It gets the EU deciding what sort of Brexit they want. Ball in your court, Mr Barnier, is the expression, I think?
And your counter-proposal is what, exactly?
How about also sending copies of the two speeches to the PM of every EU country.
I suspect they would all prefer the second speech.
Given that Leavers have at every point miscalled how member states would react to Britain's negotiating strategy, I'd have thought a touch of humility about such predictions was called for.
But that hasn't been Britain's negotiating strategy has it.
I would certainly have predicted that what we've seen so far would not have been a great success.
Because what we've seen so far is reminscent of all the other negotiating failures of the past thirty years.
I find it easy making predictions in retrospect easy too.
Your negotiating strategy would, I predict, be a crashing failure because you are treating it as transactional when by necessity, because Britain and the EU are going to be neighbours, it needs to be relational. Putting a gun to your neighbours' heads and seeking to set them against each other rarely helps defuse tensions.
My - high risk - negotiating strategy would be to state that Britain believes that it has provided all the clarity that it considers necessary at this stage on settling accounts and to provide detailed and workable papers on citizenship rights and the Irish border. Britain should also note that if the EU does not move on to the next stage in December then time will in practice have run out, to the benefit of no one.
I doubt the EU would refuse to move onto the next stage on money alone. Being seen to be the instigator of car crash Brexit over a few billion at a time when Britain was conspicuously working in good faith would look awful.
The EU does not want to look like the bad guy to itself. And in truth, the money isn't that important to them.
That said, I'm not sure there's a solution to the Irish border that can get through Parliament.
For the last year the UK government should have been absolutely focused on influencing public opinion in the EU27, not on securing positive headlines from the right wing UK press. The only leverage we have is our ability put EU27 leaders under pressure domestically. We have failed to understand that totally.
It gets the EU deciding what sort of Brexit they want. Ball in your court, Mr Barnier, is the expression, I think?
And your counter-proposal is what, exactly?
How about also sending copies of the two speeches to the PM of every EU country.
I suspect they would all prefer the second speech.
Given that Leavers have at every point miscalled how member states would react to Britain's negotiating strategy, I'd have thought a touch of humility about such predictions was called for.
But that hasn't been Britain's negotiating strategy has it.
I would certainly have predicted that what we've seen so far would not have been a great success.
Because what we've seen so far is reminscent of all the other negotiating failures of the past thirty years.
I find it easy making predictions in retrospect easy too.
Your negotiating strategy would, I predict, be a crashing failure because you are treating it as transactional when by necessity, because Britain and the EU are going to be neighbours, it needs to be relational. Putting a gun to your neighbours' heads and seeking to set them against each other rarely helps defuse tensions.
My - high risk - negotiating strategy would be to state that Britain believes that it has provided all the clarity that it considers necessary at this stage on settling accounts and to provide detailed and workable papers on citizenship rights and the Irish border. Britain should also note that if the EU does not move on to the next stage in December then time will in practice have run out, to the benefit of no one.
I doubt the EU would refuse to move onto the next stage on money alone. Being seen to be the instigator of car crash Brexit over a few billion at a time when Britain was conspicuously working in good faith would look awful.
The EU does not want to look like the bad guy to itself. And in truth, the money isn't that important to them.
That said, I'm not sure there's a solution to the Irish border that can get through Parliament.
I think we can both agree that the UK needs to change strategy.
My suggestion about the governments of the EU countries is that I think they have different aims to that of the EU.
I would say that some in the EU would be quite happy to damage the individual EU countries if that was the cost of damaging the UK. The leaders of those EU countries being less likely to have that view.
Sir James Dyson on Marr says the government should walk away from negotiations with the EU and not pay an exit bill and let the EU come to the UK for any trade bill. He also called for an end to corporation tax
Walk away Brexit should be on the table, after the EU have banked May's Florence speech - and are still holding out their hands for more.
As a minimum from March 2019."
In arrangements."
OK, Mr Barnier, you have 24 hours to tell me which press release I make..."
Brilliant. That gets you great headlines in the UK where it does not matter one little bit, while reinforcing all negative impressions about the UK in the EU27 created over the last year, where it does matter. You will also not be walking away to the status quo, but to a significantly worse position.
It gets the EU deciding what sort of Brexit they want. Ball in your court, Mr Barnier, is the expression, I think?
And your counter-proposal is what, exactly?
Pay the comparatively small amount needed to kick-start serious FTA negotiations and move on. We voted for a weak bargaining position. We need to accept that and get on with it.
They've offered it an EU is demanding a border in the middle of the UK.
Money is easy. A foreign power interfering in our internal affairs is not.
We are an EU member state. It is not a foreign power. It has made a proposal that we are perfectly at liberty to reject. But we agreed to the scheduling the EU27 set out, so it is not unreasonable for the EU27 to follow it.
The point is it has set a number of conditions it knows are unacceptable. It is offering a choice between satrapy and hostility
I am saddened because we have much in common with our European friends and we could have reached a sensible agreement. But they have chosen s different path
The EU's Irish border position is the one that the Leave campaign advocated during the referendum campaign: Brexit would change nothing. The EU is now asking the UK government to come up with a way for that to be delivered and has made its own suggestion. Likewise, the Leave campaign said that EU citizens' rights in the UK would be unaffected by Brexit. The EU27 want that too and have suggested how that might happen. I cannot see what is unreasonable about taking Leave promises at face value.
He did answer it. And he did so in the only way he sensibly could. It is not for the Government to know what every one of its citizens is doing when they are abroad and if they claimed they did then the answer would be viewed with scorn by the Iranians.
If Gove had given any othervanswer then Marr's next question would gave been 'how do you know?'
Nope. Government has position. Ministers should follow it. Politics 101.
Unless Johnson accidentally spoke the truth...
In which case he subsequently lied to the Commons.
Not impossible. Sometimes what is wrong is the right thing to do
Which means he did the wrong thing previously and should apologise.
I've been too busy to follow precisely what he did or did not say. But the impression I had is that he said two different things to the Commons. Logically only one of those can be correct...
He did answer it. And he did so in the only way he sensibly could. It is not for the Government to know what every one of its citizens is doing when they are abroad and if they claimed they did then the answer would be viewed with scorn by the Iranians.
If Gove had given any othervanswer then Marr's next question would gave been 'how do you know?'
Sir James Dyson on Marr says the government should walk away from negotiations with the EU and not pay an exit bill and let the EU come to the UK for any trade bill. He also called for an end to corporation tax
Walk away Brexit should be on the table, after the EU have banked May's Florence speech - and are still holding out their hands for more.
