Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It seems the only exiting going on at the Department for Exiti

124

Comments

  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,307
    rkrkrk said:

    DavidL said:



    9x? The rest of the EU is less than 4x the size of the UK economy and will only be just over 10% of world GDP when we leave. They are losing more than 20% of their entire output.

    Where are you getting that from?

    IMF (wiki) says 16-20 trillion for EU (22.8% of global GDP), UK is 2.62 trillion.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_European_Union
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_United_Kingdom
    The figures I used were based on PPP. In nominal terms the latest figures I have found is that the EU (inc UK) is 26.45% of GDP https://tradingeconomics.com/european-union/gdp and the UK is 4.22% making the EU 6x bigger than the UK. As the nominal figures are much more responsive to currency movements the position there is more volatile.

    On this basis the EU is going to lose 15% of its GDP.
  • Options

    in 1950 Europeans were 20% of world population
    by 2050 theyll be about 5%

    whatever happens we are on our way to being a backwater and there's nothing you can do about it unless we decide we want Irish sized families again

    "I'll see your 10 kids and raise you to twelve etc."

    There is a difference between becoming sidelined due to other's growth and hurling yourself into the nearest pit. Brexit is the latter.
    Embracing the opportunities available to us with the other 95% [more actually as the 5% includes us] is not a pit.
    What opportunities are there that the EU prevents us from taking up?
    None. We blame the nearest bogeyman for not getting off our own backsides and doing stuff right. It is like immigration. We could have blocked immigrants from the accession countries in the eastern EU but we chose not to. Now we blame the EU for sending us immigrants.
    Who is "we"?

    That was Blair's decision at the time, as part of the New Labour government, and he took a decision he was heavily criticised for by many at the time, including the public polling at large.

    The trouble was there was no clawback.
    "We" was our sovereign government.
    What a stupid response.
    https://twitter.com/Williamw1/status/907217080352743425
    Blimey. Really? Seems incredible. Where were Frank Field, Kate Hoe, John Mann, Cash etc etc?
  • Options

    in 1950 Europeans were 20% of world population
    by 2050 theyll be about 5%

    whatever happens we are on our way to being a backwater and there's nothing you can do about it unless we decide we want Irish sized families again

    "I'll see your 10 kids and raise you to twelve etc."

    There is a difference between becoming sidelined due to other's growth and hurling yourself into the nearest pit. Brexit is the latter.
    Embracing the opportunities available to us with the other 95% [more actually as the 5% includes us] is not a pit.
    What opportunities are there that the EU prevents us from taking up?
    None. We blame the nearest bogeyman for not getting off our own backsides and doing stuff right. It is like immigration. We could have blocked immigrants from the accession countries in the eastern EU but we chose not to. Now we blame the EU for sending us immigrants.
    Who is "we"?

    That was Blair's decision at the time, as part of the New Labour government, and he took a decision he was heavily criticised for by many at the time, including the public polling at large.

    The trouble was there was no clawback.
    "We" was our sovereign government.
    What a stupid response.
    https://twitter.com/Williamw1/status/907217080352743425
    Blimey. Really? Seems incredible. Where were Frank Field, Kate Hoe, John Mann, Cash etc etc?
    IDS complained that enlargement had taken so long and said it showed up 'vested interests' in France and Germany for dragging their heels.
  • Options
    PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,274

    Rachel Sylvester in The Times says

    "there has been no substantive cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU, nor any agreement around the top table about the trade-offs that should be made between access to the single market and immigration controls."

    The Cabinet has apparently not properly discussed the most serious issue any Cabinet has faced in modern times.

    Like saying the cabinet in 1940 had not discussed the war.

    Unbelievable.

    The theory that Theresa May is deliberately testing Brexit to destruction and will ultimately deliver the coup de grace by calling a second referendum in which she'd be neutral could have something going for it.
    But that would require her to show leadership skills which, on the evidence so far, she does not possess.

    May will not destroy Brexit, it will be the other way round.
    It wouldn't necessarily require leadership, just low cunning, which despite her missteps I think she does possess.
    Maybe but I doubt she has cunning either. In her TV interviews she resembles the proverbial rabbit in the headlights and that suggests she lacks the courage that is an essential ingredient when navigating the kind of political minefield she is in.
    Indecision, which seems to be May's default setting, points to a Brexit crash landing.
  • Options
    stodge said:

    Dear me, the excerpts of Vince Cable's conference speech which have been published look dire. (See Guardian Live Blog, 11:25)

    Oh dear, more predictable anti-Lib Dem jibes from you.

    Tim Farron was superb yesterday.
    Tim Farron may have been superb, I don't know.

    But those excerpts from Sir Vince's speech are embarrassingly bad, as you will see if you read them.
  • Options

    in 1950 Europeans were 20% of world population
    by 2050 theyll be about 5%

    whatever happens we are on our way to being a backwater and there's nothing you can do about it unless we decide we want Irish sized families again

    "I'll see your 10 kids and raise you to twelve etc."

    There is a difference between becoming sidelined due to other's growth and hurling yourself into the nearest pit. Brexit is the latter.
    Embracing the opportunities available to us with the other 95% [more actually as the 5% includes us] is not a pit.
    What opportunities are there that the EU prevents us from taking up?
    None. We blame the nearest bogeyman for not getting off our own backsides and doing stuff right. It is like immigration. We could have blocked immigrants from the accession countries in the eastern EU but we chose not to. Now we blame the EU for sending us immigrants.
    Who is "we"?

    That was Blair's decision at the time, as part of the New Labour government, and he took a decision he was heavily criticised for by many at the time, including the public polling at large.

    The trouble was there was no clawback.
    "We" was our sovereign government.
    What a stupid response.
    https://twitter.com/Williamw1/status/907217080352743425
    Blimey. Really? Seems incredible. Where were Frank Field, Kate Hoe, John Mann, Cash etc etc?
    Well we were officially told that only 10,000 Poles would come to the UK so it is unsurprising that there wasn't a big fuss made about the immigration that would result.
  • Options
    PeterC said:

    Rachel Sylvester in The Times says

    "there has been no substantive cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU, nor any agreement around the top table about the trade-offs that should be made between access to the single market and immigration controls."

    The Cabinet has apparently not properly discussed the most serious issue any Cabinet has faced in modern times.

    Like saying the cabinet in 1940 had not discussed the war.

    Unbelievable.

    The theory that Theresa May is deliberately testing Brexit to destruction and will ultimately deliver the coup de grace by calling a second referendum in which she'd be neutral could have something going for it.
    But that would require her to show leadership skills which, on the evidence so far, she does not possess.

    May will not destroy Brexit, it will be the other way round.
    It wouldn't necessarily require leadership, just low cunning, which despite her missteps I think she does possess.
    Maybe but I doubt she has cunning either. In her TV interviews she resembles the proverbial rabbit in the headlights and that suggests she lacks the courage that is an essential ingredient when navigating the kind of political minefield she is in.
    Indecision, which seems to be May's default setting, points to a Brexit crash landing.
    I can't think of any occasion in her career up to now when she has gone against the prevailing view of those around her. She is fundamentally a follower rather than a leader.
  • Options

    PeterC said:

    Rachel Sylvester in The Times says

    "there has been no substantive cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU, nor any agreement around the top table about the trade-offs that should be made between access to the single market and immigration controls."

    The Cabinet has apparently not properly discussed the most serious issue any Cabinet has faced in modern times.

    Like saying the cabinet in 1940 had not discussed the war.

    Unbelievable.

    The theory that Theresa May is deliberately testing Brexit to destruction and will ultimately deliver the coup de grace by calling a second referendum in which she'd be neutral could have something going for it.
    But that would require her to show leadership skills which, on the evidence so far, she does not possess.

    May will not destroy Brexit, it will be the other way round.
    It wouldn't necessarily require leadership, just low cunning, which despite her missteps I think she does possess.
    Maybe but I doubt she has cunning either. In her TV interviews she resembles the proverbial rabbit in the headlights and that suggests she lacks the courage that is an essential ingredient when navigating the kind of political minefield she is in.
    Indecision, which seems to be May's default setting, points to a Brexit crash landing.
    I can't think of any occasion in her career up to now when she has gone against the prevailing view of those around her. She is fundamentally a follower rather than a leader.
    I lost all respect for her with her nasty speech at Conference in I believe it was 2015. Everyone else had given really soft and friendly speeches being positive. May led with the horrors of immigration and how its keeping wages down etc

    It didn't fit in at all with Cameron's speech or anyone else's throughout the rest of the week. She completely stood out from the prevailing views of her colleagues then.
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549

    Well we were officially told that only 10,000 Poles would come to the UK so it is unsurprising that there wasn't a big fuss made about the immigration that would result.

