Nah. He's just another one like Peter and Richard North. They think they are so massively clever that if they can't have Brexit exactly the way they think it should be then it is bound to be a disaster. They are as arrogant as the fanatical Remainers on the other side.
So everyone's wrong but you ? Yep, arrogance.....
Not in the least.
I have already said many times that I will not get my preferred version of Brexit but that I absolutely accept that, still think it will be better than staying in and do not believe it will be a disaster. There is no arrogance there at all.
Those who are unwilling to bend to the will of the people, who think the people are 'wrong' or who do not think the people should be allowed to make such decisions are the ones who are arrogant.
It is also dangerous, the EU referendum was the first time a majority of C2DE voters beat a majority of ABC1 voters since 1974 when Wilson beat Heath, working class voters will not be happy at having that victory snatched from them by a middle class elite
I think the danger here is treating groups like 'working class voters' or 'middle class elite'* as if there were some kind of cohesive units, each with a unified thought process. They aren't, people think and vote as individuals.
(*'Middle class elite' is an oxymoron surely?)
True but nonetheless the trend was there, there was a big divide by class and education particularly but also by income too.
If working class Leave voters do not get the immigration controls they were promised because of Brexit they will either vote for Corbyn to bash the rich and the corporations or they will vote for UKIP again to find a party who will end free movement
Nah. He's just another one like Peter and Richard North. They think they are so massively clever that if they can't have Brexit exactly the way they think it should be then it is bound to be a disaster. They are as arrogant as the fanatical Remainers on the other side.
So everyone's wrong but you ? Yep, arrogance.....
Not in the least.
I have already said many times that I will not get my preferred version of Brexit but that I absolutely accept that, still think it will be better than staying in and do not believe it will be a disaster. There is no arrogance there at all.
Those who are unwilling to bend to the will of the people, who think the people are 'wrong' or who do not think the people should be allowed to make such decisions are the ones who are arrogant.
You're the person who is wrong Richard. The opinion of the people is often 'wrong', eg death penalty, and that is why they shouldn't be asked to decide on complex matters because in these issues they will always answer in a knee jerk reaction without considering the consequences.
And yet the same people who you think are not intelligent enough to decide upon the issues are apparently intelligent enough to choose the person who should decide the issues for them?
Somewhat illogical I would suggest. And certainly looking at the crop of MPs we have sitting in Parliament at the moment I wouldn't trust them to make any more of an informed and reasoned decision than the public at large. I am afraid you are displaying just the sort of arrogance I was referring to.
It is in fact, the classical argument against democracy, which great thinkers from Plato onwards have advanced.
Nah. He's just another one like Peter and Richard North. They think they are so massively clever that if they can't have Brexit exactly the way they think it should be then it is bound to be a disaster. They are as arrogant as the fanatical Remainers on the other side.
So everyone's wrong but you ? Yep, arrogance.....
Not in the least.
I have already said many times that I will not get my preferred version of Brexit but that I absolutely accept that, still think it will be better than staying in and do not believe it will be a disaster. There is no arrogance there at all.
Those who are unwilling to bend to the will of the people, who think the people are 'wrong' or who do not think the people should be allowed to make such decisions are the ones who are arrogant.
You're the person who is wrong Richard. The opinion of the people is often 'wrong', eg death penalty, and that is why they shouldn't be asked to decide on complex matters because in these issues they will always answer in a knee jerk reaction without considering the consequences.
Don't you think that attitude is just a tiny bit dangerous?
Nah. He's just another one like Peter and Richard North. They think they are so massively clever that if they can't have Brexit exactly the way they think it should be then it is bound to be a disaster. They are as arrogant as the fanatical Remainers on the other side.
So everyone's wrong but you ? Yep, arrogance.....
Not in the least.
I have already said many times that I will not get my preferred version of Brexit but that I absolutely accept that, still think it will be better than staying in and do not believe it will be a disaster. There is no arrogance there at all.
Those who are unwilling to bend to the will of the people, who think the people are 'wrong' or who do not think the people should be allowed to make such decisions are the ones who are arrogant.
You're the person who is wrong Richard. The opinion of the people is often 'wrong', eg death penalty, and that is why they shouldn't be asked to decide on complex matters because in these issues they will always answer in a knee jerk reaction without considering the consequences.
Don't you think that attitude is just a tiny bit dangerous?
Nah. He's just another one like Peter and Richard North. They think they are so massively clever that if they can't have Brexit exactly the way they think it should be then it is bound to be a disaster. They are as arrogant as the fanatical Remainers on the other side.
So everyone's wrong but you ? Yep, arrogance.....
Not in the least.
I have already said many times that I will not get my preferred version of Brexit but that I absolutely accept that, still think it will be better than staying in and do not believe it will be a disaster. There is no arrogance there at all.
Those who are unwilling to bend to the will of the people, who think the people are 'wrong' or who do not think the people should be allowed to make such decisions are the ones who are arrogant.
You're the person who is wrong Richard. The opinion of the people is often 'wrong', eg death penalty, and that is why they shouldn't be asked to decide on complex matters because in these issues they will always answer in a knee jerk reaction without considering the consequences.
Who decides who is "wrong?"
Basically the working classes can be allowed a vote provided it is for things they support which a typical Islington dinner party or Guardian leader writer might support eg nationalising the railways or putting more money into the NHS or increasing corporation tax.
However where the working classes have an 'unenlightened' opinion like wanting to leave the EU and control immigration or supporting the death penalty then decisions are best left to their more educated liberal superiors
Nah. He's just another one like Peter and Richard North. They think they are so massively clever that if they can't have Brexit exactly the way they think it should be then it is bound to be a disaster. They are as arrogant as the fanatical Remainers on the other side.
So everyone's wrong but you ? Yep, arrogance.....
Not in the least.
I have already said many times that I will not get my preferred version of Brexit but that I absolutely accept that, still think it will be better than staying in and do not believe it will be a disaster. There is no arrogance there at all.
Those who are unwilling to bend to the will of the people, who think the people are 'wrong' or who do not think the people should be allowed to make such decisions are the ones who are arrogant.
You're the person who is wrong Richard. The opinion of the people is often 'wrong', eg death penalty, and that is why they shouldn't be asked to decide on complex matters because in these issues they will always answer in a knee jerk reaction without considering the consequences.
Don't you think that attitude is just a tiny bit dangerous?
Not if one believes that one is infallible.
How can I tell if I'm infallible? Is there an app for that?
Nah. He's just another one like Peter and Richard North. They think they are so massively clever that if they can't have Brexit exactly the way they think it should be then it is bound to be a disaster. They are as arrogant as the fanatical Remainers on the other side.
So everyone's wrong but you ? Yep, arrogance.....
Not in the least.
I have already said many times that I will not get my preferred version of Brexit but that I absolutely accept that, still think it will be better than staying in and do not believe it will be a disaster. There is no arrogance there at all.
Those who are unwilling to bend to the will of the people, who think the people are 'wrong' or who do not think the people should be allowed to make such decisions are the ones who are arrogant.
You're the person who is wrong Richard. The opinion of the people is often 'wrong', eg death penalty, and that is why they shouldn't be asked to decide on complex matters because in these issues they will always answer in a knee jerk reaction without considering the consequences.
Don't you think that attitude is just a tiny bit dangerous?