As a minimum from March 2019."
In arrangements."
OK, Mr Barnier, you have 24 hours to tell me which press release I make..."
Snip
snip
Snip
They've offered it an EU is demanding a border in the middle of the UK.
Money is easy. A foreign power interfering in our internal affairs is not.
We are an EU member state. It is not a foreign power. It has made a proposal that we are perfectly at liberty to reject. But we agreed to the scheduling the EU27 set out, so it is not unreasonable for the EU27 to follow it.
The point is it has set a number of conditions it knows are unacceptable. It is offering a choice between satrapy and hostility
I am saddened because we have much in common with our European friends and we could have reached a sensible agreement. But they have chosen s different path
The EU's Irish border position is the one that the Leave campaign advocated during the referendum campaign: Brexit would change nothing. The EU is now asking the UK government to come up with a way for that to be delivered and has made its own suggestion. Likewise, the Leave campaign said that EU citizens' rights in the UK would be unaffected by Brexit. The EU27 want that too and have suggested how that might happen. I cannot see what is unreasonable about taking Leave promises at face value.
The UK has proposed an electronically monitored border. The EU has proposed dividing Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Both are workable. One is interfering in the internal affairs of a neighbour.
The UK proposed a new class of Settled status for EU citizens preserving their rights for as long as they live here overseen by our internationally regarded legal system. The EU insisted on their courts having authority over the British courts
In both cases the EU is seeking supremacy not friendship
Pay the comparatively small amount needed to kick-start serious FTA negotiations and move on. We voted for a weak bargaining position. We need to accept that and get on with it.
And the mechanism for deciding that "compartively small amount"? There isn't one - which my proposal overcomes. Under yours, when Barnier comes back and says "That "compartively small amount" will be £100 billion, please...."? - you'd pay? Leaving £45 - £65 billion on the table....great negotiating that!
You go nuclear should the EU raise the amount it is after. That's how you begin to affect public opinion in the EU27, where it actually matters.
But the EU is continually raising the amount it is after. My suggestion gives the fork in the road - without going nuclear. The EU decides: does it want a realistic payment - or no payment at all.
We can't make that decision for them. Nor should we.
He did answer it. And he did so in the only way he sensibly could. It is not for the Government to know what every one of its citizens is doing when they are abroad and if they claimed they did then the answer would be viewed with scorn by the Iranians.
If Gove had given any othervanswer then Marr's next question would gave been 'how do you know?'
Gove would be an even worse PM than terrible Theresa. At least she's not trying to pretend that he's in his job due to any merit/talent.
In light of his previous announcements on the leadership, we must take it that Gove means Boris is "doing a better job as FS than he would have being PM....".
Sir James Dyson on Marr says the government should walk away from negotiations with the EU and not pay an exit bill and let the EU come to the UK for any trade bill. He also called for an end to corporation tax
Walk away Brexit should be on the table, after the EU have banked May's Florence speech - and are still holding out their hands for more.
As a minimum from March 2019."
In arrangements."
OK, Mr Barnier, you have 24 hours to tell me which press release I make..."
Snip
snip
Snip
They've offered it an EU is demanding a border in the middle of the UK.
Money is easy. A foreign power interfering in our internal affairs is not.
We are an EU member state. It is not a foreign power. It has made a proposal that we are perfectly at liberty to reject. But we agreed to the scheduling the EU27 set out, so it is not unreasonable for the EU27 to follow it.
The point is it has set a number of conditions it knows are unacceptable. It is offering a choice between satrapy and hostility
I am saddened because we have much in common with our European friends and we could have reached a sensible agreement. But they have chosen s different path
The value.
The UK has proposed an electronically monitored border. The EU has proposed dividing Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Both are workable. One is interfering in the internal affairs of a neighbour.
The UK proposed a new class of Settled status for EU citizens preserving their rights for as long as they live here overseen by our internationally regarded legal system. The EU insisted on their courts having authority over the British courts
In both cases the EU is seeking supremacy not friendship
The UK has not suggested how the electronically monitored border would work and the UK has proposed changing EU citizens' current rights. The No Change principle underpinning the EU27's positions on both are precisely the ones advocated by the Leave side during the referendum campaign.
He did answer it. And he did so in the only way he sensibly could. It is not for the Government to know what every one of its citizens is doing when they are abroad and if they claimed they did then the answer would be viewed with scorn by the Iranians.
If Gove had given any othervanswer then Marr's next question would gave been 'how do you know?'
That said, I'm not sure there's a solution to the Irish border that can get through Parliament.
There is one obvious and simple solution that probably has a majority in Parliament, but nobody will propose it (yet)
In fact there are two simple solutions that would remove the international frontier. However, the Republic rejoining the UK is even less likely than NI joining the Republic.
I suppose simple solution number three is the Republic triggering Article 50...
"As for Brexit, the signs all point to a country that is voluntarily diminishing and impoverishing itself. If it’s not a government visibly decaying by the hour, cabinet resignations now a weekly event, it’s the data showing a stalled economy. This week we learned that as many as 50 banks have held talks about relocating out of Britain, while business warns that it is preparing for the calamity of “no deal”. The governor of the Bank of England joins the OECD in saying we’d be “booming” if it wasn’t for Brexit. To the arch-remainers, it all seems so obvious: we just need to jump off this train before it crashes."
He did answer it. And he did so in the only way he sensibly could. It is not for the Government to know what every one of its citizens is doing when they are abroad and if they claimed they did then the answer would be viewed with scorn by the Iranians.
If Gove had given any othervanswer then Marr's next question would gave been 'how do you know?'
He did answer it. And he did so in the only way he sensibly could. It is not for the Government to know what every one of its citizens is doing when they are abroad and if they claimed they did then the answer would be viewed with scorn by the Iranians.
If Gove had given any othervanswer then Marr's next question would gave been 'how do you know?'
Just as the FO is t responsible for bailing drunks out of jail in Marbella, it’s not some international rescue service for punters daft enough to go to totalitarian Islamic regimes.
I think people are about to get a shock about how archaic the process of international flight agreements is
Walsh probably gets that. He will have had detailed legal advice. He probably also cannot believe that a deal will not be done. But those proposing walking away from the Brexit talks are proposing just that.
If Government's can't function enough to ensure that planes continue to fly, just because one country leaves the EU, then there is going to be huge pressure to set up their own non-governmental arrangement to agree regulation amongst themselves. They have 16 months to put it in place....
Or willl the Spanish Govt. consider this sedition too?
That said, I'm not sure there's a solution to the Irish border that can get through Parliament.
