What a surprise. It wasn't the British government that didn't want talks to succeed at all, but those eurocrats who we're desperately trying to get away from.
Off topic, I think the EU want the UK to surrender on the ECJ jurisdiction on citizens rights, and on NI remaining in the customs union/single market before talking trade, in order to make a mockery of taking back control.
I think many in the civil service would reluctantly wear this, but it's politically impossible for the Government to accept.
May may try and, if she does, I think she falls.
I think you're right. They've picked something that they know we can't possibly budge on and won't allow talks to continue otherwise. Looks like we're crashing out with no deal.
@callummay: @jimwaterson In the loo at a Lib Dem conference I once heard a couple in a cubicle earnestly discussing *whether* to have sex. Rather than doing it.
What a surprise. It wasn't the British government that didn't want talks to succeed at all, but those eurocrats who we're desperately trying to get away from.
Given the parliament is complaining that they need "a clear answer who is responsible for the British position...", why the eff are they sticking their oar in, and what does that say about who we're supposed to be negotiating with ?? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41477817
Nobody is " blaming Brexit " for Monarch. Almost everyone is recognising that #1 A peak to trough devaluation of $1.55 to $1.20 for the £ is a significant shock to a company with huge costs in Foriegn Currency. #2 That withdrawing from the Single European Sky on Brexit Day with no earthly idea what if anything will replace it has detected external buyers.
How many of factors #1 and #2 did the Monarch boss mention in his interview?
Everything must be fitted to a 'Brexit is a disaster' narrative.
What killed Monarch (according to Monarch) was #1 Terrorism in their main markets which #2 drove them to compete in Markets that were already very competitive.
From what I've heard, what killed them was that they could not compete with low cost/no frills airlines.
There is seldom a single cause. My son lost his job recently because his firm relied heavily on EU funding (basically into global warming) so it looks like a direct consequence of Brexit but it was also a demonstration of failure to diversify and too much reliance on one client.
Brexit obviously wasn't helpful in his case, or Monarch's, but not the sole cause.
Yep - all Brexit does is throw another spanner into the works. We have made it harder for ourselves, for no discernible benefit.
Only because you refuse to acknowledge control over our own laws and us having the power to elect and eject our lawmakers as a discernible benefit.
You may not think it is a benefit worth gaining, but it is most unquestionably a benefit.
We already have that benefit, as the referendum and general election demonstrated.
I think the idea is to be able to make our own decisions without a massive amount of upheaval first, which trying to leave the EU is showing we don't have now.
I'd have some sympathy for that if the UK had spent the last 40 years being consistently outvoted at the Council of Ministers; but in reality it is hard to think of much of import that we have had to enshrine in UK law against the wishes of our elected government. Are there examples that I am not thinking of? That may well be the case.
I honestly have no idea. But the fact is that once we've signed up to something then we can't possibly go back and change that decision.
Having control means you can change your mind on something not be signed up forever.
Nobody is " blaming Brexit " for Monarch. Almost everyone is recognising that #1 A peak to trough devaluation of $1.55 to $1.20 for the £ is a significant shock to a company with huge costs in Foriegn Currency. #2 That withdrawing from the Single European Sky on Brexit Day with no earthly idea what if anything will replace it has detected external buyers.
How many of factors #1 and #2 did the Monarch boss mention in his interview?
Everything must be fitted to a 'Brexit is a disaster' narrative.
What killed Monarch (according to Monarch) was #1 Terrorism in their main markets which #2 drove them to compete in Markets that were already very competitive.
From what I've heard, what killed them was that they could not compete with low cost/no frills airlines.
There is seldom a single cause. My son lost his job recently because his firm relied heavily on EU funding (basically into global warming) so it looks like a direct consequence of Brexit but it was also a demonstration of failure to diversify and too much reliance on one client.
Brexit obviously wasn't helpful in his case, or Monarch's, but not the sole cause.
Yep - all Brexit does is throw another spanner into the works. We have made it harder for ourselves, for no discernible benefit.
Only because you refuse to acknowledge control over our own laws and us having the power to elect and eject our lawmakers as a discernible benefit.
You may not think it is a benefit worth gaining, but it is most unquestionably a benefit.
We already have that benefit, as the referendum and general election demonstrated.
The referendum showed we had the ability to regain that ability by leaving, but without leaving we don't have that ability.
The General Election lets us choose who sets some of our laws, it doesn't let us change unpopular EU laws though.
It may be the case that Leaving simply isn't possible without significant economic and political fallout.
Leavers think that it's still worth it. Remainers are horrified.
So the debate rolls on.
It's not really a debate though, is it? It's more like watching a slow-motion train-smash with one side saying it will be carnage and the other saying 'no, it won't be too bad, and possibly better for everybody in the long run'.
On the left, Sadiq Khan, the mayor of London, who is himself the son of an immigrant bus driver, applauded the license decision as a victory for “passenger safety,” aligning himself with black-cab drivers who are mostly British, white and right-leaning.
On the right, George Osborne, the editor of London’s Evening Standard and a former Conservative chancellor of the Exchequer, wrote an editorial accusing the mayor of “shutting out the future” — only to be slapped down himself by the ethics council of the National Union of Journalists for failing to declare that he sits on the board of the fund manager BlackRock, a major investor in Uber.
At risk of sounding like a broken record, black cabs are an irrelevance -- Uber users of my acquaintance previously took minicabs or buses for the most part. Osborne's conflict of interest is a worry but hardly unprecedented in the annals of British journalism.
Off topic, I think the EU want the UK to surrender on the ECJ jurisdiction on citizens rights, and on NI remaining in the customs union/single market before talking trade, in order to make a mockery of taking back control.
I think many in the civil service would reluctantly wear this, but it's politically impossible for the Government to accept.
May may try and, if she does, I think she falls.
I think you're right. They've picked something that they know we can't possibly budge on and won't allow talks to continue otherwise. Looks like we're crashing out with no deal.
Well the other side clearly prefer to be obstinate and don’t want to do a deal, so we should start preparing now to leave in 18 months’ time without one. The EU are just going to have to put up with another Switzerland or Singapore off their coast - and a large hole in their budget.
Off topic, I think the EU want the UK to surrender on the ECJ jurisdiction on citizens rights, and on NI remaining in the customs union/single market before talking trade, in order to make a mockery of taking back control.
I think many in the civil service would reluctantly wear this, but it's politically impossible for the Government to accept.
May may try and, if she does, I think she falls.
What choice will she have if the EU tell her to va te faire enculer?
She walks away. Not the preferred choice but as far as the ECJ jurisdiction and breaking up the UK goes it is not something she could survive. If she agrees she falls and whoever succeeds her says no.
No social media presence, nothing more than a parking ticket in 10 years.
I have seen interviews with two gun shop owners who both say he came in multiple times looking around, in no hurry to buy a weapon, taking several visits before he went ahead and decides to make a purchase.
Is that because people come into gun shops and buy mass-killing machine guns over the counter and nobody bats an eyelid?
You are missing my point. American guns laws are nuts.
However my point is this guy doesn't fit anything that has come before. Multi millionaire, never in any trouble, no crazy social media posts and he has been buying a massive arsenal in a calm collected manner in seemingly no hurry (and often choosing guns that don't give maximum death per buck, other times doing so).
It’s a really weird one - a guy who was reasonably well off, had had no recent shocks in his life, no history of mental illness or affiliation to groups of nutters, manages to assemble in his hotel room half a batallion’s worth of automatic guns before calmly sending a hail of bullets down onto a crowd of people below.
There has to be something missing from the story, I hope the investigators can gain an understanding of why on Earth this happened.
In a way, these days having no obvious social media presence at all is kinda of abnormal. I wouldn't be surprised if ultimately they find he had some secret dark online activity.
Nobody is " blaming Brexit " for Monarch. Almost everyone is recognising that #1 A peak to trough devaluation of $1.55 to $1.20 for the £ is a significant shock to a company with huge costs in Foriegn Currency. #2 That withdrawing from the Single European Sky on Brexit Day with no earthly idea what if anything will replace it has detected external buyers.
How many of factors #1 and #2 did the Monarch boss mention in his interview?
Everything must be fitted to a 'Brexit is a disaster' narrative.
What killed Monarch (according to Monarch) was #1 Terrorism in their main markets which #2 drove them to compete in Markets that were already very competitive.
From what I've heard, what killed them was that they could not compete with low cost/no frills airlines.
There is seldom a single cause. My son lost his job recently because his firm relied heavily on EU funding (basically into global warming) so it looks like a direct consequence of Brexit but it was also a demonstration of failure to diversify and too much reliance on one client.
Brexit obviously wasn't helpful in his case, or Monarch's, but not the sole cause.
Yep - all Brexit does is throw another spanner into the works. We have made it harder for ourselves, for no discernible benefit.
Only because you refuse to acknowledge control over our own laws and us having the power to elect and eject our lawmakers as a discernible benefit.
You may not think it is a benefit worth gaining, but it is most unquestionably a benefit.
We already have that benefit, as the referendum and general election demonstrated.
