, not the UK's.
I don't think it matters too much where Theresa May makes her speech. The contents matter more. The tone matters most of all. It's time for the Government to come down from the barricades and start talking about the type of next door neighbour it wants Britain to be.
The problem with May - unlike any other Prime Minister in recent history - is that it is absolutely impossible to judge the value of her pronouncements. Most politicians have some degree of core belief - Thatcher in the market economy and privatisation, Blair in modernising the Labour Party and also in engagement in Europe, Cameron in social liberalism and economic austerity, even with Brown and Major it was clear what their core beliefs were. And knowing that enabled us to judge the degree to which they believed what they were saying at any particular point and the way in which they were trying to move the debate.
But May is impossible to read - it is wholly unclear if she supports a hard Brexit, soft Brexit or even no Brexit (her position before the referendum). Does she genuinely believe in easing austerity and a more interventionist economic policy or is this merely rhetoric forced on her by changing public attitudes and Corbyn's unexpected election success? What kind of country does she want the UK to be?
She has changed her mind and gone back on firm commitments so often that her credibility is nil and it is hard to see how any speech from her can do much to move the Brexit process - or anything else - forward.
She needs to declare a Reconstruction: a recognition that a decision has been made and whether or not individuals like it, the future needs to be built in the interests of all, Leavers and Remainers, Britain and the EU. A candid recognition that many are appalled and alienated would help a lot (instead of Orwellian attempts to impose a consensus on "saboteurs" and "citizens of nowhere"), as would an aim of showing those who are appalled and alienated that the future can work for them too.
All of that is possible without knowing anything about her core beliefs.
I don't think it matters too much where Theresa May makes her speech. The contents matter more. The tone matters most of all. It's time for the Government to come down from the barricades and start talking about the type of next door neighbour it wants Britain to be.
The problem with May - unlike any other Prime Minister in recent
I think her core belief is that every social problem has a bureaucratic solution.
It seems to me that the UK made the pre-emptive moves, i.e. no single market, no customs union. In the circumstances, is it not appropriate to ask what custom arrangements are proposed for the land border?
No it is not.
The customs arrangements will be the same for the land border as it will be for the sea, air or chunnel border. The EU demands that as part of the sanctity of their Single Market, so you can't separate the land border from any other border we need to negotiate what kind of customs arrangements we have and then we will know what kind of border we are to have.
I don't think it matters too much where Theresa May makes her speech. The contents matter more. The tone matters most of all. It's time for the Government to come down from the barricades and start talking about the type of next door neighbour it wants Britain to be.
The problem with May - unlike any other Prime Minister in recent history - is that it is absolutely impossible to judge the value of her pronouncements. Most politicians have some degree of core belief - Thatcher in the market economy and privatisation, Blair in modernising the Labour Party and also in engagement in Europe, Cameron in social liberalism and economic austerity, even with Brown and Major it was clear what their core beliefs were. And knowing that enabled us to judge the degree to which they believed what they were saying at any particular point and the way in which they were trying to move the debate.
But May is impossible to read - it is wholly unclear if she supports a hard Brexit, soft Brexit or even no Brexit (her position before the referendum). Does she genuinely believe in easing austerity and a more interventionist economic policy or is this merely rhetoric forced on her by changing public attitudes and Corbyn's unexpected election success? What kind of country does she want the UK to be?
She has changed her mind and gone back on firm commitments so often that her credibility is nil and it is hard to see how any speech from her can do much to move the Brexit process - or anything else - forward.
You may be surprised - this is a big speech and will get huge media coverage.
As I said earlier this is the biggest moment in her career.
As a conservative remain voter who now wants to leave I hope that she strikes the right balance and makes an offer that the EU will have to consider.
If she fails then she will have a big problem at the conference in October
It seems to me that the UK made the pre-emptive moves, i.e. no single market, no customs union. In the circumstances, is it not appropriate to ask what custom arrangements are proposed for the land border?
No it is not.