There is one obvious and simple solution that probably has a majority in Parliament, but nobody will propose it (yet)
In fact there are two simple solutions that would remove the international frontier. However, the Republic rejoining the UK is even less likely than NI joining the Republic.
I suppose simple solution number three is the Republic triggering Article 50...
The Irish Republic should leave the EU and revert to Sterling from the Euro. Problem solved.
Just as the FO is t responsible for bailing drunks out of jail in Marbella, it’s not some international rescue service for punters daft enough to go to totalitarian Islamic regimes.
Neither do you expect the FO to broadcast to the Police in Marbella that the drunk they have in custody did it intentionally so he is welcome to his fate
Just as the FO is t responsible for bailing drunks out of jail in Marbella, it’s not some international rescue service for punters daft enough to go to totalitarian Islamic regimes.
He did answer it. And he did so in the only way he sensibly could. It is not for the Government to know what every one of its citizens is doing when they are abroad and if they claimed they did then the answer would be viewed with scorn by the Iranians.
If Gove had given any othervanswer then Marr's next question would gave been 'how do you know?'
Just as the FO is t responsible for bailing drunks out of jail in Marbella, it’s not some international rescue service for punters daft enough to go to totalitarian Islamic regimes.
Even those with powerful, connected husbands.
She went to Iran. A country with which we have full diplomatic relations. This is the travel advice offered by the Foreign Office:
There is absolutely no suggestion that she did not follow this advice.
That said, the safest advice for all UK citizens heading abroad is not to assume that the Foreign Secretary possesses even a modicum of competence or interest in your fate should something go wrong for you on your travels.
He did answer it. And he did so in the only way he sensibly could. It is not for the Government to know what every one of its citizens is doing when they are abroad and if they claimed they did then the answer would be viewed with scorn by the Iranians.
If Gove had given any othervanswer then Marr's next question would gave been 'how do you know?'
He did answer it. And he did so in the only way he sensibly could. It is not for the Government to know what every one of its citizens is doing when they are abroad and if they claimed they did then the answer would be viewed with scorn by the Iranians.
If Gove had given any othervanswer then Marr's next question would gave been 'how do you know?'
But, but, but all the Govites have assured us that he said the right thing! They must feel proper nanas now.
Gove did the right thing.
What makes things worse are the endless 'sources said' bollox which always make things more confused and those reading them more suspicious.
I'm not sure setting off 'maybe there is something to it' & 'more to this than meets the eye' speculation has made things less confused. Still, I suppose we can be grateful he didn't produce one of his pre-prepared, rapey Weinstein rib ticklers.
Curious as to whether people think there'll be a second referendum?
I don't see it except in the unlikely case of a kind of combination Peasant's Revolt and Jarrow March converging on Westminster in its millions crying "Oh my God, what have we done?" I think the denialist remainers genuinely think this is a possible outcome.
Sir James Dyson on Marr says the government should walk away from negotiations with the EU and not pay an exit bill and let the EU come to the UK for any trade bill. He also called for an end to corporation tax
Snip
Snip
snip
Snip
They've offered it an EU is demanding a border in the middle of the UK.
Money is easy. A foreign power interfering in our internal affairs is not.
We are an EU member state. It is not a foreign power. It has made a proposal that we are perfectly at liberty to reject. But we agreed to the scheduling the EU27 set out, so it is not unreasonable for the EU27 to follow it.
The point is it has set a number of conditions it knows are unacceptable. It is offering a choice between satrapy and hostility
I am saddened because we have much in common with our European friends and we could have reached a sensible agreement. But they have chosen s different path
The value.
The UK has proposed an electronically monitored border. The EU has proposed dividing Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Both are workable. One is interfering in the internal affairs of a neighbour.
The UK proposed a new class of Settled status for EU citizens preserving their rights for as long as they live here overseen by our internationally regarded legal system. The EU insisted on their courts having authority over the British courts
In both cases the EU is seeking supremacy not friendship
The UK has not suggested how the electronically monitored border would work and the UK has proposed changing EU citizens' current rights. The No Change principle underpinning the EU27's positions on both are precisely the ones advocated by the Leave side during the referendum campaign.
The first is a practical detail that can be worked out by specialists on each side.
The second is inevitable: we are leaving the EU. If an EU citizen leaves the UK before they are a full UK resident that is their choice.
Now please answer my question: do you think that an independent country can accept oversight of its legal system by a foreign court without fundamentally undermining its independence?
"As for Brexit, the signs all point to a country that is voluntarily diminishing and impoverishing itself. If it’s not a government visibly decaying by the hour, cabinet resignations now a weekly event, it’s the data showing a stalled economy. This week we learned that as many as 50 banks have held talks about relocating out of Britain, while business warns that it is preparing for the calamity of “no deal”. The governor of the Bank of England joins the OECD in saying we’d be “booming” if it wasn’t for Brexit. To the arch-remainers, it all seems so obvious: we just need to jump off this train before it crashes."
And in the real world:
' "Industrial production has risen for six consecutive months, a feat last achieved 23 years ago," said Samuel Tombs, chief UK economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics. '
Just as the FO is t responsible for bailing drunks out of jail in Marbella, it’s not some international rescue service for punters daft enough to go to totalitarian Islamic regimes.
Even those with powerful, connected husbands.
She went to Iran. A country with which we have full diplomatic relations. This is the travel advice offered by the Foreign Office:
There is absolutely no suggestion that she did not follow this advice.
That said, the safest advice for all UK citizens heading abroad is not to assume that the Foreign Secretary possesses even a modicum of competence or interest in your fate should something go wrong for you on your travels.
I corrected my typo.
Seems clear : “unpredictable”.
“British nationals need a visa to travel to Iran. You should make your visa application well in advance of your date of travel. The application process for an Iranian visa can be long and unpredictable. The Iranian Embassy has told the Foreign and Commonwealth Office that to get a visa you must either apply” as part of an organised tour, or have a sponsor in Iran. See Entry requirements“.
Who was her sponsor ? Why would you want to go to an Islamic hell hole for a holiday ?
The Iranians are using her as a bargaining chip - they want something. The usual suspects are queueing up to give our enemies succour by bashing the entire Foreign Office.
He did answer it. And he did so in the only way he sensibly could. It is not for the Government to know what every one of its citizens is doing when they are abroad and if they claimed they did then the answer would be viewed with scorn by the Iranians.
If Gove had given any othervanswer then Marr's next question would gave been 'how do you know?'