I think the idea is to be able to make our own decisions without a massive amount of upheaval first, which trying to leave the EU is showing we don't have now.
I'd have some sympathy for that if the UK had spent the last 40 years being consistently outvoted at the Council of Ministers; but in reality it is hard to think of much of import that we have had to enshrine in UK law against the wishes of our elected government. Are there examples that I am not thinking of? That may well be the case.
droite de suite. A real blow to the man on the street('s artist and member of the Bloomsbury set grandfather).
Off topic, I think the EU want the UK to surrender on the ECJ jurisdiction on citizens rights, and on NI remaining in the customs union/single market before talking trade, in order to make a mockery of taking back control.
I think many in the civil service would reluctantly wear this, but it's politically impossible for the Government to accept.
May may try and, if she does, I think she falls.
I think you're right. They've picked something that they know we can't possibly budge on and won't allow talks to continue otherwise. Looks like we're crashing out with no deal.
Well the other side clearly prefer to be obstinate and don’t want to do a deal, so we should start preparing now to leave in 18 months’ time without one. The EU are just going to have to put up with another Switzerland or Singapore off their coast - and a large hole in their budget.
Yes it will be difficult and painful for us unfortunately, but it is necessary now. It's obvious we can't get a decent deal so we need to take steps to move on to the next stage.
Of course the loony remainers will blame the government for this as usual.
Off topic, I think the EU want the UK to surrender on the ECJ jurisdiction on citizens rights, and on NI remaining in the customs union/single market before talking trade, in order to make a mockery of taking back control.
I think many in the civil service would reluctantly wear this, but it's politically impossible for the Government to accept.
May may try and, if she does, I think she falls.
I think you're right. They've picked something that they know we can't possibly budge on and won't allow talks to continue otherwise. Looks like we're crashing out with no deal.
Well the other side clearly prefer to be obstinate and don’t want to do a deal, so we should start preparing now to leave in 18 months’ time without one. The EU are just going to have to put up with another Switzerland or Singapore off their coast - and a large hole in their budget.
Nobody is " blaming Brexit " for Monarch. Almost everyone is recognising that #1 A peak to trough devaluation of $1.55 to $1.20 for the £ is a significant shock to a company with huge costs in Foriegn Currency. #2 That withdrawing from the Single European Sky on Brexit Day with no earthly idea what if anything will replace it has detected external buyers.
How many of factors #1 and #2 did the Monarch boss mention in his interview?
Everything must be fitted to a 'Brexit is a disaster' narrative.
What killed Monarch (according to Monarch) was #1 Terrorism in their main markets which #2 drove them to compete in Markets that were already very competitive.
From what I've heard, what killed them was that they could not compete with low cost/no frills airlines.
There is seldom a single cause. My son lost his job recently because his firm relied heavily on EU funding (basically into global warming) so it looks like a direct consequence of Brexit but it was also a demonstration of failure to diversify and too much reliance on one client.
Brexit obviously wasn't helpful in his case, or Monarch's, but not the sole cause.
Yep - all Brexit does is throw another spanner into the works. We have made it harder for ourselves, for no discernible benefit.
Only because you refuse to acknowledge control over our own laws and us having the power to elect and eject our lawmakers as a discernible benefit.
You may not think it is a benefit worth gaining, but it is most unquestionably a benefit.
We already have that benefit, as the referendum and general election demonstrated.
I think the idea is to be able to make our own decisions without a massive amount of upheaval first, which trying to leave the EU is showing we don't have now.
I'd have some sympathy for that if the UK had spent the last 40 years being consistently outvoted at the Council of Ministers; but in reality it is hard to think of much of import that we have had to enshrine in UK law against the wishes of our elected government. Are there examples that I am not thinking of? That may well be the case.
Off topic, I think the EU want the UK to surrender on the ECJ jurisdiction on citizens rights, and on NI remaining in the customs union/single market before talking trade, in order to make a mockery of taking back control.
I think many in the civil service would reluctantly wear this, but it's politically impossible for the Government to accept.
May may try and, if she does, I think she falls.
I think you're right. They've picked something that they know we can't possibly budge on and won't allow talks to continue otherwise. Looks like we're crashing out with no deal.
Well the other side clearly prefer to be obstinate and don’t want to do a deal, so we should start preparing now to leave in 18 months’ time without one. The EU are just going to have to put up with another Switzerland or Singapore off their coast - and a large hole in their budget.
Yes it will be difficult and painful for us unfortunately, but it is necessary now. It's obvious we can't get a decent deal so we need to take steps to move on to the next stage.
Of course the loony remainers will blame the government for this as usual.
It is Loony LEAVER LEMMINGS who have caused the problem and will be blamed hereafter
Off topic, I think the EU want the UK to surrender on the ECJ jurisdiction on citizens rights, and on NI remaining in the customs union/single market before talking trade, in order to make a mockery of taking back control.
I think many in the civil service would reluctantly wear this, but it's politically impossible for the Government to accept.
May may try and, if she does, I think she falls.
I think you're right. They've picked something that they know we can't possibly budge on and won't allow talks to continue otherwise. Looks like we're crashing out with no deal.
Well the other side clearly prefer to be obstinate and don’t want to do a deal, so we should start preparing now to leave in 18 months’ time without one. The EU are just going to have to put up with another Switzerland or Singapore off their coast - and a large hole in their budget.
Don't worry, German car manufacturers will insist the EU gives us a good deal.
Off topic, I think the EU want the UK to surrender on the ECJ jurisdiction on citizens rights, and on NI remaining in the customs union/single market before talking trade, in order to make a mockery of taking back control.
I think many in the civil service would reluctantly wear this, but it's politically impossible for the Government to accept.
May may try and, if she does, I think she falls.
I think you're right. They've picked something that they know we can't possibly budge on and won't allow talks to continue otherwise. Looks like we're crashing out with no deal.
Really? Is it not the case that we* picked a brexit that they couldn't possibly agree to?
Giving us a pile of cash for our health service, complete control over immigration and full access to their market.
Any comments on Amber Rudd's barmy idea of 15 years in jail for viewing the wrong things online? I can see the definition of "right-wing extremism" getting widened to anything to the right of the Guardian if Corbyn gets a sniff of power.
And anyway the idea of being jailed for reading "unapproved" views whatever they are is something I find very disturbing.
The argument about preparing for a no deal Brexit will probably morph into saying the people don't deserve their Brexit if they're not willing to make the necessary sacrifices to achieve it.
Talk about Thornberry needs to be tempered by how batshit crazy many of the Corbynistas are. The New Wave of British Heavy Socialism was supposed to bring about the next generation of people like Clive Lewis and Lisa Nandy, yet both made the terrible error of having a brain and not just doing whatever the Great Leader told them. So now they are out.
Thornberry is in a great position - she's seen as a solid Corbynista (though we know its an act), she's a great media performer, and she's equipped with a Vagina. As a replacement for Jezbollah she has to be a better bet that Diane Abbott (sorry TSE...)
But if you are a Corbyn and only Corbyn person then anyone else is a Tory. They won't want to hand over the leadership to her or anyone else - the job is Jeremy's for life if he wants it.
Mr Swaffield blamed the company's demise on "terrorism and the closure of some markets like Turkey, Tunisia and Egypt," which led to more competition on routes to Spain and Portugal. "Flights were being squeezed into a smaller number of destinations and a 25% reduction in ticket prices on our routes created a massive economic challenge for our short-haul network," he told the BBC.
Monarch pilots are trained on Airbus. Ryanair exclusively Boeing
#couldnthappentoanicerman
Easyjet exclusively use AirBus.....
Two major LoCos in Indonesia - much prefer Air Asia's 320s to Lion Air's 737s....even if they are the newest ones - the fuselage width still dates from the 1950s.....
Off topic, I think the EU want the UK to surrender on the ECJ jurisdiction on citizens rights, and on NI remaining in the customs union/single market before talking trade, in order to make a mockery of taking back control.
I think many in the civil service would reluctantly wear this, but it's politically impossible for the Government to accept.
May may try and, if she does, I think she falls.
I think you're right. They've picked something that they know we can't possibly budge on and won't allow talks to continue otherwise. Looks like we're crashing out with no deal.
Well the other side clearly prefer to be obstinate and don’t want to do a deal, so we should start preparing now to leave in 18 months’ time without one. The EU are just going to have to put up with another Switzerland or Singapore off their coast - and a large hole in their budget.
Yes it will be difficult and painful for us unfortunately, but it is necessary now. It's obvious we can't get a decent deal so we need to take steps to move on to the next stage.
Of course the loony remainers will blame the government for this as usual.
It is Loony LEAVER LEMMINGS who have caused the problem and will be blamed hereafter
It's not the leavers who signed up to a project that the MAJORITY didn't want while making it as difficult to get out of as possible.
Talk about Thornberry needs to be tempered by how batshit crazy many of the Corbynistas are. The New Wave of British Heavy Socialism was supposed to bring about the next generation of people like Clive Lewis and Lisa Nandy, yet both made the terrible error of having a brain and not just doing whatever the Great Leader told them. So now they are out.