Not if one believes that one is infallible.
How can I tell if I'm infallible? Is there an app for that?
- Alexa, am I infallible? - No, you're in Los Angeles.
It looks like the people have changed their minds or at least are on their way to changing their minds. Shoudn't we therefore have another Referendum? Surely it can't be right to foist something on us that that we don't want and rather childish to say 'you should have tought about that sooner'.
I heard a mini vox pop from Vauxhall car workers where some bad tempered folk blamed Brexit. Yet more grist to the mill
If you gov could accurately predict EU referendum voting intentions remain would have won by 4 per cent as per their final poll released at 10pm on 23 June 2016 - and Brexit wouldn't be happening.
We can't really run things and change things on the basis of opinion polls - Mrs May made that mistake last summer.
Nah. He's just another one like Peter and Richard North. They think they are so massively clever that if they can't have Brexit exactly the way they think it should be then it is bound to be a disaster. They are as arrogant as the fanatical Remainers on the other side.
So everyone's wrong but you ? Yep, arrogance.....
Not in the least.
I have already said many times that I will not get my preferred version of Brexit but that I absolutely accept that, still think it will be better than staying in and do not believe it will be a disaster. There is no arrogance there at all.
Those who are unwilling to bend to the will of the people, who think the people are 'wrong' or who do not think the people should be allowed to make such decisions are the ones who are arrogant.
You're the person who is wrong Richard. The opinion of the people is often 'wrong', eg death penalty, and that is why they shouldn't be asked to decide on complex matters because in these issues they will always answer in a knee jerk reaction without considering the consequences.
Don't you think that attitude is just a tiny bit dangerous?
Not if one believes that one is infallible.
How can I tell if I'm infallible? Is there an app for that?
- Alexa, am I infallible? - No, you're in Los Angeles.
Maybe Ireland could get its dues off Apple, pay it to the UK as recompense for our support for their banking sector in 2009 and 2010 - and we could give that to the EU. Cos if no deal may be bad for the EU - it's even worse for the Republic.
Nah. He's just another one like Peter and Richard North. They think they are so massively clever that if they can't have Brexit exactly the way they think it should be then it is bound to be a disaster. They are as arrogant as the fanatical Remainers on the other side.
So everyone's wrong but you ? Yep, arrogance.....
Not in the least.
I have already said many times that I will not get my preferred version of Brexit but that I absolutely accept that, still think it will be better than staying in and do not believe it will be a disaster. There is no arrogance there at all.
Those who are unwilling to bend to the will of the people, who think the people are 'wrong' or who do not think the people should be allowed to make such decisions are the ones who are arrogant.
You're the person who is wrong Richard. The opinion of the people is often 'wrong', eg death penalty, and that is why they shouldn't be asked to decide on complex matters because in these issues they will always answer in a knee jerk reaction without considering the consequences.
Don't you think that attitude is just a tiny bit dangerous?
What we seem to be heading towards is a situation where no one can actually govern the country.
Nah. He's just another one like Peter and Richard North. They think they are so massively clever that if they can't have Brexit exactly the way they think it should be then it is bound to be a disaster. They are as arrogant as the fanatical Remainers on the other side.
So everyone's wrong but you ? Yep, arrogance.....
Not in the least.
I have already said many times that I will not get my preferred version of Brexit but that I absolutely accept that, still think it will be better than staying in and do not believe it will be a disaster. There is no arrogance there at all.
Those who are unwilling to bend to the will of the people, who think the people are 'wrong' or who do not think the people should be allowed to make such decisions are the ones who are arrogant.
You're the person who is wrong Richard. The opinion of the people is often 'wrong', eg death penalty, and that is why they shouldn't be asked to decide on complex matters because in these issues they will always answer in a knee jerk reaction without considering the consequences.
Don't you think that attitude is just a tiny bit dangerous?
Maybe Ireland could get its dues off Apple, pay it to the UK as recompense for our support for their banking sector in 2009 and 2010 - and we could give that to the EU. Cos if no deal may be bad for the EU - it's even worse for the Republic.
We didn't bail out the Irish because it was good for them, we did because if we hadn't every British bank would have ended up like Northern Rock. It was self interest in action.
Maybe Ireland could get its dues off Apple, pay it to the UK as recompense for our support for their banking sector in 2009 and 2010 - and we could give that to the EU. Cos if no deal may be bad for the EU - it's even worse for the Republic.
We didn't bail out the Irish because it was good for them, we did because if we hadn't every British bank would have ended up like Northern Rock. It was self interest in action.
And Ireland's already paid the UK over £350m in interest on the loan.
It looks like the people have changed their minds or at least are on their way to changing their minds. Shoudn't we therefore have another Referendum? Surely it can't be right to foist something on us that that we don't want and rather childish to say 'you should have tought about that sooner'.
I heard a mini vox pop from Vauxhall car workers where some bad tempered folk blamed Brexit. Yet more grist to the mill
Better that than blame your own work ethic, eh? They're all the same in South London.
Nah. He's just another one like Peter and Richard North. They think they are so massively clever that if they can't have Brexit exactly the way they think it should be then it is bound to be a disaster. They are as arrogant as the fanatical Remainers on the other side.
So everyone's wrong but you ? Yep, arrogance.....
Not in the least.
I have already said many times that I will not get my preferred version of Brexit but that I absolutely accept that, still think it will be better than staying in and do not believe it will be a disaster. There is no arrogance there at all.
Those who are unwilling to bend to the will of the people, who think the people are 'wrong' or who do not think the people should be allowed to make such decisions are the ones who are arrogant.
You're the person who is wrong Richard. The opinion of the people is often 'wrong', eg death penalty, and that is why they shouldn't be asked to decide on complex matters because in these issues they will always answer in a knee jerk reaction without considering the consequences.
Don't you think that attitude is just a tiny bit dangerous?
It looks like the people have changed their minds or at least are on their way to changing their minds. Shoudn't we therefore have another Referendum? Surely it can't be right to foist something on us that that we don't want and rather childish to say 'you should have tought about that sooner'.
I heard a mini vox pop from Vauxhall car workers where some bad tempered folk blamed Brexit. Yet more grist to the mill
Re Vauxhall, they were bought by PSA in August, Brexit could be an excuse for redundancies, but the new owners might find it easier to close a UK plant rather than one of their French or German operations. I don't know how productivity rates at Ellesmere Port compare with PSA's other operations, but that also has a bearing on any decision.
Given the closeness of the Referendum results, the politicians are in a glorious mess of Cameron's devising yet until last weekend there had been little divergence from the 52:48 split on the day. It is possible that sentiment has shifted but until other polls from other firms move I would suggest that the case is not proven.
It looks like the people have changed their minds or at least are on their way to changing their minds. Shoudn't we therefore have another Referendum? Surely it can't be right to foist something on us that that we don't want and rather childish to say 'you should have tought about that sooner'.
I heard a mini vox pop from Vauxhall car workers where some bad tempered folk blamed Brexit. Yet more grist to the mill
Better that than blame your own work ethic, eh? They're all the same in South London.
It looks like the people have changed their minds or at least are on their way to changing their minds. Shoudn't we therefore have another Referendum? Surely it can't be right to foist something on us that that we don't want and rather childish to say 'you should have tought about that sooner'.