Sir James Dyson on Marr says the government should walk away from negotiations with the EU and not pay an exit bill and let the EU come to the UK for any trade bill. He also called for an end to corporation tax
We are an EU member state. It is not a foreign power. It has made a proposal that we are perfectly at liberty to reject. But we agreed to the scheduling the EU27 set out, so it is not unreasonable for the EU27 to follow it.
The UK has proposed an electronically monitored border. The EU has proposed dividing Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Both are workable. One is interfering in the internal affairs of a neighbour.
The UK proposed a new class of Settled status for EU citizens preserving their rights for as long as they live here overseen by our internationally regarded legal system. The EU insisted on their courts having authority over the British courts
In both cases the EU is seeking supremacy not friendship
People seem to be forgetting that Ireland is, y'know, in the EU and that the current unique status of Northern Ireland kind of relies on EU membership. The EU's preferred stance is that nothing should change - ultimately they'd rather we'd stay in, and if we must leave stay in the customs union and single market. It would save everyone a lot of time and hassle. Brexiteers are the ones who are ripping up that settlement because they want things that are incompatible with remaining in those. You cannot have an entirely 'soft' border with a country outside unless you agree on regulatory convergence, otherwise the whole single market thing doesn't work, and as a sovereign entity they are as entitled to object to something that undermines them as you think we are in this case. It's why these things are so complex - you have two competing rights.
As the ones seeking to change our relationship it's on us to come up with a work around that satisfies our own political settlement in Northern Ireland. You can't blame the EU because Brexiteers entirely neglected to do any homework on what their fantasies entailed when they met reality.
Honestly, it's like a child complaining they've failed an exam because the answers aren't the ones they invented in their head instead of studying.
Sir James Dyson on Marr says the government should walk away from negotiations with the EU and not pay an exit bill and let the EU come to the UK for any trade bill. He also called for an end to corporation tax
Snip
Snip
snip
Snip
They've offered it an EU is demanding a border in the middle of the UK.
Money is easy. A foreign power interfering in our internal affairs is not.
We are an EU member state. It is not a foreign power. It has made a proposal that we are perfectly at liberty to reject. But we agreed to the scheduling the EU27 set out, so it is not unreasonable for the EU27 to follow it.
The point is it has set a number of conditions it knows are unacceptable. It is offering a choice between satrapy and hostility
I am saddened because we have much in common with our European friends and we could have reached a sensible agreement. But they have chosen s different path
The value.
The UK has proposed an electronically monitored border. The EU has proposed dividing Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Both are workable. One is interfering in the internal affairs of a neighbour.
The UK proposed a new class of Settled status for EU citizens preserving their rights for as long as they live here overseen by our internationally regarded legal system. The EU insisted on their courts having authority over the British courts
In both cases the EU is seeking supremacy not friendship
The campaign.
The first is a practical detail that can be worked out by specialists on each side.
The second is inevitable: we are leaving the EU. If an EU citizen leaves the UK before they are a full UK resident that is their choice.
Now please answer my question: do you think that an independent country can accept oversight of its legal system by a foreign court without fundamentally undermining its independence?
Yep, I think that independent countries can quite easily do that. I think the UK is currently an independent country.
With regards to an electronic border, there needs to be some evidence that there is a practical detail to work out before you leave the fine points to the experts.
@SeanT would have very strong views on that idea, I expect. As would Emmanuel Macron.
As it happens, if I were starting with a clean sheet of paper I'd make the age of consent 14, reflecting biological reality. But 16 is fine and not worth disturbing.
Ignoring the trollish-slander; why 14? We educate 'children' to sixteen (and hope they stay on to eighteen).
It is a can-of-worms that we should not open: Let the early-teens discover without further pressure. Somethings are worth aspiring to (as my post-sixteen bed-notches will explain in spades).
He did answer it. And he did so in the only way he sensibly could. It is not for the Government to know what every one of its citizens is doing when they are abroad and if they claimed they did then the answer would be viewed with scorn by the Iranians.
If Gove had given any othervanswer then Marr's next question would gave been 'how do you know?'
Yep, I think that independent countries can quite easily do that. I think the UK is currently an independent country.
With regards to an electronic border, there needs to be some evidence that there is a practical detail to work out before you leave the fine points to the experts.
If a foreign court has oversight of your legal system then by definition you cannot be independent.
Curious as to whether people think there'll be a second referendum?
I don't see it except in the unlikely case of a kind of combination Peasant's Revolt and Jarrow March converging on Westminster in its millions crying "Oh my God, what have we done?" I think the denialist remainers genuinely think this is a possible outcome.
Curious as to whether people think there'll be a second referendum?
I don't see it except in the unlikely case of a kind of combination Peasant's Revolt and Jarrow March converging on Westminster in its millions crying "Oh my God, what have we done?" I think the denialist remainers genuinely think this is a possible outcome.
I think people are about to get a shock about how archaic the process of international flight agreements is
Walsh probably gets that. He will have had detailed legal advice. He probably also cannot believe that a deal will not be done. But those proposing walking away from the Brexit talks are proposing just that.
Isn't BA tied up with Iberia so will still have a EU connection
Yep, I think that independent countries can quite easily do that. I think the UK is currently an independent country.
With regards to an electronic border, there needs to be some evidence that there is a practical detail to work out before you leave the fine points to the experts.
If a foreign court has oversight of your legal system then by definition you cannot be independent.
There are internationl courts of course - but not every country complies with them.
He did answer it. And he did so in the only way he sensibly could. It is not for the Government to know what every one of its citizens is doing when they are abroad and if they claimed they did then the answer would be viewed with scorn by the Iranians.
If Gove had given any othervanswer then Marr's next question would gave been 'how do you know?'
But, but, but all the Govites have assured us that he said the right thing! They must feel proper nanas now.
Gove did the right thing.
What makes things worse are the endless 'sources said' bollox which always make things more confused and those reading them more suspicious.
I'm not sure setting off 'maybe there is something to it' & 'more to this than meets the eye' speculation has made things less confused. Still, I suppose we can be grateful he didn't produce one of his pre-prepared, rapey Weinstein rib ticklers.
I suspect that whatever Gove had said some people would be doing their best to show differences between it and what other people have said.
I suppose we could get the entire government and foreign office reciting exactly the same words on every occasion. But that too would then be accused of being suspicious and having something to hide.
Of course various journalists, columnists and politicians would never make the situation worse by trying to score petty points would they.
He did answer it. And he did so in the only way he sensibly could. It is not for the Government to know what every one of its citizens is doing when they are abroad and if they claimed they did then the answer would be viewed with scorn by the Iranians.