The customs arrangements will be the same for the land border as it will be for the sea, air or chunnel border. The EU demands that as part of the sanctity of their Single Market, so you can't separate the land border from any other border we need to negotiate what kind of customs arrangements we have and then we will know what kind of border we are to have.
John Major says we need a special solution for Northern Ireland. Is he wrong?
She needs to declare a Reconstruction: a recognition that a decision has been made and whether or not individuals like it, the future needs to be built in the interests of all, Leavers and Remainers, Britain and the EU. A candid recognition that many are appalled and alienated would help a lot (instead of Orwellian attempts to impose a consensus on "saboteurs" and "citizens of nowhere"), as would an aim of showing those who are appalled and alienated that the future can work for them too.
This approach is impossible because of the fragility of the case for Brexit. The moment we try to treat it in a sensible and detached fashion is the moment we realise that it makes no sense on its own terms.
I see that the thread's Leavers are under some kind of delusion that Britain is being horribly wronged by the EU. Since the Government and its acolytes, here and elsewhere, have spent the last year or so trumpeting their hostility to the EU, it's hardly surprising that the EU is treating the whole process as an entirely transactional matter for now.
The EU are fighting a false battle though.
They feel they need to hang tough and defend their interests (fair enough), but above all they don't want anyone else peeling off and abandoning ship.
To use my past analogy, it's like we've decided to set up Canada to their USA but instead of saying "ok crack on, sorry to see you go, let's trade and be great friends", they're acting as if they gave Canada the best mutually advantageous deal, New Hampshire, Vermont, Montana, and Minnesota might all want to clear off and join it.
I just don't see the desire their at all from any other of the 27 as it stands to do that. The EU is bolting a door with all the horses safely tucked up in the stable chewing their hay. Meanwhile the grumpy neighbour is just going to get more awkward.
Now long term nobody else leaving might change if Juncker got his way on unified Presidents and guns to heads in Stockholm on an EU army, Copenhagen on joining the Euro, Budapest having a couple of hundred thousand migrants sent there,or something like Greece having Dutch tax inspectors stationed on them, but that's all way out there for a different era.
In the absence of anything much positive to say last year, Remain's campaign boiled down to a Borg choice of "yes, it's a bit crap, but resistance is futile". Personally I'd rather take my chances roaming the galaxy a bit more like Blake's 7.
We're leaving the EU, not Europe. The borg will be looming over us at every turn.
Yes but I'll be roaming the galaxy with the lovely Jenna (whilst having a sneaky thing for Servalan).
I see that the thread's Leavers are under some kind of delusion that Britain is being horribly wronged by the EU. Since the Government and its acolytes, here and elsewhere, have spent the last year or so trumpeting their hostility to the EU, it's hardly surprising that the EU is treating the whole process as an entirely transactional matter for now.
The EU are fighting a false battle though.
They feel they need to hang tough and defend their interests (fair enough), but above all they don't want anyone else peeling off and abandoning ship.
To use my past analogy, it's like we've decided to set up Canada to their USA but instead of saying "ok crack on, sorry to see you go, let's trade and be great friends", they're acting as if they gave Canada the best mutually advantageous deal, New Hampshire, Vermont, Montana, and Minnesota might all want to clear off and join it.
I just don't see the desire their at all from any other of the 27 as it stands to do that. The EU is bolting a door with all the horses safely tucked up in the stable chewing their hay. Meanwhile the grumpy neighbour is just going to get more awkward.
Now long term nobody else leaving might change if Juncker got his way on unified Presidents and guns to heads in Stockholm on an EU army, Copenhagen on joining the Euro, Budapest having a couple of hundred thousand migrants sent there,or something like Greece having Dutch tax inspectors stationed on them, but that's all way out there for a different era.
I think the EU are mishandling this, as I have previously argued in thread headers. The UK has made it remarkably easy and tempting to do this though.
Land borders have different characteristics. Uk doesn't seem interested in how the border will be policed, though it is part of their international obligations. You won't be in the customs union (your choice) so there will be a border. Whether the terms are as with Canada, or North Korea is immaterial. There will be Border and it needs securing. Build a Wall?