    Those forecasts must have been some of the worst ever made in Britain, and we are world leaders at getting forecasts wrong.
  • Options

    in 1950 Europeans were 20% of world population
    by 2050 theyll be about 5%

    whatever happens we are on our way to being a backwater and there's nothing you can do about it unless we decide we want Irish sized families again

    "I'll see your 10 kids and raise you to twelve etc."

    There is a difference between becoming sidelined due to other's growth and hurling yourself into the nearest pit. Brexit is the latter.
    Embracing the opportunities available to us with the other 95% [more actually as the 5% includes us] is not a pit.
    What opportunities are there that the EU prevents us from taking up?
    None. We blame the nearest bogeyman for not getting off our own backsides and doing stuff right. It is like immigration. We could have blocked immigrants from the accession countries in the eastern EU but we chose not to. Now we blame the EU for sending us immigrants.
    Who is "we"?

    That was Blair's decision at the time, as part of the New Labour government, and he took a decision he was heavily criticised for by many at the time, including the public polling at large.

    The trouble was there was no clawback.
    "We" was our sovereign government.
    What a stupid response.
    https://twitter.com/Williamw1/status/907217080352743425
    Blimey. Really? Seems incredible. Where were Frank Field, Kate Hoe, John Mann, Cash etc etc?
    Well we were officially told that only 10,000 Poles would come to the UK so it is unsurprising that there wasn't a big fuss made about the immigration that would result.
    And they believed it? Nobody thought otherwise and they all bought the government's line?

    If so why should the government have thought otherwise if not a single contrary view was held by any opposition MP let alone party?
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549

    And they believed it? Nobody thought otherwise and they all bought the government's line?

    From what I can recall some campaigners did think they were optimistic forecasts, but I don't recall anyone predicting record rates of migration. Nobody would have believed that in a decade or so Poles would be the largest foreign born population in the UK.
  • Options

    in 1950 Europeans were 20% of world population
    by 2050 theyll be about 5%

    whatever happens we are on our way to being a backwater and there's nothing you can do about it unless we decide we want Irish sized families again

    "I'll see your 10 kids and raise you to twelve etc."

    There is a difference between becoming sidelined due to other's growth and hurling yourself into the nearest pit. Brexit is the latter.
    Embracing the opportunities available to us with the other 95% [more actually as the 5% includes us] is not a pit.
    What opportunities are there that the EU prevents us from taking up?
    None. We blame the nearest bogeyman for not getting off our own backsides and doing stuff right. It is like immigration. We could have blocked immigrants from the accession countries in the eastern EU but we chose not to. Now we blame the EU for sending us immigrants.
    Who is "we"?

    That was Blair's decision at the time, as part of the New Labour government, and he took a decision he was heavily criticised for by many at the time, including the public polling at large.

    The trouble was there was no clawback.
    "We" was our sovereign government.
    What a stupid response.
    https://twitter.com/Williamw1/status/907217080352743425
    Blimey. Really? Seems incredible. Where were Frank Field, Kate Hoe, John Mann, Cash etc etc?
    Well we were officially told that only 10,000 Poles would come to the UK so it is unsurprising that there wasn't a big fuss made about the immigration that would result.
    And they believed it? Nobody thought otherwise and they all bought the government's line?

    If so why should the government have thought otherwise if not a single contrary view was held by any opposition MP let alone party?
    You are correct. It shows how out of touch the political elite have been from the country. Thankfully a few are now trying to represent the people again, but the resistance among vested interests is fierce.
  • Options

    PeterC said:

    Rachel Sylvester in The Times says

    "there has been no substantive cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU, nor any agreement around the top table about the trade-offs that should be made between access to the single market and immigration controls."

    The Cabinet has apparently not properly discussed the most serious issue any Cabinet has faced in modern times.

    Like saying the cabinet in 1940 had not discussed the war.

    Unbelievable.

    The theory that Theresa May is deliberately testing Brexit to destruction and will ultimately deliver the coup de grace by calling a second referendum in which she'd be neutral could have something going for it.
    But that would require her to show leadership skills which, on the evidence so far, she does not possess.

    May will not destroy Brexit, it will be the other way round.
    It wouldn't necessarily require leadership, just low cunning, which despite her missteps I think she does possess.
    Maybe but I doubt she has cunning either. In her TV interviews she resembles the proverbial rabbit in the headlights and that suggests she lacks the courage that is an essential ingredient when navigating the kind of political minefield she is in.
    Indecision, which seems to be May's default setting, points to a Brexit crash landing.
    I can't think of any occasion in her career up to now when she has gone against the prevailing view of those around her. She is fundamentally a follower rather than a leader.
    I lost all respect for her with her nasty speech at Conference in I believe it was 2015. Everyone else had given really soft and friendly speeches being positive. May led with the horrors of immigration and how its keeping wages down etc

    It didn't fit in at all with Cameron's speech or anyone else's throughout the rest of the week. She completely stood out from the prevailing views of her colleagues then.
    How is stating the fact that immigration keeps wages down being nasty exactly?

    The left is obsessed about whether something is nice rather than whether it is true.
  • Options

    PeterC said:

    Rachel Sylvester in The Times says

    "there has been no substantive cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU, nor any agreement around the top table about the trade-offs that should be made between access to the single market and immigration controls."

    The Cabinet has apparently not properly discussed the most serious issue any Cabinet has faced in modern times.

    Like saying the cabinet in 1940 had not discussed the war.

    Unbelievable.

    The theory that Theresa May is deliberately testing Brexit to destruction and will ultimately deliver the coup de grace by calling a second referendum in which she'd be neutral could have something going for it.
    But that would require her to show leadership skills which, on the evidence so far, she does not possess.

    May will not destroy Brexit, it will be the other way round.
    It wouldn't necessarily require leadership, just low cunning, which despite her missteps I think she does possess.
    Maybe but I doubt she has cunning either. In her TV interviews she resembles the proverbial rabbit in the headlights and that suggests she lacks the courage that is an essential ingredient when navigating the kind of political minefield she is in.
    Indecision, which seems to be May's default setting, points to a Brexit crash landing.
    I can't think of any occasion in her career up to now when she has gone against the prevailing view of those around her. She is fundamentally a follower rather than a leader.
    I lost all respect for her with her nasty speech at Conference in I believe it was 2015. Everyone else had given really soft and friendly speeches being positive. May led with the horrors of immigration and how its keeping wages down etc

    It didn't fit in at all with Cameron's speech or anyone else's throughout the rest of the week. She completely stood out from the prevailing views of her colleagues then.
    An anti-immigrant speech at a Tory Party conference is hardly going against the prevailing views of your audience!

    May has not shown the kind of courage required to challenge the party consensus (such as Cameron's support for gay marriage or Blair's abolition of clause 4).

    She's a goner.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,311

    Rachel Sylvester in The Times says

    "there has been no substantive cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU, nor any agreement around the top table about the trade-offs that should be made between access to the single market and immigration controls."

    The Cabinet has apparently not properly discussed the most serious issue any Cabinet has faced in modern times.

    Like saying the cabinet in 1940 had not discussed the war.

    Unbelievable.

    It's classic men not going to the doctor syndrome. Rather wait until the lump is the size of a grapefruit.
  • Options
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/09/18/german-trade-boss-dismisses-brexit-empty-talk/

    Germany’s powerful trade chief has dismissed Brexit as a pipe-dream that will never happen, insisting that markets remain calm only because investors are entirely discounting the political noise from Westminster.

    “Brexit is just talk so far. I doubt it will ever happen,” said Anton Börner, president of the German federation of trade and services (BGA) and voice of the country’s exporting interests.
  • Options

    in 1950 Europeans were 20% of world population
    by 2050 theyll be about 5%

    whatever happens we are on our way to being a backwater and there's nothing you can do about it unless we decide we want Irish sized families again

    "I'll see your 10 kids and raise you to twelve etc."

    There is a difference between becoming sidelined due to other's growth and hurling yourself into the nearest pit. Brexit is the latter.
    Embracing the opportunities available to us with the other 95% [more actually as the 5% includes us] is not a pit.
    What opportunities are there that the EU prevents us from taking up?
    None. We blame the nearest bogeyman for not getting off our own backsides and doing stuff right. It is like immigration. We could have blocked immigrants from the accession countries in the eastern EU but we chose not to. Now we blame the EU for sending us immigrants.
    Who is "we"?

    That was Blair's decision at the time, as part of the New Labour government, and he took a decision he was heavily criticised for by many at the time, including the public polling at large.

    The trouble was there was no clawback.
    "We" was our sovereign government.
    What a stupid response.
    https://twitter.com/Williamw1/status/907217080352743425
    Blimey. Really? Seems incredible. Where were Frank Field, Kate Hoe, John Mann, Cash etc etc?
    It was a 2nd reading vote, which until last week was supposed to be on the principle of the bill, not its current state.