If Gove had given any othervanswer then Marr's next question would gave been 'how do you know?'
Really? You only have her word for that. Now whilst Boris was completely wrong to undermine that claim, all the more so since he did it through blind stupidity, now we are in this situation any minisyer maling a catagorical statement that they do not know to be true is only going to make the situation worse.
The first is a practical detail that can be worked out by specialists on each side.
This is an interesting rhetorical trick used by the Brexiteers whenever a practical question is raised.
"Someone, not me, some other unspecified smart person, will sort this out. Trust me"
It's fun when you spot it.
Dan Hannon uses it a lot...
Well we have a couple organisations in the UK called HMRC and Border Patrol whose responsibilities include how you manage the flow of goods through a border. I am sure there are some people in those organisations who would know more about the practical details than i would.
Curious as to whether people think there'll be a second referendum?
I don't see it except in the unlikely case of a kind of combination Peasant's Revolt and Jarrow March converging on Westminster in its millions crying "Oh my God, what have we done?" I think the denialist remainers genuinely think this is a possible outcome.
I don't see how that is politically possible without massive and demonstrable Bremorse, as in polls showing 75% thinking both that brexit was a mistake and that there should be a second referendum. Possibly Vince thinks the tide will in fact turn in that way, and he wants to have his ducks in order when it does.
I think people are about to get a shock about how archaic the process of international flight agreements is
Walsh probably gets that. He will have had detailed legal advice. He probably also cannot believe that a deal will not be done. But those proposing walking away from the Brexit talks are proposing just that.
Isn't BA tied up with Iberia so will still have a EU connection
They have common owners (IAG). But the claim isn't about British airplanes - it's about any planes in British airspace (if the European aviation authorities don't recognise the CAA, then the CAA won't recognise them)
He did answer it. And he did so in the only way he sensibly could. It is not for the Government to know what every one of its citizens is doing when they are abroad and if they claimed they did then the answer would be viewed with scorn by the Iranians.
If Gove had given any othervanswer then Marr's next question would gave been 'how do you know?'
The FS should have more important stuff to do than bail out a recent Uk passport holder who is daft enough to go to Iran.
Just as the NHS should not be frittering its time away on arses who are stupid enough to become unwell.
Ah yes choosing to go to Iran and becoming unwell - a natural comparison.
Direct your ire at the real culprits here - the evil tyrannical regime in Tehran. Not your favourite Tory.
Stop conflating issues.
You are either too thick or too stubborn to understand that our moronic Foreign Sec has increased the risk to a British citizen who was already in a precarious position.
A former Scotland Yard chief was aware pornography had allegedly been found on Damian Green's office computer during a 2008-9 police probe, he has said.
Well we have a couple organisations in the UK called HMRC and Border Patrol whose responsibilities include how you manage the flow of goods through a border. I am sure there are some people in those organisations who would know more about the practical details than i would.
Like these guys
Post-Brexit invisible border is impossible, says Irish report
Ireland’s equivalent of HMRC says it is ‘somewhat naive’ to believe a unique arrangement can be applied to Irish border
He did answer it. And he did so in the only way he sensibly could. It is not for the Government to know what every one of its citizens is doing when they are abroad and if they claimed they did then the answer would be viewed with scorn by the Iranians.
If Gove had given any othervanswer then Marr's next question would gave been 'how do you know?'
Really? You only have her word for that. Now whilst Boris was completely wrong to undermine that claim, all the more so since he did it through blind stupidity, now we are in this situation any minisyer maling a catagorical statement that they do not know to be true is only going to make the situation worse.
I have Boris & UK Govt assurances as well
" In the Commons Mr Johnson said the UK Government ‘has no doubt that she was on holiday’ in Iran and that was the sole purpose of her visit "
Well we have a couple organisations in the UK called HMRC and Border Patrol whose responsibilities include how you manage the flow of goods through a border. I am sure there are some people in those organisations who would know more about the practical details than i would.
Like these guys
Post-Brexit invisible border is impossible, says Irish report
Ireland’s equivalent of HMRC says it is ‘somewhat naive’ to believe a unique arrangement can be applied to Irish border
Zachari-Ratcliffe is Iranian born and was visiting her parents;
It is the regime in Teheran that has claimed she was teaching journalism;
She once worked for the BBC. The government believes the BBC's Persian Service is hostile to the regime and is seeking to undermine it. Around 150 employees have been arrested, had property confiscated or been otherwise harassed in the last couple of years;
She is one of several dual-nationals arrested by the Revolutionary Guard in an apparent playing of silly buggers to try and undermine the nuclear accords. (Although presumably unlike the famous incident where a very confused Iranian flotilla got lost and arrested their British counterparts, these particular guards were sober and knew exactly what they were doing.)
So what seems to have happened is that Boris in his usual fashion has said that she was locked up for teaching journalism when what he should have said is 'she was locked up after being falsely accused by a bunch of corrupt and usually pissed morons on the make of teaching journalism, which in any case no reasonable person would consider a crime.'
In other words, the reason he should resign is that he either didn't understand his brief or phrased it so clumsily that he made matters worse. Neither of which is an acceptable excuse for a Foreign Secretary.
Curious as to whether people think there'll be a second referendum?
If there were another referendum before we leave we will still not know what the practical effect will be and have to make a judgement in the absence of evidence.
Perhaps have a second referendum after 20 years or so when we can judge if it seems to have been a success or not. Even then we will not know the counterfactual and which route would have been best.
He did answer it. And he did so in the only way he sensibly could. It is not for the Government to know what every one of its citizens is doing when they are abroad and if they claimed they did then the answer would be viewed with scorn by the Iranians.
If Gove had given any othervanswer then Marr's next question would gave been 'how do you know?'
The FS should have more important stuff to do than bail out a recent Uk passport holder who is daft enough to go to Iran.
Just as the NHS should not be frittering its time away on arses who are stupid enough to become unwell.
Ah yes choosing to go to Iran and becoming unwell - a natural comparison.
Direct your ire at the real culprits here - the evil tyrannical regime in Tehran. Not your favourite Tory.
Christ on a bike. The woman was taking her 3 year old daughter to see her parents (the child's grandparents). The Foreign Office's principal function is to protect our citizens from evil tyrannical regimes, and citizens are not any the less citizens for being "recent Uk passport holders". You may think that is all a waste of public funds, and anyone not sensible enough to have parents who are white and live in Surrey, can sink or swim, but that's not the way things work at the moment.