Rising house prices might have good aspects when they are generally low but that doesn't apply to most of the UK at present.
When house prices are high they act as a block on socioeconomic mobility, lock too much capital into a non-productive asset and increase inequality by transferring wealth to the old and the rich.
Wasn't the news the other day that in most of the country earnings are growing faster than house prices? That is good news.
In most places, housing has become more affordable, since 2007, but in London and the South East, far less so.
I think rents are very high too.
Small hypocrite warning: I'm just about (god willing) to rent out my 2-bed semi to tenants at a monthly rent (£1,000pcm) that's over £200pcm more than my full repayment mortgage was on a 12 year term. That's in the South-East, of course.
It works if you have 2 x working adults living there (paying £500pcm each) but it doesn't leave much room for saving for a deposit unless you are earning decent money.
I was paying just under that for a 1 bed room though am buying a flat with mortgage repayments just over half that. However I confess I did have a bit if parental support and a bit left me by my grandfather too and indeed most people I know who have bought have had some parental support (the latter of course having benefited from the house price boom in the first place) unless they are high earners in the City
Coming back to the more domestic agenda, I was musing last evening on the politics of the lifting of the public sector pay cap. On reflection, I may have to give the Government some credit for its politics.
There's huge public support for the Police (individually more so than collectively) and the Fire Service (no one who heard what the fire crews attending Grenfell went through can have anything other than admiration) and arguably for Prison Officers. Enforcing a 1% pay cap on these areas seems harsh and mean-spirited to many so lifting it (even if no one knows where the money to pay these workers is coming from) seems a good and popular move.
That drives a wedge through the public sector between the "deserving" and the "undeserving". There are plenty who would argue nurses and paramedics are also deserving of a larger pay rise and I'd expect the Government to recognise this but what about the local authority workers and other parts of the public sector ?
"Pen pushers", chief executives earning over £200k and those enjoying the benefits of the generous local Government pensions scheme may not get the volume of public sympathy afforded to fire fighters. I'd argue social workers dealing with vulnerable children and adults and housing officers do an incredible job under very stressful circumstances but that isn't universally true across the public sector.
The Union response to the lifting of the cap for some parts of the public sector may be to push for it to be lifted across the board (the public may support the FBU if it turns down a 2% rise, it may be less sympathetic if other public sector workers try the same tactic) and seek to achieve it by industrial action.
The Government response - it would like to be able to pay more but can't - will resonate and the Conservatives will no doubt play their usual card of Union militancy and put Corbyn on the spot. That's the good politics - paying off the Police and the FBU with extra money (not that much in the scheme of things) wins public support as does standing up to obvious militancy elsewhere in the public sector. It's a balancing act - there are elements of the public sector which do enjoy public support and a hard-line response against those staff will backfire but it will be much easier to blame Union militancy and make life harder for Corbyn if the Unions are drawn into industrial action in the autumn and winter.
It seems to me that the UK made the pre-emptive moves, i.e. no single market, no customs union. In the circumstances, is it not appropriate to ask what custom arrangements are proposed for the land border?
We could, for example, say: "None at all. We are wholly open to anything that comes in via the EU", a unilateral declaration of free trade with the EU so to speak. In which case we need no infrastructure on our side of the border (with the fall back that you can do the odd informal check between NI and the other 97.5% of the UK at the very limited entry and exit points between NI and GB.
She needs to declare a Reconstruction: a recognition that a decision has been made and whether or not individuals like it, the future needs to be built in the interests of all, Leavers and Remainers, Britain and the EU. A candid recognition that many are appalled and alienated would help a lot (instead of Orwellian attempts to impose a consensus on "saboteurs" and "citizens of nowhere"), as would an aim of showing those who are appalled and alienated that the future can work for them too.
This approach is impossible because of the fragility of the case for Brexit. The moment we try to treat it in a sensible and detached fashion is the moment we realise that it makes no sense on its own terms.