I heard a mini vox pop from Vauxhall car workers where some bad tempered folk blamed Brexit. Yet more grist to the mill
Better that than blame your own work ethic, eh? They're all the same in South London.
OK then, let's take it all off the table - and see how that shakes things up.....
Has the money ever really been on the table? Isn't that what the Eurocrats are moaning about? However, I agree with the principle behind what you suggest - we should say clearly that we have no intention of discussing money until adequate progress has been made in discussing what we might get for anything that we deign to offer.
Nah. He's just another one like Peter and Richard North. They think they are so massively clever that if they can't have Brexit exactly the way they think it should be then it is bound to be a disaster. They are as arrogant as the fanatical Remainers on the other side.
So everyone's wrong but you ? Yep, arrogance.....
Not in the least.
I have already said many times that I will not get my preferred version of Brexit but that I absolutely accept that, still think it will be better than staying in and do not believe it will be a disaster. There is no arrogance there at all.
Those who are unwilling to bend to the will of the people, who think the people are 'wrong' or who do not think the people should be allowed to make such decisions are the ones who are arrogant.
You're the person who is wrong Richard. The opinion of the people is often 'wrong', eg death penalty, and that is why they shouldn't be asked to decide on complex matters because in these issues they will always answer in a knee jerk reaction without considering the consequences.
Don't you think that attitude is just a tiny bit dangerous?
It looks like the people have changed their minds or at least are on their way to changing their minds. Shoudn't we therefore have another Referendum? Surely it can't be right to foist something on us that that we don't want and rather childish to say 'you should have tought about that sooner'.
I heard a mini vox pop from Vauxhall car workers where some bad tempered folk blamed Brexit. Yet more grist to the mill
Better that than blame your own work ethic, eh? They're all the same in South London.
OK then, let's take it all off the table - and see how that shakes things up.....
Has the money ever really been on the table? Isn't that what the Eurocrats are moaning about? However, I agree with the principle behind what you suggest - we should say clearly that we have no intention of discussing money until adequate progress has been made in discussing what we might get for anything that we deign to offer.
It looks like the people have changed their minds or at least are on their way to changing their minds. Shoudn't we therefore have another Referendum? Surely it can't be right to foist something on us that that we don't want and rather childish to say 'you should have tought about that sooner'.
I heard a mini vox pop from Vauxhall car workers where some bad tempered folk blamed Brexit. Yet more grist to the mill
Better that than blame your own work ethic, eh? They're all the same in South London.
OK then, let's take it all off the table - and see how that shakes things up.....
Has the money ever really been on the table? Isn't that what the Eurocrats are moaning about? However, I agree with the principle behind what you suggest - we should say clearly that we have no intention of discussing money until adequate progress has been made in discussing what we might get for anything that we deign to offer.
OK then, let's take it all off the table - and see how that shakes things up.....
Has the money ever really been on the table? Isn't that what the Eurocrats are moaning about? However, I agree with the principle behind what you suggest - we should say clearly that we have no intention of discussing money until adequate progress has been made in discussing what we might get for anything that we deign to offer.
The problem is that the Eurocrats have always had the whole thing the wrong way round. If they want money from us they should say how much they want, not say we have to tell them how much we think we should pay.
Mind you if our lot had any sense they should have said £3.50 and made the EU come back with a counter offer. The EU doesn't seem to want to 'aggle.
OK then, let's take it all off the table - and see how that shakes things up.....
Has the money ever really been on the table? Isn't that what the Eurocrats are moaning about? However, I agree with the principle behind what you suggest - we should say clearly that we have no intention of discussing money until adequate progress has been made in discussing what we might get for anything that we deign to offer.
That way to the cliff >>>
We should know our way there. That's where all negotiating is done.
OK then, let's take it all off the table - and see how that shakes things up.....
Has the money ever really been on the table? Isn't that what the Eurocrats are moaning about? However, I agree with the principle behind what you suggest - we should say clearly that we have no intention of discussing money until adequate progress has been made in discussing what we might get for anything that we deign to offer.
It looks like the people have changed their minds or at least are on their way to changing their minds. Shoudn't we therefore have another Referendum? Surely it can't be right to foist something on us that that we don't want and rather childish to say 'you should have tought about that sooner'.
I heard a mini vox pop from Vauxhall car workers where some bad tempered folk blamed Brexit. Yet more grist to the mill
Better that than blame your own work ethic, eh? They're all the same in South London.
OK then, let's take it all off the table - and see how that shakes things up.....
Has the money ever really been on the table? Isn't that what the Eurocrats are moaning about? However, I agree with the principle behind what you suggest - we should say clearly that we have no intention of discussing money until adequate progress has been made in discussing what we might get for anything that we deign to offer.
The problem is that the Eurocrats have always had the whole thing the wrong way round. If they want money from us they should say how much they want, not say we have to tell them how much we think we should pay.
Mind you if our lot had any sense they should have said £3.50 and made the EU come back with a counter offer. The EU doesn't seem to want to 'aggle.
The truth is that we've both been shit.
They have been extraordinarily narrow in their focus, and seem determined to extract a large "settlement" from us.
We started with a terrible attitude, that got everybody's backs up.
If Mrs May had made her Florence speech on day one, and made the whole thing more "it's not you, it's me", we might be in a better place.
And if the Commission had been able to be a bit more far sighted about the fact that they lose from no deal too.
Ultimately, though, as I've always said, Brexit should be seen as a process, not as a single event.
It looks like the people have changed their minds or at least are on their way to changing their minds. Shoudn't we therefore have another Referendum? Surely it can't be right to foist something on us that that we don't want and rather childish to say 'you should have tought about that sooner'.
I heard a mini vox pop from Vauxhall car workers where some bad tempered folk blamed Brexit. Yet more grist to the mill
Re Vauxhall, they were bought by PSA in August, Brexit could be an excuse for redundancies, but the new owners might find it easier to close a UK plant rather than one of their French or German operations. I don't know how productivity rates at Ellesmere Port compare with PSA's other operations, but that also has a bearing on any decision.
Given the closeness of the Referendum results, the politicians are in a glorious mess of Cameron's devising yet until last weekend there had been little divergence from the 52:48 split on the day. It is possible that sentiment has shifted but until other polls from other firms move I would suggest that the case is not proven.
There was an article on the news about it yesterday. Apparently productivity at Ellesmere Port is atrocious compared to the French and German plants. The Vauxhall management said that the decision to cut jobs had nothing at all to do with Brexit but everything to do with trying to improve productivity before a decision is made on where to build the new Astra in January. They have been told by the PSA management that it is all down to improving productivity.
They also have a problem because the types of cars they are now making are plummeting in sales across Europe as they are being superseded by SUVs.
The Germans in particular are playing this hardball. Which suggests to me the money is less important to them than the principle. The Tories are definitely screwing this up, but it isn't easy. If money is the important thing, it's easier - you pay them.
OK then, let's take it all off the table - and see how that shakes things up.....
Has the money ever really been on the table? Isn't that what the Eurocrats are moaning about? However, I agree with the principle behind what you suggest - we should say clearly that we have no intention of discussing money until adequate progress has been made in discussing what we might get for anything that we deign to offer.