Thornberry is in a great position - she's seen as a solid Corbynista (though we know its an act), she's a great media performer, and she's equipped with a Vagina. As a replacement for Jezbollah she has to be a better bet that Diane Abbott (sorry TSE...)
But if you are a Corbyn and only Corbyn person then anyone else is a Tory. They won't want to hand over the leadership to her or anyone else - the job is Jeremy's for life if he wants it.
Is her status as Lady N not going to be a "Tristram" kind of problem for those who are not necessarily Corbynistas but don't like that kind of thing?
Nobody is " blaming Brexit " for Monarch. Almost everyone is recognising that #1 A peak to trough devaluation of $1.55 to $1.20 for the £ is a significant shock to a company with huge costs in Foriegn Currency. #2 That withdrawing from the Single European Sky on Brexit Day with no earthly idea what if anything will replace it has detected external buyers.
How many of factors #1 and #2 did the Monarch boss mention in his interview?
Everything must be fitted to a 'Brexit is a disaster' narrative.
What killed Monarch (according to Monarch) was #1 Terrorism in their main markets which #2 drove them to compete in Markets that were already very competitive.
From what I've heard, what killed them was that they could not compete with low cost/no frills airlines.
There is seldom a single cause. My son lost his job recently because his firm relied heavily on EU funding (basically into global warming) so it looks like a direct consequence of Brexit but it was also a demonstration of failure to diversify and too much reliance on one client.
Brexit obviously wasn't helpful in his case, or Monarch's, but not the sole cause.
Yep - all Brexit does is throw another spanner into the works. We have made it harder for ourselves, for no discernible benefit.
Only because you refuse to acknowledge control over our own laws and us having the power to elect and eject our lawmakers as a discernible benefit.
You may not think it is a benefit worth gaining, but it is most unquestionably a benefit.
We already have that benefit, as the referendum and general election demonstrated.
I think the idea is to be able to make our own decisions without a massive amount of upheaval first, which trying to leave the EU is showing we don't have now.
I'd have some sympathy for that if the UK had spent the last 40 years being consistently outvoted at the Council of Ministers; but in reality it is hard to think of much of import that we have had to enshrine in UK law against the wishes of our elected government. Are there examples that I am not thinking of? That may well be the case.
Any comments on Amber Rudd's barmy idea of 15 years in jail for viewing the wrong things online? I can see the definition of "right-wing extremism" getting widened to anything to the right of the Guardian if Corbyn gets a sniff of power.
And anyway the idea of being jailed for reading "unapproved" views whatever they are is something I find very disturbing.
She said "repeatedly" viewing such material, but it is still worrying.
Although, this is a speech by Home Sec to her party crowd. Most of the stuff will never make legislation.
I see she is still on about end-to-end encryption. Has this not being explained to her yet?
Talk about Thornberry needs to be tempered by how batshit crazy many of the Corbynistas are. The New Wave of British Heavy Socialism was supposed to bring about the next generation of people like Clive Lewis and Lisa Nandy, yet both made the terrible error of having a brain and not just doing whatever the Great Leader told them. So now they are out.
Thornberry is in a great position - she's seen as a solid Corbynista (though we know its an act), she's a great media performer, and she's equipped with a Vagina. As a replacement for Jezbollah she has to be a better bet that Diane Abbott (sorry TSE...)
But if you are a Corbyn and only Corbyn person then anyone else is a Tory. They won't want to hand over the leadership to her or anyone else - the job is Jeremy's for life if he wants it.
Mr Swaffield blamed the company's demise on "terrorism and the closure of some markets like Turkey, Tunisia and Egypt," which led to more competition on routes to Spain and Portugal. "Flights were being squeezed into a smaller number of destinations and a 25% reduction in ticket prices on our routes created a massive economic challenge for our short-haul network," he told the BBC.
Monarch pilots are trained on Airbus. Ryanair exclusively Boeing
#couldnthappentoanicerman
Easyjet exclusively use AirBus.....
Two major LoCos in Indonesia - much prefer Air Asia's 320s to Lion Air's 737s....even if they are the newest ones - the fuselage width still dates from the 1950s.....
Don’t fly Lion Air, they are almost single handedly keeping Boeing’s crash repair department in business with the number of 737s they’ve bent in the last few years!
The Monarch pilots are looking at Easy, BA, Virgin, FlyBe, various airlines in the Middle East, Asia and China (the latter paying $250k to captains!), all of whom are hiring.
Just read Laura Kuenssberg's article on the BBC about the mood at the Tory conference and it just reinforces how badly they miss Cameron. Former ministers who think the Party is about to go on a major decline that they can't get out of and I would agree.
If Labour had a Centre-Left leader I think the Tories would be in a hell of a lot more trouble right now. In fact they would be certainties to lose the next election.
Off topic, I think the EU want the UK to surrender on the ECJ jurisdiction on citizens rights, and on NI remaining in the customs union/single market before talking trade, in order to make a mockery of taking back control.
I think many in the civil service would reluctantly wear this, but it's politically impossible for the Government to accept.
May may try and, if she does, I think she falls.
I think you're right. They've picked something that they know we can't possibly budge on and won't allow talks to continue otherwise. Looks like we're crashing out with no deal.
Well the other side clearly prefer to be obstinate and don’t want to do a deal, so we should start preparing now to leave in 18 months’ time without one. The EU are just going to have to put up with another Switzerland or Singapore off their coast - and a large hole in their budget.
Yes it will be difficult and painful for us unfortunately, but it is necessary now. It's obvious we can't get a decent deal so we need to take steps to move on to the next stage.
Of course the loony remainers will blame the government for this as usual.
It is Loony LEAVER LEMMINGS
Insulting one side or the other in Brexit.....*cough*.......
The Article 50 negotiations are simply an opportunity to sort some things out while we are members and through an accelerated decision process. An Article 50 withdrawal agreement is only the first stage in the towards new relationships not just with the EU, but with everyone else. Equally if we don't negotiate a withdrawal agreement we are just storing up problems for later, when they will be more difficult to resolve and vastly more costly to do so.
No deal is better than a bad deal is a truism. Just how bad does that deal have to be before no deal is better? The answer is vastly worse than anything Barnier et al are proposing. In which case we might just as well sign on the dotted line (with a minimal haggle of course, but this just reflects the relative bargaining strengths of each party). They have three demands - 1) Citizens' rights, which as far as I am concerned are a GOOD THING, so I am happy the EU are pushing the line on the outcomes and would prefer my government to agree this as a matter of course; 2) Ireland. There isn't a solution so it will just have to be finessed or ignored. Which leaves (3), money. It is not worth wrecking everything for some tens of billions of euros, when we are going to pay a lot more than that anyway.
The withdrawal agreement is the easy one. If we are incapable of that we will never sort anything out.
What a surprise. It wasn't the British government that didn't want talks to succeed at all, but those eurocrats who we're desperately trying to get away from.
The EU is totally incapable of having these sort of nimble negotiations.
Like entering Emily Thornberry into the asymettric bars at the Olympics and expecting a medal.
Any comments on Amber Rudd's barmy idea of 15 years in jail for viewing the wrong things online? I can see the definition of "right-wing extremism" getting widened to anything to the right of the Guardian if Corbyn gets a sniff of power.
And anyway the idea of being jailed for reading "unapproved" views whatever they are is something I find very disturbing.
She said "repeatedly" viewing such material, but it is still worrying.
Although, this is a speech by Home Sec to her party crowd. Most of the stuff will never make legislation.
I see she is still on about end-to-end encryption. Has this not being explained to her yet?
I’m seriously thinking of volunteering my services explaining computers and technology to politicians, who all seem to think they can un-invent maths and computing power by legislation.
Every Home Sec for the last three decades has been completely housetrained by the spooks when it comes to computing and the internet.
Any comments on Amber Rudd's barmy idea of 15 years in jail for viewing the wrong things online? I can see the definition of "right-wing extremism" getting widened to anything to the right of the Guardian if Corbyn gets a sniff of power.
And anyway the idea of being jailed for reading "unapproved" views whatever they are is something I find very disturbing.
She said "repeatedly" viewing such material, but it is still worrying.
Although, this is a speech by Home Sec to her party crowd. Most of the stuff will never make legislation.
I see she is still on about end-to-end encryption. Has this not being explained to her yet?
Apparently she doesn't want it explained to her. That would be patronising.
Just read Laura Kuenssberg's article on the BBC about the mood at the Tory conference and it just reinforces how badly they miss Cameron. Former ministers who think the Party is about to go on a major decline that they can't get out of and I would agree.
If Labour had a Centre-Left leader I think the Tories would be in a hell of a lot more trouble right now. In fact they would be certainties to lose the next election.
Surely it is Cameron who caused much of the current problem by strengthening the centre (which always seems like a good idea while your cabal is running things) with disregard if not active hostility to the party in the country. (Some of this would also apply to Blair and New Labour.)
I’m seriously thinking of volunteering my services explaining computers and technology to politicians, who all seem to think they can un-invent maths and computing power by legislation. .