As an arch Federalist you would say that but your hero Juncker said it for you yesterday in his state of the union speech and in so doing turned many more to wanting out, and yes, at any cost
May is going to fuck up this Florence business because the speech is, by necessity, going to be calibrated toward the eurosceptic Sontarons of the tory party not the EU or the governments of Europe.
It seems to me that the UK made the pre-emptive moves, i.e. no single market, no customs union. In the circumstances, is it not appropriate to ask what custom arrangements are proposed for the land border?
We could, for example, say: "None at all. We are wholly open to anything that comes in via the EU", a unilateral declaration of free trade with the EU so to speak. In which case we need no infrastructure on our side of the border (with the fall back that you can do the odd informal check between NI and the other 97.5% of the UK at the very limited entry and exit points between NI and GB.
Yes, we can choose to be a serious country or we can choose to be an international joke. That's sovereignty for you.
I don't think it matters too much where Theresa May makes her speech. The contents matter more. The tone matters most of all. It's time for the Government to come down from the barricades and start talking about the type of next door neighbour it wants Britain to be.
The problem with May - unlike any other Prime Minister in recent history - is that it is absolutely impossible to judge the value of her pronouncements. Most politicians have some degree of core belief - Thatcher in the market economy and privatisation, Blair in modernising the Labour Party and also in engagement in Europe, Cameron in social liberalism and economic austerity, even with Brown and Major it was clear what their core beliefs were. And knowing that enabled us to judge the degree to which they believed what they were saying at any particular point and the way in which they were trying to move the debate.
But May is impossible to read - it is wholly unclear if she supports a hard Brexit, soft Brexit or even no Brexit (her position before the referendum). Does she genuinely believe in easing austerity and a more interventionist economic policy or is this merely rhetoric forced on her by changing public attitudes and Corbyn's unexpected election success? What kind of country does she want the UK to be?
She has changed her mind and gone back on firm commitments so often that her credibility is nil and it is hard to see how any speech from her can do much to move the Brexit process - or anything else - forward.
She needs to declare a Reconstruction: a recognition that a decision has been made and whether or not individuals like it, the future needs to be built in the interests of all, Leavers and Remainers, Britain and the EU. A candid recognition that many are appalled and alienated would help a lot (instead of Orwellian attempts to impose a consensus on "saboteurs" and "citizens of nowhere"), as would an aim of showing those who are appalled and alienated that the future can work for them too.
All of that is possible without knowing anything about her core beliefs.
She should have done that at the start of her premiership. But she chose the path of division and decided that her priority was to unite the Tory Party even though that process widened the divisions in the country which the referendum opened up.
Her opportunity to appear as a unifier has gone and it will not return.
TSE did enjoy writing that one. I think the difficulty in proof and definition makes it an, uh, dodgy market. Another hard-to-define market would be "Trump declares he is the first non-party President since George Washington". The deal with Schumer and Pelosi (if confirmed) is the second straw in the wind. He's clearly fed up with many Republicans and being the first anything has definite appeal for him. Tricky for the Democrats too, since they'd have to justify working with the guy they've been deriding as a sleazy monster.
O/T, this is the sort of thing to tackle the housing crisis that I grew up with and I've been arguing for since years:
The second Trump abandons the Republicans, formally or informally, the odds of him getting impeached skyrocket. As long as he is nominally GOP the Senate will find it all but impossible politically to impeach him. Once he has no friends in the Senate then its one good scandal away from being game over.
No, he will still do enough with the GOP to avoid impeachment while if he works with Democrats they will have second thoughts about replacing him with Pence.
Trump is simply doing what he was probably always going to do, run as George Wallace crossed with Pat Buchanan to win the GOP nomination and then beat a fatally flawed Hillary Clinton then morph into Bill Clinton and work with a Democratic congress following the midterms and move to the centre in order to win re reelection. As the base is hardly going to vote for Kasich over Trump in 2020 he now already has the 2020 GOP primaries locked up so can start to look towards the general and as he moves to the centre push the Democrats more towards a populist left liberal nominee like Warren who he can defeat
I don't think it matters too much where Theresa May makes her speech. The contents matter more. The tone matters most of all. It's time for the Government to come down from the barricades and start talking about the type of next door neighbour it wants Britain to be.