    Amendments to introduce restrictions were tabled at committee stage and were attacked by government as unnecessary and assurances were given that action could be taken if necessary, the amendments were then withdrawn.

    Final bill was passed on the nod without a division.

    Worth noting that rather that the House of Commons was not singing Ode to Joy in unison, both sides might have supported enlargement, but the Conservatives continually called for the repatriation of powers and an end to the common fisheries policy.
  • Options

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/09/18/german-trade-boss-dismisses-brexit-empty-talk/

    Germany’s powerful trade chief has dismissed Brexit as a pipe-dream that will never happen, insisting that markets remain calm only because investors are entirely discounting the political noise from Westminster.

    “Brexit is just talk so far. I doubt it will ever happen,” said Anton Börner, president of the German federation of trade and services (BGA) and voice of the country’s exporting interests.

    The Germans really aren't used to countries not doing what they are told are they?
  • Options
    Zeitgeist said:

    in 1950 Europeans were 20% of world population
    by 2050 theyll be about 5%

    whatever happens we are on our way to being a backwater and there's nothing you can do about it unless we decide we want Irish sized families again

    "I'll see your 10 kids and raise you to twelve etc."

    There is a difference between becoming sidelined due to other's growth and hurling yourself into the nearest pit. Brexit is the latter.
    Embracing the opportunities available to us with the other 95% [more actually as the 5% includes us] is not a pit.
    What opportunities are there that the EU prevents us from taking up?
    None. We blame the nearest bogeyman for not getting off our own backsides and doing stuff right. It is like immigration. We could have blocked immigrants from the accession countries in the eastern EU but we chose not to. Now we blame the EU for sending us immigrants.
    Who is "we"?

    That was Blair's decision at the time, as part of the New Labour government, and he took a decision he was heavily criticised for by many at the time, including the public polling at large.

    The trouble was there was no clawback.
    "We" was our sovereign government.
    What a stupid response.
    https://twitter.com/Williamw1/status/907217080352743425
    Blimey. Really? Seems incredible. Where were Frank Field, Kate Hoe, John Mann, Cash etc etc?
    Well we were officially told that only 10,000 Poles would come to the UK so it is unsurprising that there wasn't a big fuss made about the immigration that would result.
    And they believed it? Nobody thought otherwise and they all bought the government's line?

    If so why should the government have thought otherwise if not a single contrary view was held by any opposition MP let alone party?
    You are correct. It shows how out of touch the political elite have been from the country. Thankfully a few are now trying to represent the people again, but the resistance among vested interests is fierce.
    Who are these who are 'trying to represent the people again' ?
  • Options

    PeterC said:

    Rachel Sylvester in The Times says

    "there has been no substantive cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU, nor any agreement around the top table about the trade-offs that should be made between access to the single market and immigration controls."

    The Cabinet has apparently not properly discussed the most serious issue any Cabinet has faced in modern times.

    Like saying the cabinet in 1940 had not discussed the war.

    Unbelievable.

    The theory that Theresa May is deliberately testing Brexit to destruction and will ultimately deliver the coup de grace by calling a second referendum in which she'd be neutral could have something going for it.
    But that would require her to show leadership skills which, on the evidence so far, she does not possess.

    May will not destroy Brexit, it will be the other way round.
    It wouldn't necessarily require leadership, just low cunning, which despite her missteps I think she does possess.
    Maybe but I doubt she has cunning either. In her TV interviews she resembles the proverbial rabbit in the headlights and that suggests she lacks the courage that is an essential ingredient when navigating the kind of political minefield she is in.
    Indecision, which seems to be May's default setting, points to a Brexit crash landing.
    I can't think of any occasion in her career up to now when she has gone against the prevailing view of those around her. She is fundamentally a follower rather than a leader.
    I lost all respect for her with her nasty speech at Conference in I believe it was 2015. Everyone else had given really soft and friendly speeches being positive. May led with the horrors of immigration and how its keeping wages down etc

    It didn't fit in at all with Cameron's speech or anyone else's throughout the rest of the week. She completely stood out from the prevailing views of her colleagues then.
    How is stating the fact that immigration keeps wages down being nasty exactly?

    The left is obsessed about whether something is nice rather than whether it is true.
    I'm not on the left, I'm a Tory and was in the audience for that speech. It went down like a cup of cold sick with most people I spoke to. Contrary to what anothernick wrote Tories are not anti-immigration.
  • Options

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/09/18/german-trade-boss-dismisses-brexit-empty-talk/

    Germany’s powerful trade chief has dismissed Brexit as a pipe-dream that will never happen, insisting that markets remain calm only because investors are entirely discounting the political noise from Westminster.

    “Brexit is just talk so far. I doubt it will ever happen,” said Anton Börner, president of the German federation of trade and services (BGA) and voice of the country’s exporting interests.

    He's in for a rude awakening then.
  • Options
    Casino_Royale

    Boris and Davies have a much better chance of becoming PM than Ruth Davidson has of ever becoming FM. Firstly she is vastly overated - at least Davies is a substantial politician and Boris is Boris - Ruth Davidson teets are better than her speaches in that they are shorter. Her pathetic tweet attack on Johnson this weekend just a case in point.

    And then there is the evidence from the new polls. We have had two real polls in the last few days in Scotland - Panelbase and Survation. Both show the SNP with commanding leads and both show the Tories losing seats at both Scottish Parliament and Westminster.

    There is little evidence of peak SNP but plenty of evidence of the great Scottish Tory comeback evaporating like the last remaining snow from the Scottish mountains!
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/09/18/german-trade-boss-dismisses-brexit-empty-talk/

    Germany’s powerful trade chief has dismissed Brexit as a pipe-dream that will never happen, insisting that markets remain calm only because investors are entirely discounting the political noise from Westminster.

    “Brexit is just talk so far. I doubt it will ever happen,” said Anton Börner, president of the German federation of trade and services (BGA) and voice of the country’s exporting interests.

    The Germans really aren't used to countries not doing what they are told are they?
    Funnily enough I have just read that article in the paper at lunchtime. He sounds like he doesn't have a bloody clue about British politics.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Scott_P said:

    Charles said:

    Switching to another language is just rude.

    Mais ouais
    Ma petite choufleur
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Slightly off topic, but Jezza just pulled a classic on Piers Morgan.

    https://twitter.com/HectorBellerin/status/909856300804268032

    Actually it sounds like he was just unpleasantly rude to someone

    Deliberately excluding someone from a conversation like that is petty and ungracious
    Piers Morgan described himself as interrupting.
    Sure - he's a journalist and a tosspot and that's what they do.

    If you don't want him to be part of the conversation you tell him to go away. Switching to another language is just rude.
    Switching to the native language of the person you are talking to is hardly rude.
    It is if it is intended to exclude
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited September 2017
    Charles said:

    Scott_P said:

    Charles said:

    Switching to another language is just rude.

    Mais ouais
    Ma petite choufleur
    'Chou-fleur' is masculine (even if she's small and your girlfriend).
  • Options
    TOPPING said:

    Rachel Sylvester in The Times says

    "there has been no substantive cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU, nor any agreement around the top table about the trade-offs that should be made between access to the single market and immigration controls."

    The Cabinet has apparently not properly discussed the most serious issue any Cabinet has faced in modern times.

    Like saying the cabinet in 1940 had not discussed the war.

    Unbelievable.

    It's classic men not going to the doctor syndrome. Rather wait until the lump is the size of a grapefruit.
    We have less than a year to take the major decisions required to get a withdrawal agreement in place by Brexit day. The basics need to be resolved by next Summer to allow time for detailed dotting of is and crossing of ts so that a final text is ready to go into the approvals process in October 2018.

    If the cabinet has not even discussed where it is going on this the chances of getting an agreement must be about nil.
  • Options

    If the cabinet has not even discussed where it is going on this the chances of getting an agreement must be about nil.

    The more distance you have from it, the more obvious the denouement must seem. We will not leave the European Union.
  • Options

    PeterC said:

    Rachel Sylvester in The Times says

    "there has been no substantive cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU, nor any agreement around the top table about the trade-offs that should be made between access to the single market and immigration controls."

    The Cabinet has apparently not properly discussed the most serious issue any Cabinet has faced in modern times.

    Like saying the cabinet in 1940 had not discussed the war.

    Unbelievable.

    The theory that Theresa May is deliberately testing Brexit to destruction and will ultimately deliver the coup de grace by calling a second referendum in which she'd be neutral could have something going for it.
    But that would require her to show leadership skills which, on the evidence so far, she does not possess.