Just read Laura Kuenssberg's article on the BBC about the mood at the Tory conference and it just reinforces how badly they miss Cameron. Former ministers who think the Party is about to go on a major decline that they can't get out of and I would agree.
If Labour had a Centre-Left leader I think the Tories would be in a hell of a lot more trouble right now. In fact they would be certainties to lose the next election.
The tories are in this position because labour didn't elect a centre-left leader, post-EdM.
The right treated the election of Corbyn as a blank cheque to go for an ideological w*nk in the bushes.
I’m seriously thinking of volunteering my services explaining computers and technology to politicians, who all seem to think they can un-invent maths and computing power by legislation. .
Just read Laura Kuenssberg's article on the BBC about the mood at the Tory conference and it just reinforces how badly they miss Cameron. Former ministers who think the Party is about to go on a major decline that they can't get out of and I would agree.
If Labour had a Centre-Left leader I think the Tories would be in a hell of a lot more trouble right now. In fact they would be certainties to lose the next election.
The problem for the Tories is that the core of what they believe is just not all that popular with the general public, so to get to mass appeal they need to have someone to the left of what they stand for. It's not sustainable.
For example trying to slowly reduce government overspending and run a balanced budget is branded as "austerity" or "punishing the poor" and they are hated for it. I think it is madness, but that is where we're at unfortunately.
Here's why Boris , Gove and to an extent Ruth have to win out over the dour managerial boredom of spreadsheet Hammond and robot May
odysseanproject @odysseanproject 23m More The CAB ‘mostly believe’ the ‘slow grind of governmnt competence cd restore credibility over time’. Total delusion
What a surprise. It wasn't the British government that didn't want talks to succeed at all, but those eurocrats who we're desperately trying to get away from.
The EU is totally incapable of having these sort of nimble negotiations.
Play chicken with the EU and you end up as road kill. If Theresa May can't get the necessary compromises through parliament we'll have to keep trying new Prime Ministers until we find one who can.
Just read Laura Kuenssberg's article on the BBC about the mood at the Tory conference and it just reinforces how badly they miss Cameron. Former ministers who think the Party is about to go on a major decline that they can't get out of and I would agree.
If Labour had a Centre-Left leader I think the Tories would be in a hell of a lot more trouble right now. In fact they would be certainties to lose the next election.
The problem for the Tories is that the core of what they believe is just not all that popular with the general public, so to get to mass appeal they need to have someone to the left of what they stand for. It's not sustainable.
For example trying to slowly reduce government overspending and run a balanced budget is branded as "austerity" or "punishing the poor" and they are hated for it. I think it is madness, but that is where we're at unfortunately.
I don't believe its left or right - it's energy , enthusiasm and different thinking that voters want. Not dour efficiency at a mediocre level - which is what Hammond is trying to sell.
Just read Laura Kuenssberg's article on the BBC about the mood at the Tory conference and it just reinforces how badly they miss Cameron. Former ministers who think the Party is about to go on a major decline that they can't get out of and I would agree.
If Labour had a Centre-Left leader I think the Tories would be in a hell of a lot more trouble right now. In fact they would be certainties to lose the next election.
The problem for the Tories is that the core of what they believe is just not all that popular with the general public, so to get to mass appeal they need to have someone to the left of what they stand for. It's not sustainable.
For example trying to slowly reduce government overspending and run a balanced budget is branded as "austerity" or "punishing the poor" and they are hated for it. I think it is madness, but that is where we're at unfortunately.
I don't believe its left or right - it's energy , enthusiasm and different thinking that voters want. Not dour efficiency at a mediocre level - which is what Hammond is trying to sell.
Energy and enthusiasm is what appeals to the young. It's also stuff that doesn't need to actually be realistic, so balanced budgets are never going to win among the young compared to half a trillion quid of free money pulled out of Corbyn's anus.
Older voters appreciate people being able to add two numbers together.
I’m seriously thinking of volunteering my services explaining computers and technology to politicians, who all seem to think they can un-invent maths and computing power by legislation. .
They will be legislating that Pi = 3.0 next...
Or vote to repeal Moore’s Law...
Maybe every 18 months they will try twice as hard as before
I’m seriously thinking of volunteering my services explaining computers and technology to politicians, who all seem to think they can un-invent maths and computing power by legislation. .
Off topic, I think the EU want the UK to surrender on the ECJ jurisdiction on citizens rights, and on NI remaining in the customs union/single market before talking trade, in order to make a mockery of taking back control.
I think many in the civil service would reluctantly wear this, but it's politically impossible for the Government to accept.
May may try and, if she does, I think she falls.
I think you're right. They've picked something that they know we can't possibly budge on and won't allow talks to continue otherwise. Looks like we're crashing out with no deal.
Well the other side clearly prefer to be obstinate and don’t want to do a deal, so we should start preparing now to leave in 18 months’ time without one. The EU are just going to have to put up with another Switzerland or Singapore off their coast - and a large hole in their budget.
Yes it will be difficult and painful for us unfortunately, but it is necessary now. It's obvious we can't get a decent deal so we need to take steps to move on to the next stage.
Of course the loony remainers will blame the government for this as usual.
It is Loony LEAVER LEMMINGS who have caused the problem and will be blamed hereafter
In your dreams. Given that that would mean people believing they had made a bad choice, it will be far easier and inevitable that they blame the EU. Particularly as the EU is doing nothing to dissuade them from that position. As always the EU is its own worst enemy and Leave will happily take advantage of that.
Just read Laura Kuenssberg's article on the BBC about the mood at the Tory conference and it just reinforces how badly they miss Cameron. Former ministers who think the Party is about to go on a major decline that they can't get out of and I would agree.
If Labour had a Centre-Left leader I think the Tories would be in a hell of a lot more trouble right now. In fact they would be certainties to lose the next election.
The tories are in this position because labour didn't elect a centre-left leader, post-EdM.
The right treated the election of Corbyn as a blank cheque to go for an ideological w*nk in the bushes.
Liberals out. Dave out. Drawbridge up.
Load the cannon and point it at Germany.
Lab didn't elect a centre-left leader because at that time the difference between the two parties would have been negligible. It is only now that the Cons have lurched rightwards that a centre-left leader (or indeed centre-right one for that matter, ffs) would be differentiated.
Any comments on Amber Rudd's barmy idea of 15 years in jail for viewing the wrong things online? I can see the definition of "right-wing extremism" getting widened to anything to the right of the Guardian if Corbyn gets a sniff of power.
And anyway the idea of being jailed for reading "unapproved" views whatever they are is something I find very disturbing.
Repeated viewing -- so that's OK. More power to Amber Rudd locking up the terrorists and paedos and anyone who watched more than one news item showing people being mown down in Las Vegas yesterday.
It is Loony LEAVER LEMMINGS who have caused the problem and will be blamed hereafter
In your dreams. Given that that would mean people believing they had made a bad choice, it will be far easier and inevitable that they blame the EU. Particularly as the EU is doing nothing to dissuade them from that position. As always the EU is its own worst enemy and Leave will happily take advantage of that.
You're both right. Remainers will blame Leavers and Leavers will blame the EU. In domestic politics that's a problem for Leavers. The EU doesn't stand in Westminster. Also the EU doesn't go away while Leavers might if they get voted out.
PS What is unlikely is that anyone much will think Brexit a success. If you blame others that acknowledges failure. Again I think that's a problem for Leavers.
Just read Laura Kuenssberg's article on the BBC about the mood at the Tory conference and it just reinforces how badly they miss Cameron. Former ministers who think the Party is about to go on a major decline that they can't get out of and I would agree.
If Labour had a Centre-Left leader I think the Tories would be in a hell of a lot more trouble right now. In fact they would be certainties to lose the next election.
The problem for the Tories is that the core of what they believe is just not all that popular with the general public, so to get to mass appeal they need to have someone to the left of what they stand for. It's not sustainable.
For example trying to slowly reduce government overspending and run a balanced budget is branded as "austerity" or "punishing the poor" and they are hated for it. I think it is madness, but that is where we're at unfortunately.
What do you think "the core of what they believe" is precisely that is so unpopular?
The core of what Tories believe in is competence and freedom. Both are popular concepts on their own.
The problem is that we face other popular ideas which don't mesh nicely with competence like vast spending on absolutely everything.
Here's why Boris , Gove and to an extent Ruth have to win out over the dour managerial boredom of spreadsheet Hammond and robot May
odysseanproject @odysseanproject 23m More The CAB ‘mostly believe’ the ‘slow grind of governmnt competence cd restore credibility over time’. Total delusion
Nobody is " blaming Brexit " for Monarch. Almost everyone is recognising that #1 A peak to trough devaluation of $1.55 to $1.20 for the £ is a significant shock to a company with huge costs in Foriegn Currency. #2 That withdrawing from the Single European Sky on Brexit Day with no earthly idea what if anything will replace it has detected external buyers.
what killed them was that they could not compete with low cost/no frills airlines.
Brexit obviously wasn't helpful in his case, or Monarch's, but not the sole cause.
Yep - all Brexit does is throw another spanner into the works. We have made it harder for ourselves, for no discernible benefit.