The problem with May - unlike any other Prime Minister in recent history - is that it is absolutely impossible to judge the value of her pronouncements. Most politicians have some degree of core belief - Thatcher in the market economy and privatisation, Blair in modernising the Labour Party and also in engagement in Europe, Cameron in social liberalism and economic austerity, even with Brown and Major it was clear what their core beliefs were. And knowing that enabled us to judge the degree to which they believed what they were saying at any particular point and the way in which they were trying to move the debate.
But May is impossible to read - it is wholly unclear if she supports a hard Brexit, soft Brexit or even no Brexit (her position before the referendum). Does she genuinely believe in easing austerity and a more interventionist economic policy or is this merely rhetoric forced on her by changing public attitudes and Corbyn's unexpected election success? What kind of country does she want the UK to be?
She has changed her mind and gone back on firm commitments so often that her credibility is nil and it is hard to see how any speech from her can do much to move the Brexit process - or anything else - forward.
She needs to declare a Reconstruction: a recognition that a decision has been made and whether or not individuals like it, the future needs to be built in the interests of all, Leavers and Remainers, Britain and the EU. A candid recognition that many are appalled and alienated would help a lot (instead of Orwellian attempts to impose a consensus on "saboteurs" and "citizens of nowhere"), as would an aim of showing those who are appalled and alienated that the future can work for them too.
All of that is possible without knowing anything about her core beliefs.
She should have done that at the start of her premiership. But she chose the path of division and decided that her priority was to unite the Tory Party even though that process widened the divisions in the country which the referendum opened up.
Her opportunity to appear as a unifier has gone and it will not return.
She certainly should have done that at the start of her premiership. She played a very bad hand very badly.
It seems to me that the UK made the pre-emptive moves, i.e. no single market, no customs union. In the circumstances, is it not appropriate to ask what custom arrangements are proposed for the land border?
We could, for example, say: "None at all. We are wholly open to anything that comes in via the EU", a unilateral declaration of free trade with the EU so to speak. In which case we need no infrastructure on our side of the border (with the fall back that you can do the odd informal check between NI and the other 97.5% of the UK at the very limited entry and exit points between NI and GB.
Yes, we can choose to be a serious country or we can choose to be an international joke. That's sovereignty for you.
Are there really only two options?
How very limiting and odd to live in such a black and white world.
Well following Juncker's Borg like musings yesterday, if it's that or WTO, then WTO it is. Hopefully it won't come to that of course, but I always feared this was the real choice: Out or USE. You can bet your bottom Dollar that had we voted in by 52/48 we'd never have heard the end of it from Juncker that it was "full sails ahead, and you lot voted for it all".
In the absence of anything much positive to say last year, Remain's campaign boiled down to a Borg choice of "yes, it's a bit crap, but resistance is futile". Personally I'd rather take my chances roaming the galaxy a bit more like Blake's 7.
Resistance will occur and likely be successful, going by the German media response discussed down thread. And it will not be resistance by running away. So, the speech is no reason for us to run away further than we already have.
Tell me, how does Juncker's breadth and depth of vision compare with Delor's 30 or so years ago? Would you conclude that federalist ideology has moved forwards or merely circled its wagons well in that time?
Coming back to the more domestic agenda, I was musing last evening on the politics of the lifting of the public sector pay cap. On reflection, I may have to give the Government some credit for its politics.
There's huge public support for the Police (individually more so than collectively) and the Fire Service (no one who heard what the fire crews attending Grenfell went through can have anything other than admiration) and arguably for Prison Officers. Enforcing a 1% pay cap on these areas seems harsh and mean-spirited to many so lifting it (even if no one knows where the money to pay these workers is coming from) seems a good and popular move.
That drives a wedge through the public sector between the "deserving" and the "undeserving". There are plenty who would argue nurses and paramedics are also deserving of a larger pay rise and I'd expect the Government to recognise this but what about the local authority workers and other parts of the public sector ?