    May will not destroy Brexit, it will be the other way round.
    It wouldn't necessarily require leadership, just low cunning, which despite her missteps I think she does possess.
    Maybe but I doubt she has cunning either. In her TV interviews she resembles the proverbial rabbit in the headlights and that suggests she lacks the courage that is an essential ingredient when navigating the kind of political minefield she is in.
    Indecision, which seems to be May's default setting, points to a Brexit crash landing.
    I can't think of any occasion in her career up to now when she has gone against the prevailing view of those around her. She is fundamentally a follower rather than a leader.
    I lost all respect for her with her nasty speech at Conference in I believe it was 2015. Everyone else had given really soft and friendly speeches being positive. May led with the horrors of immigration and how its keeping wages down etc

    It didn't fit in at all with Cameron's speech or anyone else's throughout the rest of the week. She completely stood out from the prevailing views of her colleagues then.
    How is stating the fact that immigration keeps wages down being nasty exactly?

    The left is obsessed about whether something is nice rather than whether it is true.
    I'm not on the left, I'm a Tory and was in the audience for that speech. It went down like a cup of cold sick with most people I spoke to. Contrary to what anothernick wrote Tories are not anti-immigration.
    Fair enough. But I still don't understand why stating a fact made so many people upset exactly.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/907674540754567169

    I managed to get 3/1 on Dem majority a while ago (not much money though)
  • Options
    Going into Brexit talks we had 2 options - join EFTA and retain EEA membership, or be out of everything and fall back on the WTO. We should be negotiating our transition into the Free Trade Association, instead we have continued round after round of Davis/BoJo make some macho-bullshit claim about sticking it to the foreign types, and promptly concede teh point when Barnier and his team dit "non"

    Its not mid-September. We've squandered 6 months, we need the 6 months at the end to square away an agreement/prepare for tariffageddon. Which leaves 12 months. It is abundantly clear that DD of the SS* is making no progress. We have to make progress. We have to have a clear desired outcome and range of movement on our key variables and a first class team of negotiators. We have none of those things.

    Davis has to go. BoJo has to go. Fux has to go. And if May doesn't have the political authority to see them off she has to go as well. A night of the long knives indeed. Because if we struggle along like this we won't even be able to implement WTO fast enough. And however we do it we need a solution to a very simple problem.

    Outside the single market our former friends in Yerp will need to carry out the same customs process they do with any other import from a nation they have no trading relationship with. Even if our french friends work as fast as possible (and they won't) its still going to be a huge slowing of the process. Which will back up freight traffic along the entire length of the M20 (Operation SSSSSSSStack). Which will tie up trailers and tractor units and drivers. Which will mean a lack of vehicles elsewhere. Which will mean a lack of vehicles crossing the channel with food that we need every day (even if we impose no tariff or checks our vehicles will be stuck trying to cross the other way and which EU haulier would send in their vehicles to get stuck?). Which means a shortage of food in week 1 and a shortage of civil order in week 2.

    Mogg et al may want the WTO. We can't have talks finally fail late on and go "whoopee" and things will simply stock the day we leave. And the people I speak to about this either say "that won't happen the EU won't operate a border with us" or "we'll grow our own food". Whereas here on planet reality 40% of food is imported including for a whole load of "made in the UK" products that are in reality assembled here from imported ingredients.

    May can prevent all this. Sack the lot of them. Then resign.

    * His cozy nickname given by his former whip colleague Gyles Brandreth in his excellent autobiography
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Rachel Sylvester in The Times says

    "there has been no substantive cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU, nor any agreement around the top table about the trade-offs that should be made between access to the single market and immigration controls."

    The Cabinet has apparently not properly discussed the most serious issue any Cabinet has faced in modern times.

    Like saying the cabinet in 1940 had not discussed the war.

    Unbelievable.

    Substantive discussions are held in Committee not at Cabinet
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    Rachel Sylvester in The Times says

    "there has been no substantive cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU, nor any agreement around the top table about the trade-offs that should be made between access to the single market and immigration controls."

    The Cabinet has apparently not properly discussed the most serious issue any Cabinet has faced in modern times.

    Like saying the cabinet in 1940 had not discussed the war.

    Unbelievable.

    We can forget about any trading arrangements with continental Europe. That bird has flown. Boris doesn't want it. Moreover, such is Leave's fervour that anyone even suggesting it is now being branded a traitor. Just close down DD's department and hand all the resources to Liam. Let's end this farce.
    :+1:
  • Options

    TOPPING said:

    Rachel Sylvester in The Times says

    "there has been no substantive cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU, nor any agreement around the top table about the trade-offs that should be made between access to the single market and immigration controls."

    The Cabinet has apparently not properly discussed the most serious issue any Cabinet has faced in modern times.

    Like saying the cabinet in 1940 had not discussed the war.

    Unbelievable.

    It's classic men not going to the doctor syndrome. Rather wait until the lump is the size of a grapefruit.
    We have less than a year to take the major decisions required to get a withdrawal agreement in place by Brexit day. The basics need to be resolved by next Summer to allow time for detailed dotting of is and crossing of ts so that a final text is ready to go into the approvals process in October 2018.

    If the cabinet has not even discussed where it is going on this the chances of getting an agreement must be about nil.
    Boris's intervention has, as intended, completely scuppered any possibility of a trade deal with the EU. Theresa will have seen the unanimous adulation it received in the right-wing press and amongst the hardliners and been terrified out of her wits. She'll know that to deviate from Boris's preferences will be damned as treason. She's probably rewriting her Florence speech this moment, desperate not to deviate from Boris's strictures.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Scott_P said:

    Charles said:

    Switching to another language is just rude.

    Mais ouais
    Ma petite choufleur
    'Chou-fleur' is masculine (even if she's small and your girlfriend).
    Girlfriend would be "Chou" as in "honey".

    I was calling him a cabbage...
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    Going into Brexit talks we had 2 options - join EFTA and retain EEA membership, or be out of everything and fall back on the WTO. We should be negotiating our transition into the Free Trade Association, instead we have continued round after round of Davis/BoJo make some macho-bullshit claim about sticking it to the foreign types, and promptly concede teh point when Barnier and his team dit "non"

    Its not mid-September. We've squandered 6 months, we need the 6 months at the end to square away an agreement/prepare for tariffageddon. Which leaves 12 months. It is abundantly clear that DD of the SS* is making no progress. We have to make progress. We have to have a clear desired outcome and range of movement on our key variables and a first class team of negotiators. We have none of those things.

    Davis has to go. BoJo has to go. Fux has to go. And if May doesn't have the political authority to see them off she has to go as well. A night of the long knives indeed. Because if we struggle along like this we won't even be able to implement WTO fast enough. And however we do it we need a solution to a very simple problem.

    Outside the single market our former friends in Yerp will need to carry out the same customs process they do with any other import from a nation they have no trading relationship with. Even if our french friends work as fast as possible (and they won't) its still going to be a huge slowing of the process. Which will back up freight traffic along the entire length of the M20 (Operation SSSSSSSStack). Which will tie up trailers and tractor units and drivers. Which will mean a lack of vehicles elsewhere. Which will mean a lack of vehicles crossing the channel with food that we need every day (even if we impose no tariff or checks our vehicles will be stuck trying to cross the other way and which EU haulier would send in their vehicles to get stuck?). Which means a shortage of food in week 1 and a shortage of civil order in week 2.

    Mogg et al may want the WTO. We can't have talks finally fail late on and go "whoopee" and things will simply stock the day we leave. And the people I speak to about this either say "that won't happen the EU won't operate a border with us" or "we'll grow our own food". Whereas here on planet reality 40% of food is imported including for a whole load of "made in the UK" products that are in reality assembled here from imported ingredients.

    May can prevent all this. Sack the lot of them. Then resign.

    * His cozy nickname given by his former whip colleague Gyles Brandreth in his excellent autobiography

    I agree with all of that.
  • Options

    TOPPING said:

    Rachel Sylvester in The Times says

    "there has been no substantive cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU, nor any agreement around the top table about the trade-offs that should be made between access to the single market and immigration controls."

    The Cabinet has apparently not properly discussed the most serious issue any Cabinet has faced in modern times.

    Like saying the cabinet in 1940 had not discussed the war.

    Unbelievable.

    It's classic men not going to the doctor syndrome. Rather wait until the lump is the size of a grapefruit.
    We have less than a year to take the major decisions required to get a withdrawal agreement in place by Brexit day. The basics need to be resolved by next Summer to allow time for detailed dotting of is and crossing of ts so that a final text is ready to go into the approvals process in October 2018.

    If the cabinet has not even discussed where it is going on this the chances of getting an agreement must be about nil.
    Boris's intervention has, as intended, completely scuppered any possibility of a trade deal with the EU. Theresa will have seen the unanimous adulation it received in the right-wing .
    What's so right-wing about wanting the protection money we send to Europe diverted to the NHS
  • Options
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Scott_P said:

    Charles said:

    Switching to another language is just rude.