The problem is that the Eurocrats have always had the whole thing the wrong way round. If they want money from us they should say how much they want, not say we have to tell them how much we think we should pay.
Mind you if our lot had any sense they should have said £3.50 and made the EU come back with a counter offer. The EU doesn't seem to want to 'aggle.
It's a dance isn't it. How much do you want? Everything you owe us? Done. How much is that, show us your sums. You show us yours etc etc.
Personally I think £3.50 is way too much. What about all the money we've put in and now won't see the benefit of.
The EU is a busted flush and the medium/ long term returns from investing in a future relationship are illusory.
It looks like the people have changed their minds or at least are on their way to changing their minds. Shoudn't we therefore have another Referendum? Surely it can't be right to foist something on us that that we don't want and rather childish to say 'you should have tought about that sooner'.
I heard a mini vox pop from Vauxhall car workers where some bad tempered folk blamed Brexit. Yet more grist to the mill
Better that than blame your own work ethic, eh? They're all the same in South London.
It looks like the people have changed their minds or at least are on their way to changing their minds. Shoudn't we therefore have another Referendum? Surely it can't be right to foist something on us that that we don't want and rather childish to say 'you should have tought about that sooner'.
I heard a mini vox pop from Vauxhall car workers where some bad tempered folk blamed Brexit. Yet more grist to the mill
Better that than blame your own work ethic, eh? They're all the same in South London.
The Germans in particular are playing this hardball. Which suggests to me the money is less important to them than the principle. The Tories are definitely screwing this up, but it isn't easy. If money is the important thing, it's easier - you pay them.
The burden of the funding shortfall when we leave will substantially fall on Germany. I cannot bring myself to be polite about your suggested approach to a negotiation, so I'll say no more.
OK then, let's take it all off the table - and see how that shakes things up.....
Has the money ever really been on the table? Isn't that what the Eurocrats are moaning about? However, I agree with the principle behind what you suggest - we should say clearly that we have no intention of discussing money until adequate progress has been made in discussing what we might get for anything that we deign to offer.
OK then, let's take it all off the table - and see how that shakes things up.....
Has the money ever really been on the table? Isn't that what the Eurocrats are moaning about? However, I agree with the principle behind what you suggest - we should say clearly that we have no intention of discussing money until adequate progress has been made in discussing what we might get for anything that we deign to offer.
That way to the cliff >>>
EU: "Give us your money or else!"
or else what?
No deal
We might as well go now then, bye. (exit stage right)
"The business assets of the Grosvenor Estate are held in trusts to maintain continuity of ownership between generations and not to avoid inheritance tax.”
I like the way "continuity of ownership between generations" is how they legitimize their use of trusts, while "avoid(ing) inheritance tax" is a smear they don't want to be associated with.
Holding land hostage over generations ain't legitimate.
And a 6% tax on assets every 10 years is nothing relative to the expected growth in the value of those assets over 10 years, even after inflation.
The tories should go hard on this illegitimate old money. Standing for the few against the many is going to consign them to electoral oblivion.
If the boundary changes happen, which they won't (DUP lose 2 for a start), I will offer you 1000-1 odds on Jeremy getting another seat.
Meg Hillier could be forced out according to some commentators, to make way for JC.
God would be forced out were he a Labour member. "God" is interchangeable for any other being dead or alive, real or imaginary, straight or LBGT (or any similar classification), man or mouse; put simply, JC is a supersta, a rock sta, a gangsta, a fraudsta, whatever kind of sta you wan him to be. Lord love da man. He is my saviour, I worship him. I gotta lie down now.
I'm not at all sure that's their primary motivation. Perhaps more likely the fear that China buys Bombardier, and becomes real competition for the Airbus/Boeing duopoly a few years earlier than will otherwise be the case.
The Germans in particular are playing this hardball. Which suggests to me the money is less important to them than the principle. The Tories are definitely screwing this up, but it isn't easy. If money is the important thing, it's easier - you pay them.
The burden of the funding shortfall when we leave will substantially fall on Germany. I cannot bring myself to be polite about your suggested approach to a negotiation, so I'll say no more.
I think that if remainers think we should pay the EU Brexit Bill, then we should. We can introduce a Brexit Tax to pay for it. I am sure remainers would have no problem paying extra given the value of a deal to the UK economy and the disaster of no deal (so they say).
Given a 1p rise in income tax raises only about 4.5 billion a year and the EU apparently want 70 billion, then we need to raise income tax by 3p for every UK taxpayer for 5 years just to pay the EU what they want.
Can we get confirmation from all remainers that they are happy to pay this Brexit Tax themselves?
The Germans in particular are playing this hardball. Which suggests to me the money is less important to them than the principle. The Tories are definitely screwing this up, but it isn't easy. If money is the important thing, it's easier - you pay them.
The burden of the funding shortfall when we leave will substantially fall on Germany. I cannot bring myself to be polite about your suggested approach to a negotiation, so I'll say no more.
I think that if remainers think we should pay the EU Brexit Bill, then we should. We can introduce a Brexit Tax to pay for it. I am sure remainers would have no problem paying extra given the value of a deal to the UK economy and the disaster of no deal (so they say).
Given a 1p rise in income tax raises only about 4.5 billion a year and the EU apparently want 70 billion, then we need to raise income tax by 3p for every UK taxpayer for 5 years just to pay the EU what they want.
Can we get confirmation from all remainers that they are happy to pay this Brexit Tax themselves?
oooh, I like that.
"The brexit tax"
Obviously your post is complete bollocks ("can we get confirmation from all remainers" wtf?), but I can see the "brexit tax" becoming a term banded about a lot over the next couple of years.
Even an eventual super-soft brexit is likely to hammer tax receipts as the city shrivels and we have a few more quarters of business paralysis.
Pity the chancellor.
Increased borrowing and/or tax rises are inevitable.
The 'process' does not seem to be proceeding, even if it is 'accelerating'. How many games of high speed chicken end up with a collision... and how much should it concern us that our vehicle is less crash proof than that of the EU ?
The Germans in particular are playing this hardball. Which suggests to me the money is less important to them than the principle. The Tories are definitely screwing this up, but it isn't easy. If money is the important thing, it's easier - you pay them.
The burden of the funding shortfall when we leave will substantially fall on Germany. I cannot bring myself to be polite about your suggested approach to a negotiation, so I'll say no more.
I think that if remainers think we should pay the EU Brexit Bill, then we should. We can introduce a Brexit Tax to pay for it. I am sure remainers would have no problem paying extra given the value of a deal to the UK economy and the disaster of no deal (so they say).
Given a 1p rise in income tax raises only about 4.5 billion a year and the EU apparently want 70 billion, then we need to raise income tax by 3p for every UK taxpayer for 5 years just to pay the EU what they want.
Can we get confirmation from all remainers that they are happy to pay this Brexit Tax themselves?
oooh, I like that.
"The brexit tax"
Obviously your post is complete bollocks ("can we get confirmation from all remainers" wtf?), but I can see the "brexit tax" becoming a term banded about a lot over the next couple of years.
Even an eventual super-soft brexit is likely to hammer tax receipts as the city shrivels and we have a few more quarters of business paralysis.
Pity the chancellor.
Increased borrowing and/or tax rises are inevitable.
Well that is nice, but I am talking about funding the costs of the EU Brexit demand, not dealing with future tax requirements etc.