"Pen pushers", chief executives earning over £200k and those enjoying the benefits of the generous local Government pensions scheme may not get the volume of public sympathy afforded to fire fighters. I'd argue social workers dealing with vulnerable children and adults and housing officers do an incredible job under very stressful circumstances but that isn't universally true across the public sector.
The Union response to the lifting of the cap for some parts of the public sector may be to push for it to be lifted across the board (the public may support the FBU if it turns down a 2% rise, it may be less sympathetic if other public sector workers try the same tactic) and seek to achieve it by industrial action.
The Government response - it would like to be able to pay more but can't - will resonate and the Conservatives will no doubt play their usual card of Union militancy and put Corbyn on the spot. That's the good politics - paying off the Police and the FBU with extra money (not that much in the scheme of things) wins public support as does standing up to obvious militancy elsewhere in the public sector. It's a balancing act - there are elements of the public sector which do enjoy public support and a hard-line response against those staff will backfire but it will be much easier to blame Union militancy and make life harder for Corbyn if the Unions are drawn into industrial action in the autumn and winter.
Mr Stodge, much of your post makes sense as always. However, I must pick you up on one thing
"even if no one knows where the money to pay these workers is coming from)"
The govt. has been absolutely clear about this. It is coming from existing budgets. Which means fewer Police, prison officers and fire fighters.
And is precisely the opposite of what these groups are wanting.
May is going to fuck up this Florence business because the speech is, by necessity, going to be calibrated toward the eurosceptic Sontarons of the tory party not the EU or the governments of Europe.
You have no idea what her speech will contain
Interesting the media are already in Italy talking about Florence and its trading links going back generations.
This is May's Falklands moment and I reserve judgement until I have heard her speech
Comments
Back in the US,
Back in the USSR
2-1 to the US.
Oh, wait!
House prices and rents are two very different markets..
The idea that the EU27 are going to undermine their negotiators by going behind their back because Mrs May took a day trip to Florence is as bad as it comes (insert Blackadder reference if so inclined). She should have gone to Brussels , or at the very least to Bruges.
I recognise, I think, the symbolism of speaking in Florence but I’m sure a lot of people won’t.
Your 1st. preference: enter the housing market casino and apply to the manager to speculate on margin, a.k.a. take out a 95% mortgage. Triple your money if prices rise 10%, occasionally lose your shirt as people did in 1992.
Lunacy.
I think you are right that a cash settlement will be offered, maybe even in Florence, and at the same time an offer on transitional arrangements put on the table. Indeed if TM does not do something on these lines I would conclude that she would have wasted the opportunity of her Florence speech.
Indeed, this speech could be critical for her future as PM
-- by The Beatles.
A lot had to do with the fact that pre-War, council housing was meant to be inhabited by the "respectable" working classes. Getting a council house was a step up from renting from a private landlord. Some estates had committees to interview prospective tenants, in order to satisfy themselves that they were the right sort of people to live there. The same builders who were building smart houses for private owners in Metroland were hired by the LCC and local councils to build less smart, but still good-quality, houses for council tenants. Unsurprisingly, these houses are now very popular with buyers. At that stage, council housing was meant to turn a profit, if less of a profit than sales to private buyers.
After the war, council estates were increasingly designed to house the poor. Local authorities became much less concerned about the quality of the developments.
Hugely significant if true:
Renault have told Red Bull that they want to terminate their contract with them from the end of next season, casting doubt on the future of drivers Daniel Ricciardo and Max Verstappen. (Daily Mail)
Home ownership makes people trend Conservative. And, vice versa.
A funny video from Elon Musk on how not to land rockets:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvim4rsNHkQ
(will that do?)
His legacy will always be his abject failure to agree a compromise with David Cameron and being mostly to blame for the UK exit
But more important than my undoubted brilliance is the fact that things have not proceeded as Leavers anticipated or sought to persuade others that they would (the same is true of Remainers of course in different aspects; it's even true of me). That should give cause for Leavers to pause to rethink whether any of their other assumptions were wildly out of kilter and whether their worldview needs a retune.