    Mais ouais
    Ma petite choufleur
    'Chou-fleur' is masculine (even if she's small and your girlfriend).
    Girlfriend would be "Chou" as in "honey".

    I was calling him a cabbage...
    Cauliflower
  • Options
    Borexit means Borexit.
  • Options
    I'm not Mr Jones' greatest fan but this piece brings to mind nails and heads

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/19/boris-johnson-tory-scheming-chaos-brexit
  • Options

    TOPPING said:

    Rachel Sylvester in The Times says

    "there has been no substantive cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU, nor any agreement around the top table about the trade-offs that should be made between access to the single market and immigration controls."

    The Cabinet has apparently not properly discussed the most serious issue any Cabinet has faced in modern times.

    Like saying the cabinet in 1940 had not discussed the war.

    Unbelievable.

    It's classic men not going to the doctor syndrome. Rather wait until the lump is the size of a grapefruit.
    We have less than a year to take the major decisions required to get a withdrawal agreement in place by Brexit day. The basics need to be resolved by next Summer to allow time for detailed dotting of is and crossing of ts so that a final text is ready to go into the approvals process in October 2018.

    If the cabinet has not even discussed where it is going on this the chances of getting an agreement must be about nil.
    Boris's intervention has, as intended, completely scuppered any possibility of a trade deal with the EU. Theresa will have seen the unanimous adulation it received in the right-wing .
    What's so right-wing about wanting the protection money we send to Europe diverted to the NHS
    Even Farage admits that claim was "a mistake".
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/24/nigel-farage-350-million-pledge-to-fund-the-nhs-was-a-mistake/
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    edited September 2017

    twitter.com/jrmaidment/status/910114618789564417

    That declaration of disloyalty should be enough to get rid of him.

    [edit: Enoble him. Let him scream about being knifed in the back from the Lords]
  • Options

    TOPPING said:

    Rachel Sylvester in The Times says

    "there has been no substantive cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU, nor any agreement around the top table about the trade-offs that should be made between access to the single market and immigration controls."

    The Cabinet has apparently not properly discussed the most serious issue any Cabinet has faced in modern times.

    Like saying the cabinet in 1940 had not discussed the war.

    Unbelievable.

    It's classic men not going to the doctor syndrome. Rather wait until the lump is the size of a grapefruit.
    We have less than a year to take the major decisions required to get a withdrawal agreement in place by Brexit day. The basics need to be resolved by next Summer to allow time for detailed dotting of is and crossing of ts so that a final text is ready to go into the approvals process in October 2018.

    If the cabinet has not even discussed where it is going on this the chances of getting an agreement must be about nil.
    Boris's intervention has, as intended, completely scuppered any possibility of a trade deal with the EU. Theresa will have seen the unanimous adulation it received in the right-wing .
    What's so right-wing about wanting the protection money we send to Europe diverted to the NHS
    Even Farage admits that claim was "a mistake".
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/24/nigel-farage-350-million-pledge-to-fund-the-nhs-was-a-mistake/
    But what's so right-wing about wanting the protection money we send to Europe diverted to the NHS?
  • Options
    GIN1138 said:

    Cameron should be locked in his shed and left to reflect on the disaster he brought to his country for the rest of his life. The decision to hold the referendum was the most colossal and damaging political misjudgment since Munich and man who made it should never be allowed back into public life at any level.

    I am sure you are consistent, so presumably you also think that the other 543 MPs who voted for the referendum bill, including nearly all the LibDems and Labour MPs, should never have any role in public life at any level.
    Time for HMQ to do a Cromwell? ;)
    "Elizabeth's army are on their way"
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,980

    Charles said:

    Scott_P said:

    Charles said:

    Switching to another language is just rude.

    Mais ouais
    Ma petite choufleur
    'Chou-fleur' is masculine (even if she's small and your girlfriend).
    each to their own, you being genderist
  • Options
    ROCHDALE

    You are right particularly about the "sack the lot of them" bit. If the country had any sense we would insist on bringing back politicians who instilled confidence and won elections like Blair (God help me) and Salmond or those with proven competence like Ken Clarke.

    I know they don't like each other but just to get us out of this fix, before Blair could start a war, before Salmond could declare UDI and before Clarke could join the Euro - just long enough to restore order from chaos.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,820
    Ang San Suu Kyi ????? :open_mouth:
  • Options
    OchEyeOchEye Posts: 1,469
    GIN1138 said:

    Cameron should be locked in his shed and left to reflect on the disaster he brought to his country for the rest of his life. The decision to hold the referendum was the most colossal and damaging political misjudgment since Munich and man who made it should never be allowed back into public life at any level.

    I am sure you are consistent, so presumably you also think that the other 543 MPs who voted for the referendum bill, including nearly all the LibDems and Labour MPs, should never have any role in public life at any level.
    Time for HMQ to do a Cromwell? ;)
    Governor General = ?
  • Options

    TOPPING said:

    Rachel Sylvester in The Times says

    "there has been no substantive cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU, nor any agreement around the top table about the trade-offs that should be made between access to the single market and immigration controls."

    The Cabinet has apparently not properly discussed the most serious issue any Cabinet has faced in modern times.

    Like saying the cabinet in 1940 had not discussed the war.

    Unbelievable.

    It's classic men not going to the doctor syndrome. Rather wait until the lump is the size of a grapefruit.
    We have less than a year to take the major decisions required to get a withdrawal agreement in place by Brexit day. The basics need to be resolved by next Summer to allow time for detailed dotting of is and crossing of ts so that a final text is ready to go into the approvals process in October 2018.

    If the cabinet has not even discussed where it is going on this the chances of getting an agreement must be about nil.
    Boris's intervention has, as intended, completely scuppered any possibility of a trade deal with the EU. Theresa will have seen the unanimous adulation it received in the right-wing .
    What's so right-wing about wanting the protection money we send to Europe diverted to the NHS
    Even Farage admits that claim was "a mistake".
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/24/nigel-farage-350-million-pledge-to-fund-the-nhs-was-a-mistake/
    But what's so right-wing about wanting the protection money we send to Europe diverted to the NHS?
    Wanting to keep your own money marks you out as a right-wing nutter these days apparently.
  • Options
    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    Scott_P said:

    Charles said:

    Switching to another language is just rude.

    Mais ouais
    Ma petite choufleur
    'Chou-fleur' is masculine (even if she's small and your girlfriend).
    each to their own, you being genderist
    You have to be genderist to speak French.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,071
    edited September 2017

    TOPPING said:

    Rachel Sylvester in The Times says

    "there has been no substantive cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU, nor any agreement around the top table about the trade-offs that should be made between access to the single market and immigration controls."

    The Cabinet has apparently not properly discussed the most serious issue any Cabinet has faced in modern times.

    Like saying the cabinet in 1940 had not discussed the war.

    Unbelievable.

    It's classic men not going to the doctor syndrome. Rather wait until the lump is the size of a grapefruit.
    We have less than a year to take the major decisions required to get a withdrawal agreement in place by Brexit day. The basics need to be resolved by next Summer to allow time for detailed dotting of is and crossing of ts so that a final text is ready to go into the approvals process in October 2018.

    If the cabinet has not even discussed where it is going on this the chances of getting an agreement must be about nil.
    Boris's intervention has, as intended, completely scuppered any possibility of a trade deal with the EU. Theresa will have seen the unanimous adulation it received in the right-wing .
    What's so right-wing about wanting the protection money we send to Europe diverted to the NHS
    Even Farage admits that claim was "a mistake".
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/24/nigel-farage-350-million-pledge-to-fund-the-nhs-was-a-mistake/
    But what's so right-wing about wanting the protection money we send to Europe diverted to the NHS?
    Wanting to keep your own money marks you out as a right-wing nutter these days apparently.
    If you weighted people's votes by how much they contribute to the exchequer, Remain would win by a landslide.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,820

    TOPPING said:

    Rachel Sylvester in The Times says

    "there has been no substantive cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU, nor any agreement around the top table about the trade-offs that should be made between access to the single market and immigration controls."

    The Cabinet has apparently not properly discussed the most serious issue any Cabinet has faced in modern times.

    Like saying the cabinet in 1940 had not discussed the war.

    Unbelievable.

    It's classic men not going to the doctor syndrome. Rather wait until the lump is the size of a grapefruit.
    We have less than a year to take the major decisions required to get a withdrawal agreement in place by Brexit day. The basics need to be resolved by next Summer to allow time for detailed dotting of is and crossing of ts so that a final text is ready to go into the approvals process in October 2018.