So are you prepared to pay it yourself? Or does your commitment to soft Brexit only work if someone else has to pay for it?
The Germans in particular are playing this hardball. Which suggests to me the money is less important to them than the principle. The Tories are definitely screwing this up, but it isn't easy. If money is the important thing, it's easier - you pay them.
The burden of the funding shortfall when we leave will substantially fall on Germany. I cannot bring myself to be polite about your suggested approach to a negotiation, so I'll say no more.
I think that if remainers think we should pay the EU Brexit Bill, then we should. We can introduce a Brexit Tax to pay for it. I am sure remainers would have no problem paying extra given the value of a deal to the UK economy and the disaster of no deal (so they say).
Given a 1p rise in income tax raises only about 4.5 billion a year and the EU apparently want 70 billion, then we need to raise income tax by 3p for every UK taxpayer for 5 years just to pay the EU what they want.
Can we get confirmation from all remainers that they are happy to pay this Brexit Tax themselves?
oooh, I like that.
"The brexit tax"
Obviously your post is complete bollocks ("can we get confirmation from all remainers" wtf?), but I can see the "brexit tax" becoming a term banded about a lot over the next couple of years.
Even an eventual super-soft brexit is likely to hammer tax receipts as the city shrivels and we have a few more quarters of business paralysis.
Pity the chancellor.
Increased borrowing and/or tax rises are inevitable.
Well that is nice, but I am talking about funding the costs of the EU Brexit demand, not dealing with future tax requirements etc.
So are you prepared to pay it yourself? Or does your commitment to soft Brexit only work if someone else has to pay for it?
Where to start?
I'll tell you what. What if I said yes?
What if all of the people who voted remain said yes?
The implication of your post is you'd be happy with a soft brexit so long as someone else pays. I'm calling bullsh*t.
In your posts, you appear to approach brexit as a culture war where getting those other people you don't like to pay money to someone else, bringing about a settlement you're fundamentally unhappy with is some kind of victory.
The Germans in particular are playing this hardball. Which suggests to me the money is less important to them than the principle. The Tories are definitely screwing this up, but it isn't easy. If money is the important thing, it's easier - you pay them.
The burden of the funding shortfall when we leave will substantially fall on Germany. I cannot bring myself to be polite about your suggested approach to a negotiation, so I'll say no more.
I think that if remainers think we should pay the EU Brexit Bill, then we should. We can introduce a Brexit Tax to pay for it. I am sure remainers would have no problem paying extra given the value of a deal to the UK economy and the disaster of no deal (so they say).
Given a 1p rise in income tax raises only about 4.5 billion a year and the EU apparently want 70 billion, then we need to raise income tax by 3p for every UK taxpayer for 5 years just to pay the EU what they want.
Can we get confirmation from all remainers that they are happy to pay this Brexit Tax themselves?
I can't speak for anyone but myself but I for one won't be happy to pay into the EU after we have lost the benefits of membership. If you have a plan to avoid it I am all ears. But this is clearly a situation caused by the leavers rather than the remainers.
What if all of the people who voted remain said yes?
The implication of your post is you'd be happy with a soft brexit so long as someone else pays. I'm calling bullsh*t.
In your posts, you appear to approach brexit as a culture war where getting those other people you don't like to pay money to someone else, bringing about a settlement you're fundamentally unhappy with is some kind of victory.
It's bullsh*t.
I am very happy with a hard Brexit and think we should refuse to pay the EU anything. I just want to ensure that all those people who criticise the Government for 'messing up the Brexit negotiations' are happy to pay up themselves to get a 'soft' Brexit, rather than assuming that this sum can just be added to the national debt and passed on to the next generation, which is an utterly dishonest way to proceed.
Of course, if there was a Brexit Tax everyone including leavers would pay. It would be a fundamentally honest way of resolving the debate on the costs of soft Brexit.
I think you know that if there was a second referendum, question 'Are you happy to agree to a tax increase of 3p for five years in return for a free trade agreement with the EU?' then we wouldn't have to worry much about the pollsters margin of error.
The Germans in particular are playing this hardball. Which suggests to me the money is less important to them than the principle. The Tories are definitely screwing this up, but it isn't easy. If money is the important thing, it's easier - you pay them.
The burden of the funding shortfall when we leave will substantially fall on Germany. I cannot bring myself to be polite about your suggested approach to a negotiation, so I'll say no more.
I think that if remainers think we should pay the EU Brexit Bill, then we should. We can introduce a Brexit Tax to pay for it. I am sure remainers would have no problem paying extra given the value of a deal to the UK economy and the disaster of no deal (so they say).
Given a 1p rise in income tax raises only about 4.5 billion a year and the EU apparently want 70 billion, then we need to raise income tax by 3p for every UK taxpayer for 5 years just to pay the EU what they want.
Can we get confirmation from all remainers that they are happy to pay this Brexit Tax themselves?
oooh, I like that.
"The brexit tax"
Obviously your post is complete bollocks ("can we get confirmation from all remainers" wtf?), but I can see the "brexit tax" becoming a term banded about a lot over the next couple of years.
Even an eventual super-soft brexit is likely to hammer tax receipts as the city shrivels and we have a few more quarters of business paralysis.
Pity the chancellor.
Increased borrowing and/or tax rises are inevitable.
Well that is nice, but I am talking about funding the costs of the EU Brexit demand, not dealing with future tax requirements etc.
Part 2.
Without access to the European market, the economy is screwed.
Living standards will fall. Taxes will rise. For leavers & remainers alike.
I just want to ensure that all those people who criticise the Government for 'messing up the Brexit negotiations' are happy to pay up themselves to get a 'soft' Brexit
Why?
If such an absurd request was even possible, what would you have achieved?
Its still dropping altitude so it looks like its Gatwick. Can't see it flying over central London that low.
Heathrow?
Landed back at Stansted. Got to feel for those poor buggers. Nearly 3 hours in the air and right back where they started.
That looked no fun - an hour and a half going round in circles looking at where they’re supposed to be going, one half hearted attempt at an approach then back to where they started! Massive storm right over the field at Dublin by all accounts, bit of a nightmare for everyone.
For Bremorse to really get going it needs a champion.
A leader who can successfully explain why he/she was wrong to back Brexit (perhaps they could blame Cameron for a shoddy renegotiation and say they overreacted to Remain lies).
For Bremorse to really get going it needs a champion.
A leader who can successfully explain why he/she was wrong to back Brexit (perhaps they could blame Cameron for a shoddy renegotiation and say they overreacted to Remain lies).
Over to you Boris...
I don't know how serious you are, but I have wondered if that is the strategy he is following.
15 year terms for new members of the HoL sounds like a great idea, but what about new hereditary peers? Forced seppuku after 15 years?
I think I am right in saying there are no living newly created hereditary peers (except the Royals for whom different rules apply anyway). The newest post for anyone else is I believe Earl of Stockton in 1984? Since the 1970s, life peerages have been preferred.
Most Governments suffer polling unpopularity in their midterms as they seek to implement the most difficult phases of their programme, but that doesn't mean they abandon their manifesto.
15 year terms for new members of the HoL sounds like a great idea, but what about new hereditary peers? Forced seppuku after 15 years?