If though after we make a first move the EU insists on still demanding the impossible before we talk about what kind of neighbours we will be then we need to head back to the barricade.
Its impossible to talk about money for a deal without knowing what the deal is. Its impossible to resolve the border in Ireland until we know what customs arrangements are. We should offer to meet them half way and if they agree to too then great we can move on, if they insist on us meeting them as supplicants on our knees then we need to prepare for hardest Brexit.
Watching the astronaut series on BBC2? Usually on Sunday 9pm, but skipping next week for some reason. It's quite interesting. A bit like The Apprentice, but with people who are competent and nice.
I see nothing to change my mind there.
Your Renault/Red Bull story: I'm very unsurprised, given how Red Bull behaved towards Renault a few years back.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/sep/14/build-to-rent-the-solution-to-britains-housing-crisis
I wouldn't go so far as to say it's 'the solution' to our housing problems, but it can certainly be a very good part of the solution. It does however require long-term regulatory certainty.
Exit to transition deal: 50-60%
Don't think we'll get this as a get out to negotiations going badly as that would be an open ended commitment sticking in resource, but unanimity to extend is very possible if a future relationship is broadly agreed, but time is needed to put in place, for instance customs arrangements, and the transition is time limited. For differing reasons, limiting any transition is needed for both UK and EU
Exit directly to new deal: 15-20%
If broadly agreed and implementation hurdles are low, why not complete. Again the desire of EU to make v things time-limited and move on means not v as impossible as prior trade deals might suggest.
Exit with no deal: 15-20%
There is enough understanding of how bad WTO would be to strain to avoid, but breakdown of talks or parliamentary defeats that are not wrapped up in remain amendments might happen by accident.
Remain: 10%
Parliament led, but also requires public opinion to move.
In the latter two I wonder if cabinet could consider whether to enact or whether to resign en masse, this might even be a more likely fall of government mechanism than VONC.
I think it might be concern over supplying McLaren *and* Red Bull. Renault are at risk of being the worst team with a Renault engine.
Well following Juncker's Borg like musings yesterday, if it's that or WTO, then WTO it is. Hopefully it won't come to that of course, but I always feared this was the real choice: Out or USE. You can bet your bottom Dollar that had we voted in by 52/48 we'd never have heard the end of it from Juncker that it was "full sails ahead, and you lot voted for it all".
In the absence of anything much positive to say last year, Remain's campaign boiled down to a Borg choice of "yes, it's a bit crap, but resistance is futile". Personally I'd rather take my chances roaming the galaxy a bit more like Blake's 7.
But May is impossible to read - it is wholly unclear if she supports a hard Brexit, soft Brexit or even no Brexit (her position before the referendum). Does she genuinely believe in easing austerity and a more interventionist economic policy or is this merely rhetoric forced on her by changing public attitudes and Corbyn's unexpected election success? What kind of country does she want the UK to be?
She has changed her mind and gone back on firm commitments so often that her credibility is nil and it is hard to see how any speech from her can do much to move the Brexit process - or anything else - forward.
Unemployment is falling, growth is rising. Structural reforms in the Mediterranean members states are working.
The problem is that the EU refuses to discuss any trade agreement with is necessary to resolve the Irish border settlement. It's like demanding your wife cooks dinner, then locking the fridge and refusing to unlock it unless you approve of dinner.
Whether it is achievable is another matter of course. The uncertainty lies on the EU27's side, not the UK's.
All of that is possible without knowing anything about her core beliefs.
The customs arrangements will be the same for the land border as it will be for the sea, air or chunnel border. The EU demands that as part of the sanctity of their Single Market, so you can't separate the land border from any other border we need to negotiate what kind of customs arrangements we have and then we will know what kind of border we are to have.
As I said earlier this is the biggest moment in her career.
As a conservative remain voter who now wants to leave I hope that she strikes the right balance and makes an offer that the EU will have to consider.
If she fails then she will have a big problem at the conference in October
They feel they need to hang tough and defend their interests (fair enough), but above all they don't want anyone else peeling off and abandoning ship.