Well that's my take, Southam, but you know......there was 52% of voters who thought otherwise so we just have to sup it up.
Or not. People change their minds, circumstances change. Political parties don't give up and disband because they lose an election (UKIP excepted). Those against the EC didn't give up after 1975.
Yes, that's true, Logical, but I don't think there's much that can be done in this case.
For a start, a lot of the damage has already been done, and is irreversible, even if we could reverse back out of the referendum decision, which is doubtful. Best case therefore would be to reapply at some later date, but that would obviously be on inferior terms to those we previously enjoyed.
But isn't it wrong in principle to backtrack? We all have to take responsibility for our actions, collectively as well as individually, even if we were not full aware of the consequences at the time. Parliament made it clear to the electorate that although it thought on the whole Brexit would be bad for the country, it would proceed in the event of a Leave majority. Surely Parliament has to stand by its commitments?
Would anybody want it to be otherwise?
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. My problem with that is the attitude that 'we have made our bed and must lie in it'. Surely if it becomes even more obvious that we have made a mistake we should be able to try to ameliorate or even reverse it. How that could be done is another problem but the principle of being able to reverse bad decisions is surely correct. The one time that the electorate has been asked for its opinion since the referendum it refused to give Mrs May a larger majority to, as the Daily Mail put it, 'Crush the Saboteurs'. The fact that Labour were seen as more pro soft Brexit when they may or may not be was good politics on their part.
Nobody is " blaming Brexit " for Monarch. Almost everyone is recognising that #1 A peak to trough devaluation of $1.55 to $1.20 for the £ is a significant shock to a company with huge costs in Foriegn Currency. #2 That withdrawing from the Single European Sky on Brexit Day with no earthly idea what if anything will replace it has detected external buyers.
How many of factors #1 and #2 did the Monarch boss mention in his interview?
Everything must be fitted to a 'Brexit is a disaster' narrative.
What killed Monarch (according to Monarch) was #1 Terrorism in their main markets which #2 drove them to compete in Markets that were already very competitive.
From what I've heard, what killed them was that they could not compete with low cost/no frills airlines.
There is seldom a single cause. My son lost his job recently because his firm relied heavily on EU funding (basically into global warming) so it looks like a direct consequence of Brexit but it was also a demonstration of failure to diversify and too much reliance on one client.
Brexit obviously wasn't helpful in his case, or Monarch's, but not the sole cause.
Yep - all Brexit does is throw another spanner into the works. We have made it harder for ourselves, for no discernible benefit.
Only because you refuse to acknowledge control over our own laws and us having the power to elect and eject our lawmakers as a discernible benefit.
You may not think it is a benefit worth gaining, but it is most unquestionably a benefit.
We already have that benefit, as the referendum and general election demonstrated.
I think the idea is to be able to make our own decisions without a massive amount of upheaval first, which trying to leave the EU is showing we don't have now.
I'd have some sympathy for that if the UK had spent the last 40 years being consistently outvoted at the Council of Ministers; but in reality it is hard to think of much of import that we have had to enshrine in UK law against the wishes of our elected government. Are there examples that I am not thinking of? That may well be the case.
The examples you are not thinking of are all the decisions made in council regarding the EU budget. Between 2009 and 2015 the UK lost 35% of the votes on the EU budget.
To be clear, what Major is complaining about is the Treaty of Rome so it's a bizarre complaint.
No he is not he is complaining abut the ECJ interpretation of the Maastricht Treaty and specifically the social chapter.
Read it again. It's the ECJ interpretation of the Treaty of Rome, as amended by the Single European Act, that he's talking about. Article 118a on social policy is not from Maastricht.
Just read Laura Kuenssberg's article on the BBC about the mood at the Tory conference and it just reinforces how badly they miss Cameron. Former ministers who think the Party is about to go on a major decline that they can't get out of and I would agree.
If Labour had a Centre-Left leader I think the Tories would be in a hell of a lot more trouble right now. In fact they would be certainties to lose the next election.
The problem for the Tories is that the core of what they believe is just not all that popular with the general public, so to get to mass appeal they need to have someone to the left of what they stand for. It's not sustainable.
For example trying to slowly reduce government overspending and run a balanced budget is branded as "austerity" or "punishing the poor" and they are hated for it. I think it is madness, but that is where we're at unfortunately.
This illustrates the Conservatives' problems. Opposing overspending is claptrap. Defining or describing overspending is the proper stuff of political debate.
Nobody is " blaming Brexit " for Monarch. Almost everyone is recognising that #1 A peak to trough devaluation of $1.55 to $1.20 for the £ is a significant shock to a company with huge costs in Foriegn Currency. #2 That withdrawing from the Single European Sky on Brexit Day with no earthly idea what if anything will replace it has detected external buyers.
How many of factors #1 and #2 did the Monarch boss mention in his interview?
Everything must be fitted to a 'Brexit is a disaster' narrative.
What killed Monarch (according to Monarch) was #1 Terrorism in their main markets which #2 drove them to compete in Markets that were already very competitive.
From what I've heard, what killed them was that they could not compete with low cost/no frills airlines.
There is seldom a single cause. My son lost his job recently because his firm relied heavily on EU funding (basically into global warming) so it looks like a direct consequence of Brexit but it was also a demonstration of failure to diversify and too much reliance on one client.
Brexit obviously wasn't helpful in his case, or Monarch's, but not the sole cause.
Yep - all Brexit does is throw another spanner into the works. We have made it harder for ourselves, for no discernible benefit.
Only because you refuse to acknowledge control over our own laws and us having the power to elect and eject our lawmakers as a discernible benefit.
You may not think it is a benefit worth gaining, but it is most unquestionably a benefit.
We already have that benefit, as the referendum and general election demonstrated.
I think the idea is to be able to make our own decisions without a massive amount of upheaval first, which trying to leave the EU is showing we don't have now.
I'd have some sympathy for that if the UK had spent the last 40 years being consistently outvoted at the Council of Ministers; but in reality it is hard to think of much of import that we have had to enshrine in UK law against the wishes of our elected government. Are there examples that I am not thinking of? That may well be the case.
The examples you are not thinking of are all the decisions made in council regarding the EU budget. Between 2009 and 2015 the UK lost 35% of the votes on the EU budget.
To be clear, what Major is complaining about is the Treaty of Rome so it's a bizarre complaint.
No he is not he is complaining abut the ECJ interpretation of the Maastricht Treaty and specifically the social chapter.
Read it again. It's the ECJ interpretation of the Treaty of Rome, as amended by the Single European Act, that he's talking about. Article 118a on social policy is not from Maastricht.
Maastricht was a revising treaty Like almost all EU treaties since the founding it revises previous treaties and cannot be read alone. However Major believed that the UK had negotiated and secured a specific opt out from the social chapter as part of the Maastricht treaty and it is that being circumvented he is objecting to, not the original treaty of Rome.
Just read Laura Kuenssberg's article on the BBC about the mood at the Tory conference and it just reinforces how badly they miss Cameron. Former ministers who think the Party is about to go on a major decline that they can't get out of and I would agree.
If Labour had a Centre-Left leader I think the Tories would be in a hell of a lot more trouble right now. In fact they would be certainties to lose the next election.
The problem for the Tories is that the core of what they believe is just not all that popular with the general public, so to get to mass appeal they need to have someone to the left of what they stand for. It's not sustainable.
For example trying to slowly reduce government overspending and run a balanced budget is branded as "austerity" or "punishing the poor" and they are hated for it. I think it is madness, but that is where we're at unfortunately.
I don't believe its left or right - it's energy , enthusiasm and different thinking that voters want. Not dour efficiency at a mediocre level - which is what Hammond is trying to sell.
That goes some way to explain Jacob Rees-Mogg. People want to hear positivity and enthusiasm for government, which is not happening with people like Hammond, Rudd and the relentlessly negative and remain-dominated broadcast media.
We need to get some of the more positive voices out there, even if they’re not popular with everyone, talking about the opportunities of Brexit and free trade with the world. The likes of JR-M, Michael Gove, Dan Hannan are all very good communicators and relentlessly positive about what Britain can achieve outside the EU.
It would also be good to get more business leaders publicly involved, there’s an awful lot going on when it comes to international trade at the moment, but almost all of it is below the domestic media radar.
Next month I’m going to watch one event in BAE Systems’ and the RAF’s nine-Hawk demonstrator world tour, as an example. They’ve sold dozens of planes in the last month, and are hoping to have sold hundreds of planes and training by the time they get back in the spring. That’s just one example of a number of trade missions and campaigns ongoing, but again there’s no domestic publicity for them. http://greatbritaincampaign.com/#!/home
Just read Laura Kuenssberg's article on the BBC about the mood at the Tory conference and it just reinforces how badly they miss Cameron. Former ministers who think the Party is about to go on a major decline that they can't get out of and I would agree.
If Labour had a Centre-Left leader I think the Tories would be in a hell of a lot more trouble right now. In fact they would be certainties to lose the next election.