He did answer it. And he did so in the only way he sensibly could. It is not for the Government to know what every one of its citizens is doing when they are abroad and if they claimed they did then the answer would be viewed with scorn by the Iranians.
If Gove had given any othervanswer then Marr's next question would gave been 'how do you know?'
The FS should have more important stuff to do than bail out a recent Uk passport holder who is daft enough to go to Iran.
Just as the NHS should not be frittering its time away on arses who are stupid enough to become unwell.
Ah yes choosing to go to Iran and becoming unwell - a natural comparison.
Direct your ire at the real culprits here - the evil tyrannical regime in Tehran. Not your favourite Tory.
Stop conflating issues.
You are either too thick or too stubborn to understand that our moronic Foreign Sec has increased the risk to a British citizen who was already in a precarious position.
+1
There are a number of incompetent cabinet ministers who should be sacked, not just Bojo: Patel has already gone, but Davis/Fox/Grayling should be got rid of too.
We have 5 newish Sentinel ISTR planes looking for a role in a future RAF. Add in the AirSeekers and remaining 6 (?) of the Seven-Dwarves then electronic CAP (Compliance Accross Protocols) can maintain training and governance along the Intra-Irish border and the Irish Sea.
Soon we will have the tysons* - Certifiable Predators - so they can loiter around as-well. By 2020 we will be able to comfortably observe the North/South border.
* tyson: You are not a 'Predator' but you really should be 'Certified'.
Well we have a couple organisations in the UK called HMRC and Border Patrol whose responsibilities include how you manage the flow of goods through a border. I am sure there are some people in those organisations who would know more about the practical details than i would.
Like these guys
Post-Brexit invisible border is impossible, says Irish report
Ireland’s equivalent of HMRC says it is ‘somewhat naive’ to believe a unique arrangement can be applied to Irish border
What's your expertise in livestock identification?
I've been h*nting along that border. I was told that if I had a bad fall they might pick me up and carry me a few hundred yards North, on the grounds that being medically airlifted on the Eire side can be very expensive if you haven't got the right travel insurance.
Zachari-Ratcliffe is Iranian born and was visiting her parents;
It is the regime in Teheran that has claimed she was teaching journalism;
She once worked for the BBC. The government believes the BBC's Persian Service is hostile to the regime and is seeking to undermine it. Around 150 employees have been arrested, had property confiscated or been otherwise harassed in the last couple of years;
She is one of several dual-nationals arrested by the Revolutionary Guard in an apparent playing of silly buggers to try and undermine the nuclear accords. (Although presumably unlike the famous incident where a very confused Iranian flotilla got lost and arrested their British counterparts, these particular guards were sober and knew exactly what they were doing.)
So what seems to have happened is that Boris in his usual fashion has said that she was locked up for teaching journalism when what he should have said is 'she was locked up after being falsely accused by a bunch of corrupt and usually pissed morons on the make of teaching journalism, which in any case no reasonable person would consider a crime.'
In other words, the reason he should resign is that he either didn't understand his brief or phrased it so clumsily that he made matters worse. Neither of which is an acceptable excuse for a Foreign Secretary.
It is worth noting that the downside of having a dual passport is that our government has much less ability to act on behalf of a citizen when in the jurisdiction of the other country.
It sounds as if she was visiting family, but if indeed she was one of our spooks then it is even more important for Boris to stick to the cover story.
The other Brit in jail abroad is probably guilty, but I would have thought a month in Egyptian Nick and deportation would be sufficient punishment. There is a limit to what a British Consulate can do when Brits break the law.
I'm sorry, but whilst I wish Boris had kept his bloody trap shut, I don't think it's for government ministers to toe the line set by the accused and their family.
Much as I dislike Gove's politics, I watched the interview and in context what he said was reasonable i.e., the basic problem is the Iranian governments poor human rights behaviour. Having taken that position it was logical to behave as if a judicial matter was none of his business in contrast to a country where due process is not followed. It is convenient to lump Gove in with Johnson but they really aren't in the same league. Gove is a bit slippery but has some good points. Johnson is a national disgrace and embarrassment.
What's your expertise in livestock identification?
What's your expertise in trying to change the subject now that your initial gambit has spectacularly crashed and burned?
Oh, wait...
The Irish report was sceptical about the ability to *negotiate* a deal not implement one. Sure there will be some complexity but it is manageable with a bit of thought.
For instance using some of the new EID technologies in the livestock tagging market.
I'm sorry, but whilst I wish Boris had kept his bloody trap shut, I don't think it's for government ministers to toe the line set by the accused and their family.
Much as I dislike Gove's politics, I watched the interview and in context what he said was reasonable i.e., the basic problem is the Iranian governments poor human rights behaviour. Having taken that position it was logical to behave as if a judicial matter was none of his business in contrast to a country where due process is not followed. It is convenient to lump Gove in with Johnson but they really aren't in the same league. Gove is a bit slippery but has some good points. Johnson is a national disgrace and embarrassment.
I agree entirely. You have expressed far better than I the point i was trying to make earlier
He did answer it. And he did so in the only way he sensibly could. It is not for the Government to know what every one of its citizens is doing when they are abroad and if they claimed they did then the answer would be viewed with scorn by the Iranians.
If Gove had given any othervanswer then Marr's next question would gave been 'how do you know?'
Really? You only have her word for that. Now whilst Boris was completely wrong to undermine that claim, all the more so since he did it through blind stupidity, now we are in this situation any minisyer maling a catagorical statement that they do not know to be true is only going to make the situation worse.
I have Boris & UK Govt assurances as well
" In the Commons Mr Johnson said the UK Government ‘has no doubt that she was on holiday’ in Iran and that was the sole purpose of her visit "
I seriously doubt Boris has the first idea what she was doing there. Which is all the more reason why he should have kept his mouth shut and deserves to lose his job.
The FS should have more important stuff to do than bail out a recent Uk passport holder who is daft enough to go to Iran.
Really? Try a thought experiment. May gives up, Corbyn forms a minority government. Another Brit goes to Iran, and Thornberry absent-mindedly confirms the Revolutionary Guards' theory on the reason for the trip. Do you
a) Say never mind, the FCO has more important things to worry about? b) Say ha, we told you Corbyn was a sympathiser with extremists?
Don't you think that your political sympathies are influencing you?
And before you ask, no, I've been ready to praise Tory Ministers (recently Gove) when they're doing well. But you don't have to be a Labour supporter to see that Boris isn't just an accident waiting to happen, he's an accident that happens at regular intervals, and as such is not an ideal representative for Britain.
That said, I'm not sure there's a solution to the Irish border that can get through Parliament.