To use my past analogy, it's like we've decided to set up Canada to their USA but instead of saying "ok crack on, sorry to see you go, let's trade and be great friends", they're acting as if they gave Canada the best mutually advantageous deal, New Hampshire, Vermont, Montana, and Minnesota might all want to clear off and join it.
I just don't see the desire their at all from any other of the 27 as it stands to do that. The EU is bolting a door with all the horses safely tucked up in the stable chewing their hay. Meanwhile the grumpy neighbour is just going to get more awkward.
Now long term nobody else leaving might change if Juncker got his way on unified Presidents and guns to heads in Stockholm on an EU army, Copenhagen on joining the Euro, Budapest having a couple of hundred thousand migrants sent there,or something like Greece having Dutch tax inspectors stationed on them, but that's all way out there for a different era.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/19/brexit-could-spark-democratic-liberation-of-continent-says-gove
Brexit could spark democratic liberation of continent, says Gove
Justice secretary says other EU members might follow UK’s ‘galvanising, liberating, empowering moment of patriotic renewal’
Coming back to the more domestic agenda, I was musing last evening on the politics of the lifting of the public sector pay cap. On reflection, I may have to give the Government some credit for its politics.
There's huge public support for the Police (individually more so than collectively) and the Fire Service (no one who heard what the fire crews attending Grenfell went through can have anything other than admiration) and arguably for Prison Officers. Enforcing a 1% pay cap on these areas seems harsh and mean-spirited to many so lifting it (even if no one knows where the money to pay these workers is coming from) seems a good and popular move.
That drives a wedge through the public sector between the "deserving" and the "undeserving". There are plenty who would argue nurses and paramedics are also deserving of a larger pay rise and I'd expect the Government to recognise this but what about the local authority workers and other parts of the public sector ?
"Pen pushers", chief executives earning over £200k and those enjoying the benefits of the generous local Government pensions scheme may not get the volume of public sympathy afforded to fire fighters. I'd argue social workers dealing with vulnerable children and adults and housing officers do an incredible job under very stressful circumstances but that isn't universally true across the public sector.
The Union response to the lifting of the cap for some parts of the public sector may be to push for it to be lifted across the board (the public may support the FBU if it turns down a 2% rise, it may be less sympathetic if other public sector workers try the same tactic) and seek to achieve it by industrial action.
The Government response - it would like to be able to pay more but can't - will resonate and the Conservatives will no doubt play their usual card of Union militancy and put Corbyn on the spot. That's the good politics - paying off the Police and the FBU with extra money (not that much in the scheme of things) wins public support as does standing up to obvious militancy elsewhere in the public sector. It's a balancing act - there are elements of the public sector which do enjoy public support and a hard-line response against those staff will backfire but it will be much easier to blame Union militancy and make life harder for Corbyn if the Unions are drawn into industrial action in the autumn and winter.
Her opportunity to appear as a unifier has gone and it will not return.
Trump is simply doing what he was probably always going to do, run as George Wallace crossed with Pat Buchanan to win the GOP nomination and then beat a fatally flawed Hillary Clinton then morph into Bill Clinton and work with a Democratic congress following the midterms and move to the centre in order to win re reelection. As the base is hardly going to vote for Kasich over Trump in 2020 he now already has the 2020 GOP primaries locked up so can start to look towards the general and as he moves to the centre push the Democrats more towards a populist left liberal nominee like Warren who he can defeat
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/41265779
How very limiting and odd to live in such a black and white world.
Tell me, how does Juncker's breadth and depth of vision compare with Delor's 30 or so years ago? Would you conclude that federalist ideology has moved forwards or merely circled its wagons well in that time?
"even if no one knows where the money to pay these workers is coming from)"
The govt. has been absolutely clear about this. It is coming from existing budgets. Which means fewer Police, prison officers and fire fighters.
And is precisely the opposite of what these groups are wanting.
Interesting the media are already in Italy talking about Florence and its trading links going back generations.
This is May's Falklands moment and I reserve judgement until I have heard her speech