The problem for the Tories is that the core of what they believe is just not all that popular with the general public, so to get to mass appeal they need to have someone to the left of what they stand for. It's not sustainable.
For example trying to slowly reduce government overspending and run a balanced budget is branded as "austerity" or "punishing the poor" and they are hated for it. I think it is madness, but that is where we're at unfortunately.
What do you think "the core of what they believe" is precisely that is so unpopular?
The core of what Tories believe in is competence and freedom. Both are popular concepts on their own.
The problem is that we face other popular ideas which don't mesh nicely with competence like vast spending on absolutely everything.
What is the point in reducing political beliefs down to such vague terms as 'competence' and 'freedom', which nobody in the world would oppose? Or ignoring the concrete criticisms of their spending reductions, as if people attack 'austerity' because they're in favour of 'government overspending' and against a balanced budget, as if it's so simple? Surely it's impossible to understand anything about politics in these terms, the real divisions and disagreements that exist between parties, groups, classes, nations, whatever.
Just read Laura Kuenssberg's article on the BBC about the mood at the Tory conference and it just reinforces how badly they miss Cameron. Former ministers who think the Party is about to go on a major decline that they can't get out of and I would agree.
If Labour had a Centre-Left leader I think the Tories would be in a hell of a lot more trouble right now. In fact they would be certainties to lose the next election.
The tories are in this position because labour didn't elect a centre-left leader, post-EdM.
The right treated the election of Corbyn as a blank cheque to go for an ideological w*nk in the bushes.
Liberals out. Dave out. Drawbridge up.
Load the cannon and point it at Germany.
Lab didn't elect a centre-left leader because at that time the difference between the two parties would have been negligible. It is only now that the Cons have lurched rightwards that a centre-left leader (or indeed centre-right one for that matter, ffs) would be differentiated.
Sure. It's reaction/counterreaction.
Had Dave won the referendum 55%+ he'd be lord of all he surveys, right now.
Corbyn, a joke.
TM would be shuffling paperclips, planning her retirement.
PM-in-waiting, George Osborne, would be busy nicking every liberal and centre lefty policy he could find for his 2020 manifesto, just as his help to buy policies (due to expire on the eve of the election) pushed house prices new highs.
Dacre and the loony right were about to be consigned to oblivion.
To be clear, what Major is complaining about is the Treaty of Rome so it's a bizarre complaint.
No he is not he is complaining abut the ECJ interpretation of the Maastricht Treaty and specifically the social chapter.
Read it again. It's the ECJ interpretation of the Treaty of Rome, as amended by the Single European Act, that he's talking about. Article 118a on social policy is not from Maastricht.
Maastricht was a revising treaty Like almost all EU treaties since the founding it revises previous treaties and cannot be read alone. However Major believed that the UK had negotiated and secured a specific opt out from the social chapter as part of the Maastricht treaty and it is that being circumvented he is objecting to, not the original treaty of Rome.
So, as on so many occasions, you are wrong.
I'm afraid I'm not wrong... Here's the Single European Act (which Major mentions by name in the letter). What he was objecting to was that when negotiating Maastricht he didn't realise that these areas were already within the scope of a previous treaty.
Article 118a 1. Member States shall pay particular attention to encouraging improvements, especially in the working environment, as regards the health and safety of workers, and shall set as their objective the harmonization of conditions in this area, while maintaining the improvements made. 2. In order to help achieve the objective laid down in the first paragraph, the Council, acting by a qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission, in co-operation with the European Parliament and after consulting the Economic and Social Committee, shall adopt, by means of directives, minimum requirements for gradual implementation, having regard to the conditions and technical rules obtaining in each of the Member States. Such directives shall avoid imposing administrative, financial and legal constraints in a way which would hold back the creation and development of small and medium-sized undertakings. 3. The provisions adopted pursuant to this Article shall not prevent any Member State from maintaining or introducing more stringent measures for the protection of working conditions compatible with this Treaty.’
The idea that George Osborne has a conflict of interest because some Blackrock funds invest in Uber is completely silly. I can only assume that the people making such barmy such claims haven't the faintest idea what BlackRock is. For a starter, it's not BlackRock's money, it's their clients' money which is invested in Uber, and secondly, and more importantly, BlackRock has $5.7 trillion under management; Uber's entire market cap doesn't even register as a rounding error on that.
Just read Laura Kuenssberg's article on the BBC about the mood at the Tory conference and it just reinforces how badly they miss Cameron. Former ministers who think the Party is about to go on a major decline that they can't get out of and I would agree.
If Labour had a Centre-Left leader I think the Tories would be in a hell of a lot more trouble right now. In fact they would be certainties to lose the next election.
The tories are in this position because labour didn't elect a centre-left leader, post-EdM.
The right treated the election of Corbyn as a blank cheque to go for an ideological w*nk in the bushes.
Liberals out. Dave out. Drawbridge up.
Load the cannon and point it at Germany.
Lab didn't elect a centre-left leader because at that time the difference between the two parties would have been negligible. It is only now that the Cons have lurched rightwards that a centre-left leader (or indeed centre-right one for that matter, ffs) would be differentiated.
Sure. It's reaction/counterreaction.
Had Dave won the referendum 55%+ he'd be lord of all he surveys, right now.
Corbyn, a joke.
PM-in-waiting, George Osborne, would be busy nicking every liberal and centre lefty policy he could find for his 2020 manifesto, just as his help to buy policies (due to expire on the eve of the election) pushed house prices new highs.
The loony right were about to be consigned to oblivion.
You think the Tory Eurosceptics would have settled down quietly after losing the referendum? One can just as easily imagine a UKIP surge among Tory Eurosceptic voters and exposed divisions which the promise of a referendum had kept under wraps.
Off topic, I think the EU want the UK to surrender on the ECJ jurisdiction on citizens rights, and on NI remaining in the customs union/single market before talking trade, in order to make a mockery of taking back control.
I think many in the civil service would reluctantly wear this, but it's politically impossible for the Government to accept.
May may try and, if she does, I think she falls.
I think you're right. They've picked something that they know we can't possibly budge on and won't allow talks to continue otherwise. Looks like we're crashing out with no deal.
Well the other side clearly prefer to be obstinate and don’t want to do a deal, so we should start preparing now to leave in 18 months’ time without one. The EU are just going to have to put up with another Switzerland or Singapore off their coast - and a large hole in their budget.
Yes it will be difficult and painful for us unfortunately, but it is necessary now. It's obvious we can't get a decent deal so we need to take steps to move on to the next stage.
Of course the loony remainers will blame the government for this as usual.
It is Loony LEAVER LEMMINGS who have caused the problem and will be blamed hereafter
Very poor response mike,will we see the non stop remain british government bashing side on here do the same about the EU now ?
I’m seriously thinking of volunteering my services explaining computers and technology to politicians, who all seem to think they can un-invent maths and computing power by legislation. .
And yet every few years people suggest that Moore’s Law is about to break, but they manage to make faster and more efficient fabrication processes. They’re getting a lot closer to connectors the width of atoms though, at which point it will become physically impossible to make them any smaller!
Just read Laura Kuenssberg's article on the BBC about the mood at the Tory conference and it just reinforces how badly they miss Cameron. Former ministers who think the Party is about to go on a major decline that they can't get out of and I would agree.
If Labour had a Centre-Left leader I think the Tories would be in a hell of a lot more trouble right now. In fact they would be certainties to lose the next election.
The problem for the Tories is that the core of what they believe is just not all that popular with the general public, so to get to mass appeal they need to have someone to the left of what they stand for. It's not sustainable.
For example trying to slowly reduce government overspending and run a balanced budget is branded as "austerity" or "punishing the poor" and they are hated for it. I think it is madness, but that is where we're at unfortunately.
I don't believe its left or right - it's energy , enthusiasm and different thinking that voters want. Not dour efficiency at a mediocre level - which is what Hammond is trying to sell.
Energy and enthusiasm is what appeals to the young. It's also stuff that doesn't need to actually be realistic, so balanced budgets are never going to win among the young compared to half a trillion quid of free money pulled out of Corbyn's anus.
Older voters appreciate people being able to add two numbers together.
Austerity, inequality and running a balanced enough budget seem to have become hopelessly confused in peoples' minds and 'Tories' have very different core beliefs. What unites
Clarke, Allen, Soubry, Wollaston or Stewart
with
Mogg, Bone, Redwood, Cash and Fox?
The core of what the former MPs believe would probably win a contest with Corbyn. The core beliefs of the latter would lose the same contest.
An interesting comment by the IFS on the recent announcements on tuition fees:
[lifting the repayment threshold from £21K to £25K] will save middle earning graduates a lot of money - up to £15,700 over their lifetimes. It also represents a big shift in policy raising the long run cost to the taxpayer of providing higher education by around 40%, or over £2.3bn a year in the long run.
Nope you are wrong. This is from the EU themselves.