I think I am right in saying there are no living newly created hereditary peers (except the Royals for whom different rules apply anyway). The newest post for anyone else is I believe Earl of Stockton in 1984? Since the 1970s, life peerages have been preferred.
I think you’re right. When a current hereditary peer passes on, there’s a by-election held, in which the current title-holders of the old hereditary peerages from the same party as the deceased peer may stand and may vote. The elected peer then takes their seat in the Lords for life. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/By-elections_to_the_House_of_Lords
For Bremorse to really get going it needs a champion.
A leader who can successfully explain why he/she was wrong to back Brexit (perhaps they could blame Cameron for a shoddy renegotiation and say they overreacted to Remain lies).
For Bremorse to really get going it needs a champion.
A leader who can successfully explain why he/she was wrong to back Brexit (perhaps they could blame Cameron for a shoddy renegotiation and say they overreacted to Remain lies).
Over to you Boris...
The big problem for that is the previous "status quo" is off the table.
Not only Dave's deal, but if Verhofstadht is to be believed the British opt-outs too.
Polling should test whether the UK public would prefer to persist with Brexit or go "all in" to the EU with the euro and schengen as well.
For Bremorse to really get going it needs a champion.
A leader who can successfully explain why he/she was wrong to back Brexit (perhaps they could blame Cameron for a shoddy renegotiation and say they overreacted to Remain lies).
Over to you Boris...
I don't know how serious you are, but I have wondered if that is the strategy he is following.
I'm a little bit serious.
I could imagine Boris doing this if he thought it was the only way to the top... or at the very least setting out a much softer Brexit strategy than TM is currently following.
I'm imagining a Telegraph article like:
"My friends, the great British public have a wonderful trait.
When they feel they are being bullied or pushed around, they grit their teeth, dig their heels in harder, fight ever more ferociously, and frankly tend to triumph.
But this instinct, has I suspect, led us astray. I remember when David Cameron announced Brexit meant WWIII, or George Osborne declared a punishment budget....and [bullshit anecdote about working class person saying up yours to elite politicians]
But we now see that even though the Remain campaign misled us in many ways, they were on to something when they talked about economic damage.
We have stood up to Europe. We have shown them our spine. we can now negotiate from a position of strength. As [classical historical reference] did...
Europe know we will leave, and indeed we should leave if they will not talk. But I think we can now have the proper renegotiation we should have had two years ago....
For Bremorse to really get going it needs a champion.
A leader who can successfully explain why he/she was wrong to back Brexit (perhaps they could blame Cameron for a shoddy renegotiation and say they overreacted to Remain lies).
For Bremorse to really get going it needs a champion.
A leader who can successfully explain why he/she was wrong to back Brexit (perhaps they could blame Cameron for a shoddy renegotiation and say they overreacted to Remain lies).
Over to you Boris...
The big problem for that is the previous "status quo" is off the table.
Not only Dave's deal, but if Verhofstadht is to be believed the British opt-outs too.
Polling should test whether the UK public would prefer to persist with Brexit or go "all in" to the EU with the euro and schengen as well.
I don't think the status quo is off the table just yet. You might be right though.
For Bremorse to really get going it needs a champion.
A leader who can successfully explain why he/she was wrong to back Brexit (perhaps they could blame Cameron for a shoddy renegotiation and say they overreacted to Remain lies).
Over to you Boris...
I don't know how serious you are, but I have wondered if that is the strategy he is following.
I'm a little bit serious.
I could imagine Boris doing this if he thought it was the only way to the top... or at the very least setting out a much softer Brexit strategy than TM is currently following.
I'm imagining a Telegraph article like:
"My friends, the great British public have a wonderful trait.
When they feel they are being bullied or pushed around, they grit their teeth, dig their heels in harder, fight ever more ferociously, and frankly tend to triumph.
But this instinct, has I suspect, led us astray. I remember when David Cameron announced Brexit meant WWIII, or George Osborne declared a punishment budget....and [bullshit anecdote about working class person saying up yours to elite politicians]
But we now see that even though the Remain campaign misled us in many ways, they were on to something when they talked about economic damage.
We have stood up to Europe. We have shown them our spine. we can now negotiate from a position of strength. As [classical historical reference] did...
Europe know we will leave, and indeed we should leave if they will not talk. But I think we can now have the proper renegotiation we should have had two years ago....
Etc.
You're good. (Assuming you aren't actually Boris flying a kite on here.)
For Bremorse to really get going it needs a champion.
A leader who can successfully explain why he/she was wrong to back Brexit (perhaps they could blame Cameron for a shoddy renegotiation and say they overreacted to Remain lies).
For Bremorse to really get going it needs a champion.
A leader who can successfully explain why he/she was wrong to back Brexit (perhaps they could blame Cameron for a shoddy renegotiation and say they overreacted to Remain lies).
Over to you Boris...
The big problem for that is the previous "status quo" is off the table.
Not only Dave's deal, but if Verhofstadht is to be believed the British opt-outs too.
Polling should test whether the UK public would prefer to persist with Brexit or go "all in" to the EU with the euro and schengen as well.
I don't think the status quo is off the table just yet. You might be right though.
For Bremorse to really get going it needs a champion.
A leader who can successfully explain why he/she was wrong to back Brexit (perhaps they could blame Cameron for a shoddy renegotiation and say they overreacted to Remain lies).
Over to you Boris...
I don't know how serious you are, but I have wondered if that is the strategy he is following.
I'm a little bit serious.
I could imagine Boris doing this if he thought it was the only way to the top... or at the very least setting out a much softer Brexit strategy than TM is currently following.
I'm imagining a Telegraph article like:
"My friends, the great British public have a wonderful trait.
When they feel they are being bullied or pushed around, they grit their teeth, dig their heels in harder, fight ever more ferociously, and frankly tend to triumph.
But this instinct, has I suspect, led us astray. I remember when David Cameron announced Brexit meant WWIII, or George Osborne declared a punishment budget....and [bullshit anecdote about working class person saying up yours to elite politicians]
But we now see that even though the Remain campaign misled us in many ways, they were on to something when they talked about economic damage.
We have stood up to Europe. We have shown them our spine. we can now negotiate from a position of strength. As [classical historical reference] did...
Europe know we will leave, and indeed we should leave if they will not talk. But I think we can now have the proper renegotiation we should have had two years ago....
Etc.
You're good. (Assuming you aren't actually Boris flying a kite on here.)
It's good but is still saying to the GBP: you got it wrong. Step forward JRM at that point.
For Bremorse to really get going it needs a champion.
A leader who can successfully explain why he/she was wrong to back Brexit (perhaps they could blame Cameron for a shoddy renegotiation and say they overreacted to Remain lies).
For Bremorse to really get going it needs a champion.
A leader who can successfully explain why he/she was wrong to back Brexit (perhaps they could blame Cameron for a shoddy renegotiation and say they overreacted to Remain lies).
Over to you Boris...
The big problem for that is the previous "status quo" is off the table.
Not only Dave's deal, but if Verhofstadht is to be believed the British opt-outs too.
Polling should test whether the UK public would prefer to persist with Brexit or go "all in" to the EU with the euro and schengen as well.
I don't think the status quo is off the table just yet. You might be right though.
But the status quo is a crap position that is untenable medium to long term.
It coalesces around perpetually having a contrary view and existing outside the central power block of the EU.