There is one obvious and simple solution that probably has a majority in Parliament, but nobody will propose it (yet)
In fact there are two simple solutions that would remove the international frontier. However, the Republic rejoining the UK is even less likely than NI joining the Republic.
I suppose simple solution number three is the Republic triggering Article 50...
The Irish Republic should leave the EU and revert to Sterling from the Euro. Problem solved.
And have Queen Elizbeth as their monarch and accept rule from Westminster, Er! Somehow, I don't think that will ever happen....
@SkyNewsBreak: Sky News understands Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson has spoken to the husband of Briton Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and they have agreed to meet in person in the next few weeks following a "constructive" conversation
The FS should have more important stuff to do than bail out a recent Uk passport holder who is daft enough to go to Iran.
Really? Try a thought experiment. May gives up, Corbyn forms a minority government. Another Brit goes to Iran, and Thornberry absent-mindedly confirms the Revolutionary Guards' theory on the reason for the trip. Do you
a) Say never mind, the FCO has more important things to worry about? b) Say ha, we told you Corbyn was a sympathiser with extremists?
Don't you think that your political sympathies are influencing you?
And before you ask, no, I've been ready to praise Tory Ministers (recently Gove) when they're doing well. But you don't have to be a Labour supporter to see that Boris isn't just an accident waiting to happen, he's an accident that happens at regular intervals, and as such is not an ideal representative for Britain.
Further to this I would also disagree with TGOHFs basic premise. One of th basic jobs of the FCO is to look after the interests of British citizens abroad whether they have been British for 80 years or 80 days. There are lots of dangerous places in the world and Brits have to visit them for hundreds of different reasons. They do so on the basis that the FCO, whilst it may not always be able to prevent them getting into trouble will, at least, not make things worse.
The FS should have more important stuff to do than bail out a recent Uk passport holder who is daft enough to go to Iran.
Really? Try a thought experiment. May gives up, Corbyn forms a minority government. Another Brit goes to Iran, and Thornberry absent-mindedly confirms the Revolutionary Guards' theory on the reason for the trip. Do you
a) Say never mind, the FCO has more important things to worry about? b) Say ha, we told you Corbyn was a sympathiser with extremists?
Don't you think that your political sympathies are influencing you?
And before you ask, no, I've been ready to praise Tory Ministers (recently Gove) when they're doing well. But you don't have to be a Labour supporter to see that Boris isn't just an accident waiting to happen, he's an accident that happens at regular intervals, and as such is not an ideal representative for Britain.
Further to this I would also disagree with TGOHFs basic premise. One of th basic jobs of the FCO is to look after the interests of British citizens abroad whether they have been British for 80 years or 80 days. There are lots of dangerous places in the world and Brits have to visit them for hundreds of different reasons. They do so on the basis that the FCO, whilst it may not always be able to prevent them getting into trouble will, at least, not make things worse.
One of the reasons I think this govt is no longer fit for purpose is that they seem to be putting British people into harms way and not really worrying about it too much.
That said, I'm not sure there's a solution to the Irish border that can get through Parliament.
There is one obvious and simple solution that probably has a majority in Parliament, but nobody will propose it (yet)
In fact there are two simple solutions that would remove the international frontier. However, the Republic rejoining the UK is even less likely than NI joining the Republic.
I suppose simple solution number three is the Republic triggering Article 50...
The Irish Republic should leave the EU and revert to Sterling from the Euro. Problem solved.
And have Queen Elizbeth as their monarch and accept rule from Westminster, Er! Somehow, I don't think that will ever happen....
Comments
My suggestion about the governments of the EU countries is that I think they have different aims to that of the EU.
I would say that some in the EU would be quite happy to damage the individual EU countries if that was the cost of damaging the UK. The leaders of those EU countries being less likely to have that view.
“I think Boris is doing a good job as FS”
Gove would be an even worse PM than terrible Theresa. At least she's not trying to pretend that he's in his job due to any merit/talent.
Talk is cheap
Walsh has a legal obligation not to mislead investors
https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/929674453180706818
The UK proposed a new class of Settled status for EU citizens preserving their rights for as long as they live here overseen by our internationally regarded legal system. The EU insisted on their courts having authority over the British courts
In both cases the EU is seeking supremacy not friendship
We can't make that decision for them. Nor should we.
That still leaves a space of variable dimensions.
. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/british-airways-boss-rubbishes-claims-flights-will-be-grounded-by-brexit-and-says-life-will-go-on-a3672231.html
What makes things worse are the endless 'sources said' bollox which always make things more confused and those reading them more suspicious.
I suppose simple solution number three is the Republic triggering Article 50...
https://www.theguardian.com/global/commentisfree/2017/nov/10/never-stop-brexit-trump-address-anger-impeachment-second-referendum
"As for Brexit, the signs all point to a country that is voluntarily diminishing and impoverishing itself. If it’s not a government visibly decaying by the hour, cabinet resignations now a weekly event, it’s the data showing a stalled economy. This week we learned that as many as 50 banks have held talks about relocating out of Britain, while business warns that it is preparing for the calamity of “no deal”. The governor of the Bank of England joins the OECD in saying we’d be “booming” if it wasn’t for Brexit. To the arch-remainers, it all seems so obvious: we just need to jump off this train before it crashes."
Anybody know why Boris said what he said to the Select Committee? Was it because it was the truth?
Either he is claiming to know the outcome of a deal that is not signed, or he is claiming they will fly illegally.
If I was in his position, I might say the same thing.
It wouldn't make it true.
He has a well documented history of saying things that are not fully aligned with the actuality.
He has been sacked before for making stuff up.
Probably not pre-crash, but it's one way out of the cul-de-sac that current crop of politicians are intent on driving into
It’s not rocket science.
Just as the FO is t responsible for bailing drunks out of jail in Marbella, it’s not some international rescue service for punters daft enough to go to totalitarian Islamic regimes.
Even those with powerful, connected husbands.
Or willl the Spanish Govt. consider this sedition too?
The Irish Republic should leave the EU and revert to Sterling from the Euro. Problem solved.
Remarkable even by your standards.
" In the Commons Mr Johnson said the UK Government ‘has no doubt that she was on holiday’ in Iran and that was the sole purpose of her visit"
Read more: http://metro.co.uk/2017/11/07/boris-johnson-admits-mistake-over-nazanin-zaghari-ratcliffe-claims-7061661/?ito=cbshare
Twitter: https://twitter.com/MetroUK | Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MetroUK/ "
https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/iran
There is absolutely no suggestion that she did not follow this advice.