The outcome of Maastricht was the Treaty on European Union signed by the Member States of the European Community on 7 February 1992, a Protocol on Social Policy and an Agreement, annexed to the Protocol, between 11 Member States, with the exception of the UK (which benefited from an opt-out), also on Social Policy. The Protocol notes that 11 Member States ‘wish to continue along the path laid down in the 1989 Social Charter [and] have adopted among themselves an Agreement to this end’; accordingly, all 12 Member States:
1. Agree to authorise those 11 Member States [excluding the UK] to have recourse to the institutions, procedures and mechanisms of the Treaty for the purposes of taking among themselves and applying as far as they are concerned the acts and decisions required for giving effect to the above-mentioned Agreement.
2. The [UK] shall not take part in the deliberations and the adoption by the Council of Commission proposals made on the basis of this Protocol and the above-mentioned Agreement...
3. Acts adopted by the Council... shall not be applicable to the [UK].’ This division in the Community over social policy might have been resolved by the expected victory of the Labour Party in the British general election of April 1992, which would have led to the UK becoming party to the Agreement. Its provisions would then have substituted for the provisions in the Treaty. As this did not happen, there continued in existence two parallel sets of provisions: one applicable to all the Member States (in the Treaty), and one applicable to all but the UK (in the Agreement).
An interesting comment by the IFS on the recent announcements on tuition fees:
[lifting the repayment threshold from £21K to £25K] will save middle earning graduates a lot of money - up to £15,700 over their lifetimes. It also represents a big shift in policy raising the long run cost to the taxpayer of providing higher education by around 40%, or over £2.3bn a year in the long run.
Nope you are wrong. This is from the EU themselves.
Read the letter:
However, in its judgement today, the European Court of Justice has ruled that the scope of Article 118a is much broader than the United Kingdom envisaged when the article was originally agreed, as part of the Single European Act. This appears to mean that legislation which the United Kingdom had expected would be dealt with under the Protocol can in fact be adopted under Article 118a.
I’m seriously thinking of volunteering my services explaining computers and technology to politicians, who all seem to think they can un-invent maths and computing power by legislation. .
And yet every few years people suggest that Moore’s Law is about to break, but they manage to make faster and more efficient fabrication processes. They’re getting a lot closer to connectors the width of atoms though, at which point it will become physically impossible to make them any smaller!
Aren't there new technologies being developed thatdoes away with this limitation? 3D arrays and quantum processing?
The idea that George Osborne has a conflict of interest because some Blackrock funds invest in Uber is completely silly. I can only assume that the people making such barmy such claims haven't the faintest idea what BlackRock is. For a starter, it's not BlackRock's money, it's their clients' money which is invested in Uber, and secondly, and more importantly, BlackRock has $5.7 trillion under management; Uber's entire market cap doesn't even register as a rounding error on that.
Chris Frost, chair of the NUJ’s ethics councils, said that the Evening Standard should note Osborne’s role at BlackRock alongside newspaper and online articles it publishes about Uber. The publication did not mention Osborne’s job with BlackRock in Monday’s newspaper.
Frost said: “He [Osborne] ought to make it clear to readers that he has a financial interest in what he is writing about. My advice to editors and journalists would be always to declare your interests.”
Just read Laura Kuenssberg's article on the BBC about the mood at the Tory conference and it just reinforces how badly they miss Cameron. Former ministers who think the Party is about to go on a major decline that they can't get out of and I would agree.
If Labour had a Centre-Left leader I think the Tories would be in a hell of a lot more trouble right now. In fact they would be certainties to lose the next election.
The problem for the Tories is that the core of what they believe is just not all that popular with the general public, so to get to mass appeal they need to have someone to the left of what they stand for. It's not sustainable.
For example trying to slowly reduce government overspending and run a balanced budget is branded as "austerity" or "punishing the poor" and they are hated for it. I think it is madness, but that is where we're at unfortunately.
I don't believe its left or right - it's energy , enthusiasm and different thinking that voters want. Not dour efficiency at a mediocre level - which is what Hammond is trying to sell.
That goes some way to explain Jacob Rees-Mogg. People want to hear positivity and enthusiasm for government, which is not happening with people like Hammond, Rudd and the relentlessly negative and remain-dominated broadcast media.
We need to get some of the more positive voices out there, even if they’re not popular with everyone, talking about the opportunities of Brexit and free trade with the world. The likes of JR-M, Michael Gove, Dan Hannan are all very good communicators and relentlessly positive about what Britain can achieve outside the EU.
It would also be good to get more business leaders publicly involved, there’s an awful lot going on when it comes to international trade at the moment, but almost all of it is below the domestic media radar.
Next month I’m going to watch one event in BAE Systems’ and the RAF’s nine-Hawk demonstrator world tour, as an example. They’ve sold dozens of planes in the last month, and are hoping to have sold hundreds of planes and training by the time they get back in the spring. That’s just one example of a number of trade missions and campaigns ongoing, but again there’s no domestic publicity for them. http://greatbritaincampaign.com/#!/home
Nobody has ever bought a single Hawk as a result of seeing the RAFAT. That's just not how military aircraft procurement works.
Nope you are wrong. This is from the EU themselves.
Read the letter:
However, in its judgement today, the European Court of Justice has ruled that the scope of Article 118a is much broader than the United Kingdom envisaged when the article was originally agreed, as part of the Single European Act. This appears to mean that legislation which the United Kingdom had expected would be dealt with under the Protocol can in fact be adopted under Article 118a.
Which was exactly what the agreement under the Protocol was specifically supposed to stop. So again. It is the circumvention of the agreement under the protocol not the Treaty of Rome that he is objecting to.
You are wrong. Admit it and stop making a fool of yourself.
It's the reverse trick the tories are playing on the young and the poor.
Look at these juicy tax cuts and minimum wage rises we've given you!
While deliberately pumping house prices/rents.
Can you tell us more about these "pumped" house prices and rents you are talking about.
On ONS figures, Private Rents in London have risen a little slower than RPI since 2011, and outside London signifcantly (like a third) more slowly. RPI over the period Jan 2011 to Aug 2017 is up 16%. London rents 15%. Outside London rents 11%.
Frost said: “He [Osborne] ought to make it clear to readers that he has a financial interest in what he is writing about. My advice to editors and journalists would be always to declare your interests.”
Precisely. Osborne doesn't have the slightest financial interest in Uber, or at least not through his role at BlackRock. Like other journalists and editors, he might through any investments he holds, of course.
I’m seriously thinking of volunteering my services explaining computers and technology to politicians, who all seem to think they can un-invent maths and computing power by legislation. .
And yet every few years people suggest that Moore’s Law is about to break, but they manage to make faster and more efficient fabrication processes. They’re getting a lot closer to connectors the width of atoms though, at which point it will become physically impossible to make them any smaller!
Aren't there new technologies being developed thatdoes away with this limitation? 3D arrays and quantum processing?
Well some very very brainy people have been finding innovative ways to keep Moore’s Law running for more than 50 years now, despite millions of words written during that time suggesting that the end was nigh. I don’t doubt that the scientists will continue to find ways to do things in the future that we haven’t thought about today. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law
OT Is David Davis sincere in claiming he wants to hang up his baton? I get the impression he is not enjoying Brexit but I did assume him to be ambitious. Maybe he realises just how poisoned this Conservative Leader chalice is?
Look at these juicy tax cuts and minimum wage rises we've given you!
While deliberately pumping house prices.
Yep.
With Brexit followed by Corbyn the UK could be getting the reset it desperately needs after years of governments propping up asset prices at the expense of the young.
Can you tell us more about these "pumped" house prices and rents you are talking about.
On ONS figures, Private Rents in London have risen a little slower than RPI since 2011, and outside London signifcantly (like a third) more slowly. RPI over the period Jan 2011 to Aug 2017 is up 16%. London rents 15%. Outside London rents 11%.
Nope you are wrong. This is from the EU themselves.
Read the letter:
However, in its judgement today, the European Court of Justice has ruled that the scope of Article 118a is much broader than the United Kingdom envisaged when the article was originally agreed, as part of the Single European Act. This appears to mean that legislation which the United Kingdom had expected would be dealt with under the Protocol can in fact be adopted under Article 118a.
Which was exactly what the agreement under the Protocol was specifically supposed to stop. So again. It is the circumvention of the agreement under the protocol not the Treaty of Rome that he is objecting to.
You are wrong. Admit it and stop making a fool of yourself.
The UK exclusion applied to the protocol in Maastricht. It was not intended to exclude the UK from anything in the Single European Act.
Look at these juicy tax cuts and minimum wage rises we've given you!
While deliberately pumping house prices.
Yep.
With Brexit followed by Corbyn the UK could be getting the reset it desperately needs after years of governments propping up asset prices at the expense of the young.
Can you tell us more about these "pumped" house prices and rents you are talking about.
On ONS figures, Private Rents in London have risen a little slower than RPI since 2011, and outside London signifcantly (like a third) more slowly. RPI over the period Jan 2011 to Aug 2017 is up 16%. London rents 15%. Outside London rents 11%.
Without seeing it, that sounds like the kind of number used by people trying to tempt in new BTL landlords, rather than being an accurate representation of all rented property in the PRS.
Comments
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41477817
Having control means you can change your mind on something not be signed up forever.
So let's all wait and see what happens.