For Bremorse to really get going it needs a champion.
A leader who can successfully explain why he/she was wrong to back Brexit (perhaps they could blame Cameron for a shoddy renegotiation and say they overreacted to Remain lies).
Over to you Boris...
I don't know how serious you are, but I have wondered if that is the strategy he is following.
I'm a little bit serious.
I could imagine Boris doing this if he thought it was the only way to the top... or at the very least setting out a much softer Brexit strategy than TM is currently following.
I'm imagining a Telegraph article like:
"My friends, the great British public have a wonderful trait.
When they feel they are being bullied or pushed around, they grit their teeth, dig their heels in harder, fight ever more ferociously, and frankly tend to triumph.
But this instinct, has I suspect, led us astray. I remember when David Cameron announced Brexit meant WWIII, or George Osborne declared a punishment budget....and [bullshit anecdote about working class person saying up yours to elite politicians]
But we now see that even though the Remain campaign misled us in many ways, they were on to something when they talked about economic damage.
We have stood up to Europe. We have shown them our spine. we can now negotiate from a position of strength. As [classical historical reference] did...
Europe know we will leave, and indeed we should leave if they will not talk. But I think we can now have the proper renegotiation we should have had two years ago....
Etc.
That's a very plausible looking article. Thing is of course that nobody seriously believes BoJo is a Brexit enthusiast. Like most populists, he looks for whatever hot button issue he thinks will advance his career at the moment whether he believes in it or not (or even understands it or not). Trump had his wall, Corbyn tuition fees, Boris Brexit.
The only thought that occurs to me is that such a reverse ferret would royally piss off all leavers and not convert Remainers to thinking of him as a nice cuddly person - they will still surely hate his guts for causing the upheaval in the first place. Whether he would realise that I don't know.
15 year terms for new members of the HoL sounds like a great idea, but what about new hereditary peers? Forced seppuku after 15 years?
I think I am right in saying there are no living newly created hereditary peers (except the Royals for whom different rules apply anyway). The newest post for anyone else is I believe Earl of Stockton in 1984? Since the 1970s, life peerages have been preferred.
Yes, but under the “transitional” arrangements agreed in 1999 that are still in place (a warning to Brexiteers) 92 heriditaries are still in the HoL. When one of them dies a new hereditary is elected to the house by the other peers and stays for life. That arrangement will presumably need to be modified.
Mr. Doethur, I agree. Mr. rkrkrk's suggestion is plausible, but would it not have a sudden impact on Boris' political life expectancy?
Well quite. There may be some appetite for it among 10% of the political elite, but if anyone thinks they can just call off Brexit without seriously upsetting the 17,000,000 people who voted for it, then they’re in for a shock as Nigel Farage becomes prime minister!
The more difficult actually Leaving is shown to become, the more it reinforces that we made the right choice to leave now before it becomes even worse.
For Bremorse to really get going it needs a champion.
A leader who can successfully explain why he/she was wrong to back Brexit (perhaps they could blame Cameron for a shoddy renegotiation and say they overreacted to Remain lies).
Over to you Boris...
I don't know how serious you are, but I have wondered if that is the strategy he is following.
I'm a little bit serious.
I could imagine Boris doing this if he thought it was the only way to the top... or at the very least setting out a much softer Brexit strategy than TM is currently following.
I'm imagining a Telegraph article like:
"My friends, the great British public have a wonderful trait.
When they feel they are being bullied or pushed around, they grit their teeth, dig their heels in harder, fight ever more ferociously, and frankly tend to triumph.
But this instinct, has I suspect, led us astray. I remember when David Cameron announced Brexit meant WWIII, or George Osborne declared a punishment budget....and [bullshit anecdote about working class person saying up yours to elite politicians]
But we now see that even though the Remain campaign misled us in many ways, they were on to something when they talked about economic damage.
We have stood up to Europe. We have shown them our spine. we can now negotiate from a position of strength. As [classical historical reference] did...
Europe know we will leave, and indeed we should leave if they will not talk. But I think we can now have the proper renegotiation we should have had two years ago....
Etc.
"I remember when David Cameron announced Brexit meant WWIII"
You must have a very odd memory, as he did no such thing.
For Bremorse to really get going it needs a champion.
A leader who can successfully explain why he/she was wrong to back Brexit (perhaps they could blame Cameron for a shoddy renegotiation and say they overreacted to Remain lies).
For Bremorse to really get going it needs a champion.
A leader who can successfully explain why he/she was wrong to back Brexit (perhaps they could blame Cameron for a shoddy renegotiation and say they overreacted to Remain lies).
Over to you Boris...
The big problem for that is the previous "status quo" is off the table.
Not only Dave's deal, but if Verhofstadht is to be believed the British opt-outs too.
Polling should test whether the UK public would prefer to persist with Brexit or go "all in" to the EU with the euro and schengen as well.
I don't think the status quo is off the table just yet. You might be right though.
There can be no return to the status quo. We would have no voice in the EU if we were to return. Even making the most basic points of clarification would be met with "Here they go again...just STFU won't you?"
At home, many would look on the entire current generation of politicians with utter contempt, rightly scorned in turns for getting us tied into the EU so tightly we were never intended to leave and not having the intellectual wherewithall to extract us. A very significant minority would be prepared to listen to a new breed of politicians who would promise them they would not be so lily-livered. To them, every slight suffered - personally and as a nation - would still be the fault of the EU.
The more difficult actually Leaving is shown to become, the more it reinforces that we made the right choice to leave now before it becomes even worse.
You mean the more beneficial being a member is shown to become
Comments
If working class Leave voters do not get the immigration controls they were promised because of Brexit they will either vote for Corbyn to bash the rich and the corporations or they will vote for UKIP again to find a party who will end free movement
https://twitter.com/dpjhodges/status/920044719324921857
However where the working classes have an 'unenlightened' opinion like wanting to leave the EU and control immigration or supporting the death penalty then decisions are best left to their more educated liberal superiors
- No, you're in Los Angeles.
I heard a mini vox pop from Vauxhall car workers where some bad tempered folk blamed Brexit. Yet more grist to the mill
We can't really run things and change things on the basis of opinion polls - Mrs May made that mistake last summer.
https://uk.flightaware.com/live/flight/RYR119
Edit: looks like it's going to have a go at landing now though
Former Sky Sports presenter Kevin Cadle, the face of NFL coverage in the UK, dies aged 62
Sky's coverage of the NFL has never been as good since they gave him the heave-ho.
I find that extremely dangerous.
I expect the passengers will be charged for the return trip.
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/ireland-pays-more-than-400m-in-interest-on-uk-bailout-loan-1.3053791
Given the closeness of the Referendum results, the politicians are in a glorious mess of Cameron's devising yet until last weekend there had been little divergence from the 52:48 split on the day. It is possible that sentiment has shifted but until other polls from other firms move I would suggest that the case is not proven.
Mind you if our lot had any sense they should have said £3.50 and made the EU come back with a counter offer. The EU doesn't seem to want to 'aggle.
They have been extraordinarily narrow in their focus, and seem determined to extract a large "settlement" from us.
We started with a terrible attitude, that got everybody's backs up.
If Mrs May had made her Florence speech on day one, and made the whole thing more "it's not you, it's me", we might be in a better place.