    If the cabinet has not even discussed where it is going on this the chances of getting an agreement must be about nil.
    Boris's intervention has, as intended, completely scuppered any possibility of a trade deal with the EU. Theresa will have seen the unanimous adulation it received in the right-wing .
    What's so right-wing about wanting the protection money we send to Europe diverted to the NHS
    Even Farage admits that claim was "a mistake".
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/24/nigel-farage-350-million-pledge-to-fund-the-nhs-was-a-mistake/
    But what's so right-wing about wanting the protection money we send to Europe diverted to the NHS?
    Wanting to keep your own money marks you out as a right-wing nutter these days apparently.
    If you weighted people's votes by how much they contribute to th exchequer, Remain would win by a landslide.
    A fool and his money... ;)
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,937
    edited September 2017
    The Minister for Winging It is being found out. David Davis had years to learn how the EU works, to understand how complex leaving would be and to research what dynamics drive international trade agreements. But he could not be bothered. He found it much more agreeable to wave Union Jacks and to talk airily about the tyranny of Brussels.

    What seems to unite the right-wing Brexit elite is a complete aversion to detail, hard work and preparation. The UK will pay the price economically and in terms of our global standing. If you give power to plastic patriots shielded from real life by wealth and privilege that's what happens.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,820

    The Minister for Winging It is being found out.

    What makes you say that? I personally think DD is doing a good job.
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    If Boris flounces it will be a Labour Brexit. I don't think he's thought this through. :)
  • Options

    TOPPING said:

    Rachel Sylvester in The Times says

    "there has been no substantive cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU, nor any agreement around the top table about the trade-offs that should be made between access to the single market and immigration controls."

    The Cabinet has apparently not properly discussed the most serious issue any Cabinet has faced in modern times.

    Like saying the cabinet in 1940 had not discussed the war.

    Unbelievable.

    It's classic men not going to the doctor syndrome. Rather wait until the lump is the size of a grapefruit.
    We have less than a year to take the major decisions required to get a withdrawal agreement in place by Brexit day. The basics need to be resolved by next Summer to allow time for detailed dotting of is and crossing of ts so that a final text is ready to go into the approvals process in October 2018.

    If the cabinet has not even discussed where it is going on this the chances of getting an agreement must be about nil.
    Boris's intervention has, as intended, completely scuppered any possibility of a trade deal with the EU. Theresa will have seen the unanimous adulation it received in the right-wing .
    What's so right-wing about wanting the protection money we send to Europe diverted to the NHS
    Even Farage admits that claim was "a mistake".
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/24/nigel-farage-350-million-pledge-to-fund-the-nhs-was-a-mistake/
    But what's so right-wing about wanting the protection money we send to Europe diverted to the NHS?
    Wanting to keep your own money marks you out as a right-wing nutter these days apparently.
    If you weighted people's votes by how much they contribute to the exchequer, Remain would win by a landslide.
    Contribute possibly, contributed no.

    Not that it should make a difference to the argument anyway. Let me rephrase it for you:

    Wanting to keep the country's money rather than giving it away marks you out as a right-wing nutter apparently.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,820
    edited September 2017
    felix said:

    If Boris flounces it will be a Labour Brexit.

    Why?

    Just because Boris "flounces" why does that mean the CPP and DUP will no confidence themselves?
  • Options

    The Minister for Winging It is being found out. David Davis had years to learn how the EU works, to understand how complex leaving would be and to research what dynamics drive international trade agreements. But he could not be bothered. He found it much more agreeable to wave Union Jacks and to talk airily about the tyranny of Brussels.

    What seems to unite the right-wing Brexit elite is a complete aversion to detail, hard work and preparation. The UK will pay the price economically and in terms of our global standing. If you give power to plastic patriots shielded from real life by wealth and privilege that's what happens.

    DD 'shielded from real life by wealth and privilege', Southam? Really?
  • Options
    GIN1138 said:

    The Minister for Winging It is being found out.

    What makes you say that? I personally think DD is doing a good job.
    I don't think it is possible for a remainer to believe that a leaver could be doing anything of value whatsoever.

    Just one more facet of the collective mental breakdown they've been having for the last 18 months.
  • Options

    stodge said:

    Dear me, the excerpts of Vince Cable's conference speech which have been published look dire. (See Guardian Live Blog, 11:25)

    Oh dear, more predictable anti-Lib Dem jibes from you.

    Tim Farron was superb yesterday.
    Tim Farron may have been superb, I don't know.

    But those excerpts from Sir Vince's speech are embarrassingly bad, as you will see if you read them.

    When it comes to embarrassingly bad, this Tory government is way out in front, setting a pace that no-one has a hope of matching.

  • Options
    Wow. If Boris goes then surely Gove will follow. Who else?
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited September 2017

    Wow. If Boris goes then surely Gove will follow. Who else?

    Priti Patel. More likely than Gove, I think.
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    scotslass said:

    ROCHDALE

    You are right particularly about the "sack the lot of them" bit. If the country had any sense we would insist on bringing back politicians who instilled confidence and won elections like Blair (God help me) and Salmond or those with proven competence like Ken Clarke.

    I know they don't like each other but just to get us out of this fix, before Blair could start a war, before Salmond could declare UDI and before Clarke could join the Euro - just long enough to restore order from chaos.

    I might actually vote for that :D:D
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    The Minister for Winging It is being found out. David Davis had years to learn how the EU works, to understand how complex leaving would be and to research what dynamics drive international trade agreements. But he could not be bothered. He found it much more agreeable to wave Union Jacks and to talk airily about the tyranny of Brussels.

    What seems to unite the right-wing Brexit elite is a complete aversion to detail, hard work and preparation. The UK will pay the price economically and in terms of our global standing. If you give power to plastic patriots shielded from real life by wealth and privilege that's what happens.

    DD 'shielded from real life by wealth and privilege', Southam? Really?
    You think a Senior Govt Minister is poor and unprivileged?
  • Options

    TOPPING said:

    Rachel Sylvester in The Times says

    "there has been no substantive cabinet discussion on our future relationship with the EU, nor any agreement around the top table about the trade-offs that should be made between access to the single market and immigration controls."

    The Cabinet has apparently not properly discussed the most serious issue any Cabinet has faced in modern times.

    Like saying the cabinet in 1940 had not discussed the war.

    Unbelievable.

    It's classic men not going to the doctor syndrome. Rather wait until the lump is the size of a grapefruit.
    We have less than a year to take the major decisions required to get a withdrawal agreement in place by Brexit day. The basics need to be resolved by next Summer to allow time for detailed dotting of is and crossing of ts so that a final text is ready to go into the approvals process in October 2018.

    If the cabinet has not even discussed where it is going on this the chances of getting an agreement must be about nil.
    Boris's intervention has, as intended, completely scuppered any possibility of a trade deal with the EU. Theresa will have seen the unanimous adulation it received in the right-wing .
    What's so right-wing about wanting the protection money we send to Europe diverted to the NHS
    Even Farage admits that claim was "a mistake".
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/24/nigel-farage-350-million-pledge-to-fund-the-nhs-was-a-mistake/
    But what's so right-wing about wanting the protection money we send to Europe diverted to the NHS?
    Wanting to keep your own money marks you out as a right-wing nutter these days apparently.
    If you weighted people's votes by how much they contribute to the exchequer, Remain would win by a landslide.
    Does that include Scottish remainers?
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908

    in 1950 Europeans were 20% of world population
    by 2050 theyll be about 5%

    whatever happens we are on our way to being a backwater and there's nothing you can do about it unless we decide we want Irish sized families again

    "I'll see your 10 kids and raise you to twelve etc."

    There is a difference between becoming sidelined due to other's growth and hurling yourself into the nearest pit. Brexit is the latter.
    Embracing the opportunities available to us with the other 95% [more actually as the 5% includes us] is not a pit.
    What opportunities are there that the EU prevents us from taking up?
    None. We blame the nearest bogeyman for not getting off our own backsides and doing stuff right. It is like immigration. We could have blocked immigrants from the accession countries in the eastern EU but we chose not to. Now we blame the EU for sending us immigrants.
    Who is "we"?

    That was Blair's decision at the time, as part of the New Labour government, and he took a decision he was heavily criticised for by many at the time, including the public polling at large.

    The trouble was there was no clawback.
    "We" was our sovereign government.
    What a stupid response.
    https://twitter.com/Williamw1/status/907217080352743425
    Blimey. Really? Seems incredible. Where were Frank Field, Kate Hoe, John Mann, Cash etc etc?
    Among the Ayes - William Cash, John Redwood, Frank Field, Kate Hoey, John Mann.
    Really is quite extraordinary.
  • Options
    GIN1138 said:

    felix said:

    If Boris flounces it will be a Labour Brexit.

    Why?

    Just because Boris "flounces" why does that mean the CPP and DUP will no confidence themselves?
    I think the government will probably stagger on if Boris goes, but it will be impossible for it to make any progress with Brexit and the talks will collapse. As the cliff edge approaches May will be the first to be pushed over it, probably well before March 2019.
  • Options

    The Minister for Winging It is being found out. David Davis had years to learn how the EU works, to understand how complex leaving would be and to research what dynamics drive international trade agreements. But he could not be bothered. He found it much more agreeable to wave Union Jacks and to talk airily about the tyranny of Brussels.