Of course the loony remainers will blame the government for this as usual.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4943596/Bomb-Paris-St-Germain-football-ground.html
Giving us a pile of cash for our health service, complete control over immigration and full access to their market.
It was an impossible fantasy.
You were lied to.
* "we" = 52% of Brits.
And anyway the idea of being jailed for reading "unapproved" views whatever they are is something I find very disturbing.
Thornberry is in a great position - she's seen as a solid Corbynista (though we know its an act), she's a great media performer, and she's equipped with a Vagina. As a replacement for Jezbollah she has to be a better bet that Diane Abbott (sorry TSE...)
But if you are a Corbyn and only Corbyn person then anyone else is a Tory. They won't want to hand over the leadership to her or anyone else - the job is Jeremy's for life if he wants it.
Two major LoCos in Indonesia - much prefer Air Asia's 320s to Lion Air's 737s....even if they are the newest ones - the fuselage width still dates from the 1950s.....
Although, this is a speech by Home Sec to her party crowd. Most of the stuff will never make legislation.
I see she is still on about end-to-end encryption. Has this not being explained to her yet?
Is there a market for who has the most furious remainer reaction to the speech ?
The Monarch pilots are looking at Easy, BA, Virgin, FlyBe, various airlines in the Middle East, Asia and China (the latter paying $250k to captains!), all of whom are hiring.
Pretty much everywhere except Ryanair. So sad.
If Labour had a Centre-Left leader I think the Tories would be in a hell of a lot more trouble right now. In fact they would be certainties to lose the next election.
No deal is better than a bad deal is a truism. Just how bad does that deal have to be before no deal is better? The answer is vastly worse than anything Barnier et al are proposing. In which case we might just as well sign on the dotted line (with a minimal haggle of course, but this just reflects the relative bargaining strengths of each party). They have three demands - 1) Citizens' rights, which as far as I am concerned are a GOOD THING, so I am happy the EU are pushing the line on the outcomes and would prefer my government to agree this as a matter of course; 2) Ireland. There isn't a solution so it will just have to be finessed or ignored. Which leaves (3), money. It is not worth wrecking everything for some tens of billions of euros, when we are going to pay a lot more than that anyway.
The withdrawal agreement is the easy one. If we are incapable of that we will never sort anything out.
Like entering Emily Thornberry into the asymettric bars at the Olympics and expecting a medal.
Every Home Sec for the last three decades has been completely housetrained by the spooks when it comes to computing and the internet.
The right treated the election of Corbyn as a blank cheque to go for an ideological w*nk in the bushes.
Liberals out. Dave out. Drawbridge up.
Load the cannon and point it at Germany.
For example trying to slowly reduce government overspending and run a balanced budget is branded as "austerity" or "punishing the poor" and they are hated for it. I think it is madness, but that is where we're at unfortunately.
odysseanproject @odysseanproject 23m
More
The CAB ‘mostly believe’ the ‘slow grind of governmnt competence cd restore credibility over time’. Total delusion
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41482140
https://twitter.com/pswidlicki/status/915158700444307456
Older voters appreciate people being able to add two numbers together.
Though there are still a few tricks which will keep the ball rolling for a while...
http://www.nature.com/nnano/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nnano.2017.178.html
PS What is unlikely is that anyone much will think Brexit a success. If you blame others that acknowledges failure. Again I think that's a problem for Leavers.
The core of what Tories believe in is competence and freedom. Both are popular concepts on their own.
The problem is that we face other popular ideas which don't mesh nicely with competence like vast spending on absolutely everything.
But it looks like the Cam/Osborne gang and money is on Rudd.
So, as on so many occasions, you are wrong.
We need to get some of the more positive voices out there, even if they’re not popular with everyone, talking about the opportunities of Brexit and free trade with the world. The likes of JR-M, Michael Gove, Dan Hannan are all very good communicators and relentlessly positive about what Britain can achieve outside the EU.
It would also be good to get more business leaders publicly involved, there’s an awful lot going on when it comes to international trade at the moment, but almost all of it is below the domestic media radar.
Next month I’m going to watch one event in BAE Systems’ and the RAF’s nine-Hawk demonstrator world tour, as an example. They’ve sold dozens of planes in the last month, and are hoping to have sold hundreds of planes and training by the time they get back in the spring. That’s just one example of a number of trade missions and campaigns ongoing, but again there’s no domestic publicity for them. http://greatbritaincampaign.com/#!/home
Had Dave won the referendum 55%+ he'd be lord of all he surveys, right now.
Corbyn, a joke.
TM would be shuffling paperclips, planning her retirement.
PM-in-waiting, George Osborne, would be busy nicking every liberal and centre lefty policy he could find for his 2020 manifesto, just as his help to buy policies (due to expire on the eve of the election) pushed house prices new highs.
Dacre and the loony right were about to be consigned to oblivion.
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/SingleEuropeanAct_Crest.pdf
Article 118a
1. Member States shall pay particular attention to encouraging improvements, especially in the working environment, as regards the health and safety of workers, and shall set as their objective the harmonization of conditions in this area, while maintaining the improvements made.
2. In order to help achieve the objective laid down in the first paragraph, the Council, acting by a qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission, in co-operation with the European Parliament and after consulting the Economic and Social Committee, shall adopt, by means of directives, minimum requirements for gradual implementation, having regard to the conditions and technical rules obtaining in each of the Member States. Such directives shall avoid imposing administrative, financial and legal constraints in a way which
would hold back the creation and development of small and medium-sized undertakings.
3. The provisions adopted pursuant to this Article shall not prevent any Member State from maintaining or introducing more stringent measures for the protection of working conditions compatible with this Treaty.’
Clarke, Allen, Soubry, Wollaston or Stewart
with
Mogg, Bone, Redwood, Cash and Fox?
The core of what the former MPs believe would probably win a contest with Corbyn. The core beliefs of the latter would lose the same contest.
[lifting the repayment threshold from £21K to £25K] will save middle earning graduates a lot of money - up to £15,700 over their lifetimes. It also represents a big shift in policy raising the long run cost to the taxpayer of providing higher education by around 40%, or over £2.3bn a year in the long run.
https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9965
The outcome of Maastricht was the Treaty on European Union signed by the Member States of the European Community on 7 February 1992, a Protocol on Social Policy and an Agreement, annexed to the Protocol, between 11 Member States, with the exception of the UK (which benefited from an opt-out), also on Social Policy. The Protocol notes that 11 Member States ‘wish to continue along the path laid down in the 1989 Social Charter [and] have adopted among themselves an Agreement to this end’; accordingly, all 12 Member States:
1. Agree to authorise those 11 Member States [excluding the UK] to have recourse to the institutions, procedures and mechanisms of the Treaty for the purposes of taking among themselves and applying as far as they are concerned the acts and decisions required for giving effect to the above-mentioned Agreement.
2. The [UK] shall not take part in the deliberations and the adoption by the Council of Commission proposals made on the basis of this Protocol and the above-mentioned Agreement...
3. Acts adopted by the Council... shall not be applicable to the [UK].’
This division in the Community over social policy might have been resolved by the expected victory of the Labour Party in the British general election of April 1992, which would have led to the UK becoming party to the Agreement. Its provisions would then have substituted for the provisions in the Treaty. As this did not happen, there continued in existence two parallel sets of provisions: one applicable to all the Member States (in the Treaty), and one applicable to all but the UK (in the Agreement).
I'm well chuffed. I just hope May stays in power long enough for the autumn budget to pass.
However, in its judgement today, the European Court of Justice has ruled that the scope of Article 118a is much broader than the United Kingdom envisaged when the article was originally agreed, as part of the Single European Act. This appears to mean that legislation which the United Kingdom had expected would be dealt with under the Protocol can in fact be adopted under Article 118a.
New YouGov poll finds increase in Leavers wanting restoration of capital punishment. In March split was 53-37% - now backed by 69% to 24%
Remainers, according to YouGov oppose reintroduction of capital punishment by 65% to 28%
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/centreright/2008/10/on-judicial-cor.html
Frost said: “He [Osborne] ought to make it clear to readers that he has a financial interest in what he is writing about. My advice to editors and journalists would be always to declare your interests.”
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/sep/25/evening-standard-urged-to-declare-osbornes-job-with-uber-shareholder
You are wrong. Admit it and stop making a fool of yourself.
On ONS figures, Private Rents in London have risen a little slower than RPI since 2011, and outside London signifcantly (like a third) more slowly. RPI over the period Jan 2011 to Aug 2017 is up 16%. London rents 15%. Outside London rents 11%.
Here is the rent index::
Sources:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/bulletins/indexofprivatehousingrentalprices/august2017
http://www.hl.co.uk/tools/calculators/inflation-calculator
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law
https://www.ft.com/content/58bb3090-a53d-11e7-9e4f-7f5e6a7c98a2?mhq5j=e6
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41484909
This is the judgement in question - http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:61994CJ0084
Without seeing it, that sounds like the kind of number used by people trying to tempt in new BTL landlords, rather than being an accurate representation of all rented property in the PRS.