And if the Commission had been able to be a bit more far sighted about the fact that they lose from no deal too.
Ultimately, though, as I've always said, Brexit should be seen as a process, not as a single event.
They also have a problem because the types of cars they are now making are plummeting in sales across Europe as they are being superseded by SUVs.
Member of establishment / elite uses data set to claim oiks are wrong in magazine that has a definite agenda.
I'm inclined to think that, if asked again in an actual polling booth, most people would tick the "oi mate, didn't you hear me the first time?" box.
Personally I think £3.50 is way too much. What about all the money we've put in and now won't see the benefit of.
The EU is a busted flush and the medium/ long term returns from investing in a future relationship are illusory.
https://twitter.com/marcmallett_utv/status/920056189223874561
https://www.bce2018.org.uk/
Interesting.
Which makes one feel that Roger has jumped the gun somewhat.
Barking & Beckton
Battersea & Clapham
Bexley & Sidcup
Brixton & Vauxhall
Camden & St Pancras
Chingford & Woodford
Croydon South East
Croydon South West
Dulwich & Sydenham
Ealing & Acton
Eltham & Welling
Enfield
Erith & Crayford
Feltham & Hounslow
Finchley & Enfield Southgate
Finsbury Park & Stoke Newington
Greenford & Sudbury
Greenwich & Deptford
Hackney Central
Hammersmith & Fulham
Hampstead
Harrow North
Harrow South & Kenton
Hillingdon & Uxbridge
Ilford North & Wanstead
Isleworth, Brentford & Chiswick
Islington
Kensington & Chelsea
Kilburn
Lewisham & Catford
Leyton & Stratford
Mitcham & Norbury
Norwood & Thornton Heath
Poplar & Canning Town
Shoreditch & Bethnal Green
Southall & Heston
Stepney & Bow
Streatham & Brixton South
Wandsworth & Putney
Wembley
Willesden & Shepherd's Bush
Woolwich
Another set of reasons why Brexit will not happen.
"The business assets of the Grosvenor Estate are held in trusts to maintain continuity of ownership between generations and not to avoid inheritance tax.”
I like the way "continuity of ownership between generations" is how they legitimize their use of trusts, while "avoid(ing) inheritance tax" is a smear they don't want to be associated with.
Holding land hostage over generations ain't legitimate.
And a 6% tax on assets every 10 years is nothing relative to the expected growth in the value of those assets over 10 years, even after inflation.
The tories should go hard on this illegitimate old money. Standing for the few against the many is going to consign them to electoral oblivion.
Perhaps more likely the fear that China buys Bombardier, and becomes real competition for the Airbus/Boeing duopoly a few years earlier than will otherwise be the case.
But the politics of it are indeed interesting.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41642052
Given a 1p rise in income tax raises only about 4.5 billion a year and the EU apparently want 70 billion, then we need to raise income tax by 3p for every UK taxpayer for 5 years just to pay the EU what they want.
Can we get confirmation from all remainers that they are happy to pay this Brexit Tax themselves?
"The brexit tax"
Obviously your post is complete bollocks ("can we get confirmation from all remainers" wtf?), but I can see the "brexit tax" becoming a term banded about a lot over the next couple of years.
Even an eventual super-soft brexit is likely to hammer tax receipts as the city shrivels and we have a few more quarters of business paralysis.
Pity the chancellor.
Increased borrowing and/or tax rises are inevitable.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/16/brussels-trip-by-pm-fails-to-unblock-stalemate-as-both-sides-harden-stance
The 'process' does not seem to be proceeding, even if it is 'accelerating'.
How many games of high speed chicken end up with a collision... and how much should it concern us that our vehicle is less crash proof than that of the EU ?
So are you prepared to pay it yourself? Or does your commitment to soft Brexit only work if someone else has to pay for it?
I'll tell you what. What if I said yes?
What if all of the people who voted remain said yes?
The implication of your post is you'd be happy with a soft brexit so long as someone else pays. I'm calling bullsh*t.
In your posts, you appear to approach brexit as a culture war where getting those other people you don't like to pay money to someone else, bringing about a settlement you're fundamentally unhappy with is some kind of victory.
It's bullsh*t.
Of course, if there was a Brexit Tax everyone including leavers would pay. It would be a fundamentally honest way of resolving the debate on the costs of soft Brexit.
I think you know that if there was a second referendum, question 'Are you happy to agree to a tax increase of 3p for five years in return for a free trade agreement with the EU?' then we wouldn't have to worry much about the pollsters margin of error.
Without access to the European market, the economy is screwed.
Living standards will fall. Taxes will rise. For leavers & remainers alike.
Surely you understand that?
If such an absurd request was even possible, what would you have achieved?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/news/tour-operators-cover-monarch-repatriation-bill/
A leader who can successfully explain why he/she was wrong to back Brexit (perhaps they could blame Cameron for a shoddy renegotiation and say they overreacted to Remain lies).
Over to you Boris...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/By-elections_to_the_House_of_Lords
Not only Dave's deal, but if Verhofstadht is to be believed the British opt-outs too.
Polling should test whether the UK public would prefer to persist with Brexit or go "all in" to the EU with the euro and schengen as well.
I could imagine Boris doing this if he thought it was the only way to the top... or at the very least setting out a much softer Brexit strategy than TM is currently following.
I'm imagining a Telegraph article like:
"My friends, the great British public have a wonderful trait.
When they feel they are being bullied or pushed around, they grit their teeth, dig their heels in harder, fight ever more ferociously, and frankly tend to triumph.
But this instinct, has I suspect, led us astray.
I remember when David Cameron announced Brexit meant WWIII, or George Osborne declared a punishment budget....and [bullshit anecdote about working class person saying up yours to elite politicians]
But we now see that even though the Remain campaign misled us in many ways, they were on to something when they talked about economic damage.
We have stood up to Europe. We have shown them our spine. we can now negotiate from a position of strength. As [classical historical reference] did...
Europe know we will leave, and indeed we should leave if they will not talk.
But I think we can now have the proper renegotiation we should have had two years ago....
Etc.
TMerkel still struggling to find coallition partners
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/christian-linder-fdp-vorsitzender-kritisiert-grosse-koalition-15249425.html
we cant go back to May 2016
It coalesces around perpetually having a contrary view and existing outside the central power block of the EU.
The only thought that occurs to me is that such a reverse ferret would royally piss off all leavers and not convert Remainers to thinking of him as a nice cuddly person - they will still surely hate his guts for causing the upheaval in the first place. Whether he would realise that I don't know.
Mr. Doethur, I agree. Mr. rkrkrk's suggestion is plausible, but would it not have a sudden impact on Boris' political life expectancy?
I'm off to work. Have a good morning.
The more difficult actually Leaving is shown to become, the more it reinforces that we made the right choice to leave now before it becomes even worse.
You must have a very odd memory, as he did no such thing.
At home, many would look on the entire current generation of politicians with utter contempt, rightly scorned in turns for getting us tied into the EU so tightly we were never intended to leave and not having the intellectual wherewithall to extract us. A very significant minority would be prepared to listen to a new breed of politicians who would promise them they would not be so lily-livered. To them, every slight suffered - personally and as a nation - would still be the fault of the EU.
"As you were" just isn't an option.