    What seems to unite the right-wing Brexit elite is a complete aversion to detail, hard work and preparation. The UK will pay the price economically and in terms of our global standing. If you give power to plastic patriots shielded from real life by wealth and privilege that's what happens.

    DD 'shielded from real life by wealth and privilege', Southam? Really?

    Yep - he is a very well paid minister, with a safe seat, a large expense account, a generous pension package and an address book full of contacts. He may have started life at the bottom, but that's not where he is now. He is immensely privileged. Brexit will do no damage to him.

  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    The Minister for Winging It is being found out. David Davis had years to learn how the EU works, to understand how complex leaving would be and to research what dynamics drive international trade agreements. But he could not be bothered. He found it much more agreeable to wave Union Jacks and to talk airily about the tyranny of Brussels.

    What seems to unite the right-wing Brexit elite is a complete aversion to detail, hard work and preparation. The UK will pay the price economically and in terms of our global standing. If you give power to plastic patriots shielded from real life by wealth and privilege that's what happens.

    They want the glory, not the sweat.

    The "party of incompetence" label used to be reserved for Labour, but now the Tories seem determined to share it.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,820

    GIN1138 said:

    The Minister for Winging It is being found out.

    What makes you say that? I personally think DD is doing a good job.
    I don't think it is possible for a remainer to believe that a leaver could be doing anything of value whatsoever.

    Just one more facet of the collective mental breakdown they've been having for the last 18 months.
    +1. :D
  • Options

    The Minister for Winging It is being found out. David Davis had years to learn how the EU works, to understand how complex leaving would be and to research what dynamics drive international trade agreements. But he could not be bothered. He found it much more agreeable to wave Union Jacks and to talk airily about the tyranny of Brussels.

    What seems to unite the right-wing Brexit elite is a complete aversion to detail, hard work and preparation. The UK will pay the price economically and in terms of our global standing. If you give power to plastic patriots shielded from real life by wealth and privilege that's what happens.

    I'm confused now. You're saying that all Brexiteers are wealthy and privileged, while @williamglenn says we're all stupid and poor?

    Could it maybe be that people of all backgrounds voted were split between both sides last year and that while there are some trends, drawing a crude caricature of supporters is a dumb idea?
  • Options

    You think a Senior Govt Minister is poor and unprivileged?

    No, but he hardly comes from a background of 'wealth and privilege', unlike Jeremy Corbyn for example. Presumably Southam would rule out Sir Keir Starmer as well, given his career.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,937
    edited September 2017
    chrisoxon said:

    The Minister for Winging It is being found out. David Davis had years to learn how the EU works, to understand how complex leaving would be and to research what dynamics drive international trade agreements. But he could not be bothered. He found it much more agreeable to wave Union Jacks and to talk airily about the tyranny of Brussels.

    What seems to unite the right-wing Brexit elite is a complete aversion to detail, hard work and preparation. The UK will pay the price economically and in terms of our global standing. If you give power to plastic patriots shielded from real life by wealth and privilege that's what happens.

    I'm confused now. You're saying that all Brexiteers are wealthy and privileged, while @williamglenn says we're all stupid and poor?

    Could it maybe be that people of all backgrounds voted were split between both sides last year and that while there are some trends, drawing a crude caricature of supporters is a dumb idea?

    "The right wing Brexit elite": the shysters who led the charge, but never took the time or made the effort to do the hard yards.

  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited September 2017

    Yep - he is a very well paid minister, with a safe seat, a large expense account, a generous pension package and an address book full of contacts. He may have started life at the bottom, but that's not where he is now. He is immensely privileged. Brexit will do no damage to him.

    And so are all the politicians who are players in this. You are letting your prejudice blind you. Why would your description not fit Nick Clegg or Keir Starmer?
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,820
    edited September 2017

    GIN1138 said:

    felix said:

    If Boris flounces it will be a Labour Brexit.

    Why?

    Just because Boris "flounces" why does that mean the CPP and DUP will no confidence themselves?
    I think the government will probably stagger on if Boris goes, but it will be impossible for it to make any progress with Brexit and the talks will collapse. As the cliff edge approaches May will be the first to be pushed over it, probably well before March 2019.
    Oh I can see Theresa going for sure... But I still can't see how this leads to the government "collapsing" and a new election being called.

    If anything the worst things get the more the Tories and DUP will be determined to keep the show on the road as long as they can... Turkey's don't vote for Christmas so Con/DUP MP's will not no confidence their government early.
  • Options

    chrisoxon said:

    The Minister for Winging It is being found out. David Davis had years to learn how the EU works, to understand how complex leaving would be and to research what dynamics drive international trade agreements. But he could not be bothered. He found it much more agreeable to wave Union Jacks and to talk airily about the tyranny of Brussels.

    What seems to unite the right-wing Brexit elite is a complete aversion to detail, hard work and preparation. The UK will pay the price economically and in terms of our global standing. If you give power to plastic patriots shielded from real life by wealth and privilege that's what happens.

    I'm confused now. You're saying that all Brexiteers are wealthy and privileged, while @williamglenn says we're all stupid and poor?

    Could it maybe be that people of all backgrounds voted were split between both sides last year and that while there are some trends, drawing a crude caricature of supporters is a dumb idea?

    "The right wing Brexit elite": the shysters who led the charge, but never took the time or made the effort to do the hard yards.

    Southam "Champagne Socialist" Observer
  • Options
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,820
  • Options
    Tony claims (or did) that he's a socialist, so that's a good thing, right?
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,937
    edited September 2017

    Yep - he is a very well paid minister, with a safe seat, a large expense account, a generous pension package and an address book full of contacts. He may have started life at the bottom, but that's not where he is now. He is immensely privileged. Brexit will do no damage to him.

    And so are all the politicians who are players in this. You are letting your prejudice blind you. Why would your description not fit Nick Clegg or Keir Starmer?

    It would. Bur neither Clegg nor Starmer spent years railing against the EU and saying leaving would be a piece of cake and that we'd be agreeing free trade deals left, right and centre within months of triggering Article 50. I don't begrudge Davis his wealth and privilege, I criticise him for his intellectual laziness and aversion to hard work. The wealth and privilege shield him from the consequences of that. Exactly the same applies to Jeremy Corbyn, of course.

  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Odds on Boris being FS on 1st October markets ?
  • Options
    Cancelling Brexit could result in a socialist-leaning Labour government... in fact it almost certainly would as so many voters would abandon the party.
  • Options

    chrisoxon said:

    The Minister for Winging It is being found out. David Davis had years to learn how the EU works, to understand how complex leaving would be and to research what dynamics drive international trade agreements. But he could not be bothered. He found it much more agreeable to wave Union Jacks and to talk airily about the tyranny of Brussels.

    What seems to unite the right-wing Brexit elite is a complete aversion to detail, hard work and preparation. The UK will pay the price economically and in terms of our global standing. If you give power to plastic patriots shielded from real life by wealth and privilege that's what happens.

    I'm confused now. You're saying that all Brexiteers are wealthy and privileged, while @williamglenn says we're all stupid and poor?

    Could it maybe be that people of all backgrounds voted were split between both sides last year and that while there are some trends, drawing a crude caricature of supporters is a dumb idea?

    "The right wing Brexit elite": the shysters who led the charge, but never took the time or made the effort to do the hard yards.

    Southam "Champagne Socialist" Observer

    I am not a socialist and I am not a fan of champagne. I'd describe myself as a beer-drinking left of centrist!

  • Options
    Choice of listening to Vince Cable or Donald Trump or going shopping with my dear wife this afternoon

    And my dear wife wins by a mountain mile though I dislike shopping intensely
  • Options

    Yep - he is a very well paid minister, with a safe seat, a large expense account, a generous pension package and an address book full of contacts. He may have started life at the bottom, but that's not where he is now. He is immensely privileged. Brexit will do no damage to him.

    And so are all the politicians who are players in this. You are letting your prejudice blind you. Why would your description not fit Nick Clegg or Keir Starmer?

    It would. Bur neither Clegg nor Starmer spent years railing against the EU and saying leaving would be a piece of cake and that we'd be agreeing free trade deals left, right and centre within months of triggering Article 50. I don't begrudge Davis his wealth and privilege, I criticise him for his intellectual laziness and aversion to hard work. The wealth and privilege shield him from the consequences. Exactly the same applies to Jeremy Corbyn, of course.