That said, the safest advice for all UK citizens heading abroad is not to assume that the Foreign Secretary possesses even a modicum of competence or interest in your fate should something go wrong for you on your travels.
The FS should have more important stuff to do than bail out a recent Uk passport holder who is daft enough to go to Iran.
The second is inevitable: we are leaving the EU. If an EU citizen leaves the UK before they are a full UK resident that is their choice.
Now please answer my question: do you think that an independent country can accept oversight of its legal system by a foreign court without fundamentally undermining its independence?
' "Industrial production has risen for six consecutive months, a feat last achieved 23 years ago," said Samuel Tombs, chief UK economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics. '
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41939068
' Tourism is booming in the UK with nearly 40 million overseas people expected to have visited the country during 2017 - a record figure.
Tourist promotion agency VisitBritain forecasts overseas trips to the UK will increase 6% to 39.7 million with spending up 14% to £25.7bn this year. '
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41564655
Do you get the idea that the Jonathan Freedland is yearning for failure and gets a little bitter whenever he reads good economic news.
Seems clear : “unpredictable”.
“British nationals need a visa to travel to Iran. You should make your visa application well in advance of your date of travel. The application process for an Iranian visa can be long and unpredictable. The Iranian Embassy has told the Foreign and Commonwealth Office that to get a visa you must either apply” as part of an organised tour, or have a sponsor in Iran. See Entry requirements“.
Who was her sponsor ? Why would you want to go to an Islamic hell hole for a holiday ?
The Iranians are using her as a bargaining chip - they want something. The usual suspects are queueing up to give our enemies succour by bashing the entire Foreign Office.
"Someone, not me, some other unspecified smart person, will sort this out. Trust me"
It's fun when you spot it.
Dan Hannon uses it a lot...
With regards to an electronic border, there needs to be some evidence that there is a practical detail to work out before you leave the fine points to the experts.
It is a can-of-worms that we should not open: Let the early-teens discover without further pressure. Somethings are worth aspiring to (as my post-sixteen bed-notches will explain in spades).
Direct your ire at the real culprits here - the evil tyrannical regime in Tehran. Not your favourite Tory.
Anyway, I must be off. My pre-race ramble is up here: http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2017/11/brazil-pre-race-2017.html
I'll probably do the post-race analysis tomorrow. Play nicely, children.
I suppose we could get the entire government and foreign office reciting exactly the same words on every occasion. But that too would then be accused of being suspicious and having something to hide.
Of course various journalists, columnists and politicians would never make the situation worse by trying to score petty points would they.
You mean an 'expert'?
So rather than lying that she was their solely "on holiday" when she wasn't, he lied by saying he did not know why she was there.
You are either too thick or too stubborn to understand that our moronic Foreign Sec has increased the risk to a British citizen who was already in a precarious position.
Does it matter whether it was or it wasn't?
CDU/CSU 30%
SPD 22%
AfD 13%
FDP 11%
Green 10%
Left 10%
Others 4%
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/
Post-Brexit invisible border is impossible, says Irish report
Ireland’s equivalent of HMRC says it is ‘somewhat naive’ to believe a unique arrangement can be applied to Irish border
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/08/post-brexit-invisible-border-is-impossible-says-irish-report
" In the Commons Mr Johnson said the UK Government ‘has no doubt that she was on holiday’ in Iran and that was the sole purpose of her visit "
Read more: http://metro.co.uk/2017/11/07/boris-johnson-admits-mistake-over-nazanin-zaghari-ratcliffe-claims-7061661/?ito=cbshare
Twitter: https://twitter.com/MetroUK | Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MetroUK/ "
Zachari-Ratcliffe is Iranian born and was visiting her parents;
It is the regime in Teheran that has claimed she was teaching journalism;
She once worked for the BBC. The government believes the BBC's Persian Service is hostile to the regime and is seeking to undermine it. Around 150 employees have been arrested, had property confiscated or been otherwise harassed in the last couple of years;
She is one of several dual-nationals arrested by the Revolutionary Guard in an apparent playing of silly buggers to try and undermine the nuclear accords. (Although presumably unlike the famous incident where a very confused Iranian flotilla got lost and arrested their British counterparts, these particular guards were sober and knew exactly what they were doing.)
So what seems to have happened is that Boris in his usual fashion has said that she was locked up for teaching journalism when what he should have said is 'she was locked up after being falsely accused by a bunch of corrupt and usually pissed morons on the make of teaching journalism, which in any case no reasonable person would consider a crime.'
In other words, the reason he should resign is that he either didn't understand his brief or phrased it so clumsily that he made matters worse. Neither of which is an acceptable excuse for a Foreign Secretary.
Perhaps have a second referendum after 20 years or so when we can judge if it seems to have been a success or not. Even then we will not know the counterfactual and which route would have been best.
There are a number of incompetent cabinet ministers who should be sacked, not just Bojo: Patel has already gone, but Davis/Fox/Grayling should be got rid of too.
Oh, wait...
It's Dan Hannan.
I'm sure everyone can spell the standard addendum of 'is a...'
Soon we will have the tysons* - Certifiable Predators - so they can loiter around as-well. By 2020 we will be able to comfortably observe the North/South border.
* tyson: You are not a 'Predator' but you really should be 'Certified'.
I'lll get my coat...
It sounds as if she was visiting family, but if indeed she was one of our spooks then it is even more important for Boris to stick to the cover story.
The other Brit in jail abroad is probably guilty, but I would have thought a month in Egyptian Nick and deportation would be sufficient punishment. There is a limit to what a British Consulate can do when Brits break the law.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5074343/Father-s-fears-British-holidaymaker-jailed-Egypt.html
For instance using some of the new EID technologies in the livestock tagging market.
a) Say never mind, the FCO has more important things to worry about?
b) Say ha, we told you Corbyn was a sympathiser with extremists?
Don't you think that your political sympathies are influencing you?
And before you ask, no, I've been ready to praise Tory Ministers (recently Gove) when they're doing well. But you don't have to be a Labour supporter to see that Boris isn't just an accident waiting to happen, he's an accident that happens at regular intervals, and as such is not an ideal representative for Britain.
"Someone, not me, some other unspecified smart person, will sort this out. Trust me"
Even if it were true that it is manageable with a bit of thought (and I don't believe it is), the timetable is insufficient
I do claim some level of expertise on large Government IT projects. There will not be an invisible, high tech border in place by March 2019
One of the reasons I think this govt is no longer fit for purpose is that they seem to be putting British people into harms way and not really worrying about it too much.
This was clear to me on 24/6/16.