    This is the Nick Clegg that claimed the European Army now being pushed forwards by Juncker was a figment of eurosceptic's imagination? The one that claimed there would be a recession when we left? The one that pushed EU integration, opposed a democratic referendum and has the nerve to call himself a liberal democrat? Plenty of intellectual laziness there. And his taxpayer funded wealth allows him to put his kids in private schools unaffected by mass migration.

    Of course, Europhiles are out of scope for your criticism.
  • Options
    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    felix said:

    If Boris flounces it will be a Labour Brexit.

    Why?

    Just because Boris "flounces" why does that mean the CPP and DUP will no confidence themselves?
    I think the government will probably stagger on if Boris goes, but it will be impossible for it to make any progress with Brexit and the talks will collapse. As the cliff edge approaches May will be the first to be pushed over it, probably well before March 2019.
    Oh I can see Theresa going for sure... But I still can't see how this leads to the government "collapsing" and a new election being called.

    If anything the worst things get the more the Tories and DUP will be determined to keep the show on the road as long as they can... Turkey's don't vote for Christmas so Con/DUP MP's will not no confidence their government early.
    I dont agree, a few Tory MPs may actually want this whole dogs breakfast passed to a divided Labour party ,who lets be honest are hardly in a position to sort it out. I think a 2018 election is closer than many think and calling one now may actually help the Tories re-new...there are a lot of bright young MPs (Tugendhardt, Stewart, Mercer) who look at the mess created by May, Johnson, Gove etc and are thinking its time for a big change - the DUP have hardly covered themselves in glory only 10 weeks in as well.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited September 2017

    It would. Bur neither Clegg nor Starmer spent years railing against the EU and saying leaving would be a piece of cake and that we'd be agreeing free trade deals left, right and centre within months of triggering Article 50. I don't begrudge Davis his wealth and privilege, I criticise him for his intellectual laziness and aversion to hard work. The wealth and privilege shield him from the consequences. Exactly the same applies to Jeremy Corbyn, of course.

    Come off it, it's got absolute b-all to do with wealth and privilege. You could just as well (or to be more precise, just as irrationally) accuse many of those such as Nick Clegg and David Cameron who campaigned for Remain as being shielded from the consequences by their wealth and privilege - which is much more than DD's however you measure it.

    Here's a thought: maybe DD honestly and reasonably believes that leaving the EU is good for the whole country. Have you considered this extraordinary possibility, even if you think he is wrong?
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,190

    Choice of listening to Vince Cable or Donald Trump or going shopping with my dear wife this afternoon

    And my dear wife wins by a mountain mile though I dislike shopping intensely

    Capitalism owes a lot to women who like to go shopping.
  • Options

    It would. Bur neither Clegg nor Starmer spent years railing against the EU and saying leaving would be a piece of cake and that we'd be agreeing free trade deals left, right and centre within months of triggering Article 50. I don't begrudge Davis his wealth and privilege, I criticise him for his intellectual laziness and aversion to hard work. The wealth and privilege shield him from the consequences. Exactly the same applies to Jeremy Corbyn, of course.

    Come off it, it's got absolute b-all to do with wealth and privilege. You could just as well (or to be more precise, just as irrationally) accuse many of those such as Nick Clegg and David Cameron who campaigned for Remain as being shielded from the consequences by their wealth and privilege - which is much more than DD's however you measure it.

    Here's a thought: maybe DD honestly and reasonably believes that leaving the EU is good for the whole country. Have you considered this extraordinary possibility, even if you think he is wrong?
    I think the answer to that is clearly no.

    By the way you seem to know what you're talking about, in your opinion how are the negotiations with the EU are going? What do you think the end result will be?
  • Options

    It would. Bur neither Clegg nor Starmer spent years railing against the EU and saying leaving would be a piece of cake and that we'd be agreeing free trade deals left, right and centre within months of triggering Article 50. I don't begrudge Davis his wealth and privilege, I criticise him for his intellectual laziness and aversion to hard work. The wealth and privilege shield him from the consequences. Exactly the same applies to Jeremy Corbyn, of course.

    Here's a thought: maybe DD honestly and reasonably believes that leaving the EU is good for the whole country. Have you considered this extraordinary possibility, even if you think he is wrong?
    As so often,
    lefties view righties as bad people
    righties view lefties as people with bad ideas...
  • Options

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    felix said:

    If Boris flounces it will be a Labour Brexit.

    Why?

    Just because Boris "flounces" why does that mean the CPP and DUP will no confidence themselves?
    I think the government will probably stagger on if Boris goes, but it will be impossible for it to make any progress with Brexit and the talks will collapse. As the cliff edge approaches May will be the first to be pushed over it, probably well before March 2019.
    Oh I can see Theresa going for sure... But I still can't see how this leads to the government "collapsing" and a new election being called.

    If anything the worst things get the more the Tories and DUP will be determined to keep the show on the road as long as they can... Turkey's don't vote for Christmas so Con/DUP MP's will not no confidence their government early.
    I dont agree, a few Tory MPs may actually want this whole dogs breakfast passed to a divided Labour party ,who lets be honest are hardly in a position to sort it out. I think a 2018 election is closer than many think and calling one now may actually help the Tories re-new...there are a lot of bright young MPs (Tugendhardt, Stewart, Mercer) who look at the mess created by May, Johnson, Gove etc and are thinking its time for a big change - the DUP have hardly covered themselves in glory only 10 weeks in as well.
    Sorry, but that's a load of balls. A lot of Labour MPs were happy to take what they thought would be a brief break from government to "renew" themselves in 1979 - how did that work out for them?

    The Tories and DUP need to hang on to power like grim death, before the Corbynites do to the country what they've done to the Labour Party.
  • Options

    You think a Senior Govt Minister is poor and unprivileged?

    No, but he hardly comes from a background of 'wealth and privilege', unlike Jeremy Corbyn for example. Presumably Southam would rule out Sir Keir Starmer as well, given his career.
    Only Remainers could claim that someone who grew up with a single mum in a council house is privileged.
  • Options
    tlg86 said:

    Choice of listening to Vince Cable or Donald Trump or going shopping with my dear wife this afternoon

    And my dear wife wins by a mountain mile though I dislike shopping intensely

    Capitalism owes a lot to women who like to go shopping.
    So true
  • Options
    Zeitgeist said:

    Yep - he is a very well paid minister, with a safe seat, a large expense account, a generous pension package and an address book full of contacts. He may have started life at the bottom, but that's not where he is now. He is immensely privileged. Brexit will do no damage to him.

    And so are all the politicians who are players in this. You are letting your prejudice blind you. Why would your description not fit Nick Clegg or Keir Starmer?

    It would. Bur neither Clegg nor Starmer spent years railing against the EU and saying leaving would be a piece of cake and that we'd be agreeing free trade deals left, right and centre within months of triggering Article 50. I don't begrudge Davis his wealth and privilege, I criticise him for his intellectual laziness and aversion to hard work. The wealth and privilege shield him from the consequences. Exactly the same applies to Jeremy Corbyn, of course.

    This is the Nick Clegg that claimed the European Army now being pushed forwards by Juncker was a figment of eurosceptic's imagination? The one that claimed there would be a recession when we left? The one that pushed EU integration, opposed a democratic referendum and has the nerve to call himself a liberal democrat? Plenty of intellectual laziness there. And his taxpayer funded wealth allows him to put his kids in private schools unaffected by mass migration.

    Of course, Europhiles are out of scope for your criticism.
    I'm happy to criticise Clegg. I think his style of dissembling and not being straight with people has contributed greatly to ending up in this mess. We need more pro-Europeans like Clarke who are not afraid of a genuine argument.
  • Options

    It would. Bur neither Clegg nor Starmer spent years railing against the EU and saying leaving would be a piece of cake and that we'd be agreeing free trade deals left, right and centre within months of triggering Article 50. I don't begrudge Davis his wealth and privilege, I criticise him for his intellectual laziness and aversion to hard work. The wealth and privilege shield him from the consequences. Exactly the same applies to Jeremy Corbyn, of course.

    Come off it, it's got absolute b-all to do with wealth and privilege. You could just as well (or to be more precise, just as irrationally) accuse many of those such as Nick Clegg and David Cameron who campaigned for Remain as being shielded from the consequences by their wealth and privilege - which is much more than DD's however you measure it.

    Here's a thought: maybe DD honestly and reasonably believes that leaving the EU is good for the whole country. Have you considered this extraordinary possibility, even if you think he is wrong?

    I am sure he believes it. As I say, he is intellectually lazy.

  • Options
    Zeitgeist said:

    You think a Senior Govt Minister is poor and unprivileged?

    No, but he hardly comes from a background of 'wealth and privilege', unlike Jeremy Corbyn for example. Presumably Southam would rule out Sir Keir Starmer as well, given his career.
    Only Remainers could claim that someone who grew up with a single mum in a council house is privileged.

    Only Leavers focus on the past, not the present.

This discussion has been closed.